Rose Bowl: SC vs. Illinois

[johngateswhiteley]

SC: 39
Illini: 17

[spursRgay]

USC rolls in this one

[djohn14]

Yep, go Juice, but the juice will run out

[SanAntonioBuckeye]

SC by a wide margin!

[johngateswhiteley]

SC by a wide margin!

besides playing lsu in the title game, a nice matchup considering the 2003 split title, i would have loved playing the buckeyes. i think we would work them...kind of like michigan last year. now, what pisses me off is lsu is going to equal SC with 2 titles in the last 6 years. but SC will still have been to more BCS games and have more BCS wins...and i can't pull for ohio state b/c they suck ass as does the big 10, plus then i would have to listen to espn suck their cock as they already do...for no reason i might add.

[DisgruntledLionFan#54,927]

Illini 73

USC 14

[johngateswhiteley]

USC 73

Illini 14


yeah, perhaps. i just don't know if Pete will run up the score that high.

[Jimcs50]

:sleep

[Thunder Dan]

besides playing lsu in the title game, a nice matchup considering the 2003 split title, i would have loved playing the buckeyes. i think we would work them...kind of like michigan last year. now, what pisses me off is lsu is going to equal SC with 2 titles in the last 6 years. but SC will still have been to more BCS games and have more BCS wins...and i can't pull for ohio state b/c they suck ass as does the big 10, plus then i would have to listen to espn suck their cock as they already do...for no reason i might add.
so USC fan wants the whole world to foget that they lost to Stanford at home? I understand that Booty was hurt, but that argument only works if you lose to Oregon or UCLA. Stanford is one of the worst programs in the country. USC might be the best team on paper, but they are not the best team in the counrty. Thei "dynasty" only has one BCS Title. Here are some stats

Team A
1 BCS Title
6 BCS Apperances
4-1 in BCS Games

Team B
1 BCS Title
4 Apperances
3-0 record

Team c
1 BCS Title
6 BCS Apperances
4-1 in BCS Games

Team D
1 BCS Title
6 Apperances
2-3 record

which one of these looks like the Dynasty of the group? I don't think any of them.


(Team A: Ohio State, Team B:LSU , Team C: USC, Team D: Oklahoma)


The funny thing is that if Ohio State didn't get blown out last year vs Florida, nobody would ever question the fact that they are one of the top 2 programs in the country. But since that happened everyone became college football experts by sitting on their couch and reading stuff on the internet. They believe that programs should be judged by one game, and not the enitre body of work.....oh wait.. those people also want us to forget the entire body of work that the 2007 USC Trojans by arguing that they never lost to one of the 10 worst programs in college football this decade.

[johngateswhiteley]

so USC fan wants the whole world to foget that they lost to Stanford at home? I understand that Booty was hurt, but that argument only works if you lose to Oregon or UCLA. Stanford is one of the worst programs in the country. USC might be the best team on paper, but they are not the best team in the counrty. Thei "dynasty" only has one BCS Title. Here are some stats

Team A
1 BCS Title
6 BCS Apperances
4-1 in BCS Games

Team B
1 BCS Title
4 Apperances
3-0 record

Team c
1 BCS Title
6 BCS Apperances
4-1 in BCS Games

Team D
1 BCS Title
6 Apperances
2-3 record

which one of these looks like the Dynasty of the group? I don't think any of them.


(Team A: Ohio State, Team B:LSU , Team C: USC, Team D: Oklahoma)


USC is the best team in the country, losing to Stanford doesn't change that. do they deserve to be in the title game?...no, b/c they lost to stanford. thats the difference.

as for your dynasty argument, you're not taking into account periods of time and ignore USC's 2003 title. anyone who doesn't count USC's title in 2003, outside of LSU fan, is completely ignorant. the coaches poll is contractually obligated to VOTE for the winner as the national champion...the AP is not. they can decide, though they have only done it once (USC), another team deserves the title.

therefore in the previous 5 years(exclusive of this season):

Southern Cal

1. 5 BCS bowl games
2. 4-1 in BCS (only loss in 2005 BCS title game)
3. closest margin of the 4 wins was 14 points
4. 2 national championships (back2back and played for a 3rd straight)

Ohio State

1. 4 BCS bowl games
2. 3-1 in BCS
3. blown out by florida in last years title game
4. 1 national championship

LSU

1. 2 BCS bowl games
2. 2-0 in BCS
3. 1 national championship

Oklahoma

1. 4 BCS bowl games
2. 1-3 BCS


...to met its clear that USC is the best program in the last 5 years, would i call them a dynasty?...not sure, but they are definitely the closest thing to it. its nearly impossible to win back2back national championships and play for a 3rd straight these days. if USC wins it all next year, then i think you can make a claim for a dynasty....plus, lets see how this years bowls play out.

not to mention USC has won the last 5 Pac-10 titles, while ohio state has only won 3 of 5 of their conference titles.

