Jump to content
[[Template core/front/custom/_customHeader is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

USC - AP National Champions


Kansas State 2000
 Share

Recommended Posts

I want to offer congratulations and props to USC. I never thought anybody would hold my Wolverines to only 14 points. My guys got out-coached...9 quarterback sacks of Navarre! big_shoc The Michigan coaching staff did not have an answer for the Trojans defense. doah shrug USC also did a great job of making Chris Perry a non-factor.

 

I did not know USC had such a fast defense! I had not seen USC play this year and all I heard was that they had a soft schedule. Well, I guess that criticism doesn't mean anything.

 

Forget the BCS...USC is #1 as far as I'm concerned! Congrats again, USC fans. cool_thu

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sgt. Ryan:

College football has a National Championship game, and it hasnt been played yet.

 

The Sooners will be THE NATIONAL CHAMPS, and USC will be a paper version of a Champion.

You're right Ryan, USC will indeed be a paper champion: all the college football writers from all the papers across the country will vote them the AP National Champion. As we all know, the AP's "paper champion" was the one that mattered most before the arrival of the BCS system, which basically everyone now agrees is so flawed as to approach irrelevance.

 

The crystal football that's up for grabs on Sunday will sure look nice in somebody's trophy case, but the bottom line is it's not going to mean as much this season given the BCS fiasco. Regardless of what happens at the Sugar, many folks will view USC as this year's national champions, and deservedly so: they came into the Rose Bowl the unanimous #1 in both the human polls, and beat Michigan convincinly.

 

For you to argue otherwise further proves how blind to reality you are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I watched the whole game, the Michigan OL looked like Athena. But USC couldnt contain B Edwards all day. He dropped a TD on the firt drive, and a BS int off his shoe and this game could have turned out much differently. Michigan CBs looked slow as hell, and 28 pts is all USC could muster up on them. Hell I thought this team could put 40 on anyone. Didnt the lowly OSwho offense score 28 on Michigan.

 

Forgive me if I dont agree USC is the #1 team in the country. I watched OU destroy opponents virtually every week, and I watched them choke away a perfect season in what was called a game that didnt matter. Of course it mattered, as had they won, not a sole would be saying USC deserves Athena. USC lost to the weaker team, and played the weaker competition. All 3 teams have a loss, and the writers are penalizing teams for losing late, while the BCS got it right and made every loss hurt equally, whether its by 28 to a BCS team or 3 to a 6 loss team.

 

 

--------------------------------------------

 

Ryan, you're a real tool. OF COURSE it matters if a team loses late by 28 points vs. early by 3 pts, because you're supposed to have your s-hit together, and that is why USC was #1 going into last night's game in BOTH polls. The only other team to have a claim to #1 going into the Sugar on Sunday night is LSU, not OU, you ignorant **** !

 

If this were a playoff system, guess who's little team would be O-U-T in the first round? Sooners might get 1/2 of the NC title, but that's it. Nice try saying "End of discussion" too, as if you can stop the discussion with your brilliant comments....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A few more reasons why Ryan is a tool:

 

"...not a sole would be saying.." - are we all fish or shoes now? Think youi mean 'soul' Einstein.

 

"...the Michigan OL looked like Athena. But USC couldnt contain B Edwards all day" - do you think that might have something to do with USC's speed? And do you think that USC really worried much about stopping someone who was dropping passes and making mental mistakes all day? He wasn't even turned and looking for the ball that hit him in the foot, when he knew his QB was getting serious pressure all day - what a dweeb!

 

"Michigan CBs looked slow as hell, and 28 pts is all USC could muster up on them. Hell I thought this team could put 40 on anyone. Didnt the lowly OSwho offense score 28 on Michigan?" - Again, USC's speed makes anyone else look slow, although I will say a game vs. a more speedy LSU or OU would've been a different story. And FYI, it could've also easily been 38-14 if not for a missed FG and a TO deep in UM territory late in the game. It was 28-7 late in the 3rdQ, and it wasn't even that close. Also, OSU put up 28 points on UM in a come from behind, throw-it-every-down type situation, while USC did try to run some time off the clock. Norm Chow didn't even use half of his bag of tricks - if we'd kept throwing all night, we might've hung 50 on them....

 

Nightie night Ryan, enjoy your sleep for a few nights before your team gets their ass handed to them on Sunday night by a superior LSU team...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

davearm:

 

You're right Ryan, USC will indeed be a paper champion: all the college football writers from all the papers across the country will vote them the AP National Champion. As we all know, the AP's "paper champion" was the one that mattered most before the arrival of the BCS system, which basically everyone now agrees is so flawed as to approach irrelevance.

 

The crystal football that's up for grabs on Sunday will sure look nice in somebody's trophy case, but the bottom line is it's not going to mean as much this season given the BCS fiasco. Regardless of what happens at the Sugar, many folks will view USC as this year's national champions, and deservedly so: they came into the Rose Bowl the unanimous #1 in both the human polls, and beat Michigan convincinly.

 

For you to argue otherwise further proves how blind to reality you are.

 

And everybody considered the world to be flat before 1492. So your "AP champ used to be" arguement means nothing to me. But, fact of the matter is: whoever wins the BCS gets the crystal trophy and is this year's National Champion!

