College Football Again

[dalThor]

I can't believe South Carolina beat #1 Alabama by two touchdowns.

:)

And (former?) Heisman candidate Denard Robinson looked like dog doodoo. It's nice to see MSU wipe up U of M years in a row for a change. Though in all honesty, had Robinson not thrown the INTs he did, especially the two potential touchdowns in the first quarter, it would have been a totally different game.

[BLU-RAY]

Andrew Luck, on the other hand, may have righted his own Heisman bandwagon. That game was a blast, it's always fun to go out on the field after, but jesus, I must've lost a year or two off my life. That's at least the third XP Nate Whitaker has missed this season, but fortunately, he redeemed himself. And that true frosh WR for USC is a beast. All that said, I think this game turned out closer than it should have because we put the damn ball on the ground three times. Without those three fumbles, I think it's much less of a blood pressure hazard.

Also, it was scary as fuck to see Owusu out there playing the way he did one week after a concussion. He was awesome, and fun to watch, but yeesh.

[Bronn Stone]

Unlikely. Alabama is not going to drop out of the top ten for this one. Ohio State, Nebraska and TCU won handily. Oklahoma is idle. Boise State are very large favorites at home vs. Toledo.

Oregon seems on its way to a win. So. Carolina is unlikely to jump Arkansas, the Florida-LSU winner or Michigan State.

Barring upsets of Utah, Arizona, Stanford, Miami or Auburn, 12th-15th is about the best you can hope for.

Well, the AP poll is out (though I can't find the full thing). You got your wish. #10. Undeserved, IMO. Auburn should have dropped after a poor effort against a poor team, which should have made your loss to them less excusable. But the polls don't work that way.

ETA: Got the whole poll here.

[Starkimus]

Is hell freezing over? I think it is.

Because...

USC finally beat a #1 Team!!! Woohoo!! Damn, if only I were 15 years younger, with no kids...I would have gone downtown and celebrated like it was 1999.

In all my years of watching USC, I think I have only seen one or two other 'complete' games by the Gamecocks. First one was at Clemson back in 1993? When Tannyhill was the Quarterback, and signed the Tiger Paw. I was on the hill at that game (back in my college years). Oh my, how my Tigger friends were pissed.

The other was at home vs. Florida back when Urban Meyer first took over. That was an incredible win, even though Florida was down that year. Cevil Newton, what a talent, if only he didn't get a career ending injury during his heroics that game.

The best part of this game was this. It wasn't that Bama threw the game away, it wasn't that it was a nailbitter, it wasn't shear luck (which is how USC has one big games in the past), USC looked good...all day. The one blackmark was the safety at the begining of the 2nd half. And I will be honest, there was a small part in me (a huge part really), that said...oh damn...here we go again. Going to piss it away...

But we didn't. I just hope that Spurrier drills it into his boys heads, that although on paper, the next two games are wins...they still gotta get out there and play. On paper, we should be 7-1 when Arkansas comes calling. On paper that is...

Great game! And I am sure this was the wake up call Bama needed. I don't expect them to lose another game (except maybe the SEC title game!!!). Ok, that was wishful thinking.

Hasta!

Stark Out!

[Original Ned's Bones]

So much for my previous comments on Bama. That was fun to watch. I can't tell you how thrilled I am to see the Miami of this decade, Florida, drop another game. I wonder if we'll hear any "they were sick" excuses from Urban this year.

In the Big 12, everyone is drinking the Husker Kool-Aide and rightfully so until someone proves them wrong. I'm still unsure about Mizzou. It was a great accomplishment to shut out Colorado (even though it was Colorado), there have only been 3 shutouts in the last 5 years of Big 12 conference games. Their defense looks great, with the best front 4 they have had in several years, and that's without their All American candidate Aldon Smith, who will be back next week. Their kicking game has amazed me this year, at seems like at least once a game they are pinning teams back on their 1. Biggest concerns are still a lack of a real running game, and I hate to say it, but a questionable quarterback. Gabbert just looks off this year. He has happy feet in the pocket, holds the ball too long, and often zones in on 1 receiver. After the fifth game of the season, I still have no idea how they're going to be, even sitting at 5-0. This run in their schedule will give the answer, going to TX A&M, playing Oklahoma at home, and then Nebraska on the road.

