WOOOOHOOOO!!!!
A new school and Pac-10 record: 26 straight wins for USC.
If there is any justice in the world — or, to be more specific, any sanity in the polls (ha!) — ASU will rise in the rankings because they played USC so close, not fall because they lost. There is no shame in losing 38-28 to the #1 team in the country and consensus national-championship favorite in a game that wasn’t decided until the final three minutes. Hell, that might be the closest anyone comes to beating the Trojans this season!
Nice job, Sun Devils. And, way to go, Trojans!
P.S. Whew is right.
|
Categories: Audio clips
|
October 1st, 2005 at 7:59:29 pm
They pulled it out.
They played badly — for them.
October 1st, 2005 at 8:02:36 pm
Yeah. This was USC’s “down” game… and they still beat a very good team. Hence my saying that “that might be the closest anyone comes to beating the Trojans this season!”
October 1st, 2005 at 8:05:08 pm
Whew! [wipes brow]
October 1st, 2005 at 8:12:29 pm
Good for ASU … They played a really good team very close …
And congrats to the Trojans. I may give them a hard time about their (in my opinion) easy schedule, but no matter how you look at it, a 26-game win streak is impressive. Period.
October 1st, 2005 at 8:15:35 pm
For anyone not totally overwhelmed with East Coast Bias (or East of the Rocky Mountains Bias, whatever), I think the last two weeks have pretty well disproved the “USC’s schedule is easy” meme. You’ve seen them go on the road against two teams that are clearly quite good, and pull out one extremely impressive victory after early struggles, and one extremely gutty victory after early struggles. They’ve got two more road games against good teams: Notre Dame and Cal. I’m not saying it’s the toughest schedule in the country, but easy? No way.
October 1st, 2005 at 8:19:46 pm
P.S. I agree with the rest of what you said, Josh. :)
October 1st, 2005 at 8:20:38 pm
The Pac-10, in my opinion, is a better conference than a lot of people give them credit four. The last three losses USC has had have all been Pac-10 opponents and in the past 2+ years are the only teams to come close to beating them. I think the Pac-10 is very good — but fairly even.
October 1st, 2005 at 8:21:02 pm
for not four, dough… too much post game stress to thing clearly.
October 1st, 2005 at 8:21:24 pm
think not thing… not again…
October 1st, 2005 at 8:25:55 pm
Also, the term if “D’oh!”, not “dough”. That is, if we’re being picky…
October 1st, 2005 at 8:30:41 pm
sign, I need a nap, or a Scotch… or both…
October 1st, 2005 at 8:43:56 pm
I asked Regie Bush’s father, did you play football? His father said no I played basket ball. I then asked both of Regie Bush’s parents how Regie got into foot ball and both his parents said almost in unison
“It is a gift from god”
In deed!
What a fun game to watch!
October 1st, 2005 at 9:21:37 pm
Brendan - who will you root for when SC plays Notre Dame?
October 1st, 2005 at 9:23:50 pm
USC, of course. Gotta go with my undergrad alma mater!
October 1st, 2005 at 9:35:51 pm
Proud of my Devils.
October 1st, 2005 at 9:50:43 pm
ASU is a solid team. Save for two fluke plays they should have beaten LSU handily. And it says a lot that Keller threw so many picks and USC couldn’t dominate.
Sadly, I don’t think the Sun Devils will get the love they deserve in the polls. Ideally they should stay ranked ~#15, but will probably end up #23 or so…
The talent & coaching on the team would warrant a real top-15 look.
By the end of the season I expect the Sun Devils to have won out & earn a berth in the Holiday Bowl.
October 1st, 2005 at 10:02:31 pm
Here is my version of the standings in Brendan’s USC pool with the Az St. game included. This includes ONLY those with a perfect 4-0 record and only those who submitted their entries in the comments to Brendan’s announcement of the pool…as I mentioned earlier today in another post. This time I show the figures based on difference between USC’s actual winning margins and those projected by each person.
Andrew 46
Mike 58
B. Williams 58
Ken 60
Scientizzle 63
Brendan 69
girard 70
Ricardo 71
K. Moot 78
Jason Gilman 85
josh 86
Lisa 88
nug 89
Adrienne 89
Andy Waz 96
October 1st, 2005 at 10:06:58 pm
I’m working on the spreadsheet right now. I’m showing Andy Waz at 102, not 96… and Mike at 68, not 58. Dunno if it’s my mistake or yours — I’ll go back and check.
I’ll post the official standings a little later this evening. :) Thanks for the unofficial update, Ken.
October 1st, 2005 at 10:12:29 pm
Ken, your mistake on Andy was that he had USC losing to Oregon by 3, not winning by 3. That explains the 6-point difference between our numbers.
I’m not sure where the disrepancy on Mike is coming in, but I double-checked and 68 appears to be correct.
October 1st, 2005 at 11:32:37 pm
dcl, how many teams outside the pac-10 has USC played in the past three years?
choklahoma?
hail-to-the-2-2-1 michigan?
they are good but the pac-10 is just nowhere near as physical as other conferences.
did you or did you not see “mr. hollywood” leinart sprawled on the ground today after being tickled by the ASU defender?
October 1st, 2005 at 11:53:38 pm
Anonymous, don’t make me laugh. “Chokahoma” was undefeated and universally regarded as an excellent team right up until USC dismantled them 55-19. Your ability to use the Trojans’ vast superiority as an argument against us is remarkable. And Michigan? Isn’t that the same Michigan team that beat Notre Dame 38-0? I don’t know if you’re an Irish fan or just a general Trojan-basher, but if you’re the former, that’s an awfully weak argument. And even if you’re the latter, you might want to recall how Michigan beat Ohio State to end the Buckeye’s title hopes that year, only to be destroyed by the Trojans. Other high-quality “teams outside the pac-10″ that USC has defeated in the past three years: Auburn, Virginia Tech, and of course Notre Dame, by 31 points, twice (soon to be three times).
