USC - Final word

blgstocks

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 4, 2005
3,181
12
0
So. Cal
gecko said:
kosar -


Then you can understand why Scott and other USC fans felt wronged about not playing in the championship game.

Yes, the BCS is reality right now. A bunch of powerful conferences concerned with only how they and their teams do in the postseason. That's why they love the BCS bowl system -- a bunch of second and third-tier bowls and four (soon to be five) larger revenue-generating bowls.

Taking into context your back-to-back posts on this page, you flatly deny USC the co-championship in 2003 which even the BCS apparently recognizes. This shared title is NOT a media creation (which you and others seem to believe), otherwise the BCS wouldn't even touch it. USC deserved the split title because it did finish #1 in the AP poll, which the BCS recognized. This even though LSU won the BCS title game. The fact is, like it or not, the so-called "BCS system" of crowning ONE champ did not work that year, as was originally intended....and that is why USC and LSU are co-champions.

I agree with most everything you have said gecko, and you have added more facts and support for SC than scott has all season. But i hate the use of symantecs. Saying LSU won "the title game" is stepping around the fact that LSU won the NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP GAME. even though you mean the same thing, you cannot say the same thing about USC.
Yeah BCS didnt work that year, and Scott reminds us of his pain and longing in every post with his signature. But I dont see why LSU has to split the title of National Champions when USC didnt play in the National Championship game! I mean there were other bowls that year too, but only 1 NC bowl.

Either way U guys know where I stand on the issue, SC had a very good but overhyped run and who cares they will suck next year and then no one will be talking about them but Scott so why dont we just drop the subject and move onto next season and who will be winning bets 4 us next season
 

dlvlsu

Registered
Forum Member
Aug 29, 2002
588
2
0
I agree to some extent SUN TWO SEC is the best football conference no doubt wether the rest of the world wants to admit it or not.
South Carolina gave up 21 point lead and barely got beat.

The number 1 team from Big 12 north and number 2 team in the big twelve (Colorado in case you didnt know) Got beat by miami 23-3 Then number 2 team in SEC beats Miami 40-3 As I said before put any team from any other conference in the SEC and they will loose more games than they do in there conference they are in. Just because of injuries and beating each other up every week. I dont care what anybody says playing Florida, georgia, Tenn. Alabama, Auburn,LSU, etc and so on week in and week out is not the same as mizzou or baylor or kansas or oregon or az or az st or wash or wash st or indiana, minnesota, or mich st etc
 

gecko

Senior Lurker
Forum Member
Dec 7, 2001
2,469
0
0
parts unknown
I appreciate the kind words. I have no pro-USC sentiments whatsoever, nor do I have an anti-USC or any other regional allegiance, so I believe I can analyze this issue more objectively than many have so far.

I do believe that the BCS "title game" was set up to match the 2 best teams in the nation. But you see, in that sense we are dealing with hypotheticals anyways. If there is enough sentiment for any teams left out of that said "title game", you will have a groundswelling for support of those teams. USC had a legit beef in 2003, especially given that they were ranked #1 by both human polls entering bowl season.

I also do have a different take on this most. LSU did win the game, and given that has every right to claim a "national title", that of the BCS championship. It's not their fault, and I see how they seem slighted with all this mention of a USC 3-peat heading into the Rose Bowl.

Now, given that Oklahoma lost so badly to K-State and convincingly to LSU it is apparent in hindsight that it were the Sooners who shouldn't have made the championship game. Jason White wasn't 100%, but that's just too bad. Obviously, if USC was matched up against LSU it would be legitimately a barnburner (or in Scott's eyes a USC romp ?). The BCS' system just didn't work, and they know it!

So yes, we have to put this to rest. Give LSU and USC their due as champions for 2003.
 

blgstocks

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 4, 2005
3,181
12
0
So. Cal
gecko said:
Obviously, if USC was matched up against LSU it would be legitimately a barnburner (or in Scott's eyes a USC romp ?). The BCS' system just didn't work, and they know it!