 

This year's BCS deboggle means nothing to me, as well. So, when OU hoists that crystal trophy tomorrow, the fact that USC fans are a bunch of whiners doesn't deter from the fact that OU will be the National Champions! Yeah, USC was tough this year and they whooped up on Michigan pretty good but, they aren't playing in the Sugar Bowl.

 

20 years from now when people are puffing out their chests bragging about whose team is better, nobody is going to remember about this garbage. All they will know is that the Oklahoma Sooners won the Sugar Bowl in 2003-2004 and that's just another National Championship Year that they got to paint up on the side of their stadium.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess we can wait until OU gets stomped by the superior LSU team, then maybe the Lil 12 Homers can accept that LSU and USC will be co-champs, that will be okay,huh, just not if OU wins :confused: wall_bas wall_bas

 

I take much more stock in the views of the VOTERS , than a computer that guesstimates. Also considering that Trev Alberts,Mark May,T.Bowden and EVERY SINGLE PERSON talked too or interviewed by ESPN considers a split national champion should be discarded by the opions of this forum yawn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think ESPN's Ivan Maisel pretty well sums up the majority opinion everywhere outside of OK and LA.

 

He really hit the nail on the head with this:

 

The winner of the Sugar Bowl will win the coaches' poll, and there will be two national champions, and we'll all survive. But even Michigan coach Lloyd Carr acknowledged the ludicrous corner that the American Football Coaches Association had painted itself into.

 

"I'm committed to vote the winner of the Sugar Bowl as the national champion," Carr said. "If I was a member of the media or the press, you could certainly make a case for Southern Cal. You could make me an honorary member."

 

In the latest Coaches Poll, USC got 37 of 63 first-place votes. Those 37 coaches that voted USC #1 coming into the Bowls will now be mandated by the AFCA to vote the Sugar Bowl winner #1, despite USC's dominance.

 

Who here wants to stand up and argue that those 37 coaches would have switched their vote anyway?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SGT. Ryan, you say the Pac 10 played no one yet they are 4-2 in bowls( and beat Texas ) don't they play in your precoius Lil 12? You say OU schdule was SOOO.... tough, yet the Lil 12 is 2-3 in the bowls and 1 win was against Navy jester . If OU does manifest a miracle and beat LSU, you and your Homey's can go to campus and squeeze the crystal cup tight,while the rest of the nation acknowledges the people's choice,USC. The fact of the matter is, OU got a gift, their schedule was overrated, the Lil 12 is weak and once the voters realized it, all be it late, they pulled the plug and dropped them to 3. So, #1 USC has already won and OU can only hope for a split.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First off, Ivan Maisel is an Idiot..

 

Secondly, USC deserves a share of the National Title under the wack way D1 determines "quaisi" national champs.

 

BUT, they deserve that no more than the winner of LSU/OU deserves their share. For folks to anoint USC THE champs before all the games are played, especially the Sugar Bowl which the the PAC-10 agreed would be THE national championship, is proposterous.

 

We all know that the only reason USC is ahead of LSU in the polls is because they lost before LSU. That's it, end of story.

 

USC has a very good team, but lets not give those freakin' sportswriters this kind of credit. The way they determine ranking is based somewhat on the games outcomes, and more on when those outcomes take place. Fair or unfair, that's the way they do it. I guarantee you if LSU loses Sept-27 and USC loses Oct-11, all else being the same, LSU is No1 and USC is No2. That's the way the AP has always done it.

 

I don't have any solutions, those are just my opinions. By the way, Gueax LSU!!

 

Travis

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Travisc7777:

BUT, they deserve that no more than the winner of LSU/OU deserves their share.  For folks to anoint USC THE champs before all the games are played, especially the Sugar Bowl which the the PAC-10 agreed would be THE national championship, is proposterous. 

thumbs_u I agree - I'm waiting until after the Sugar Bowl to claim that USC (a team that I despise) is hands-down the best team in the country. :D
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let us review,

 

Pac10 #6 APNRUCLA (who shouldn't have even been in a bowl) gets beat by Fresno St in a decent matchup 17-9

 

Pac10 #5 APNROSU routs New Mexico 55-14

 

Pac10 #4 APNRCal wins a shootout with AP#34 Va Tech 52-49

 

Pac10 #3 AP#30UO loses in the last minute due to piss poor decision by Belotti to call two time outs that allowed the AP#24 Gophers time to kick a FG and win the game 31-30.

 

Pac10 #2 AP#15WSU beats AP#5 Texas 28-20.

 

Pac10 #1 AP#1USC beats up on AP#4 Michigan 28-14.

 

That seems like pretty good Pac10 representation in the bowl games. However, all the writers and coaches rank the opponents/teams in the Pac10 as weak. How can that be?

 

USC, WSU, Cal, OSU, and UO are all top teams in college ball yet the conference still gets disrespected. If I'm not mistaken, I heard a stat last year that the Pac10 is the most represented conference for active NFL players. I guess that means nothing also.

 

These teams beat up on eachother throughout the season and everyone assumes they're weak.

 

Here are some regular season reminders for everyone who doubts the strength of the Pac10:

 

Cal 32- Southern Miss 2

Oregon 31- #4 Michigan 27

Oregon State 26- #18 Boise St 24

Southern Cal 23- Auburn 0

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information