Texas vs USC championship game

[Perchoutofwater]

The key for Texas is whether or not they can protect the ball better than the Sooners did.  I predict they will have more TOs than USC..

 

1219788[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Maybe, but VY is a much better QB than the statue that was Jason White. USC lost some very good pass rushers to the NFL, and their secondary is just barely above average. With the exception of Pittman, I think all of Texas' WR's are 6'-3" or better, which will make it hard for your average CB's to cover. What USC need to do is rattle VY early by doing a bunch of zone blitzing. If they can get to him you might be right, but not many have been able to get to him.

[GWPFFL BrianW]

Besides Ohio State, Texas has faced no good defenses. And don't fire defensive rankings at me either. Texas Tech's defense sucks, I don't care what ranking they have, there ranking is accumulated playing other losers. Stats are meaningless. And again... Pete Carroll has a history of making great defensive game plans with a month to prepare. If this was played 1 week after the last game of the season... then I'd give Texas more of a chance. But giving Carroll a month to prepare for the Texas offense is like giving him the Longhorn playbook. Texas' defense is NOT good enough to slow down USC's offense, much less stop it. I think blitzing is EXACTLY what USC will probably do. Texas A & M was successful with it, and I think we all know what the outcome of that game woulda been with the USC's offense in place. IF thats the Texas team we see... you'll get exactly the same score as last years game. I'm just not sold on the fact that USC's defense is that terrible either. They have a lot of speed, which sometimes hurts them. But when they needed to make a play, they did it. If this game is a shootout, I give the edge to USC, if its not a shoot out... then its a USC blow out.

[wildcat2334]

USC -7 is a gift- SC rolls over another overrated Big 12 team. Gimme a break.

Vince Young 1st team All-American?? wow, what a crock. MY little sister has better mechanics and thows a better ball then he does.

 

USC 48

Texas 21 book it

 

[Perchoutofwater]

Besides Ohio State, Texas has faced no good defenses. And don't fire defensive rankings at me either. Texas Tech's defense sucks, I don't care what ranking they have, there ranking is accumulated playing other losers. Stats are meaningless.  And again... Pete Carroll has a history of making great defensive game plans with a month to prepare. If this was played 1 week after the last game of the season... then I'd give Texas more of a chance. But giving Carroll a month to prepare for the Texas offense is like giving him the Longhorn playbook. Texas' defense is NOT good enough to slow down USC's offense, much less stop it. I think blitzing is EXACTLY what USC will probably do. Texas A & M was successful with it, and I think we all know what the outcome of that game woulda been with the USC's offense in place. IF thats the Texas team we see... you'll get exactly the same score as last years game. I'm just not sold on the fact that USC's defense is that terrible either. They have a lot of speed, which sometimes hurts them. But when they needed to make a play, they did it. If this game is a shootout, I give the edge to USC, if its not a shoot out... then its a USC blow out.

 

1220038[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

So you don't want to talk about defensive rankings never mind that Texas is #6 and USC isn't even in the Top 25. You don't want to talk about statistics even though Texas average score is slightly higher than USC's, and Texas has faced much better defenses. So you just want to throw out all the stats and say, "yeah, but it's Pete Carrol." I guess you can do that, but that is all gut and no rational thinking. Arguments can be made for both teams, and I think it is going to be a close game, but your wanting to bury your head in the sand, and not give credit to the Texas defense, and ignoring the fact that Texas' offense has actually out scored the USC offense playing against better defenses is just childish.

[GWPFFL BrianW]

I would argue that both teams have faced very bad defenses this year, which is why both teams have such a high scoring average. Defensively, on paper, Texas looks good. To me USC's defense has faced much tougher offenses. Teams like UCLA ( who like Texas shredded Oklahoma)and Notre Dame (Who is a better offense than ANY TEXAS has seen). Texas went into Columbus and played Ohio State who is by far a better defense than any defense USC has seen, so if by that one game, you mean that Texas has seen much "tougher" defenses, then I guess I agree with you. Maybe my head is in the sand, but in 3 years NO ONE, has even come close to stopping USC, now all of the sudden Texas can, even though they haven't seen ANY OFFENSE that even resembles a POOR MAN's USC. The last good offense that even came close, was Michigan in last years Rose bowl game, and they did whatever they wanted on the vaunted Texas D led by that Derrick Johnson fella, who incidentally, doens't play for Texas anymore. Now all of the sudden, that defense has magically improved SO MUCH, that they have a shot at stopping USC's offense who has shredded teams (and I might add, in the last 3 bowl games, Top defenses) for 3 years. I'm gonna have to disagree with you there. I will give Texas the edge defensively. I just don't think that edge will be NEARLY enough to be able to win this game.

