Page 3 of 3
Re: USC-Washington in game...
Posted: Mon Sep 21, 2009 8:52 pm
by Python
And you type too much.
Re: USC-Washington in game...
Posted: Mon Sep 21, 2009 10:26 pm
by SoCalTrjn
Van wrote: he doesnt want any coaches that will ever be "yes Pete" guys,
That makes zero sense. So, what, he wants guys who will argue with him? He "ran off" Holt for being too agreeable??
You have nothing on which to base any of this, and it makes no sense either.
My bad, I meant Pete doesnt want anything but "yes Pete" guys.
Van wrote:thats why Chow left and is now at UCLA
Chow left because he and Pete had a fundamental disagreement over the type of offense Pete wanted to run. Pete wanted to stretch the field more, and Chow wanted to run a more conservative ball-control type shorter passing game offense, with less running and less stretching of the field.
How much has Morton stretched the field? Morton is obviously a Pete chosen pawn there to do things Pete wanted and I cant think of a single pass that tyraveled more than 15 yards down field through 3 fucking games, Sarkisian stretched the field when he was at USC, Morton hasnt dont dick
Van wrote:Orgeron was available, Pete should have gone hard after him after Holt left, anything would be better than Seto
USC's D has been fantastic so far. Quit whining about it. It's the offense that deserves your venom, specifically the arch-conservative play calling.
Shit, keep in mind one simple thing: If Sanchez had stuck around, like
every other USC QB did - and like Colt McCoy, Sam Bradford and Tim Tebow did - we aren't having this discussion. USC is 3-0 right now, with three comfortable wins and a #2 ranking in the polls. They'd have the best combined offense in the country right now.
This isn't Seto's fault, and it's not the USC D's fault. The USC offense is running on two cylinders right now, and that's nearly the entire problem so far.
8-4 team at best, Carroll needs to hire some real coordinators, whether they agree with him all the time or not, Morton and Seto are not going to get it done. The team has played with zero fire, no hate in their hearts and everyone is looking at someone else to provide motivation or to make a play, the defensive coordinators job is to light that fire and ignite motivation, Seto does neither.
Re: USC-Washington in game...
Posted: Tue Sep 22, 2009 12:55 am
by Van
Sarkisian ran the same ultra-conservative offense when Booty went down and Sanchez had to fill in, and it cost USC the Oregon game in '07. I guarantee you that if Sark was still at USC they would've still ran a ridiculously conservative offense with Barkley and Corp getting their first starts in college ball.
This obviously isn't the offense Morton would be running if he had an experienced Mark Sanchez back there. This is the offense they're running right now because of Corp and Barkley. Pete and Morton are simply trying to limit rookie QB mistakes.
I don't agree with that philosophy, but that's what we're seeing, and it's what we'd be seeing if Sark were still there.
By the end of the season the USC offense will look very different. It may still suck, but it'll certainly look different.
Py, I don't type
enough.
Re: USC-Washington in game...
Posted: Tue Sep 22, 2009 2:47 am
by Blueblood
$C lost to Washington.... because they didn't have their starting QB and their best player (Mays) on the field.
They'll be LOADED.... when they come to 'Strawberry Canyon'.
The way it should be.
Re: USC-Washington in game...
Posted: Tue Sep 22, 2009 3:21 am
by TheJON
What the fuck is Strawberry Canyon?
Sincerely,
Everyone outside of Northern California
Re: USC-Washington in game...
Posted: Tue Sep 22, 2009 3:22 am
by Van
...and most people inside northern California, as well.
Re: USC-Washington in game...
Posted: Tue Sep 22, 2009 3:45 am
by Blueblood
TheJON wrote:What the fuck is Strawberry Canyon?
Sincerely,
Everyone outside of Northern California
Hmmm.....
The best team in College Football.... plays there....
Is this starting to help out Vannie, and the 'Midwesterners' ???
Re: USC-Washington in game...
Posted: Tue Sep 22, 2009 3:51 am
by TheJON
Is this starting to help out Vannie, and the 'Midwesterners' ???
Nope.
The scenery isn't anything special. I've lived in areas with much nicer scenery. Sorry, that's just the way it is.
Re: USC-Washington in game...
Posted: Tue Sep 22, 2009 4:02 am
by Blueblood
TheJON wrote:Is this starting to help out Vannie, and the 'Midwesterners' ???
