My Top 10 in November

[Simon]

Aside from Penn State, probably not a lot different than my Top10 in October or September. It'll annoy some people no matter what month it is.

 

1) Texas

2) Georgia

3) Alabama

4) Penn State

5) Miami

6) Ohio State

7) Florida

8) USC

9) LSU

10) Virginia Tech

 

Notes:

>Notre Dame doesn't make it because they haven't actually beat a real good team yet.

>USC is low because they haven't actually played a real good team yet. (for about 3 years)

>Florida State was a real factor until they found a way to lose to NC State.

>Georgia has Shockley back and deserves a lot more respect than they ever seem to get.

[bartshan-83]

1) Texas

2) Georgia

3) Alabama

4) Penn State

5) Miami

6) Ohio State

7) Florida

8) USC

9) LSU

10) Virginia Tech

 

Notes:

>Notre Dame doesn't make it because they haven't actually beat a real good team yet.

>USC is low because they haven't actually played a real good team yet. (for about 3 years)

>Florida State was a real factor until they found a way to lose to NC State.

>Georgia has Shockley back and deserves a lot more respect than they ever seem to get.

496660[/snapback]

 

 

I'll give you a pass on ND because I can imagine if I wasn't as fan, I could see that argument.

 

I don't quite understand Florida. How can you give them the same #7 and leave ND out on the same basis? WHO has Florida beaten besides Georgia w/o their QB? No one. They have lost their only tough games.

 

C'mon man, your USC argument is getting a little silly. This season alone they have beaten TWO very good football teams. First they trounced Oregon AT Oregon and handed them their only loss. And they beat Notre Dame South Bend. They have beaten the #7 and #11 teams AWAY. And what about last year? Does beating the #2 team in the country, Oklahoma, 55-19 in the NATL champ game not count? Wins over Cal, AZ St. and Michigan not count? Give them their due.

 

Mine would look like this:

 

1. USC

2. Texas

3. Alabama

4. Miami

5. VT

6. PSU

7. ND

8. Georgia

9. LSU

10. OSU

[smokinandjokin]

Aside from Penn State, probably not a lot different than my Top10 in October or September. It'll annoy some people no matter what month it is. 

 

1) Texas

2) Georgia

3) Alabama

4) Penn State

5) Miami

6) Ohio State

7) Florida

8) USC

9) LSU

10) Virginia Tech

 

Notes:

>Notre Dame doesn't make it because they haven't actually beat a real good team yet.

>USC is low because they haven't actually played a real good team yet. (for about 3 years)

>Florida State was a real factor until they found a way to lose to NC State.

>Georgia has Shockley back and deserves a lot more respect than they ever seem to get.

496660[/snapback]

 

 

Genius Simon is spewing more garbage around the college football forum. You immediately lose all credibility for placing Georgia at #2 and Alabama at #3. Florida at #7 and Southern Cal at #8??? You are a clown.

 

I already listed the Top-10 teams USC has beaten in the past three years here. But while stating that they haven't beaten a Top 10 team, you also stated that you place no stock in the info I listed because, in your opinion, the rankings are flawed. Oh yeah, and Bowl Games don't count. The national championship game is a pointless bowl game? If anyone else wants a good chuckle, you can read Simon's Einstein reply here.

 

As an alumni of USC, I don't pretend that my views are not biased. But I am also willing to wager that I have seen three-times as many USC games as you have over the past 4 years, and I have not seen a college team that is better. Texas can probably hang in with them, but other than that, USC is dominant. Because they beat teams by 35 points, you assume their schedule is weak. And yet you list Texas as your #1, playing in the INCREDIBLE Big 12.

 

Going on the road to defeat Notre Dame, Oregon, and Arizona State, plus Cal and UCLA in the next few weeks, is no easy task. But you keep making up things to defend your ass-backwards rankings. You think USC would have squeaked one out at home vs. Vanderbilt in OT, like your #7 Florida did?

