T1B

I'm calling it now. USC/MSU 2012 Rose Bowl.

I'm calling Dins out now...

http://espn.go.com/blog/ncfnation/post/ ... sc-is-back

This...

"USC, which finished this season 10-2 and ranked No. 5, will have 19 starters returning in 2012 including both specialists and a guy by the name of Matt Barkley."

...is what makes Kalil's and Perry's early departure so frustrating. USC was thisclose to returning 21 of 22 starters, plus their All-Conference placekicker and punter. That was going to be one seriously loaded team. It still will be, but those are two big losses, especially the loss of Kalil.

With the receivers you guys have returning Barkley could throw for 5,000 yards and 50 TDs.

King Crimson wrote:interesting song choice for the Song Girls vid.

Pixies: Gouge Away?

yeah. so the person who made that video is 39 and wasn't into college football while in school.

Van wrote:I'm calling Dins out now...

http://espn.go.com/blog/ncfnation/post/ ... sc-is-back

This...

"USC, which finished this season 10-2 and ranked No. 5, will have 19 starters returning in 2012 including both specialists and a guy by the name of Matt Barkley."

...is what makes Kalil's and Perry's early departure so frustrating. USC was thisclose to returning 21 of 22 starters, plus their All-Conference placekicker and punter. That was going to be one seriously loaded team. It still will be, but those are two big losses, especially the loss of Kalil.

Quit yer bitchin'. You're USC for christ sakes. Doubt you will actually see considerable on-field impact from those losses. I remember when many of the Big Ten pundits said Michigan State would take a step back because of the loss of Greg Jones, yet the defense and team as a whole were better because the sum of their parts were better. That'll be the case with USC as well.

Mikey wrote:With the receivers you guys have returning Barkley could throw for 5,000 yards and 50 TDs.

Nah. Kiffin is too enamored with offensive balance to allow Barkley to throw for 5,000 yards. He knows that in order for USC to beat teams like Oregon and Stanford they're going to have to be effective in the running game.

I'll be more than happy if Barkley can simply be as efficient next year as he was this year. It was his completion % and TD-Int ration that was key. Give me 150 yards-per-game from the running backs and another 300 yards from Barkley while avoiding excessive turnovers and penalties. That's their recipe for success.

Mgo, the difference is that USC is shooting for a national title next year. MSU's eyes were on a lesser prize. Sure, USC will still have enough to win the South and play for the Pac 10 title, but due to their relative lack of depth their margin for error was already going to be slim, and you know they have to run the table in order to get the nod in the BCS beauty pageant. Losing their anchor who protected Barkley's blindside—Kalil gave up zero sacks in 2011—could be the difference between 11-2 vs 12-1 or even 12-1 vs 13-0.

The guy is that good. His back-up will be talented, but will he be '#2 pick in the draft' talented...and a senior who was one of the leaders of the team? No, he won't. There is going to be a decided drop-off in production at the all-important left tackle position.

And speaking of calling out Dins, check out Oregon's OOC schedule for 2012: Arkansas State, Fresno State and Tennessee Tech.

Like the article described it: pitiful.

It doesn't matter what the teams are shooting for, it's the same principle. The impact from the loss of one position can be made up for by the improvement from many other positions.

Maybe his loss will show in some stats and perhaps even margin of victory but I seriously doubt his departure will account for one or two actual losses nor will it affect USC's ability to chase an MNC.

I hope you're right, but I'd feel a whole lot better about USC's national title aspirations next year if Matt Kalil was still protecting Barkley's blindside.

Ummm...has Kalil actually signed with an agent yet? I'm picturing a "Merry Christmas, Van!" scenario whereby Kalil sees today's Barkley announcement and says to himself, "Awww, fuck it. Let's do this. I didn't want to play in Minnesota or St. Louis anyway."

I have to RACK Barkley for coming back. He's a great QB and an outstanding representative of his team and his school, and it will be a great pleasure to watch him play next year.