[Thunder Dan]

USC is the best team in the country, losing to Stanford doesn't change that. do they deserve to be in the title game?...no, b/c they lost to stanford. thats the difference.

as for your dynasty argument, you're not taking into account periods of time and ignore USC's 2003 title. anyone who doesn't count USC's title in 2003, outside of LSU fan, is completely ignorant. the coaches poll is contractually obligated to VOTE for the winner as the national champion...the AP is not. they can decide, though they have only done it once (USC), another team deserves the title.

therefore in the previous 5 years(exclusive of this season):

Southern Cal

1. 5 BCS bowl games
2. 4-1 in BCS (only loss in 2005 BCS title game)
3. closest margin of the 4 wins was 14 points
4. 2 national championships (back2back and played for a 3rd straight)

Ohio State

1. 4 BCS bowl games
2. 3-1 in BCS
3. blown out by florida in last years title game
4. 1 national championship

LSU

1. 2 BCS bowl games
2. 2-0 in BCS
3. 1 national championship

Oklahoma

1. 4 BCS bowl games
2. 1-3 BCS


...to met its clear that USC is the best program in the last 5 years, would i call them a dynasty?...not sure, but they are definitely the closest thing to it. its nearly impossible to win back2back national championships and play for a 3rd straight these days. if USC wins it all next year, then i think you can make a claim for a dynasty....plus, lets see how this years bowls play out.

not to mention USC has won the last 5 Pac-10 titles, while ohio state has only won 3 of 5.

I said "BCS Titles" as anything else is not recognized by the NCAA as a National Title, so in terms of how history will be read, they only have one title. I think USC is a very good team, but they are not levels above anyone else (that was my point in the post). USC is on par with LSU, OSU, and Oklahoma. I think out of those 4, they are at the top, but the 2nd team is close. I don't get too caught up with conference titles because since 2002, the Big Ten has been a better conference than the Pac-10. This year was the opposite, and the future could be different, but since 2002 the Pac-10 has been a weak conference with USC miles ahead of any actual competition. For instance, since 2002 6 Big Ten Teams have made it to BCS games, as opposed to 3 different teams from the Pac-10 (Penn St., Ohio State, Michigan, Wisonsin, Iowa)(Washington State, Oregon, USC).


But USC plays Ohio State next September so we shall see

[johngateswhiteley]

I said "BCS Titles" as anything else is not recognized by the NCAA as a National Title, so in terms of how history will be read, they only have one title. I think USC is a very good team, but they are not levels above anyone else (that was my point in the post). USC is on par with LSU, OSU, and Oklahoma. I think out of those 4, they are at the top, but the 2nd team is close. I don't get too caught up with conference titles because since 2002, the Big Ten has been a better conference than the Pac-10. This year was the opposite, and the future could be different, but since 2002 the Pac-10 has been a weak conference with USC miles ahead of any actual competition. For instance, since 2002 6 Big Ten Teams have made it to BCS games, as opposed to 3 different teams from the Pac-10 (Penn St., Ohio State, Michigan, Wisonsin, Iowa)(Washington State, Oregon, USC).


But USC plays Ohio State next September so we shall see

thats incorrect. the NCAA does recognize USC's title in 2003...don't know where you got that idea from. i am not even going to comment on the Pac-10 being weak or not.

USC has an incredibly difficult non-conference schedule next year:

2008

@Virginia
Ohio state

2009

San Jose State
@ Ohio State

2010

@Hawaii >>>>>>>>>> take note Hawaii apologists, we are going to kick the shit out of your team again, just like last time
Virginia

...SC has done a great job of scheduling non-conference opponents, as of late.