 

Your #8 team has won 31 straight, #1 in the AP poll for 29 straight weeks, and has won 42 out of 43 games, with the only loss coming at Cal in 3OT. They have the best QB, the best RB, and one of the top 5 WR in the nation. I don't know why you have to continue to trash them and their schedule.

[R. Rich]

     

 

Genius Simon is spewing more garbage around the college football forum.  You immediately lose all credibility for placing Georgia at #2 and Alabama at #3.  Florida at #7 and Southern Cal at #8???  You are a clown.

 

I already listed the Top-10 teams USC has beaten in the past three years here.  But while stating that they haven't beaten a Top 10 team, you also stated that you place no stock in the info I listed because, in your opinion, the rankings are flawed.  Oh yeah, and Bowl Games don't count.  The national championship game is a pointless bowl game?    If anyone else wants a good chuckle, you can read Simon's Einstein reply here.

 

As an alumni of USC, I don't pretend that my views are not biased.  But I am also willing to wager that I have seen three-times as many USC games as you have over the past 4 years, and I have not seen a college team that is better.  Texas can probably hang in with them, but other than that, USC is dominant.  Because they beat teams by 35 points, you assume their schedule is weak.  And yet you list Texas as your #1, playing in the INCREDIBLE Big 12.

 

Going on the road to defeat Notre Dame, Oregon, and Arizona State, plus Cal and UCLA in the next few weeks, is no easy task.  But you keep making up things to defend your ass-backwards rankings.  You think USC would have squeaked one out at home vs. Vanderbilt in OT, like your #7 Florida did?

 

Your #8 team has won 31 straight, #1 in the AP poll for 29 straight weeks, and has won 42 out of 43 games, with the only loss coming at Cal in 3OT.  They have the best QB, the best RB, and one of the top 5 WR in the nation.  I don't know why you have to continue to trash them and their schedule.

496723[/snapback]

 

 

Be nice. Remember, attack the post, NOT the poster.

 

 

As for your "USC is the best in college football" statement, that may or may not be true. It's hard to discount what Auburn did last year in THE most competitive conference in the nation, no less! To run the table in the SEC? That's impressive. As long as teams like USC and Texas can recruit well (and they can), they should be in the mix regularly, since the Pac 10 and Big 12 conferences aren't nearly as competitive as the SEC, ACC, or the Big 11. Personally, I think USC is among the best right now (considering they've won 2 "national titles" and have Reggie Bush, who is clearly the most dynamic player in college football now), but to say they have the best team? I just don't know. I imagine they'd have a much tougher road playing the tougher defenses in the conference I mentioned earlier than they would running through the Pac 10. Now, if they were playing those teams weekly and still put up the numbers they have been, then I'd say they're clearly the best in college football.

[Simon]

How can you give them the same #7 and leave ND out on the same basis? WHO has Florida beaten besides Georgia w/o their QB? No one. They have lost their only tough games.

That's a fair argument. I think the win vs Georgia was a real quality win even with Shockley out. And I think they've played a far tougher schedule (Tenn, 'Bama, LSU, Georgia) than Notre Dame but have still compiled a better record. That's why I gave them the nod over the Irish.

 

Does beating the #2 team in the country, Oklahoma, 55-19 in the NATL champ game not count? ...........The national championship game is a pointless bowl game?

It's a solid win for them and maybe the best thing on their resume in the last 3 years. But I don't believe for a second that Oklahoma was the second best team in the country (or even in the Top10) when they beat them. The fact that they've dropped about 40 spots less than a year later seems to support that theory.

 

As an alumni of USC, I don't pretend that my views are not biased.

Well that about says it all right there, doesn't it?

 

Because they beat teams by 35 points, you assume their schedule is weak.

No, I assume their schedule is weak because the teams they play suck.

 

Going on the road to defeat Notre Dame, Oregon, and Arizona State, plus Cal and UCLA in the next few weeks, is no easy task.....You think USC would have squeaked one out at home vs. Vanderbilt in OT, like your #7 Florida did?

