until Texas vs Kansas

Wednesday, October 26

 

Deconstructing the USC cheerleaders

We’re all well aware that October BCS rankings are about as meaningful as Major League Soccer. Nonetheless, I’m just astounded by all the carping I’m hearing around the country. Most of it is from dinosaur journalists like Tony Kornheiser (who unbelievably manages to be wrong no matter what issue he’s blathering about) and petulant USC fans.

For the record, I have absolutely no problem if you think USC should be ranked #1. They’re a great, great football team, and if you think they’re better than Texas, by all means, you can rank them #1 and be justified. But with that said, I’ve had it with some of the asinine arguments people are pothering. Let’s put some of those to rest.

USC should be #1 because every team brings their A-game trying to gun them down.

This is a partial truth. I have absolutely no doubt that every single team that faces USC has that game circled on their calendar. But for the argument to hold water, it would have to be true that teams get less jacked up to play Texas. How is Texas not the biggest game on every single team’s schedule this year, too? Do you think Missouri, Baylor, Oklahoma, and Texas A&M will be any less motivated to knock off a giant than the USC gunners are? And what about Ohio State? They spent their entire offseason preparing for the Week 2 showdown with the Horns. It’s a silly argument. Texas is the biggest game on all their opponent’s schedule this year, too. That somehow teams get extra psyched up for USC, as opposed to Texas, is just wrong.

USC should be #1 because they haven’t lost in 29 games.

Huh? Following that logic, Oklahoma should still be in the Top 25, as we’d need to take into account what they’d done the past two years. This is the worst of the USC #1 arguments. What happened last year is irrelevant.

The computers are stupid—they can’t see what I see with my own eyes on the field

No, they can’t see what you see—four, maybe five, games a week. They see them all. Computers are not perfect, but the criticisms I hear of them are American anti-intellectualism at its finest. Or worst.

Texas has a patsy schedule and hasn’t beaten anyone good

I’ve seen two of the highest-caliber college football games I’ve seen in quite some time this year. The first was USC-Notre Dame, and the second was Texas-Ohio State. The latter was a match up of two of the nastiest defenses in the country, playing at a level USC and Notre Dame haven’t even sniffed this year. The former was a match up of two of the most prolific offenses I’ve seen in the college game in a long time (which Ohio State certainly hasn’t sniffed this year). The Big 12 may be down, but Texas is pounding their inferior competition like no other. USC stumbled through Oregon and Arizona State, let Arizona hang in the game, and managed to allow 24 points to… Washington? You can’t punish Texas for their schedule if you aren’t also going to acknowledge that USC isn’t pounding their lesser opponents the way a #1 team should. It’s a draw, at worst.

I could probably go on for a while on this topic, but I’ll let it go for now. There is a justified case for voting USC #1 in the country. Too often, though, you just don’t hear it. What you hear is a bunch of garbage, and today, I’m taking out the trash.

--PB--


Comments:
I thought this was going to be about white sweaters.
 
On the last argument... It's proof that YOU were not watching the ganmes. 7 of Washington's points were off of a INT by the backup QB in junk time.

And until Clemens got hurt, Oregon looked like it could go 10-1. Not shabby.

And how's Ohio State doing these days? Or are we counting how a team was ranked WHEN we played them?
 
C’mon, BFT, that’s a straw man argument and you know it. I expect more from a Georgetown grad. Seriously. The point I made was the USC wasn’t demolishing inferior competition, a point that few are arguing with. They let Arizona hang in the game, they let Arizona State (losers to Stanford) hang in the game, they played a miserable half against Oregon, and they toyed around with Washington for far too long. And if we’re going to give credit to USC for beating a two-loss Notre Dame team on the road (who lost at home to Michigan State), why shouldn’t we give equal credit to Texas for beating two-loss Ohio State on the road (who lost to Penn State on the road)? You missed my point entirely. You can do better.
 
Among all this debate is that Notre Dame isn't as good as everyone thinks. They lost to Michigan St, whom everyone is now seeing as a pretender in the Big 10. They also have not really beaten anyone that good (a 4-3 Michigan team is probably their greatest victory so far), and in the USC game, Leinart played like crap (0 passing TDs, 2 INTs). If USC allowed Arizona to keep it close for awhile (I still think Oregon and ASU are decent teams, and Stanford, despite a loss to UC-Davis is not as terrible as everyone thinks...not good by any means, but not terrible), maybe they did the same with Notre Dame. If the same game happened with a Pac-10 opponent (or any other non-"big name" school), they wouldn't regard this as one of the greatest games of all time.
 
Just to clarify, I don't mean that I think Notre Dame is as bad as Arizona, but I think they are in the same class as Oregon and ASU. Plus, playing at Notre Dame is much tougher than many other places, so I can see why USC would stumble and take so long to win that game. But I think that game was more of a reflection on USC than on Notre Dame.
 
My personel favorite is "to be the champ you have to beat the champ". This obviously comes from boxing where this is true; in boxing the championship stays with one person generally until they lose. Football however is a cyclical sport and the championship is (theoretically) based on the outcome of the games from the current season. The year's previous outcome has nothing to do with it. It is the ugly stepsister of the 28 game win streak argument.
 