[j-6]

According to the NCAA's website, USC was granted a share in 02, 03, 04, and 05.

http://www.ncaa.org/champadmin/ia_football_past_champs.html

[DisgruntledLionFan#54,927]

USC 30

Detroit 13

[johngateswhiteley]

According to the NCAA's website, USC was granted a share in 02, 03, 04, and 05.

http://www.ncaa.org/champadmin/ia_football_past_champs.html

http://www.answers.com/topic/ncaa-division-i-a-national-football-championship

[johngateswhiteley]

USC 300

Detroit 13

perhaps. i don't know if Pete would run the score up that high.

[DisgruntledLionFan#54,927]

perhaps. i don't know if Pete would run the score up that high.

Why is that all SC players that come to Detroit flat out suck?

Williams is pushing 270+ on the Titans(perfect for VY) and Cody couldn't hand fight his way put of a paper bag.

[Vizzini]

Why is that all SC players that come to Detroit flat out suck?

Williams is pushing 270+ on the Titans(perfect for VY) and Cody couldn't hand fight his way put of a paper bag.

Don't forget about Rodney Peete and Chris Claiborne as well. SC has given Detroit some shitty players.

[DisgruntledLionFan#54,927]

Don't forget about Rodney Peete and Chris Claiborne as well. SC has given Detroit some shitty players.


Peete gets a pass from me. Fontes fucked that whole QB situation up.

Claiborne ate his way out of the league as well.

[Thunder Dan]

thats incorrect. the NCAA does recognize USC's title in 2003...don't know where you got that idea from. i am not even going to comment on the Pac-10 being weak or not.

USC has an incredibly difficult non-conference schedule next year:

2008

@Virginia
Ohio state

2009

San Jose State
@ Ohio State

2010

@Hawaii >>>>>>>>>> take note Hawaii apologists, we are going to kick the shit out of your team again, just like last time
Virginia

...SC has done a great job of scheduling non-conference opponents, as of late.
Ohio State goes USC 2008/2010, Miami Fla 2009/2010, Oklahoma 2011/2012

[JamStone]

USC is the best team in the country, losing to Stanford doesn't change that.

Actually, losing to Standford is one of the main reasons USC is not the best team in the country. Don't know the logic to that statement. And, it's not like Stanford was the only team that beat them.

No one cares about the Rose Bowl this year anyway. USC probably wins easily but Juice and Mendenhall will be a lot tougher than USC fans expect. And, their defense is solid.

But, again, no one really cares anyway.

[johngateswhiteley]

Actually, losing to Standford is one of the main reasons USC is not the best team in the country. Don't know the logic to that statement. And, it's not like Stanford was the only team that beat them.

No one cares about the Rose Bowl this year anyway. USC probably wins easily but Juice and Mendenhall will be a lot tougher than USC fans expect. And, their defense is solid.

But, again, no one really cares anyway.

no, it means SC let their guard down. they are playing better than anyone else right now and its shame they lost to stanford, otherwise its another title game.

nobody cares? lol...poor jamstone.

only a day and a half till the rose bowl!

[JamStone]

no, it means SC let their guard down. they are playing better than anyone else right now and its shame they lost to stanford, otherwise its another title game.

nobody cares? lol...poor jamstone.

only a day and a half till the rose bowl!


The "best team in the country" doesn't let their collective guard down against a shitty team. And, again, Stanford wasn't their only loss.

And, yes, no one but USC and Illini fans care about the Rose Bowl this year. Sorry. They don't.

[johngateswhiteley]

The "best team in the country" doesn't let their collective guard down against a shitty team. And, again, Stanford wasn't their only loss.

And, yes, no one but USC and Illini fans care about the Rose Bowl this year. Sorry. They don't.

you don't have to be sorry...your not the authority on anything rose bowl related except SC trashing michigan. but thanks for letting me know nobody cares...thats a big relief. lmao...

[Dre_7]

plus then i would have to listen to espn suck their cock as they already do

:lol The irony of that stantment, and from an SC fan. HAHAHA

[BeerIsGood!]

Man, Illinois sucks balls. One dimensional and not even great at that dimension. Worst Rose Bowl Ever.

[LaMarcus Bryant]

If your the NCAA you set up the system so that USC's BCS bowl is always in their backyard at the Rose Bowl
not only that but instead of putting them against a pretty good team like OU, they put them against a team that won 6 games the previous 3 years

this is pathetic
usc is so worthless, how good are they when they have to travel a whopping 45 miles to their bowl game?