[Perchoutofwater]

Just the Stats

 

Total Defense

Texas #6

USXC #39

 

Scoring Defense

Texas #4

USC #27

 

Average Opponets D ranking

Texas 54.273

USC 76.819

 

Total Offense

USC #1

Texas #3

 

Scoring Offense

Texas #1

USC #2

 

QB Rating

Vince Young 168.6 #1 in NCAA

Matt Leinart 158.3 #7 in NCAA

 

Rushing Offense

Texas #3

USC #4

 

Edit to Add: All stats were taken from the official NCAA website. I had to do the math to find the average of the opponents D ranking.

 

I can now see why those that don't like the Longhorns wouldn't want to talk about statistics.

Edited December 16, 2005 by Perchoutofwater

[wildcat2334]

You can throw Texas D rankings all over the place, fine, whatever. The Big 12 STINKS- flat out- that conference is a joke. Pac 10 was down overall this year IMO, but still OU, UCLA solid solid teams, TTech? Oklahoma?? Please. USC did stumble a bit this year, have some mediocre games that exposed the D. Let's get real tho- they will pull it together and thump the Horns. Take a look at the conferences a bit. Taking USC and Texas out of the equation-

 

Wins vs. top 30

 

Little 12 - 3

Pac 10- 6

 

Nice season for the Horns, but Little 12 and UT fans should focus on Hoops b/c y'all gonna get exposed and blown out on National TV.

[rbmcdonald]

Wins vs. top 30

 

Little 12 - 3

Pac 10-  6 

 

1220222[/snapback]

 

Can you provide a little more detail on this statistic and the source? I think that the BCS, USA Today and Harris Polls only produce a top 25. Based on my quick review of the final BCS top 25, Non USC PAC-10 vs top 25 was 2-4 (two loses to ND, 1 to LSU and 1 to Louisville. Wins over Northwestern & Fresno St.) Non-UT Big 12 vs top 25 0-2. Losses to UCLA and TCU. Surely you were not including inner conference games. I hardly think that the argument that the PAC-10 is better at beating themselves is grounds for labeling them vastly superior.

 

Nothing in those status justifies labeling the PAC-10 vastly superior. Sure you can make an argument the PAC-10 is better, but not vastly better.

 

In fact one of the computer polls ranks the conferences in this order: Big 10, ACC, Big 12, PAC-10, SEC and Big East (based on non-conference records and strength of schedule).

 

.

[wildcat2334]

Can you provide a little more detail on this statistic and the source?  I think that the BCS, USA Today and Harris Polls only produce a top 25.  Based on my quick review of the final BCS top 25, Non USC PAC-10 vs top 25 was 2-4 (two loses to ND, 1 to LSU and 1 to Louisville. Wins over Northwestern & Fresno St.)  Non-UT Big 12 vs top 25 0-2.  Losses to UCLA and TCU.  Surely you were not including inner conference games.  I hardly think that the argument that the PAC-10 is better at beating themselves is grounds for labeling them vastly superior.

 

Nothing in those status justifies labeling the PAC-10 vastly superior.  Sure you can make an argument the PAC-10 is better, but not vastly better.

 

In fact one of the computer polls ranks the conferences in this order: Big 10, ACC, Big 12, PAC-10, SEC and Big East (based on non-conference records and strength of schedule).

 

.

 

1220285[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Sure, I got the vs. top 30 stats from Sagarin's Conferenc Rankings. Those include conference games, why wouldn't they?? Your numbers show me something, I did not even realize- how incredibly weak the Little 12 non-conference scheduling is. So, based off your numbers, those 11 teams played 2 non-conference teams in the top 25?? And one of them was TCU??? That is shocking to me. The conference as a whole this year was not VASTLY better than the BIg 12- top to bottom - stonger but, yes I will give you the PAC 10 had some very weak teams this year. However, I think you can safely say that the top of the conference is VASTLY better than the Big 12.

 

USC, Oregon, UCLA vs. Texas, TTech, Oklahoma???? You kidding me??

 

We saw directly what UCLA did to OU-

We WILL SEE USC dismantle UT

Oregon is a much stronger squad than T Tech, OU.

 

 

BIG TEN (A) = 82.91 82.42 ( 1) 11

2 ATLANTIC COAST (A) = 78.39 77.80 ( 4) 12

3 PAC-10 (A) = 77.79 78.85 ( 2) 10

4 BIG 12 (A) = 76.92 77.93 ( 3) 12

[GWPFFL BrianW]

Well personally, I got Oklahoma pegged for beating Oregon, in what should be one of the better bowl games.

