Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
2009/10 College Football Thread
- Thread starter echeck
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Wow. 
I honestly thought Oregon would win this game, but I NEVER imagined a complete blowout like that.
USC's defense was absolutely horrible, or at least the play-calling was. The Trojans obviously have a ton of talent, but tonight I think they were seriously out-coached. It seems like they were out of place a lot, and then when they did break up a play Masoli was able to turn what should have been a loss of yards in to a 10-15-20 yard play. Pretty amazing.
Tomorrow's polls are going to be very interesting. Obviously Oregon will likely jump Boise State, because we all know head-to-head doesn't matter in the BCS standings. Not to mention the fact that everyone and their dog will again be discounting Boise's win over Oregon giving every excuse in the book as to why they lost.
But, such is the life of a non-BCS school.
Of course, for the record take a look at what Bruce Feldman says about Boise's D...
I honestly thought Oregon would win this game, but I NEVER imagined a complete blowout like that.
USC's defense was absolutely horrible, or at least the play-calling was. The Trojans obviously have a ton of talent, but tonight I think they were seriously out-coached. It seems like they were out of place a lot, and then when they did break up a play Masoli was able to turn what should have been a loss of yards in to a 10-15-20 yard play. Pretty amazing.
Tomorrow's polls are going to be very interesting. Obviously Oregon will likely jump Boise State, because we all know head-to-head doesn't matter in the BCS standings. Not to mention the fact that everyone and their dog will again be discounting Boise's win over Oregon giving every excuse in the book as to why they lost.
But, such is the life of a non-BCS school.
Of course, for the record take a look at what Bruce Feldman says about Boise's D...
USC!!!!!! LOST!!!!!!!
oh well.......... see you guys at the SUN BOWL OR CAPITAL ONE BOWL!
haha
Oregon.......i smell ROSES and i also smell a diamond football
oh well.......... see you guys at the SUN BOWL OR CAPITAL ONE BOWL!
haha
Oregon.......i smell ROSES and i also smell a diamond football
But boy is it nice seeing Pete Carrol getting his ass handed to him with all the smug success he's had here over the years. Don't think I've ever seen a worse loss in his era. The media here will run with this
You only consider it "smug" because your team hasn't had similar success over the past 10 years. Coach Carroll has always been humble and sincere, throughout all his years at USC.
I can, too. I can also see Oregon taking it to Florida in that game.
Nope.
I think our ranking was legitimate because I think there are only a few teams who are legitimately better. Namely, the teams in front of us in the BCS ranking and Oregon. I really don't think Iowa can beat us or any of the people ranked around them.
He's an all around great guy. If you don't like USC you don't like USC, but there's no need to wish us ill because of some perceived arrogance that we don't have.
Nope, the defense was.
We rely too much on talent. We're so used to one of our players being able to make a spectacular play that we over-run certain plays and take risks we shouldn't be taking.
Our D-line was truly awful, which is surprising considering the talent on it.
Oh well, I guess there's next year. We'll have Matt Barkley with another year of practice and actually add what he needs most: wide receivers. We have the top two receiver recruits in the country coming and that spells disaster for our opponents. I never thought we were good enough for a title this year and I've just been proven right. Next year though, count on us being a team that will be very hard to beat.
According to the College Gameday Final guys, the last USC loss this bad was 1997. The worst loss Pete Carroll has suffered before this was 11 points. Wow.
I enjoyed watching the last part of the "I Wish They Could Both Lose Part I" Bowl last night, but I was glad USC got sent back home with their tail between their legs. And in the "I Wish They Could Both Lose Part II" Bowl, I wish it could have gone the other way, because the in-laws are visiting this weekend and they're Texas fans. They, my wife, and my son got back from Trick-Or-Treating (I was watching the OU/KSU game) and asked how the UT/OSU game was going. I told them, "Well, I'm not doing this, so what does that tell you?"
I'm sorry, there's no justifiable reason whatsoever why USC was ranked ahead of Boise, TCU, or even LSU. I'm glad to see them drop.
I'm sorry, there's no justifiable reason whatsoever why USC was ranked ahead of Boise, TCU, or even LSU. I'm glad to see them drop.