[JamStone]

Big Ten sucked balls this year. Illinois offense is atrocious.

[BeerIsGood!]

Just when USC started to show their suckness Illinois fumbles going into the end zone. I had to watch the replay to make sure it wasn't Jamaal Charles.

[scott]

Good thing the Tournament of Roses got to have their stupid parade, otherwise this absolutely sucky football game wouldn't be acceptable. :rolleyes

[slayermin]

Good thing the Tournament of Roses got to have their stupid parade, otherwise this absolutely sucky football game wouldn't be acceptable. :rolleyes

If you live in Pasadena, it's on. The Trojan clan will be out in full force.

[Dirk Nowitzki]

no, it means SC let their guard down. they are playing better than anyone else right now and its shame they lost to stanford, otherwise its another title game.

nobody cares? lol...poor jamstone.

only a day and a half till the rose bowl!


USC is overrated. They had their 1 National Title year and then were dethroned by Texas the next season. They had nice seasons the past 2 years but they literally werent good enough to make it to the big dance. You lost to Standford and got your asses kicked by Oregon. You didnt deserve to be in the National Title game. Oh and the winner of the National title game will have had more championships than USC this decade. Best team in the country my ass. If they were the best they wouldnt have lost twice.

[slayermin]

USC is overrated. They had their 1 National Title year and then were dethroned by Texas the next season. They had nice seasons the past 2 years but they literally werent good enough to make it to the big dance. You lost to Standford and got your asses kicked by Oregon. You didnt deserve to be in the National Title game. Oh and the winner of the National title game will have had more championships than USC this decade. Best team in the country my ass. If they were the best they wouldnt have lost twice.

ABC listed Pete Carroll with two National Championships.

[johngateswhiteley]

ABC listed Pete Carroll with two National Championships.

thx slayermin.

[spursRgay]

what a beat down...nice call by inviting Illinois :lol

[Dirk Nowitzki]

ABC listed Pete Carroll with two National Championships.

The one in 2004 doesnt count. LSU was the National Champs that year. USC wasnt in the National Title game so they cant be called National Champions if they werent in the actual title game. 2005 was legit and they lost in 2006.

[spursRgay]

The one in 2004 doesnt count. LSU was the National Champs that year. USC wasnt in the National Title game so they cant be called National Champions if they werent in the actual title game. 2005 was legit and they lost in 2006.

they were the AP national champs and LSU was the BCS champ

[Dirk Nowitzki]

they were the AP national champs and LSU was the BCS champ

BCS champs is the one that matters. Fact remains USC is overrated.

[johngateswhiteley]

BCS champs is the one that matters. Fact remains USC is overrated.

do you enjoy not making any sense? ...enjoy that.

[Ignignokt]

USC = chode > johngateswhiteley


Mookie > El pimpo's ex > Elpimpo.

[johngateswhiteley]

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/bowls07/columns/story?columnist=schlabach_mark&id=3176724

[Dirk Nowitzki]

Haha@nations best. Dont lose to teams like Stanford and Oregon if you want to be called that. If they truly were the best, they would be in the National Championship game.

[johngateswhiteley]

Haha@nations best. Dont lose to teams like Stanford and Oregon if you want to be called that. If they truly were the best, they would be in the National Championship game.

bro, stop posting in this thread...you're too smart.

[leemajors]

greatness.

[johngateswhiteley]

greatness.

we are all witnesses.

[Dirk Nowitzki]

bro, stop posting in this thread...you're too smart.

Says the biased USC fan. You arent the best team in the country when you lose to Standford at home.

BTW Vince Young > Matt "pretty boy" Leinart in college and NFL. Made it to the playoffs in a tougher division and conference with lesser offensive weapons. Kurt Warner did a better job than the pretty boy and almost led them to the playoffs. While Young hasnt had a great season, it was better than Leinart's.

[Mr Dio]

This game showed that the Trojans proved they could whip up on the 3rd best team in the Big 10.

[Cant_Be_Faded]

if USC still had the Ting Brothers, they'd be the easily the most unassailable defense of the entire history of the NCAA

[johngateswhiteley]

greatness...

[LaMarcus Bryant]

ting