[Ken Stone]

:)

:)

Congrats Sir Scot! That was a great win and it was fun to watch.

[lokisnow]

what a weekend, the drive from LA to SF is a long one, especially when you're starting at 1:30am and get only about 3 hours sleep before going to the Cal game. UCLA was pretty well destroyed, Cal's passing was no where near the sweet spot that Stanford and USC play at, but it didn't need to be. I didn't see any of the other Pac10 games other than about half the USC game, but I was disappointed in Arizona as much as I was pleased with Cal. Nice win for Arizona State, fuck washington.

Washington State led Oregon for a time, and they covered the spread for the last three weeks, I think playing that much above expectations with Oregon and USC and UCLA should hopefully get Paul Wulff off the hot seat with fans. it's unfortunate for Wulff that he has the worst possible home schedule for a coach in his position. when your only games at home are against the conference bruisers it's a fucking nightmare to try and persuade fans to attend the game.

UCLA has beaten its two tough non conference opponents, lost a heartbreaker away to its comparitively cupcake non conference opponent, and has been virtually shut out by its two conference opponents. And they struggled to win the conference scrimmage against Washington State.

I sort of feel the Pac10 is a bit easier to rate this week:

1. Oregon

2. Stanford

3. Oregon State (this is nuts, they're the only other 2-0 team in the conference!

4. Arizona

5. Cal

0. USC

6. Arizona State

7. Washington

8. UCLA

9. Washington State

the trickiest part is Cal/USC/Arizona State, USC clearly has a better offense than Cal with Barkley maturing into an amazing talent, but USC also has what amounts to a non-existent defense at the moment. at times they make tackles, but mostly they just allow a first down and then sometimes tackle, if they feel like it, but making stops is sort of beyond them. and USC has the worst field goal kicker of all time, which doesn't help things.

USC is the closest team to being unbeaten of any of the teams with a loss, we've lost by one point on a last second field goal, and by two points on a last second field goal. Clearly we need to work on field goal blocking. Or just stopping a two minute offense.

next week: Cal at USC, Zona at Wazzu, Oregon State at Washington,

UCLA, Oregon, Stanford, Arizona State are all idle. very lame.

[Bronn Stone]

USC has the worst field goal kicker of all time, which doesn't help things.

Cal's is worse. Really. The crowd gasps with delight any time a kickoff reaches the 10 yard line. Tedford won't really trust him over 40 yards. He gave away the Arizona game. His name is Giorgio Tavecchio. And he is really bad.

I think I'd flip-flop Cal and USC in your list. I expect the Trojans to be too much for the Bears this week.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

What's this I read about Boise State being atop the BCS Rankings? Any truth to that assertion? Someone needs to force Boise State to play in a real conference.

[Andriy Czarchenko]

What's this I read about Boise State being atop the BCS Rankings? Any truth to that assertion? Someone needs to force Boise State to play in a real conference.

Like say, Big East or ACC?

I´m also sure they would gladly switch to Nebraska´s creampuff of a schedule, but that wouldn´t be good enough when you´re seen as automatically inferior by some idiots.

[Starkimus]

Like say, Big East or ACC?

I´m also sure they would gladly switch to Nebraska´s creampuff of a schedule, but that wouldn´t be good enough when you´re seen as automatically inferior by some idiots.

There are 2 sides to this arguement (like all things). On the one hand, Boise State has proven time and again that they can play SINGLE games with the big boys of other conferences. They have won BCS bowl games. In my opinion, they deserve a lot of respect. The flip side of that is, Boise does not face teams like USC (the pretenders on the west coast), the Ducks, Stanford, or SEC foes like Bama, Auburn, LSU, Florida, or Big 10 foes like Michagin, M state, O State, on a weekly basis. I would add ACC and Big East here..but I dont think I would make any points...

