There are 83 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Notre Dame vs USC

Originally posted by KRS-1:
Originally posted by YourHuckleberry:
Originally posted by crzy:
I don't like USC, but they would dominate in any conference.

Agreed.

You both honestly think they could walk into Oklahoma, Texas, LSU, Florida or Alabama and just dominate these teams on the road ?

They couldn't even dominate the "2nd rate" teams in these 2 conferences on the road if they played against them. I bet the schools from those conferences would even surprise USC in their own house with how much more competitive they tend to be as compared to Pac-10 schools.

Yes, I believe they could easily compete with all of those teams.

It surprises me that you think they couldn't.
  • dman
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 7,453
Originally posted by YourHuckleberry:
Originally posted by KRS-1:
Originally posted by YourHuckleberry:
Originally posted by crzy:
I don't like USC, but they would dominate in any conference.

Agreed.

You both honestly think they could walk into Oklahoma, Texas, LSU, Florida or Alabama and just dominate these teams on the road ?

They couldn't even dominate the "2nd rate" teams in these 2 conferences on the road if they played against them. I bet the schools from those conferences would even surprise USC in their own house with how much more competitive they tend to be as compared to Pac-10 schools.

Yes, I believe they could easily compete with all of those teams.

It surprises me that you think they couldn't.

USC is just as good as those teams ... this year they are down a bit but in general they can compete with any team.
  • crzy
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 39,284
USC's talent level easily matches any program in this country.

Their entire linebacking corps from last year went in the first two rounds in the last draft and Rey Maualuga should have gone in the top 15.
FWIW, Clausen is good. I'm not denying that. I just think he's a whiny little sally and a punk. So I'm glad he blew it at the end.

But I think the whole "if we had Malcolm we would have won" is hilarious. If my aunt had a dick she'd be my uncle. But she doesn't, and ND didn't have Malcolm, so the point is moot.

And KRS, you can knock Barkley if you want, but he's still undefeated as a starter, and has won in Columbus and South Bend as a true freshman. The kid can flat out play, end of story.
Originally posted by nipplehead:
FWIW, Clausen is good. I'm not denying that. I just think he's a whiny little sally and a punk. So I'm glad he blew it at the end.

But I think the whole "if we had Malcolm we would have won" is hilarious. If my aunt had a dick she'd be my uncle. But she doesn't, and ND didn't have Malcolm, so the point is moot.

And KRS, you can knock Barkley if you want, but he's still undefeated as a starter, and has won in Columbus and South Bend as a true freshman. The kid can flat out play, end of story.

I never knocked Barkley really. Go back and read this thread, I said he has a bright future but he plays on a team where he won't spend his freshman year being sacked 50+ times, have no run game and WR's who could not get open. Clausen has grown into his position and shown a great deal of toughness (both mental and physical) and tenacity. Notre Dame's recruiting classes pre Weis were not very good at all and that talent did little to nothing to help surround JC with the same thing Barkley has come into. Clausen has earned any national attention he has received this year and EARNED his way into the Heisman talks.

I also never said if Floyd plays we win, I said the game is a different one. Good try at twisting my words on me. Again Notre Dame is not as deep in talent as USC is. You take away the best WR and outside of a very good #2 WR we have few actual playmakers who have proven ready (Shaq Evans has proven he still is far from ready to step up as evidenced by his play since Floyd went down).

And that sally whiny punk as you call him has had to lead the charge for his team on the final drive for the last 4 weeks, and vs Michigan his D blew the lead and left the offense with under 10 seconds to perform some sort of miraculous comeback. Again a huge difference than him and Barkley. Barkley's team does not seem to put him in those positions, Barkley's team D is not ranked 100th in the nation they are ranked 6th.

Barkley may have won in Columbus and South Bend but he has a very good Defense on his side and is surrounded with not only more but a deeper talent level than OSU or ND. He is a great young talent that will have a great and storied college career but like many USC QB's that have preceded him, he is in a position to succeed not a position where he needs to overcome and step up in order for himself and his team to gain the nation's respect.

So let's all hang from Barkley's nuts for going into South Bend and shredding the 100th ranked defense in the nation. What a superior performance he had today.
Originally posted by YourHuckleberry:
Originally posted by KRS-1:
Originally posted by YourHuckleberry:
Originally posted by crzy:
I don't like USC, but they would dominate in any conference.

Agreed
.

You both honestly think they could walk into Oklahoma, Texas, LSU, Florida or Alabama and just dominate these teams on the road ?

They couldn't even dominate the "2nd rate" teams in these 2 conferences on the road if they played against them. I bet the schools from those conferences would even surprise USC in their own house with how much more competitive they tend to be as compared to Pac-10 schools.

Yes, I believe they could easily compete with all of those teams.

It surprises me that you think they couldn't.

They are a very talented and deep team but are not nearly as competitive as those teams are both on the road and at home. They don't face conference competition like what we see on a yearly basis from the Big 12 and SEC teams where any team pretty much can come into your house and beat you any given week or put on a great showing for their home crowd on any given week.

The Pac-10's competitiveness and the Pac-10 bias on this board is quite obvious. You guys should watch those SEC and Big 12 games a little closer to notice that USC would not DOMINATE if they played in either of those conferences.