Wow, they lucked out and beat Notre Dame who hasn't beat anybody yet. Congratulations. And if you want to convince me that they have a difficult schedule, you can leave those PAC-10 tomato cans off your ridiculous list of "tough" opponents.

And I don't know if they'd have squeaked out a win vs Vandy. They may very well have been beaten.

 

Your #8 team has won 31 straight, #1 in the AP poll for 29 straight weeks, and has won 42 out of 43 games, with the only loss coming at Cal in 3OT. They have the best QB, the best RB, and one of the top 5 WR in the nation. I don't know why you have to continue to trash them and their schedule.

They've won 31 straight against a candy-assed schedule. They're #1 according to a bunch of figure skating judges. And Mike Williams was also "the best" until he had to play against real defenders for the first time in his life.

And saying your team is the 8th best team in the country is hardly what I call "trashing" them. Wow, you really get upset when somebody doesn't teabag your team like the national media.

 

I imagine they'd have a much tougher road playing the tougher defenses in the conference I mentioned earlier than they would running through the Pac 10. Now, if they were playing those teams weekly and still put up the numbers they have been, then I'd say they're clearly the best in college football.

Exactly

You take any one of those Top7 teams I listed and put them in the joke that is the PAC-10, they go undefeated every year and are considered some sort of dynasty.

But if you put USC in the SEC or the Big10 where they have to play real football teams throughout the season, then USC goes 9-2 or 8-3 and ends up on the outside with all the other good teams who don't get to play a postseason game because they had to play a real schedule in a real conference.

 

If USC wants my respect, they need to go play a few tough physical teams; not the pussified Pac-10. They don't even have to play anybody on my Top10 list; have them go play Wisconsin, Auburn, Florida State and Colorado like other teams have to. If they still go undefeated I'll consider putting them at the top even though they still won't have played a Top10 team. Until then, they can stay right around #8 where the Pac-10 "champion" belongs.

[smokinandjokin]

Wow, you really get upset when somebody doesn't teabag your team like the national media. 

496951[/snapback]

Not looking for a teabag, just looking for you to start making some sense. You should try watching a few games instead of just saying that the Pac-10 is soft.

 

But if you put USC in the SEC or the Big10 where they have to play real football teams throughout the season, then USC goes 9-2 or 8-3 and ends up on the outside with all the other good teams who don't get to play a postseason game because they had to play a real schedule in a real conference.

496951[/snapback]

The SEC is probably the best conference in the country, but the top teams aren't elite teams. Alabama and Georgia are both going to be exposed before this year is out. LSU blew a huge lead at home against a sad Tennessee team. Auburn has been flying under the radar, and Florida is nothing special. The rest of that conference is questionable at best. Tell me these aren't cakewalk games: Vanderbilt, Kentucky, Ole Miss, Miss State, Arkansas?

 

And the Big 10??? Please!!! Penn State is a solid team, and Northwestern is entertaining to watch. Everyone else is a pretender in that conference. They all beat up on each other because they are all jokers who can't win on the road.

 

If USC wants my respect, they need to go play a few tough physical teams; not the pussified Pac-10. They don't even have to play anybody on my Top10 list; have them go play Wisconsin, Auburn, Florida State and Colorado like other teams have to. If they still go undefeated I'll consider putting them at the top even though they still won't have played a Top10 team. Until then, they can stay right around #8 where the Pac-10 "champion" belongs.

496951[/snapback]

 

First game of last season, USC @ Virginia Tech (in D.C.), USC wins 24-13. Yep, that same VT team that was the ACC "champion" last year and was as high as #3 this year.

 

First game of the 2003 season: USC @ Auburn, USC wins 23-0. Yep, that Auburn team had Jason Campbell, Ronnie Brown, and Cadillac Williams and was ranked #9 in the country at the time. USC walked into their house and destroyed them.

 

USC smothered Michigan, the Big 10 "champion", in the Rose Bowl 28-14. Michigan never had a prayer in that game. Oh yeah, bowl games don't count with you because players don't take them seriously. I forgot.