So lets face it...Boise is never going to be beaten to smitherins by the end of the season, like teams from other major conferences. On a side note, did anyone catch the Auburn / Clemson game a few weeks back? I think that was one of the hardest hitting ballgames (on both sides) that I have seen in a long time!!

If Boise State is one of two undefeated teams, I say they should go to the National Title game. If Boise is one of three undefeated teams...and the other two are from major conferences, then it is going to be real hard to make a case for them.

Of course that will change if the Real USC goes 12-1 and wins the SEC..then I'll have to punt on Boise :P No bias of course...

Hasta!

Stark Out!

[lokisnow]

What if Michigan State and Ohio State both go undefeated? you have the nightmare scenario of the half the east coast media wanting them in the title game and the rest of the country going fucking apeshit at the prospect of one conference stealing both NC berths. This is the only year this could happen, but it's a distinct possibility if everyone else has one loss except Boise and TCU who don't really count, right?

http://www.cleveland.com/osu/index.ssf/2010/10/a_new_nightmare_scenario_for_t.html

It will be interesting to see which games the fake USC on the east coast (the courts agree ;)) drops this year and what team will rise to be SEC champion. Alabama will probably still win the conference, but Oklahoma, Oregon and Nebraska now have better shots at the NC berth than the SEC champ (and I don't really believe Auburn will stay undefeated any more than I think Michigan State will). And I have to figure that Boise and TCU have better chances of going to the NC than the winners of the big East or ACC, even still, for Boise or TCU to get into the NC the winner of the SEC and Big12 and Pac10 will all have to have two or more losses. a two loss SEC team will get in before Boise or TCU, imo.

in order of likelyhood of going to the NC game

1. Undefeated Big12 winner

2. Undefeated Big10 winner

3. One loss SEC winner

4. Undefeated Oregon

5. two loss SEC winner

6. one loss Big12 winner

7. one loss Big10 winner

8. Undefeated Boise

9. one loss ACC winner

10. three loss SEC winner

11. Undefeated TCU

12. undefeated Big10 co champion

13. Some pathetic team from the Big East with a conference championship

[Starkimus]

The courts are stuffed with California lawyers!!! We all know its true! USC was here before the 'other' USC!!

Ok, all joshing aside. I have seen USC play for too many years to really think they can go undefeated the rest of the season. Chances are, they will either screw up either at Kentucky or Vandy....OR...make us all really sweat by making it to the Florida game and then stinking it up there. My bet is actually on the Arkansas game, even though that is at home. I am thinking Arkansas will beat Auburn, and everyone else in the west, but still be screwed because they lost to Bama. So.. meh. As long as we do not 'give' games away (like we did at Auburn, and so many countless times in the past), I will be satisfied.

Also, this year, I do not think a 2 loss SEC team will make the NC game. Unless everyone else has 2 losses, and the non Big conference teams have 1 loss each. Just my opinion, but I have to think that from the SEC performance so far, it is kind of down this year. Georgia = suck but showing small signs of life. Tennessee = suck, period. Florida = maybe above average, but certainly not a powerhouse. LSU = lucky as hell, and that luck will run out. Auburn = Some luck, some good. They could actually be a top 10 team. Alabama = yeah, still the cream of the crop even though they lost. Arkansas = to me...might be the best team in the SEC, we shall see.

So, yeah, the SEC East is down, which is why it SHOULD be USC's year..but I am sure we will muck it up somehow. :)

Hasta!

Stark Out!

[lokisnow]

the tricky part is not so much the USC stanford and UCLA stanford games as it is the USC Cal and UCLA Cal games. I think it's more Cal is the holdout demanding all games be preserved and Stanford could be persuaded to just one rivalry game.

It seems marketing consideration nixed a zipper plus two plan as well, which would otherwise solve every objection by every school. Apparently the ACC is unpopular because nobody knows who is in what division, not because all twelve teams suck at football. ;)

a big bombshell dropped in sports illustrated today, Josh Luchs, former agent, participated in a tell all story about how corrupt the industry is, and this is just one guy who didn't even get into the higher echelons of players like Reggie Bush (Luchs was only paying in the thousands, not buying houses worth a couple hundred thousand).