I also like how now you say they could "easily compete" now but originally you agreed that they would "dominate".
  • crzy
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 39,284
And, conversely, I think the SEC has become massively overrated. Every year we hear about how great the SEC is, blah blah blah.

Fact #1: The Pac-10 was 10-7 head-to-head since 2000 coming into this season against the supposedly elite SEC.

Fact #2: Since the 2000 season, the Pac-10 has the best record in games against the other Bowl Championship Series conference.
[ Edited by crzy on Oct 18, 2009 at 8:11 AM ]
Originally posted by crzy:
And, conversely, I think the SEC has become massively overrated. Every year we hear about how great the SEC is, blah blah blah.

Fact #1: The Pac-10 was 10-7 head-to-head since 2000 coming into this season against the supposedly elite SEC.

Fact #2: Since the 2000 season, the Pac-10 has the best record in games against the other Bowl Championship Series conference.

Fact: An SEC team has won the championship for the past 3 seasons.

Fact: Make that 4.
I don't know why people think USC wouldn't be good in other conferences...the Trojans kick the s**t out of every nonconference opponent except Texas in 2005. From what I can see, the only teams in the country that can beat SC is the Pac-10.
Originally posted by nipplehead:
I don't know why people think USC wouldn't be good in other conferences...the Trojans kick the s**t out of every nonconference opponent except Texas in 2005. From what I can see, the only teams in the country that can beat SC is the Pac-10.

Good and dominate are 2 different things. Domination requires that you win your conference in down years as well as your championship years. That's not going to happen in the SEC. USC might be the best program in the country, but they won't be able to march into Florida and win in a down year. They're not going to win the SEC with a true freshman at QB.

Yeah Pac 10 is a very good conference but they're a one headed monster. Move them into a conference with Texas or Florida and you're not going to see USC win it every year.
[ Edited by tjd808185 on Oct 18, 2009 at 12:13 PM ]
Originally posted by nipplehead:
I don't know why people think USC wouldn't be good in other conferences...the Trojans kick the s**t out of every nonconference opponent except Texas in 2005. From what I can see, the only teams in the country that can beat SC is the Pac-10.

I live in SEC country and I can tell you that the PAC 10 is always the most underrated conference while the SEC is alway overrated. When USC loses to an unranked Pac 10 team it is considered a big upset. When a top SEC team loses to an unranked SEC team, the talk goes "Well, its the SEC. Any team can win on any given day."
Originally posted by dirtysouthniner:
Originally posted by nipplehead:
I don't know why people think USC wouldn't be good in other conferences...the Trojans kick the s**t out of every nonconference opponent except Texas in 2005. From what I can see, the only teams in the country that can beat SC is the Pac-10.

I live in SEC country and I can tell you that the PAC 10 is always the most underrated conference while the SEC is alway overrated. When USC loses to an unranked Pac 10 team it is considered a big upset. When a top SEC team loses to an unranked SEC team, the talk goes "Well, its the SEC. Any team can win on any given day."

Probably because the SEC keeps winning the national championship. That might have something to do with it.
Originally posted by pantstickle:
Originally posted by dirtysouthniner:
Originally posted by nipplehead:
I don't know why people think USC wouldn't be good in other conferences...the Trojans kick the s**t out of every nonconference opponent except Texas in 2005. From what I can see, the only teams in the country that can beat SC is the Pac-10.

I live in SEC country and I can tell you that the PAC 10 is always the most underrated conference while the SEC is alway overrated. When USC loses to an unranked Pac 10 team it is considered a big upset. When a top SEC team loses to an unranked SEC team, the talk goes "Well, its the SEC. Any team can win on any given day."

Probably because the SEC keeps winning the national championship. That might have something to do with it.

That has nothing to do with the strength of the conference, and you know that. That has to do with the SEC having a couple beastly elite teams. Having two great teams does not automatically mean the other 10 teams in the conference are also good.
Of course USC would be good in the SEC or the Big 12. (Or is it "easily compete" now?) I don't think anyone is saying otherwise. But dominate?

No way USC would dominate the Big 12 or the SEC the way it currently dominates the PAC-10.
Originally posted by nipplehead:
Originally posted by pantstickle:
Originally posted by dirtysouthniner:
Originally posted by nipplehead:
I don't know why people think USC wouldn't be good in other conferences...the Trojans kick the s**t out of every nonconference opponent except Texas in 2005. From what I can see, the only teams in the country that can beat SC is the Pac-10.

I live in SEC country and I can tell you that the PAC 10 is always the most underrated conference while the SEC is alway overrated. When USC loses to an unranked Pac 10 team it is considered a big upset. When a top SEC team loses to an unranked SEC team, the talk goes "Well, its the SEC. Any team can win on any given day."

Probably because the SEC keeps winning the national championship. That might have something to do with it.

That has nothing to do with the strength of the conference, and you know that. That has to do with the SEC having a couple beastly elite teams. Having two great teams does not automatically mean the other 10 teams in the conference are also good.

Sure it does. The PAC-10 has usc and some other teams. The SEC has Florida, Alabama, and LSU that are all legit teams. They also have Georgia and Auburn that are both talented enough to beat top teams if they play well enough. How many teams aside from usc has the PAC-10 sent to the national championship game? Homerism aside, do you really think the PAC-10 has as many elite teams as the SEC?