 

The first two games of the 2002 season (the beginning of these great Trojan teams) they beat Auburn at home 24-17, and beat Colorado in Boulder, 40-3. Then they beat the Big 10 "champion" Iowa in the Orange Bowl 38-17. Whoops, bowl game doesn't count, sorry about that.

 

JUST BECAUSE YOU SAY SOMETHING DOESN'T MAKE IT TRUE

 

Keep making things up, it only makes your posts more entertaining. Have fun sitting around in Big 10 land talking about how great Minnesota and Wisconsin are. Everyone in the college football forum is now dumber after reading your posts.

[Mark VI]

8) USC

496660[/snapback]

 

Dr. Z would be proud of your contrarian position.

 

At this point, your supposed to prattle on about you Heisman vote for the TE from Rice.

[PSU_Mouse]

I'll give you a pass on ND because I can imagine if I wasn't as fan, I could see that argument.

 

I don't quite understand Florida. How can you give them the same #7 and leave ND out on the same basis? WHO has Florida beaten besides Georgia w/o their QB? No one. They have lost their only tough games.

 

C'mon man, your USC argument is getting a little silly. This season alone they have beaten TWO very good football teams. First they trounced Oregon AT Oregon and handed them their only loss. And they beat Notre Dame South Bend. They have beaten the #7 and #11 teams AWAY. And what about last year? Does beating the #2 team in the country, Oklahoma, 55-19 in the NATL champ game not count? Wins over Cal, AZ St. and Michigan not count? Give them their due.

 

Mine would look like this:

 

1. USC

2. Texas

3. Alabama

4. Miami

5. VT

6. PSU

7. ND

8. Georgia

9. LSU

10. OSU

496682[/snapback]

 

VT AHEAD of PSU? what has VT done to deserve that ranking? they beat ?????? oh yeah BC. they just lost at HOME by 20.

[Simon]

You should try watching a few games instead of just saying that the Pac-10 is soft.

Watching a few games is exactly why I know the PAC-10 is soft. And if you really don't believe it's soft, you're so utterly delusional that there's really no point in continuing this conversation.

 

And yet you list Texas as your #1, playing in the INCREDIBLE Big 12.

I won't even mention their win over the same Oklahoma team you beat for your "national championsip" <giggle>, because it's not a very impressive win for them(of course for you its the best thing on your resume in the last 3 years ). I will mention their complete destruction of Texas Tech, who's a better team than anybody on your schedule this year. And their win at Ohio State, who's a better team than anybody on your schedule this century.

 

Tell me these aren't cakewalk games: Vanderbilt, Kentucky, Ole Miss, Miss State, Arkansas

Of course they're cakewalk games; just like Washington, Wash St, Arizona, Arizona St, Stanford, UCLA, Oregon and Oregon St. All conferences have weak sisters, the difference here is that while the PAC-10 is composed almost entirely of weak sisters a strong conference like the SEC balances them out with strong teams like Georgia AND Alabama AND LSU AND Florida AND Tennessee AND Auburn. Meanwhile the PAC-10 balances them out with teams like USC, and...ummm and uhhhhh Cal.... and uhhhhh, well I guess that's it isn't it? And even Cal is weaker than they've been in years because Tedford can't find a real QB.

Watching somebody trying to make the PAC-10 look even average by disparaging the SEC is really embarassing to see. Hell, you'd have a tougher time in the freakin MAC.

 

 

 

And now he follows it up with the big impressive list of USC's awesome out of conference wins over real teams which finally prove the Trojans' greatness. Well, those are some inspiring victories; of course I'm sure you won't mind if we take a closer look at them to see just how great they all are, right?

 

First game of last season, USC @ Virginia Tech (in D.C.), USC wins 24-13. Yep, that same VT team that was the ACC "champion" last year and was as high as #3 this year.

You mean that same Virginia Tech team that also lost to NC State in the joke that was the ACC last year; not to mention got destroyed on national TV the other night? Wow, pretty impressive 24-13 win.