Unfortunately, there will not be hundreds of vacated wins, returned trophies and vacated championships as the NCAA has an absurd four year statute of limitations on investigating allegations (and knowing that quite a few players confirmed they took money etc from Luchs).

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/magazine/10/12/agent/index.html?eref=sihp

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Stark,

Don't put the cart before the horse here. I make no claims to SC making a real run. We've got to play this thing one game at a time. Kentucky is not a push over and we've beaten them ten years in a row. SC coming off a big win has a history (the 84 Navy game when we were undefeated) of letting games we should win bite us in the ass. We can and should win at Kentucky I'm just not willing to say with certainty that we will. It all depends on how grounded the players are after the big win over Alabama.

[lokisnow]

Perfection is Elusive in Deep Pac10

How hard is undefeated (and untied)? In 1972, USC rolled to a 12-0 finish. The next time a conference team finished with a perfect record was Washington in 1991. After that, it was USC in 2004. All three were national champions.

How hard is it to go undefeated (and untied) in Pac-10 play? Besides those aforementioned seasons, and using that same time frame, USC also did it in 1973, 1976, 1988 and 2005. Arizona State was perfect until the Rose Bowl in 1996. UCLA lost two games in 1998 but was perfect in conference games.

That means teams ended up unbeaten in Pac-10 play just nine times in 38 seasons. For comparison's sake, the SEC champion was unbeaten in conference play seventeen times during that span-- 18, really, because two teams were unbeaten in the conference in 1981. In fact, it's happened seven times in the SEC since 1991.

*snip*

But perfection is rare. And the question of stringing together wins goes beyond Oregon. What about the conference producing multiple elite, top-10 teams? Or a second BCS bowl team? That hasn't happened since 2002.

Since the conference expanded to 10 teams in 1978, the Pac-10 has produced two or more teams that finished the season with two or fewer defeats just 10 times. And it hasn't happened at all since the nine-game, round-robin conference schedule was adopted in 2006.

Isn't it fascinating that the supposedly brutal SEC has produced an undefeated conference team almost 50% of the time while the supposedly easy PAC10 has produced an undefeated conference team less than 25% of the time?

It makes me chuckle that Mack Brown thinks that two berths at the BCS will be easier to get with a nine game conference round robin. I think he and Bob Stoops are in for a rude awakening in terms of how much harder their season is about to get next year. This also means that teams like Iowa State and Missouri (or Kansas State and Kansas) have a chance to do the Oregon State and Oregon thing and improve their schools reputation on their endurance and ability to close a season late and drop the traditional big bruisers to the south.

[Ken Stone]

Perfection is Elusive in Deep Pac10

Isn't it fascinating that the supposedly brutal SEC has produced an undefeated conference team almost 50% of the time while the supposedly easy PAC10 has produced an undefeated conference team less than 25% of the time?

So the argument here is that PAC10 is better because their best teams manage to lose a game almost every year?

[Bronn Stone]

The NFL has produced exactly two unbeaten regular seasons in the past forty years. Because it is really, really hard to go unbeaten in the NFL. I don't know off the top of my head, but I'd guess there were maybe three more where teams were unbeaten through the eleven or twelve games that constitute a college season. Not so true in some of the top-heavy but bottom weak college leagues.

The Pac 10 has NFL-like depth across the board. There are NO basket programs (though there are some basket teams and even some teams that go through 5-10 year streaks of poor play). From 1990 forward (20 seasons plus current), every single Pac 10 program has had either a champion representing the league in the Rose Bowl or a top 10 national finish in the polls. Every single one. Without exception. I believe that in that same time frame, Colorado had a national championship (shared) and Utah had a top 10 national finish so this will still be true when the Pac 12 starts play next year.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Merge the PAC-10 and SECOND extend the college season and see who has the better record after 5 years. It's the only way to be sure.

;)

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

SEC I hate blackberry auto-correct feature.