I seriously hope that he stays healthy and wins the stiff-arm trophy, and that SC goes 12-2 in the coming season.

Mikey wrote:I seriously hope that he stays healthy and wins the stiff-arm trophy, and that SC goes 12-2 in the coming season.

Bastard!

Do you still hope that even if Oregon wins the North?

Van wrote:Do you still hope that even if Oregon wins the North?

That won't happen.

Sure it will, unless Stanford can somehow manage without Luck. Mike Leach isn't getting Wazzou turned around that quickly, and Washington probably isn't ready yet either.

Van wrote:

Mikey wrote:I seriously hope that he stays healthy and wins the stiff-arm trophy, and that SC goes 12-2 in the coming season.

Bastard!

Do you still hope that even if Oregon wins the North?

We'll cross that bridge if and when we come to it, but I would think that in that case I would be fine with 13-1.

Well, if Cal doesn't turn the ball over 5 times against U$C and gives them an average starting field position of the 40 yard line in "Bear Territory"... Cal would have CRUSHED $C this year.

How in the hell does Cal have more offensive yards in the game... with 5 turnovers ???

Oh yeah, Cal's true freshman cb held Woods to 4 catches for 36 yards in the game... in his first start ever.

Cal held $C to its lowest offensive output of the year... and all at the same time turning the ball over 5 times.

The PAC is in for a big surprise... when they unleash the 15 blueshirt All-Americans they've had sitting in the wings from last year.

Not to mention the 28 studs they'll have this year... as the top ranked recruiting class in college football this year.


Watch the Army All-American high school football game this year... I think it's on the 7th of January.

Cal will have more players represented at the game than any college in the country.


Just a heads up for what's to come in the PAC next year.

So...8-4? 9-3, if absolutely every last fucking thing falls perfectly into place?

Last I checked, Jeff Tedford is still your coach—and he's always your fallback excuse every time Cal loses—Maynard will again be your QB, and it still reads "Cal" on your jerseys.

Van wrote:So...8-4? 9-3, if absolutely every last fucking thing falls perfectly into place?

Last I checked, Jeff Tedford is still your coach—and he's always your fallback excuse every time Cal loses—Maynard will again be your QB, and it still reads "Cal" on your jerseys.

I'm sensing fear in $C fan... and I don't blame him.

Cal has the #3 high school QB in the country coming in next year... much like Barkeley as a freshman.

http://rivals.yahoo.com/cal/football/re ... ine-101131

The only difference is Barkeley is coming back for his senior year and will turnout just like every $C QB has over the last 40 years.

A complete failure.

First, as to the OOC -- the SEC showed the path of least resistance. Where would Oregon be if they hadn't scheduled LSU? It's unfortunate the BCS discourages decent OOC games the way they do.

As far as lost scholarships... much ado about nothing. Math doesn't really support the assertions.

D1 has 85 schollies. Take away 10, and you have 75.

Sure, some of those 75 are going to be busts.

But think about it -- you have 22 positions to fill. 3 deep at each makes 66 "key" players.

If you end up with your seventh-string corner in due to injuries, guess what? You weren't winning much anyway.

Van wrote:So...8-4? 9-3, if absolutely every last fucking thing falls perfectly into place?

Last I checked, Jeff Tedford is still your coach—and he's always your fallback excuse every time Cal loses—Maynard will again be your QB, and it still reads "Cal" on your jerseys.

So, Kal was 5 turnovers from 9-3.

I guess, then, that Stanford might have been 5 turnovers from playing for the MNC. BFD.

Dinsdale wrote:First, as to the OOC -- the SEC showed the path of least resistance. Where would Oregon be if they hadn't scheduled LSU? It's unfortunate the BCS discourages decent OOC games the way they do.

As far as lost scholarships... much ado about nothing. Math doesn't really support the assertions.

D1 has 85 schollies. Take away 10, and you have 75.