 

First game of the 2003 season: USC @ Auburn, USC wins 23-0. Yep, that Auburn team had Jason Campbell, Ronnie Brown, and Cadillac Williams and was ranked #9 in the country at the time.

Yep, that Auburn team that finished 8-5 and got beat worse in the SEC than they did by USC. Yeah, that's quite a resume builder.

 

The first two games of the 2002 season (the beginning of these great Trojan teams) they beat Auburn at home 24-17, and beat Colorado in Boulder, 40-3.

Ummmm, that Auburn team was 9-4 and while you beat them by 7 powerhouse Arkansas beat them by 21.

And that Colorado team finished 9-5 and had just lost to almighty Colorado State before USC beat them.

Wow those are some really great victories there. I guess in addition to USC's rigorous PAC-10 schedule they've also played lots of real great teams outside their conference.

If I laugh any harder, I'm going to need a doctor.

 

JUST BECAUSE YOU SAY SOMETHING DOESN'T MAKE IT TRUE

And just because you're in denial doesn't make it false.

 

 

You know, you sound amazingly similar to the 'Canes fans I was having this same debate with throughout the season which ended up with them getting their ass kicked by Ohio State when they had to play a real team for the first time in 3 years. The only real differences I see are that USC has faced a little more adversity which might bode well for them. And that those 'Canes fans were less delusional and insulting than you. With apologies to BADOL and dib, congrats to you smokinandjokin for reaching a level below even that of a Miami fan.

[smokinandjokin]

Wow those are some really great victories there. I guess in addition to USC's rigorous PAC-10 schedule they've also played lots of real great teams outside their conference.

498432[/snapback]

 

You know, you sound amazingly similar to the 'Canes fans I was having this same debate with throughout the season which ended up with them getting their ass kicked by Ohio State when they had to play a real team for the first time in 3 years.

498432[/snapback]

 

I don't know what you're all bitter about Simon. Every team that USC beats, you discount them as being bad. You say USC's best win in three years was the Oklahoma game, but that wasn't even a game. It was one team being outclassed by another. I think dominating the Big 10 champion two years in a row in BCS bowl games were better victories.

 

Your current Top 10 goes against everything you state in your arguments against USC. Your #2 Georgia (who has not even won all of their games)- who have they beaten this year? Tennessee (3-5)? Wow!!! And a nice non-conference win against Louisiana-Monroe.

 

Your #3 Alabama? Nice win at home against Florida (cough cough), but what else? A 6-3 trouncing (at home) against 3-5 Tennesee? Utah State? Middle Tennessee? IMPRESSIVE!!! Just as a point of reference, USC and Alabama both played Arkansas at home this year. Bama won 24-13, USC won 70-17.

 

Your #6 Ohio State? Lost to ranked Texas at home, and lost to ranked Penn State away. But they have beaten 5-4 Iowa and 5-4 Michigan State. Holy Chit, they are amazing.

 

Your #7 Florida? They beat one ranked team this year, and that was 14-10, while said team was playing without their QB. They allowed Alabama, who beat (3-5) Tennessee 6-3, (3-5) Ole Miss 13-0, and (2-7) Miss St 17-0, to run up 31 points against them. PATHETIC.

 

If you are going to use one method to trash a team, try using the same method when you evaluate the others. USC has beaten every team this year, and the year-and-a-half before that, both bad and good. Their best win is not against chump squads like Tennessee or Minnesota, but the same can't be said for other teams you place above them.

 

You can knock the PAC-10 all you want. I could care less. Texas, USC, and maybe Miami are the only teams in your Top-10 that could go into Notre Dame or Oregon and win. Winning 31 in a row (which would be 43 in a row barring a 3 point, triple-OT loss on the road) is not an accident. And you can't blame it on three years of bad competition. Dominating BCS bowl victories against the #3 (Iowa), #4 (Michigan) and #2 (Oklahoma) teams in the country cannot be discarded. USC had a month between games also, so you can set that shameful argument aside. Oh, and keep patting yourself on the back for guessing the Miami-OSU game. I won't even mention that they had that game won once already. A hilarious pass interference call makes you a genius. Nice.