Try living down here. I can see the new rankings from the LA press:
1: Oregon
2: USC
3: Florida
...
Well, believe me, it's there. There's a reason USC fans have the reputation they do.
Somewhat ironic coming from a UT fan.
Great wins for Florida, Texas and Oregon. Should be an interesting BCS poll today.
Well, believe me, it's there. There's a reason USC fans have the reputation they do.
@Badandy Sorry I'm lazy so I'll respond here. I'm assuming you've been to a game or 12. Aren't you a student there? If you cannot recognize the uppity, snooty, chosen people vibe at an SC game then this discussion makes no sense. It's entirely annoying, yes I've been. And yes I could never afford to go there.
I actually really like the coach but he comes across as Jesus coach and really has never faced failure like this most recent one, unless we talk about the Patriots. Now if UCLA kicks their ass, well...
I don't really have a college team so this isn't about me rooting for another team or being a disillusioned fan. If USC is on, I'll watch and I expect them to win because they have a recent history of putting out an excellent team. This year, not so much. Not even sure they are a top ten team really.
Oregon looked freaky good. I'd like to see a real game with Boise again as i don't think it would be close and then we're talking about an undefeated Oregon team going to the BCS so far.
Ridiculous statement. Just because Oregon lost (got throttled, really) doesn't mean it wasn't a "real" game.
Real was thrown in there for a reason.
Right, because there's no way Boise State actually was the better team.
P-Worm
There is entirely a way that Boise is/was. They obviously won the game then, I don't see them winning the game now. Moot point really.
Well, believe me, it's there. There's a reason USC fans have the reputation they do.
Perceived arrogance on the part of the coaching. Most fans are arrogant if their team is any good.
Yes.
The reason there's that vibe is because there are a lot of snooty, uppity people who don't know football who go to the games because it's the popular thing to do. To be sure, we are very confident in our team, and most years, that confidence is well-placed. Whether you're the Trojans, the Patriots, the Celtics, the Lakers, or the Yankees, there are people who want you to lose because of your success. We're looked at as arrogant because of our attitude + our success on the field. The only difference between us and fans of other teams is that there's not a whole lot of delusion.
I actually really like the coach but he comes across as Jesus coach and really has never faced failure like this most recent one, unless we talk about the Patriots. Now if UCLA kicks their ass, well...
I mean, it's always possible, but UCLA is 0-5 in conference. Now that's pathetic with some of the recruits they have.
BTW, it's because he is Jesus...
I don't know, we're inconsistent because we're so young. Next year and the year after will be nuts though, just watch. We'll have the best college quarterback with the best college receivers.
I agree with you here. It's cheapening the win Boise St. had but I feel like teams can change during the year. I mean, Oregon St. beat us during a year we throttled the BIG-10 in the Rose Bowl, does that mean Oregon St. is a better team? No, they were better that day...
Why don't you think they could win again? Who have they lost to this year that would make you think that?
P-Worm
Perceived arrogance on the part of the coaching. Most fans are arrogant if their team is any good.
Yes.
The reason there's that vibe is because there are a lot of snooty, uppity people who don't know football who go to the games because it's the popular thing to do. To be sure, we are very confident in our team, and most years, that confidence is well-placed. Whether you're the Trojans, the Patriots, the Celtics, the Lakers, or the Yankees, there are people who want you to lose because of your success. We're looked at as arrogant because of our attitude + our success on the field. The only difference between us and fans of other teams is that there's not a whole lot of delusion.
I mean, it's always possible, but UCLA is 0-5 in conference. Now that's pathetic with some of the recruits they have.
BTW, it's because he is Jesus...
I don't know, we're inconsistent because we're so young. Next year and the year after will be nuts though, just watch. We'll have the best college quarterback with the best college receivers.
I agree with you here. It's cheapening the win Boise St. had but I feel like teams can change during the year. I mean, Oregon St. beat us during a year we throttled the BIG-10 in the Rose Bowl, does that mean Oregon St. is a better team? No, they were better that day...
I agree that in one to two years, USC will be a great team. QB is still getting it together really.