[rbmcdonald]

  1  BIG TEN            (A) =  82.91      82.42  (  1)    11

  2  ATLANTIC COAST      (A) =  78.39      77.80  (  4)    12

  3  PAC-10              (A) =  77.79      78.85  (  2)    10

  4  BIG 12              (A) =  76.92      77.93  (  3)    12

 

1220398[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

 

Ok let me get this straight, you are telling that by looking at which PAC-10 team beat which PAC- 10 team, we can gain insight into if the PAC-10 is a better conference, than another Conference? As in the fact that a lower ranked PAC-10 team beating a higher ranked PAC-10 team is evidence that the PAC-10 is a better conference, but then doesn't that mean a higher ranked PAC-10 team just lost to a lower ranked team?

 

Then to follow up this insight, you post the fact that Sagarin has the PAC-10 ranked 3rd with a 77.79/78.85 rating and the Big 12 ranked 4th with a 76.92/77.93 rating as evidence to support your claim that “The Big 12 Stinks-flat out-that conference is a joke” and “The PAC-10 was down overall this year, IMO”

 

It is the same old crap over and over again, we are great, and everyone else is a joke. Just like last year, all these people bitched and bitched about UT jumping California in the BCS, and how California was so much better, and got so screwed, because they were #2 in the mighty PAC-10. Then what happens? UT goes on to beat Michigan, and California gets destroyed in the Holiday Bowl. Now this year the fact that Texas Tech is the 2nd or 3rd best team in the Big 12 is used as “obvious” evidence that the BIG 12 sucks. Tech can’t possibly be any good, just wait until the bowl game they will……… well, just what did they do last year in the bowl game last year?

[GWPFFL BrianW]

i think both tech and cal were overrated last year.

[rbmcdonald]

i think both tech and cal were overrated last year.

 

1220491[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

If everyone is overrated, doesn't that mean that nobody is overrated?

[GWPFFL BrianW]

If Cal wasn't deserving of a BCS Bowl over Texas, then wasn't Texas not deserving of one 2 years ago when Wazzu slammed them?

[Droobie42]

I'm just going to say, I can't blame you guys for thinking or knowing USC will win, but to avoid the fact that this IS going to be a great game kinda baffles me as a football fan. The numbers don't lie, and you can't throw them out on the count that they played better/worse teams, because then you're ignoring numbers aren't you?

 

Oklahoma will make that a good game and were playing about as pathetic football as a team could play at that point in the year, they're a much different team now.

 

Coffeeman has the right idea, Turnover battle=winner of the game, period. People tend to forget that it was somewhat of a game last year until OU turned it over and gave up points on 2 straight possessions in the 2nd, then coughed up another one at the end of it to make it blown way out of proportion. Had OU controlled the ball a little better and put up some points (which should be easier for Tx this year than OU last year) it might not have been so bad. I don't doubt USC will be scoring points, as will Texas. The key will be who can slow down the other team (more likely Texas) or get turnovers (more likely to be USC). If both of those are happening it'll just make this game even more amazing. And for the people that think that OU last year > Texas this year...you are crazy my friend. I would go out on a limb here too and say that overall, USC was a better team last year. I also agree that Vince will get picked off, at least once (fairly generous when you look at the USC turnover margin) so the key will be our D's ability to slow USC or hold em to field goals. Either way I can't wait, Hook 'Em.

[rbmcdonald]

If Cal wasn't deserving of a BCS Bowl over Texas, then wasn't Texas not deserving of one 2 years ago when Wazzu slammed them?

 

1220853[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

My intention was not to argue that Cal was not deserving. I think that you could have made an argument for either team to go. What irritated me was the people that seem to think that California was screwed, and it was so obvious that they should have been the one to go. I think that in part this was driven by the myth that some how the PAC-10 is far superior to the Big 12. Then you do not hear anything after Tech beats Cal, but next year it is the same old thing, about how inferior the BIG 12 is. In the last nine years the Holiday has been Big 12 v PAC 10 8 times, The Big 12 is 5-3 in those games. Hardly evidence that the PAC-10 is vastly better. If someone thinks the PAC-10 is a better conference top to bottom, fine. But the facts do not support such terms as "Big 12 stinks", "the conference (Big 12) is a joke" and "litte 12". All of which were used in this thread.

[GWPFFL BrianW]

I think that both conferences are down this year, and felt going into last years game that Cal (much like Oregon this year) was getting way to much credit for a quality LOSS. Much like Texas 2 years ago was getting way too much credit for quality losses.