 

Your rankings alone stamped moron all over yourself; but you've really impressed me with some extremely iditoic posts to back yourself up. Keep 'em coming.

[bartshan-83]

VT AHEAD of PSU?  what has VT done to deserve that ranking?  they beat ??????  oh yeah BC. they just lost at HOME by 20.

498424[/snapback]

Fair enough.

 

1. USC

2. Texas

3. Alabama

4. Miami

5. PSU

6. VT

7. ND

8. Georgia

9. LSU

10. OSU

[Chilly]

My 10...

 

1.) Texas

2.) USC

3.) Penn State

4.) Miami

5.) Alabama

6.) Georgia

7.) VT

8.) LSU

9.) ND

10.) OSU

[Simon]

I think dominating the Big 10 champion two years in a row in BCS bowl games were better victories......Dominating BCS bowl victories against the #3 (Iowa), #4 (Michigan) and #2 (Oklahoma) teams in the country cannot be discarded. USC had a month between games also, so you can set that shameful argument aside.

 

Yeah, both teams had a month between games; which is one of the reason that these bowl games are so meaningless as measuring sticks. The fact that teh players are there to party and the game isn't even their primary concern is another. If neitehr team is even close to the top of their game, there's simply no point in considering the outcome meaningful as far as how good the involved teams are.

 

 

Your current Top 10 goes against everything you state in your arguments against USC.

If you can use USC's games over the last 3 years to prove thier worthiness as a top pick, then I can use other teams' recent history as a gauge as well. All of the teams I have above your precious Trojans ahve been playing well against tough schedules for the last couple years. The only exception is 'Bama and they're up there because a team that's undefeated in the country's toughest conference belongs up there until there's a reason to knock them down.

 

 

Texas, USC, and maybe Miami are the only teams in your Top-10 that could go into Notre Dame or Oregon and win.

Now that's some high quality comedy!

You must be forgetting that Michigan State (the 8thplace team in the Big 10)also went into Soutn Bend and hung 44 on Notre Dame when they beat them. But yeah, nobody else could do it for sure but Texas and your big bad Trojans. Maybe I should put MichState up there too? Nahhhh, the Big 10 sucks.

Oh and great win over those dominating Oregon Ducks. Nobody else but Texas could have pulled it off. Of course Oregon had to eke out close home wins against FresnoState from the might WAC and 3-6 Arizona. But yeah I'm sure nobody else could go in there and win since Fresno and Arizona are both better than anybody (except USC and Oregon).

 

Oh, and keep patting yourself on the back for guessing the Miami-OSU game. I won't even mention that they had that game won once already. A hilarious pass interference call makes you a genius. Nice.

Nice selective memory. You left out the part where Miami was getting their ass handed to them all game and then needed a gimmick punt return, a couple Winslow miracles and a pack of zebras to even get them back in the game in the 4th qrtr. If not for the officiating crew, the 'Canes lose in regulation, and if not for some good fortune late, they lose by 2-3 scores.

For what it's worth I think USC is better than those 'Canes teams, but there are some similarities which when considered make one hesitant to prop USC up the same way Miami was propped up.

 

I don't know what you're all bitter about Simon...........

 

Genius Simon is spewing more garbage.....

You are a clown......

you can read Simon's Einstein reply.....

Toolbox.....

Everyone in the college football forum is now dumber after reading your posts.....

Your rankings alone stamped moron all over yourself.....

youve really impressed me with some extremely iditoic posts to back yourself up.....

 

Uh-huh, yeah. I'm the bitter one.

 

This is easier than yaggin' smalleys in a spring rain.

[smokinandjokin]

Yeah, both teams had a month between games; which is one of the reason that these bowl games are so meaningless as measuring sticks. The fact that the players are there to party and the game isn't even their primary concern is another. If neitehr team is even close to the top of their game, there's simply no point in considering the outcome meaningful as far as how good the involved teams are.