LOL true, I think in Scotts eyes though Texas/USC was a USC romp, everyone else just has the score wrong
 

DerekNJND

Registered
Forum Member
Oct 21, 2005
2,022
4
0
44
Jersey
Sun Tzu said:
The AP never "solely" crowned the champions. There has ben UPI and many other outfits that schools have recognized. Take USC - one or more of their claimed national titles are NOT AP, UPI or BCS.
Just got to the NCAA web site and you can find this.

Wrong. The AP was the only nationally recognized legitimate crowner of national champions until the BCS began. Period. You can crown 54 champions per season if you want to, but the world only recognizes two sources: AP and BCS. Deal with it

No doubt there are countless ranking systems and ratings. Sadly though, only the AP was recognized as the MEANINGFUL system from 1936 until the BCS. Sure the NCAA website lists as many as 8 different sources of national champions per year. Unfortunately, the AP is the only one that is nationally recognized and counted.

And WRONG again. USC has 2 national titles that they claimed in the last 3 years. 2 were from the AP, not the UPI, the VFW, or the AAA, or whatever other organizations your mind can invent.
 
Last edited:

DerekNJND

Registered
Forum Member
Oct 21, 2005
2,022
4
0
44
Jersey
kosar said:
Is reading comprehension a requirement in law school anymore? My comment was referring to the fact that a playoff would be a much better solution than the BCS. I would be pissed if I was an Auburn fan and was undefeated and was not able to play for a NC. It's not that difficult counselor.

I dont care WHAT your comment was "referring" to. The point is that you play the fence, and recognize that AP as meaningful when it supports your argument and disown it when you disagree with what someone says. At least be consistent, then MAYBE you will get some credibility. Maybe...
 

Sun Tzu

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 10, 2003
6,197
9
0
Houston, Texas
DerekNJND said:
Wrong. The AP was the only nationally recognized legitimate crowner of national champions until the BCS began. Period. You can crown 54 champions per season if you want to, but the world only recognizes two sources: AP and BCS. Deal with it

No doubt there are countless ranking systems and ratings. Sadly though, only the AP was recognized as the MEANINGFUL system from 1936 until the BCS. Sure the NCAA website lists as many as 8 different sources of national champions per year. Unfortunately, the AP is the only one that is nationally recognized and counted.

And WRONG again. USC has 2 national titles that they claimed in the last 3 years. 2 were from the AP, not the UPI, the VFW, or the AAA, or whatever other organizations your mind can invent.

You are an absloute idiot. Try doing a little homework. The AP and UPI were the major polls for many years. In year like 1970, 1974, 1978, 1990 (when Colorado beat Notre Dame) and others there were split titles that everyone recognized as split titles. Another example is 1973 with Notre Dame and Alabama. For about 40 years the AP and UPI were recognized as the polls that mattered, published every week in every newspaper, and determinative of the national champion. The UPI was the original coaches poll. It eventually became know as the USA Today/CNN Poll and later USA Today/ESPN Poll. Maybe you heard of them. Since you are apparently about 16 years old I doubt you actually know how it worked.

And I wasnt talking about one of the last 3 years with USC. That is what you get for assuming. 2 years ago USC decided to officially proclaim themselves as the 1939 National Champions. You will note they werent the AP champs, or any other real poll for that matter.


The AP rankings began in 1936 and consist of a poll of sportswriters and broadcasters throughout the nation. In the coaches poll, begun in 1950, head coaches across the country are polled. These two polls have produced different champions, and teams on probation are not recognized in the poll of coaches while the AP permits their inclusion. Beginning in 1974, by agreement with the American Football Coaches Association, teams on NCAA probation were ineligible for ranking and national championship consideration by the poll of coaches. Not until the 1974 season did the poll of coaches conduct its final poll after the bowl games. Prior to this time the poll of coaches champion was announced at the end of the regular season. The AP first announced its post-bowl champion after the 1965 season, then dropped the practice for two years before resuming after the 1968 campaign.
 