I tend to think that teams play differently throughout the season and hopefully they get better. Oregon to me looked awesome last night. Did you watch the game? No offense to Boise; I'd actually like to see the game played now.
I would agree teams change over the season, but with BSU patsy schedule, it's really hard to gauge how good they are right now and that's mostly my point. Oregon looks great this year (They sure took it to my Utes this year
), but I just don't think we know enough about BSU right now to definitively say who would win in a rematch.P-Worm
I would agree teams change over the season, but with BSU patsy schedule, it's really hard to gauge how good they are right now and that's mostly my point. Oregon looks great this year (They sure took it to my Utes this year
P-Worm
I was in SLC a couple weeks ago for work and ended up in a sports bar for some food and a beer. Legends, if you know it. Utes were on and there was a nice showing of fans rooting them on.
I would LOVE for Boise State to play Oregon again, because I think our defense would still make things extremely difficult. I don't think we would completely shut them down like we did in September, but I think our D would do a MUCH better job than what USC did last night.
I think Nevada's QB Caepernick helped us in dealing with Masoli better than other teams Oregon has played this year. Caepernick is very similar to Masoli with the run/pass threat, but Masoli is much better. But after two years of playing against Nevada our defense knows how to handle that kind of dual threat.
Who knows. There's been talk (and will likely be more now) in the media of an Oregon vs. Boise State rematch in the Rose Bowl, but I don't see it happening. One, I seriously doubt Iowa will make it to the NC Game to open up the spot, and for two I don't see the Rose Bowl Committee wanting to schedule that rematch anyway. Who wants to see two teams play each other again? They'll want a more dynamic match-up. But again, it's moot because there's no way Iowa makes it to the NC Game.
TCU jumped us in the Coaches poll, but only by six points. I'm really curious to see what the computers will do for us...
EDIT:
Here's an interesting tidbit I saw on www.bcsfootball.org today about the revenue sharing of the BCS...
For starters, I've always thought the BCS money stayed in the BCS Bowls. Knowing that they do spread the money around at least a little bit is kind of nice, but in the grand scheme of things it's still pathetic. Heh.
The non-AQ money is hard to track because obviously the conference with a team in a BCS bowl game gets a larger share because of the direct participation. As stated in the article, the MWC received roughly $9.8 million last year. Now is that divided equally between teams, or does Utah get a larger share because they were in the game? Anyone know?
The article also states that the non-AQ schools get to split $19.3 million among 52 teams, although again I'm not sure how that really comes out when one of the teams goes to a BCS bowl. If it's simply $19.3 million divided up by all the teams in the conference it comes to an average of $371,000 per team.
More importantly you'll notice that each automatic qualifying conference get's $17.8 million.
That comes to $1.48 million per team for the SEC, ACC and Big 12. $1.62 million for each team in the Big 10. $1.78 million for each team in the PAC-10. And $2.23 for each team in the Big East.
So if I'm right in my assumption then all of this money is the "guaranteed" BCS money, and then the team/conference that actually participates in the BCS bowls will get even more.
The part of the article I have the hardest time with is the last sentence of point No. 6.
I think what is even MORE noteworthy is the prejudice against non-BCS teams to begin with. Yeah, BCS conferences have 90% of the teams in the BCS bowls, but that's a direct correlation to the amount of money they receive year in and year out combined with that prejudice that forces us to have perfect seasons just to be considered.
This is why I respect teams like Boise State, Utah, TCU and BYU a LOT more than the schools from the hand-out conferences. What we've done with the EXTREMELY limited resources is absolutely amazing, and there are many, many BCS teams that are horrible year in and year out but yet they still receive all these hand-outs.
And then when there are two non-BCS teams in the top 7 of the BCS standings still no one could ever imagine two *gasp!!* non-AQ teams going to BCS bowls, because that would take all the money away from the precious BCS elitist conferences.
/steps off soap box
I think Nevada's QB Caepernick helped us in dealing with Masoli better than other teams Oregon has played this year. Caepernick is very similar to Masoli with the run/pass threat, but Masoli is much better. But after two years of playing against Nevada our defense knows how to handle that kind of dual threat.