498739[/snapback]

Oh, I get it. You're punishing USC because their opponent isn't prepared to play IN THE BIGGEST GAME OF THE SEASON. Michigan wasn't concerned with winning the Rose Bowl, they'd rather party? For a guy who sweats the Big Ten, you should know that their season is defined by that game. Don't knock a team for winning a bowl game. They try to win 11 others so they have a chance to win that one.

Your arguing that point only pays more of a compliment to USC and their coaching staff. If it is that hard to keep players focused, USC's 3-0 record in BCS games over the past three years speaks volumes about their leadership.

If you can use USC's games over the last 3 years to prove thier worthiness as a top pick, then I can use other teams' recent history as a gauge as well.

498739[/snapback]

 

I'm not trying to prove their worthiness. I think two straight national titles justifies that. I'm merely responding to your claims that USC hasn't played a quality team in 3 years. I listed the AP Top 10 teams they had beaten, but you said those teams weren't any good either. You said you'd like to see them play "Wisconsin, Auburn, or Colorado," so I listed the games in the past three years when they had beaten the Big 10 champ (twice), as well as Auburn (twice, home and away) and Colorado (away). You proceeded to trash those opponents. You trash the win vs. Oklahoma, yet they handed your #1 Texas (with Cedric Benson) their only loss last year. You're dancing circles around yourself.

 

All of the teams I have above your precious Trojans ahve been playing well against tough schedules for the last couple years.

498739[/snapback]

Hey now! Big round of applause for playing well! Sorry Simon, but there's a HUGE difference between playing well and actually WINNING games. USC has miraculously found a way to do both.

 

For what it's worth I think USC is better than those 'Canes teams, but there are some similarities which when considered make one hesitant to prop USC up the same way Miami was propped up.

498739[/snapback]

This is a concise and understandable thought, Simon. Well done. I can see your apprehension to give USC the b.j. However, placing them #8 in your poll makes me skeptical as to what you're watching. If you are down on USC, I could see you placing them behind Texas, and maybe Miami after their trouncing at VT. But lower than that seems like you are going out of your way to disrespect the consensus #1.

I mentioned Arkansas before as a common opponent for USC and Bama. Your #2, Georgia, beat them 23-20 at home (yes, Shockley did get hurt that game.) USC beat them 70-17.

I watch a LOT of college football, mainly for financial gaming reasons. I see as many teams and games as I can, including West Coast games, which I know a lot of folks in the East don't do. USC is as good a team as you are going to see. Texas is dangerous, and Vince Young is a weapon. Miami is athletic as hell, but they blew their chance when they "played well" but lost to FSU. Penn State can play, but not at the level of USC or UT. Outside of those, I don't see another team to take seriously on a national scale.

I think if you stopped trying to sh*t on USC so much and actually watched them play, you might enjoy it. They were a better "team" last year, as a lot of starting defenders (seven, I think) graduated. But their offense is something to see, and very fun to watch.

[R. Rich]

Penn State can play, but not at the level of USC or UT

498858[/snapback]

 

 

As well as the PSU defense is playing this year, I'm sure they'd love to have a shot @ USC. I don't think USC is unbeatable this year. Were it not for the loss of so many defensive players, which has made their defense very ordinary, that might be true.

 

Now, last year's USC team vs last year's Penn State team? That would be very ugly for Penn State.

[smokinandjokin]

As well as the PSU defense is playing this year, I'm sure they'd love to have a shot @ USC.  I don't think USC is unbeatable this year.  Were it not for the loss of so many defensive players, which has made their defense very ordinary, that might be true. 

 

Now, last year's USC team vs last year's Penn State team?  That would be very ugly for Penn State.