Last edited:

DerekNJND

Registered
Forum Member
Oct 21, 2005
2,022
4
0
44
Jersey
Sun Tzu said:
You are an absloute idiot. Try doing a little homework. The AP and UPI were the major polls for many years.

The AP rankings began in 1936 and consist of a poll of sportswriters and broadcasters throughout the nation. In the coaches poll, begun in 1950, head coaches across the country are polled. These two polls have produced different champions, and teams on probation are not recognized in the poll of coaches while the AP permits their inclusion. Beginning in 1974, by agreement with the American Football Coaches Association, teams on NCAA probation were ineligible for ranking and national championship consideration by the poll of coaches. Not until the 1974 season did the poll of coaches conduct its final poll after the bowl games. Prior to this time the poll of coaches champion was announced at the end of the regular season. The AP first announced its post-bowl champion after the 1965 season, then dropped the practice for two years before resuming after the 1968 campaign.

Oh ok, the Coaches poll was sooooooo important that it is where now? It became assimilated into the BCS while the AP poll stands alone STILL. AND you fail to mention that the AP poll was created in 1936, while the coaches poll wasnt around till the 1950's. Hmm, who crowned the champions for nearly 20 years before the coaches poll even EXISTED??

Polls didnt start including bowl game results until the 60s because bowl games werent created to determine a champion. I would think someone twice my age would know this. They were designed as incentives and rewards to celebrate a good season. You had your regular season to prove your worth in the old days and that was it. Thats why we didnt always see #1 play #2 in a bowl game, because as far as everyone was concerned, the AP poll determined the champ. What happened after that was "post" season, meaning AFTER its over.

And UPI? I apologize for not being 40 years old with nothing better to do than try to give people a histroy lesson via the internet. Its called the ESPN/USA today poll. If you talked like the year was 2006, and realized that the 70s and 80s are looooooooooooong gone, maybe you'd be better off. Its been called ESPN/CNN/BULLCRAP since 1990, so maybe you should set your clock ahead an hour and crawl out of your barn!

Here's a history lesson for you grandpa. Guess how the coaches did their voting? Most had the AP poll IN HAND before placing their votes for the next week. If one poll bases its positioning on the other poll, which one is more important and meaningful? Hmmmmmm.

The AP is a comany that monopolizes the sports media. It is the largest source of sports news and reporting worldwide. In fact, ESPN and USA today used to get half their news from the AP. Almost everyone did, and I would think someone that lives in a shoe like you would realize that. One day they created a poll that is nothing more than a piggyback to the AP poll.

What seems more credilble to you? A poll of nonbiased sportswriters who have the time and energy to research and follow every team, OR a bunch of head coaches who A.)probably dont know a damn thing about half the teams they vote for, unless they happen to be on their schedule, and B.)75% of them just vote based on AP positioning anyway. Like I said, which poll is more credible?
 
Last edited:

Scott4USC

Fight On!
Forum Member
Sep 11, 2002
5,410
18
38
44
Good posts gecko! Unfortunately the posters on the other side of this debate don't have much of an argument. Only their opinion. :)

blgstocks SC had a very good but overhyped run and who cares [COLOR=Red said:
they will suck next year and then no one will be talking about them but Scott[/COLOR] so why dont we just drop the subject and move onto next season and who will be winning bets 4 us next season

USC will be the most talented team in the country for at least the next 3 years. 4 straight years USC has brought in the highest average rated recruiting class in the country. 2nd most talented team isn't even close. Sorry to disappoint you but USC isn't going anywhere. In fact they are getting MORE talented. No coach has ever recruited like Pete Carroll.
 
Last edited:

Dice34

Off parole
Forum Member
Dec 18, 2004
4,731
27
0
D.O.C.
Yeah and Urban Meyer is not doing a bad job at Florida, give him time to get a base like Carrol did and then we'll see who has the most talent in 3 or 4 years..........
 

