USC to win third straight title

First, karma police, your SN is great.

I am not saying Bama is necessarily better than Texas, but Texas plays no one and therefore will easily make the title game. Even if Bama goes undefeated it won't matter. VT is good but not good enough to escape the rest of their schedule unscathed. Everyone talks about "this conference sucks, that conference sucks" - that's part of the fun, NO ONE KNOWS which conferences are really the best, it's all conjecture, and we get to find out (sort of - one game isn't really enough to judge) when bowl time comes around. I don't believe this year's SC team is even close to the best ever, and their offense isn't the best ever either (although the trojans are f***ing good, 95 Nebraska would absolutely rape 05 SC). I think the SEC has the best teams year in year out, but I don't think you can discount the west coast. Everyone says that they suck, but why? Arizona State played LSU a tough game, obviously SC is good. The truth is they don't get out to the east enough to play other teams so it's tough to know, but I think if anyone sucks its the Big XII. They freaking blow this year. The Pac 10 would dominate the Big XII, I guarentee it. Oklahoma is awful this year, Nebraska is their typical mediocre self (typical since the first couple of years of Solich's tenure), Oklahoma state sucks, Texas A and M sucks, Colorado and Missou are mediocre... there is just nothing good about that conference at all except Texas. I think the order of conferences this year is as follows:

1. SEC/ACC (too tough to tell right now)

3. Pac 10

4. Big Ten

5. Big XII (don't you love how I even use the official spellings)

Look for VT to lose to Miami this weekend.

I agree with your rankings, although I may have the Big Ten ahead or tied with Pac 10. Pac 10 has better top teams with USC, but somewhere in the middle of the pack the Big 10 would start getting wins. Big XII is having a down year, although the south isn't horrible.

The SEC is the toughest most years. The ACC is having a great year. If VT ends up going undefeated and not being in the BCS championship game, then something is wrong.

With all this BCS BS, USC would be best off to lose a PAC 10, or any other game. Remember, their first of the back-to-back titles, they did not play in the 1 versus 2 BCS game. They were not the BCS champion. They were the poll champion, thus the 'shared title'. They might be best off to be upset, avoid the potentially tougher BCS title game, play a weak bowl opponent, and be voted champ again.

The Anti Vol wrote:

You should know all about losing this year. The Ole Miss game is starting to look like an upset. At least the rest of the SEC is happy. No one is hated in this conference like you arrogant pricks. Enjoy the Vandy loss in a couple of weeks.

We got Justin Gatlin. We got Tim Mack. What else is there. The Vols will do their duty.

I'm a transplant from L.A. Everything is cool in TN but I can't do with that silly Jesus crutch they get into like it's the next steroid or sump'in like 'dat.

This year the University of South Central will make it's mark as the greatest college football team ever surpassing Notre Dame in national championships. The sons of the Crips, the Surfers, the Bloods, the 18th st boys, the Vatos, the Bikers, the Hollywierohs, the O.C., the Barrios, the Hood, the 90210, the L.A.P.D. pigs, have all done us proud.

Fight On U.S.C. !

I love how the Big 11 always gets credit as one of the best conference in the nation. Since 1955, the conference has won 3 1/2 reputable national championships. They are: OSU('02 & '68), Mich('97 half and a joke at that), and Minn('60). In that time span Notre Dame, USC, Oklahoma, Miami, Nebraska, and Alabama have each won more titles than the Big Integer. The response by apologists is that Big 11 schools always "beat up on each other." There's a reason, it's because they all play on the same mediocre level. But I guess that is what you get when your conference's past time is dodging tough competition.

watch for those Tigers and DeAngelo too, vol lovers.

West Coast Sucks - You make a very good argument. By pointing out that the names of teams in other conferences are "Miami, Fla St, BC ... Georgia, Auburn, Tennessee, Florida," you prove beyond a doubt that those conferences are superior to teams with names like "Oregon, Cal, and UCLA."

And you're absolutely correct that USC can have an off day and still win, while if Alabama is off for any of their games - kaboom, season over. Because look at it, just last Sept. 24th, Alabama had to play that SEC standout Arkansas, but luckily Alabama doesn't have down days and took them 24-13 ... one week after USC beat Arkansas 70-17. (Was this an Arkansas plan - you know, to get Alabama overconfident in the hope that then the Crimson Tide might do the unfathomable and actually have a down day? ... Wow, it makes you wonder!)

As for Virginia Tech, I actually think they're USC's equal. They have a great defense and a pretty good offense. Of course, USC under Carroll has grown much stronger each year as the season wears on (sort of like Bobby Bowden's old Florida St. teams). But FSU and Miami are nowhere near where they were in the past. I've been an FSU fan for years, used to fly out once a year to catch one of their home games, and I don't even recognize them anymore. (Of course, with this paragraph I've probably broken your rules - you know, by actually knowing about or even watching the teams I'm talking about ... much better to do it your way - just decide certain teams and conferences are good because I like their names or live geographically near to them).

But let me ask you a question, West Coast Sucks: Why do you think that USC's closest games over the past few years have been against PAC 10 rivals and not the stellar champions of other conferences? Is it because Pete Carroll doesn't know diddly and can't manage to get his team motivated from week to week (I mean, other than the last 30 weeks of play - you know, when they've won 30 games in a row)? Or is it because maybe, just maybe, the PAC 10 is actually a pretty tough conference, and teams like Michigan and Oklahoma and Auburn are just cakewalks after all USC goes through during the conference schedule?