[wildcat2334]

My intention was not to argue that Cal was not deserving.  I think that you could have made an argument for either team to go.  What irritated me was the people that seem to think that California was screwed, and it was so obvious that they should have been the one to go.  I think that in part this was driven by the myth that some how the PAC-10 is far superior to the Big 12.  Then you do not hear anything after Tech beats Cal, but next year it is the same old thing, about how inferior the BIG 12 is.  In the last nine years the Holiday has been Big 12 v PAC 10 8 times, The Big 12 is 5-3 in those games.  Hardly evidence that the PAC-10 is vastly better.  If someone thinks the PAC-10 is a better conference top to bottom, fine.  But the facts do not support such terms as "Big 12 stinks", "the conference (Big 12) is a joke" and "litte 12".  All of which were used in this thread.

 

1222531[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Come on- you cannot seriously be taking Holiday Bowl results as some way to measure the Big 12 vs. the Pac 10, I don't that is very revevant at all. I am not going by bowl results, per se- I mean there are plenty of times when, like Cal last year- they were crusehd, motivivation shot to hell. Lots of teams don't show up and play a solid game in 2nd tier bowl games. I put more weight on quality wins ( Which by the way tend to apply to conference games since that is the bulk of the schedule). I mean, the Big 12 just does not play tough, meaningful games outside their conference. What was your stat? 0-2 against top 25 teams?? ridiculous. I give Texas credit for going to OSU- definitely a quality win. I just honestly believe from watching alot of games, the PAC is a superior conference. I just think, for one the level of Offense is light years ahead of the Big 12. I mean, the Big 12 will have a UT, OU pop up year to year, and be solid- but as far as the conferences as a whole- the PAC is just flat out better. The tradition, the level of quality NFL players it produces, I really don't understand how anyone in the Big 12 cannot admit it is a weak football conference. As an Arizona alum, and avid college hoops fan, I can respect the level of quality hoops in the Big 12, and admit without question it is a stronger basketball conference. There are nice teams like UT this year that are very talented but week in and week out the Big 12 does not have enough good, competitive teams. The PAC may be down this year, but there are no Baylors, Kansas, Missouri- types of squads. Anyway- game should be interesting, I for one as a college football fan am hoping it is a close, solid game, I just don't see it undeing up that way.....

[polksalet]

"The PAC may be down this year, but there are no Baylors, Kansas, Missouri- types of squads."

[rbmcdonald]

Come on- you cannot seriously be taking Holiday Bowl results as some way to measure the Big 12 vs. the Pac 10

 

1222622[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

If you are going to claim that the results of head to head competition between Big-12 and PAC-10 teams in bowl games has no bearing in a discussion about which football conference is better. And you are going to argue that some how the results of games played by PAC-10 team against other PAC-10 teams does have a bearing on that discussion, then there is no point talking to you. You believe what you believe, and nothing anyone says or facts they show you will have any bearing on that.

 

Again to make my point clear. I have no problem with someone thinking that the PAC-10 overall is a better Football Conference than the Big-12. I do not agree with that, but I certainly recognize that the argument can be made, and that there are certainly facts to support that argument. What irritates me is when people make ridicules statements like “I really don't understand how anyone in the Big 12 cannot admit it is a weak football conference” or “the conferences as a whole- the PAC is just flat out better” or “The Big 12 STINKS- flat out- that conference is a joke” without any facts to support the statement (or distorted facts). It is all rhetoric, and of no value.

[wildcat2334]

" Big 12: The Big 12 is down despite Texas' run to the Rose Bowl. The North is a joke and Oklahoma's rebuilding year didn't help, either. "

 

 

Quote from ESPN College Football Insider. I guess, I am not the only one who uses Big 12 and the word joke in the same sentence.

 

FYI- he had the PAC 10 #3, Big 12 #5 in his BCS conference rankings.

[rbmcdonald]

1219788[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Coffeeman, I am suprised that nobody has pointed out the error on your tag-line to you.

[wildcat2334]

 

Texas - 60%

USC - 40%

 

Poll- as of 12/29/05 good stuff.

[Droobie42]

I had a question to those that have been to the rose bowl...are there a lot of scalpers at the game? My buddy has 1k to spend on a ticket, but would rather wait til the game starts and not pay 800 on ebay. Is he crazy or does he have a pretty good chance of getting a ticket? I think there will be scalpers just like any other sporting event and i'm trying to tell him he's crazy to think there won't be.

 

Our road trip begins Sunday Night...after we watch the cowboys (assuming the game actually means anything) Tempe monday for the fiest....la tue...rose bowl wed and maybe price is right/universal studios on thursday

[MojoMan]

TU by 10 although they could blow out sc by 28.

 

1212265[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

 

Polky hopes to be remembered for an outrageous prediction. See paragraph 3

 

http://forums.thehuddle.com/index.php?showtopic=137849&hl=

Edited January 4, 2006 by MojoMan