October 1st, 2005 at 11:54:43 pm
P.S. Your question, on its face, is idiotic. “how many teams outside the pac-10 has USC played in the past three years?” Umm, the same number of non-conference teams that everybody plays. Some of those teams have been cupcakes, which is hardly unusual. (Texas has its North Texases, Auburn has its Ball States and USC has its Hawaiis.) Some have been tough. We’ve played the SEC, we’ve played the ACC/Big East (whatever conference Virginia Tech was in that year), and in the two years before that, we played the Big 12 (Kansas State). And then in the bowls, as you point out but inexplicably deride, we’ve played the Big 10 and the Big 12. And we’ve won 26 in a row. Give me a f***ing break.
October 2nd, 2005 at 12:03:25 am
P.P.S. USC could beat the New England Patriots and you die-hard anti-Trojan folks would still say we have a weak schedule and didn’t earn it. If you’re capable of dismissing the 55-19 Orange Bowl win over Oklahoma, you’re capable of anything.
[/soapbox]
October 2nd, 2005 at 12:10:31 am
how many teams outside the pac-10 has USC played in the past three years?
Okay “Anonymous,” I’ll bite…
Non-conf. schedule (then-rankings included):
2002
#12 Notre Dame (big win)
#22 Auburn (close win)
#6 K State (close loss)
#14 Colorado (big win)
#3 Iowa (big win)
2003
Auburn (big win)
BYU (big win)
Hawaii (big win)
Notre Dame (big win)
#4 Michigan (big win)
2004
Virginia Tech (close win)
Colorado State (big win)
BYU (big win)
Notre Dame (big win)
#3 Oklahoma (big win)
That ain’t bad…In fact, it’s ridiculously good. So sit down and shaddup.
they are good but the pac-10 is just nowhere near as physical as other conferences.
What are you basing that on? The only teams that have played USC close in the last couple of years (besides VaTech) have been Pac-10 teams.
October 2nd, 2005 at 1:29:16 am
jes keeping things in perspective folks
USC could beat the New England Patriots
they quite possibly could have…
…when Pete Carroll was coaching the Patriots!
October 2nd, 2005 at 1:51:16 am
Good job, Scientizzle. I was too lazy to do all that research. :) But yeah.
You left out at least one “then-ranking,” though. Auburn was, as I recall, ranked #6 or #7 at the time of that game in 2003.
October 2nd, 2005 at 1:52:24 am
(For the record, I am not actually suggesting that USC could beat the Patriots. I’m just saying that, even if they did, some of you haters would still be complaining about their easy schedule.)
October 2nd, 2005 at 2:35:29 am
You’re right…I missed that one, Brendan. Auburn, in 2003, was ranked #6 at the beginning of the season.
The most important thing to note, however, is that each of these teams is a legit program from at least a mid-major conference (ND the obvious exception). Not necessarily the best teams, but clearly stiffer competition than many other major schools play.
Also, regarding Pete Carroll & the Patriots:
1997
10-6; won the AFC Eastern Division and advanced to the second round of the playoffs
1998
9-7; advanced to the playoffs
1999
8-8; just missed the playoffs
[Carroll’s overall record in New England was 27-21 in the regular season and 1-2 in the playoffs. He owns the franchise’s second-best winning percentage for a coach (54.9%)…]
So, again, Anonymous…sit down & shaddup. :)
October 2nd, 2005 at 3:30:48 am
the story of another nfl reject
2000
11-5; won the AFC Eastern Division and advanced to the second round of the playoffs
2001
11-5; advanced to the playoffs
2002
9-7; just missed the playoffs
total winning percentage 64.1%
the team: miami dolphins
the coach: dave wannstedt
the new team: pittsburgh
the difference: pitt doesn’t “do” jailbirds and jucos
October 2nd, 2005 at 3:57:27 am
Anonymous, USC started off 1-5 in 2001, PC’s first year. You can’t judge Wannstedt on his first four or five games, or even his first season; it takes at least two seasons to implement your system.
Also, going by the rankings of the team at the time USC played them is pretty dumb, IMO. The only poll that matters is the one at the end of the season, after the bowl games are done. Remember when fucla beat “#3-ranked” Alabama a few years ago, and then ‘Bama ended up 3-8? Exactly. Polls are meaningless in the middle of the season.
October 2nd, 2005 at 4:04:52 am
True, Andrew, “then-ranked” means little…but I didn’t wanna go find the final rankings of each team.
October 2nd, 2005 at 4:05:13 am
Also Anonymous, USC’s dominance is not built on either jailbirds or jucos. On average USC brings in 2 or 3 jucos a year, but that is nothing compared to Kansas State, Nebraska, and other programs. On their starting roster, the Trojans have a juco transfer starting at left guard, and a juco transfer starting at free safety. 2 players out of 22 is nothing. Also, USC accepts hundreds of junior college transfers every year; how many does Notre Dame accept every year? My guess is not many, because ND wants to get four years’ worth of tuition money….
The jailbirds comment is inaccurate, too. How many kids has USC recruited that were talented but troubled in high school? None. I remember only two years ago, the top DB in the entire nation was at Los Alamitos HS, not too far from my house, and many considered him to be a lock for USC. Then he got caught selling dope, and the Trojans immediately withdrew their offer even though he was the #1-rated safety in the nation.
As far as the athletes that get in trouble with the law once at USC are punished. Thus, Eric Wright transferred, and Winston Justice had to sit out an entire year to get back in good graces with the university.
Your slur speaks more to your own ignorance and bias than it does to the reality of the situation. But then, that’s why you post anonymously, because you’re an ignorant pussy.