Sure, some of those 75 are going to be busts.

But think about it -- you have 22 positions to fill. 3 deep at each makes 66 "key" players.

If you end up with your seventh-string corner in due to injuries, guess what? You weren't winning much anyway.

$C will be down to 65 scholarship players in the next few years. That's right... just 65.

If ANY go to the NFL early, become academic casualties(very likely), or get injured... well, they could be down to less than 50 players on scholarship and they can't bring in new players since Kiffin back loaded most of the current players. This is the last year $C can back load players to the 2011 class.


$C is fucked for the next 10 years or so, after this year.

Dins, I can't believe it, but M2 is right...and you're wrong. Those thirty lost schollies are going to prove deadly. That's a fuckton of missing players, not counting normal attrition and/or the Matt Kalils of the team leaving early. There will also be the missed recruits who choose not to go to USC simply because they know USC will be down in the coming years.

Come the middle of this decade, USC will be running on fumes.

As for your pitiful OOC schedule, c'mon, there's somewhere between LSU and Tennessee Tech. For starters, how about simply playing D1 teams? No Presbyterians, no Portland States. After that, yeah, maybe you could work on limiting it to respectable D1 teams, rather than the Arkansas States of the world.

Where would you be had you not scheduled LSU? Exactly where you are now, in the Rose Bowl, only with a 12-1 record. Had you beaten Waxed Asshole State rather than losing to LSU you still wouldn't have finished ahead of Bama, so the LSU loss really didn't matter. Moreover, had you beaten LSU then the loss to USC wouldn't have mattered. You'd be playing in the national title game.

M2, USC afraid of Cal? USC is shooting for a national title next year. They've beaten Cal eight in a row, even including easy wins during their probation years. Next year, all USC has to do is stay healthy and they're going to destroy Cal.

Learn your place, M2...

Cal is a big, fat horsefly, and USC is a speeding windshield.

Van wrote:Dins, I can't believe it, but M2 is right...and you're wrong.

Cal is a MONSTER on the rise, and U$C is a cheating whore.

There ya go...


Every game $C has won /cheated since 2004 is just a footnote in criminology.

Hey, whatever you need to sell yourself.

Always remember, though, that you're still just Cal. As you lie awake in a pool of your own fetid failure, simply keep chanting it, until finally you drift off into blessed sleep...

1938...

1938...

1938...

1938...

1938...

So, from what I can gather from this conversation is that, in a few years, USC will only have 65 players better than Cal's 85.

Cal has more MNC's in College Football than... Oregon, Auburn, Penn State, LSU, etc...

With 5 and the kids actually have to go to school... no basket weaving or ballroom dancing classes at Cal.

http://www.calbears.com/trads/cal-nat-champs.html



Watch your ass... in the next 10 years.




Bevo's actually taken a liking to it... just look at bevo's eyes.

With every new M2-Texas post the likelihood of Texas rolling Cal goes up that much more.

Van wrote:With every new M2-Texas post the likelihood of Texas rolling Cal goes up that much more.

Tedford's got a purdy mouf.

USC is 64-29 all time vs Cal


The Trojans can also take 19 scholarships this off season as long as 4 of them are early enrollees

USC will have 19 players eligibility run out this year
in 2013 they will have 12 players whose eligibility is scheduled to run out
In 2014 they will have 10 players whose eligibility is scheduled to run out

The way Kiff set things up, the Trojans may actually gain players compared to the roster they had for this seasons 10-2 team

It still sucks that Kalil is leaving, he should have just borrowed a little from his brother who is the highest paid center in the NFL.
Kalils > Armsteads, of course that could mostly because they are from Southern California instead of northern california

SoCalTrjn wrote:USC will have 19 players eligibility run out this year
in 2013 they will have 12 players whose eligibility is scheduled to run out
In 2014 they will have 10 players whose eligibility is scheduled to run out

I guess graduating is out of the question.

What, and take a cut in pay?