498869[/snapback]

 

Agreed. Their LB's outplayed OSU's "best in the nation" LB's when those two played each other. As good as a defense can play, USC is still going to get their points. Teams like Arizona State and Oregon have stopped USC for a quarter+ or a half, but they didn't score enough on offense. ASU was up 21-3 at half, but needed to be about 34-3. The Trojans scored 5 TD's in the 2nd half to win. I'm not sure Robinson could put up enough points, because stopping USC means you held them in the 28-34 range.

 

I'm sure Miami is kicking themselves as well. Like usual, their defense is unbelievably fast. But after outplaying and losing to FSU, they lost their shot at USC or Texas.

[R. Rich]

Agreed.  Their LB's outplayed OSU's "best in the nation" LB's when those two played each other.  As good as a defense can play, USC is still going to get their points.  Teams like Arizona State and Oregon have stopped USC for a quarter+ or a half, but they didn't score enough on offense.  ASU was up 21-3 at half, but needed to be about 34-3.  The Trojans scored 5 TD's in the 2nd half to win.  I'm not sure Robinson could put up enough points, because stopping USC means you held them in the 28-34 range.

 

I'm sure Miami is kicking themselves as well.  Like usual, their defense is unbelievably fast.  But after outplaying and losing to FSU, they lost their shot at USC or Texas.

498888[/snapback]

 

 

It depends on what JoePa wants, in terms of scoring. When he gives Galen Hall and JayPa the green light, they can put points on the board, especially since we have an outstanding group of young receivers who can make big plays (and have done so) down the field. The only things I worry about are:

 

(1) PSU's offensive line, which isn't as dominant as their lines have been in the past. If they give good pass protection, Robinson can get the ball downfield to guys like Butler, King, and Norwood, who all have game breaking ability (I won't even mention Derrick, but he'll have more than his say next season).

 

(2) Robinson himself. If his head is in the game (as it has been for mosst of this season), he's very tough to beat. He does still have lapses where he'll miss wide open WRs though, and that's an issue that would really hurt PSU against a squad like USC (especially if the defense keeps them in the game, as I suspect they would). They would have to make good on their opportunities to score, and that would put the pressure on Robinson to do well.

 

 

If Robinson handles the pressure well, and the OL gives him the time he needs, then Penn State can beat ANY team in the nation. Yes, even USC.

[smokinandjokin]

If Robinson handles the pressure well, and the OL gives him the time he needs, then Penn State can beat ANY team in the nation.  Yes, even USC.

498907[/snapback]

 

I don't disagree. It would take a mistake-free game from Robinson, and he would have to cash in on every chance to get 7. Field goals just wouldn't cut it.

 

I think PSU has a nice team. I would have them at 4 behind Miami at 3, just because of UM's big win on the road. Both those teams would beat Alabama soundly, IMO.

 

They do have some playmakers, and it's nice to see the freshmen getting quality time and contributing. That should help with recruiting. IMO, JoePa's reluctance to play freshmen in the past hurt his recruiting more than his job uncertainty did. I know JoePa didn't have a "policy" regarding not playing freshmen; if you were good enough, you played. But all things being equal, Joe was old school, and would play the vet over the rook, even if playing the rook would've been better for the long term.

[bills_fan]

You know, you sound amazingly similar to the 'Canes fans I was having this same debate with throughout the season which ended up with them getting their ass kicked by Ohio State when they had to play a real team for the first time in 3 years. The only real differences I see are that USC has faced a little more adversity which might bode well for them. And that those 'Canes fans were less delusional and insulting than you. With apologies to BADOL and dib, congrats to you smokinandjokin for reaching a level below even that of a Miami fan.

 

Ummmm...if Willis McGahee doesn't get injured, Miami scores the TD and goes to OT again. There was no "ass kicking" in that game.

[e-dog]

8TH You put Southern Cal 8TH ???????

 

I've come to the following conclusions;

1. you don't watch college football.

2. you do watch a little and don't understand what your watching.

3. you hate them because they are good.

 

And Ohio St. didn't give miami an "ass kicking". how can you possibly say that ? The game went to ot on a highly questionable flag.

 

8th ???? That is a real good one.