Scott4USC

Fight On!
Forum Member
Sep 11, 2002
5,410
18
38
44
Dice34 said:
Yeah and Urban Meyer is not doing a bad job at Florida, give him time to get a base like Carrol did and then we'll see who has the most talent in 3 or 4 years..........

Yes Meyer is looking like a recruiting machine just like Carroll. If Meyer wasn't at FL, USC would have landed #1 WR Harvin from Virginia. USC wanted/needed him badly because USC lacks speed at WR. But Carroll has set recruiting records the last 3 years and this year USC has ZERO 3-star commits. All 5-star and 4-star recruits. Which is sick.
 

Dice34

Off parole
Forum Member
Dec 18, 2004
4,731
27
0
D.O.C.
Yeah, I've seen what Carroll has done, and it is impressive......I was just looking at the receivers Meyer has landed #2 Harvin, #3 Fayson, #8 Williams, #21 Williams and #29 McDaniel(soft verbal)......2 five star and 3 4 star along with 5 star recruit Qb in Tebow.......
 

Scott4USC

Fight On!
Forum Member
Sep 11, 2002
5,410
18
38
44
Dice34 said:
Yeah, I've seen what Carroll has done, and it is impressive......I was just looking at the receivers Meyer has landed #2 Harvin, #3 Fayson, #8 Williams, #21 Williams and #29 McDaniel(soft verbal)......2 five star and 3 4 star along with 5 star recruit Qb in Tebow.......

Meyer doing fantastic job. Plus Meyer inherited bunch of talent from Zook that is already on the team. Nice additions! Tebow is supposed to be the PERFECT QB for Meyer system. With leak back, Tebow will benefit greatly sitting out a year.

Check out Carrolls WR corps. Last year Carroll got the #1 WR in country Turner. This year according to Scout, USC got the #1 and #6 WR's in the country. All 5-star. That is not fair. All 3 will have tough time earning playing time. Which is even more sick.

USC, Florida, and ND will be the top 3 teams to contend with year in year out next 5 years. (if all 3 HC's stay)
 

dlvlsu

Registered
Forum Member
Aug 29, 2002
588
2
0
Went ok Glad to take your mom there. Bull ripped here azz out pretty good!
 

thom24ad

UDFlyers
Forum Member
Sep 29, 2005
2,124
0
0
45
Columbus, OH
Derek,
My post got cut off in that one thread because it was closed, but I did reply...it was sort of long and didn't feel like doing it over right away

But I have a finance degree and currently in banking with a new company trying to work my way up the ladder...most likely I will be getting into investing eventually

the lawyers I worked for in college were Rion, Rion, and Rion...out of Dayton...they're listed in that book top 100 lawyers in the country...Ever heard of them by chance...They have been featured on American Justice on A&E for some of their cases...The big guy of the firm Jon Rion is close friends with Bruce Cutler which was cool

Had some issues when I worked for them...these guys all made a ton of money doing criminal law but some of the scum bags they would represent were ridiculous...like Gross Sexual Imposition with a minor...and these guys would laugh and joke about their clients in the morning meeting...my conscious got the better of me and I got another job...but it was awesome driving around their cars and we had a catered lunch everyday from a four star restaurant

1st year a law school is tough my buddy told me...a lot of lectures and essay exams...he told me you just got to keep up on your reading and chit

As for the S&E, yeah tough industry to get into and just like with most things its who you know...but good luck to you with what you choose to do

:topic: :mj22:

Sorry for the hijacked thread but with this crowd within this thread I am sure there has been more then one post off topic
 

Sun Tzu

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 10, 2003
6,197
9
0
Houston, Texas
Law school is and was cake if you know what you are doing. Was far easier to me than undergrad, and that was at a high-caliber law school. Especially first year - geez the class is a year long and in most schools the final is all that matters. Should be out getting laid and drunk every night.
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top