I know this is a little off topic, but UCLA's cheerleaders look better than USC's also. Hands down...

-John
 
Back when I was an undergrad at UCLA, cheerleaders were the only advantage USC had over us. I'm glad to see that even though they have taken the football crown from us, we still have the hotter (and smarter) girls.
 
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
 
I deconstructed a USC cheerleader once. You know what I'm saying?!! *WINK WINK*







Me either.
 
Too bad the computers don't watch games. Then they would have seen what the rest of the world saw: Notre Dame beat USC.
 
There's really only way to settle the argument...

It starts with a ''R" and ends with an "Ose Bowl."
 
PB, I'm curious; what is the "justified case for voting USC #1 in the country?" I think it would be interesting to see you make that argument after deconstructing many of the common arguments.
 
Well, I think Texas is playing better than USC, which is why I’ve been voting the Horns #1 in the Blog Poll. I think USC has as much talent, or more, as anyone in the country, but they aren’t exactly dominating the way one would think they would, given the public perception of their team. So I won’t make a case for USC being #1. In my mind, Texas has been better and looks like they’d win a head-to-head matchup. With that said, I don’t get particularly upset that some people think USC is better, or that USC can’t be beat with Leinart-Bush. The teams are both elite, and it doesn’t bother me much if someone wants to rank USC #1. I just get sick of the dumb justifications people offer. I’d much rather hear an argument about why USC is a better football team. Not a bunch of garbage about intangible, or irrelevant, factors. Bleh.
 
Pac 10, who is that?
SEC, Big 12 and ACC, that is where it's at.

Oklahoma vs. USC?
Wasn't it a MASSIVE USC victory?

Now it's Texas so they say.
We'll just see on Rosebowl day.

Pac 10, who is that?
The ones who will own you again, that's a fact.
 
No hard feelings, just some fun trolling from a fan :)
 
PAC-10..The No Defense Conference.

Put SC in the SEC and see how well they do. Put SC in the ACC and see how they do. Sure, they have a stellar Offense that can turn it on at will, but the Defense blows like Monica Lewinski. Defense wins championships..or so the cliche goes, and Texas has enough speed on Defense to hang with SC.

The Horns practice against a mobile QB, speedy receivers and top calibur talent every day. They will be ready for SC should they not get screwed out of the Rose Bowl...ala Auburn last year.
 
Stop hyperventilating people. Wait until Dec. 4th and I'm sure we'll see Texas with the inevitable choke game loss somewhere down the line. 'Bama will lose with an anemic offense. Georgia will collapse without D.J. VA Tech will drop against Miami or FSU and 'SC can still drop UCLA. So we could be stuck with UCLA and FSU in the Rose Bowl! Now THAT would suck!
 
Rush Defense:
USC - 95.1 ypg
Texas - 93.3 ypg
Pass Defense:
USC - 252.14 ypg
Texas - 179.29 ypg
Scoring Defense:
USC - 21.6 pg
Texas - 14.4 pg
Turnover Margin:
USC - +7
Texas - +1
Sacks
USC - 3.43 pg
Texas 3.00 pg

Surely Monica sucks better than that. The offensive stats aren't quite as even, but that's probably becuase the Pac 10 has no defense.
 
Nice blog with interesting topics. I have a website that offers alot of controversial topics here. Just go to the links page and look for "Video Reviews"
 
Hey, you have a great blog here! I'm definitely going to bookmark you!
I have a **great** site/blog. It pretty much covers football reading related stuff.
Come and check it out if you get time :-)
 
Straving forcused %%desc%% maean we have remove obstacles %%desc%% that block our visual path.
 
I think everyone here has valid opinions. One thing for sure, I don't see any other teams in Rose bowl than USC and Texas. It will be Offense vs. Defese with not so bad offense. I am a USC fan but think Texas can really run with USC's weapons. It won't be a Game like last years where SC destroyed OU. It will be good.
 
nebraska is going to beat both those teams handily next year
 
Watiti.com
Join me and my circle of friends at http://www.watiti.com,
an online social networking community that connects
people from all over the world.

Meet new people, share photos, create or attend
events, post free classifieds, send free e-cards,
listen music, read blogs, upload videos, be part of a
club, chat rooms, forum and much more!

See you around! Bring all your friends too!

Watiti.com
 
cheap airline
 
As much as viagra has rescued the people from the cruel grip of erectile dysfunction it has also proved to be a curse to many because of wrong conception and wrong interpretation of its functioning. People buy viagra with the notion of having an extra erotic night without actually having the need to. Nowadays Viagra is also easily accessible and anyone can buy viagra online. In addition viagra online is more often than not cheap viagra i.e. a discounted version. People can easily get Viagra from the online pharmacies using wrong information. But in this way they will harm no one but their own selves, so it is always handy to have a clear conception of the drug one is taking.
 
Post a Comment

<< Home |

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Listed on BlogShares Weblog Commenting and Trackback by HaloScan.com < ? Texas Blogs # >