Who knows. There's been talk (and will likely be more now) in the media of an Oregon vs. Boise State rematch in the Rose Bowl, but I don't see it happening. One, I seriously doubt Iowa will make it to the NC Game to open up the spot, and for two I don't see the Rose Bowl Committee wanting to schedule that rematch anyway. Who wants to see two teams play each other again? They'll want a more dynamic match-up. But again, it's moot because there's no way Iowa makes it to the NC Game.
TCU jumped us in the Coaches poll, but only by six points. I'm really curious to see what the computers will do for us...
EDIT:
Here's an interesting tidbit I saw on www.bcsfootball.org today about the revenue sharing of the BCS...
BCSfootball.org said:
For starters, I've always thought the BCS money stayed in the BCS Bowls. Knowing that they do spread the money around at least a little bit is kind of nice, but in the grand scheme of things it's still pathetic. Heh.
The non-AQ money is hard to track because obviously the conference with a team in a BCS bowl game gets a larger share because of the direct participation. As stated in the article, the MWC received roughly $9.8 million last year. Now is that divided equally between teams, or does Utah get a larger share because they were in the game? Anyone know?
The article also states that the non-AQ schools get to split $19.3 million among 52 teams, although again I'm not sure how that really comes out when one of the teams goes to a BCS bowl. If it's simply $19.3 million divided up by all the teams in the conference it comes to an average of $371,000 per team.
More importantly you'll notice that each automatic qualifying conference get's $17.8 million.
That comes to $1.48 million per team for the SEC, ACC and Big 12. $1.62 million for each team in the Big 10. $1.78 million for each team in the PAC-10. And $2.23 for each team in the Big East.
So if I'm right in my assumption then all of this money is the "guaranteed" BCS money, and then the team/conference that actually participates in the BCS bowls will get even more.
The part of the article I have the hardest time with is the last sentence of point No. 6.
I think what is even MORE noteworthy is the prejudice against non-BCS teams to begin with. Yeah, BCS conferences have 90% of the teams in the BCS bowls, but that's a direct correlation to the amount of money they receive year in and year out combined with that prejudice that forces us to have perfect seasons just to be considered.
This is why I respect teams like Boise State, Utah, TCU and BYU a LOT more than the schools from the hand-out conferences. What we've done with the EXTREMELY limited resources is absolutely amazing, and there are many, many BCS teams that are horrible year in and year out but yet they still receive all these hand-outs.
And then when there are two non-BCS teams in the top 7 of the BCS standings still no one could ever imagine two *gasp!!* non-AQ teams going to BCS bowls, because that would take all the money away from the precious BCS elitist conferences.
/steps off soap box
What I read in my local paper last year after the Sugar Bowl was that each team in the conference got an equal share except for Utah which got 2 shares.
P-Worm
Ah, I misunderstood. I will say that most fans are arrogant if their team is any good and they haven't been around long enough to see their team go through a poor season.
Sitting in 100+ degree heat in the student section late in the 4th quarter, watching your then #10 squad be down 63 to an unranked UCLA, knowing that when you get back to the dorm your machine will be full of taunting messages from friends back home, not even yet realizing that your team will struggle to win four games that season - that kind of crap teaches some humility that stays with you.
It's not somewhat ironic - it's completely ironic. In fact, I was at work today and chuckled because I knew you'd have an issue with my statement.
It turns out I misunderstood Badandy, but I was prepared to admit that if he lived in Austin, he'd have exactly the same complaints there that I have living here.
It's not somewhat ironic - it's completely ironic. In fact, I was at work today and chuckled because I knew you'd have an issue with my statement.
Haha, I was trying to be nice. But your point is very true, though.
I've had the (unenviable) circumstance of living in Austin right as UT started to get good again under Mack Brown, and then the (equally unenviable) circumstance of living in LA right as USC was starting to get good under Carroll.
It appears we're headed towards Texas versus Florida at the BCS Championship Game. And Texas will win a squeaker over Florida because Texas has a more consistent offense, unless Tim Tebow starts to play really well over the next few weeks.