I suspect the answer is a little more complicated than either of those possibilities ... but I wouldn't want to hurt that big powerful brain of yours by actually making it think.

no, odds are stacked against USC. they nearly lost once, and will for sure lose in the championship game

V. Tech is going to beat Miami's ass and Florida States ass to boost them into the Conference Championship which they will win to get their way to the National Championship and Title!

gibberish wrote:

no, odds are stacked against USC. they nearly lost once, and will for sure lose in the championship game

I tend to agree - at least with the possibility. 30 in a row is a lot of wins. Miami seemed unbeatable a couple years back when Ohio St. beat them in the championship game (does anyone really think that Ohio St. team was superior to Miami's?).

But it won't be Texas that takes USC - if that's what it comes down to. Virginia Tech is a different matter ... but we'll have to wait and see. That's why they make them play the game.

Tennessee Volunteers wrote:

This year the University of South Central will make it\'s mark as the greatest college football team ever surpassing Notre Dame in national championships.

Fight On U.S.C. !

Not unless they award USC titles for the \'06, \'07, and \'08 seasons this year. To award USC with 11 titles, you would have to give Notre Dame 20 or so. USC has 8, or at most, 9 national titles. Even with your fuzzy math, you\'d have a long way to go to catch princeton, harvard, and yale.

I believe Miami lost that game because their best player's knee fell apart early in the game.

Va Tech-USC would be the best championship game because they are the two best teams. I think the point that is trying to be made by West Coast Sucks (although pretty badly) is that Va Tech could be one of the 2 best teams, but lose a game due to their very hard schedule, while Texas or USC have a better chance of going undefeated primarily because of their arguably easier schedule, therefore the national championship game is determined not by who the best teams are, but rather by who had the easiest schedule along the way.

This is the reason I really don't enjoy college football, they need a play-off at the end of the season so it can really be determined on the field.

As a pac 10 guy, one of the reasons USC's closest games are against pac 10 rivals is because they always play these schools, thus there is a level of familiarity that doesn't occur with out of conferance schools. The teams know each other better and play each other better. Here's the bottom line though, USC is the best team in the nation, hands down. Now, they may not win the national title, stranger things have happened (OSU over Miami). I think Texas or Virginia Tech is better than OSU was that year. But, one of the things with football is that upsets are much more common than in sports like cross country which we are used to. There was no way anyone was gonna beat stanford in '02 and '03. I'd equate USC to a team like that.

U.S.C.'s biggest weakness is that they are in L.A. where there is so much to do. Los Angeles is THE sports capitol of the world, Los Angeles is the media, entertainment, movie, recording, etc. capitol of the world. There are so many distractions. Travel anywhere outside of the United States, and it's Hollywood that is the sole symbol of America.

The U.S.C. football coaches and team members are mainly from Los Angeles. They have the same problem that everyone in L.A. has. Distractions, too much to do, too much to see, too much to buy, to many places to cruise, too many thug cops, too many red-light runners, too many gangsters, too many sports events to go to, too many car chases on T.V., too many movie premiers, too many shootings, too many songs to download, too many crack heads, too many 70mm THX Dolby stereo movie theaters. There's simply no time for nothin. And then coach tells you you gotta get to practice and get on the bus to LAX and go play those rinky-dink pee-hole town football teams.

That's L.A.

I think several of you are giving VT way too much credit. Number one they haven't played anyone, and in the BC game they didn't pull away until late. Expect Miami to give them a beat down again this weekend. And Miami is definately not that good.

thinker - I agree on all counts.

thinker wrote:

Va Tech-USC would be the best championship game because they are the two best teams. I think the point that is trying to be made by West Coast Sucks (although pretty badly) is that Va Tech could be one of the 2 best teams, but lose a game due to their very hard schedule, while Texas or USC have a better chance of going undefeated primarily because of their arguably easier schedule, therefore the national championship game is determined not by who the best teams are, but rather by who had the easiest schedule along the way.

VaTech scheduled Ohio, W. Virginia, and Marshall for thier OOC games. USC and UT both had early OOC games agaist big time opponents. The sargin strength of schedule rankings are: USC#25, Texas #33, and VaTech#43. If VaTech wants to crawl out of the backwoods, they need to play national games.

I agree their OOC schedule isn't outstanding, although that game at WVU is tougher than anyone who has never been there to see a game could ever believe. Va Tech's strength of schedule will be on the upswing at the end of the season with the game this week against Miami and then the ACC Championship game most likely against Fl St. Texas only has the Big XII championship game most likely against a 21 ranked Colorado which is their only ranked opponent left. USC has Cal, Fresno St, and UCLA to boost theirs, although it is possible that Cal and Fresno St are not ranked at the end of the season.

A surprise if a couple of the "big three" lose is if Alabama goes undefeated, their end schedule could be LSU, Auburn, and Georgia. That's a heck of a boost to their strength of schedule at the end. I doubt it if they can win all those games, but you never know.

Another wild card in this picture is if UCLA does beat USC, what happens to them? Their schedule isn't real tough, but you know if they win that game they will get a ton of exposure, and they'll be undefeated.

"USC is the best team of all time..."

That's bold statement. They have two great players. That's it. Their schedule is soft.

How about these rankings:

http://espn.go.com/page2/s/list/colfootball/teams/best.html

How about these numbers pulled from that list:

"Alabama went 11-0 in 1961, racking up 297 points and allowing only 25"

"Many consider the 1971 version of the Cornhuskers the best college football team ever, and we can't find any reason to disagree. The team averaged more than 39 points a game on offense, and surrendered only 8.2 points a game. Led by kick and punt returner par excellence Johnny Rodgers (who won the 1972 Heisman), the top-ranked Cornhuskers defeated No. 2 Oklahoma 35-31 on Thanksgiving Day, in what some have called the "Game of the Century." They rounded out their 13-0 season with a 38-6 drubbing of Alabama in the Orange Bowl."