Nope.
The scenery isn't anything special. I've lived in areas with much nicer scenery. Sorry, that's just the way it is.
Iowa...
Sure is pretty with that Ocean in the background.....
Re: USC-Washington in game...
Posted: Tue Sep 22, 2009 4:04 am
by TheJON
What does Iowa have to do with this discussion???
Thanks for proving yet again you're just another idiot NoCal.
Re: USC-Washington in game...
Posted: Tue Sep 22, 2009 4:25 am
by Blueblood
TheJON wrote:What does Iowa have to do with this discussion???
Good boy.... now go
fetch.
Re: USC-Washington in game...
Posted: Wed Sep 23, 2009 8:22 pm
by GreginPG
Van wrote:Danimal, yes, the company line remains the same: After talking with his contacts in the NFL, and keeping in mind the history of how QBs who came out early fared in their NFL careers, yes, Pete was sincere in his belief - and advice - that it wasn't in Sanchez's best interests to enter the NFL after only having started sixteen games in college.
As it turns out Sanchez may prove to be the exception, but Pete's concern for the mistake he felt Sanchez was making was sincere, and based in fact.
Doesn't mean he also didn't want Sanchez back to run his offense though, oh hell no.
As for your contention that USC's O line is only "pretty average" right now, you may want to look up the meaning of the word.
There are 119 D1 teams out there. USC's O line is not merely the 50th or 60th best in the land. By all accounts it's in the top five, if not number one.
This hardly makes them average.
The O line has done a good job, considering what they've been given to work with. The only real issue I've had with them over the first three games is the excessive number of holding penalties to begin drives.
The kickoff return team has been even worse, in that regard.
If I remember correctly, Sanchez' dad was also against him coming out early.
I think as soon as Sanchez saw that Bradford and (to a smaller extent) Tebow decided to return, Mark saw that as his opportunity and bolted.
Re: USC-Washington in game...
Posted: Wed Sep 23, 2009 8:27 pm
by indyfrisco
GreginPG wrote:If I remember correctly, Sanchez' dad was also against him coming out early.
Damn...how much was HE getting paid?
Dirty Sanchez did the right thing though. He'd have been the 4th-5th QB taken if Stafford, McCoy, Bradford and Tebow all came out especially knowing they'd all HAVE to come out. Apparently he and his dad aren't very close if pops didn't think he'd get some profit sharing with a #1 or #2 QB pick in the draft.
Re: USC-Washington in game...
Posted: Wed Sep 23, 2009 8:42 pm
by Van
Indy, you don't watch a whole lotta NFL football then, I take it?
Sanchez, the 4th or 5th QB taken, had McCoy, Bradford and Tebow also come out?
No chance in hell. Sanchez was nearly the #1 QB taken, and the #1 pick in the draft. The only reason Stafford was taken above him was the worry over the sixteen college starts being too few for Sanchez.
There would've been not a chance in hell that either Tebow or McCoy would've been taken ahead of Sanchez. Bradford is the only one, and that would've been iffy, since Sanchez ran a pro-style offense and Bradford runs a gimick offense which isn't utilized in the NFL.
Tebow?? Tebow may end up not even getting drafted to play QB in the NFL. He sure as hell will not be a high 1st rounder. Nobody's going to waste a high 1st round pick on a guy about whom they don't even quite know his position.
If Tebow isn't willing to play another position he may end up never even getting to play in the NFL, and he just may be unwilling to play another position. It's not like the kid needs the NFL, and he sure as hell has no great desire to be an H-back for the Seattle Seahawks.
Re: USC-Washington in game...
Posted: Wed Sep 23, 2009 8:53 pm
by Dinsdale
I dunno -- with the new lust-affair with the NFL wildcat these days...
Can you imagine lining Tebow up at fullback to take the shotgun snap?
There'd be some beat-up linebackers, methinks.
Re: USC-Washington in game...
Posted: Wed Sep 23, 2009 9:05 pm
by Van
True, Dins, and that will likely be his role. I referred to it as an H-back, but yeah, something along those lines.
Point being, that sort of a player will not be a high 1st round pick. Nobody's choosing a Wildcat option guy over a prototypical franchise-type drop back passer who's already adept at handling a pro-style offense.
Super Bowls are never won with gimicks. Super Bowl winning QBs are all drop back passers/readers of defenses/quick decision makers first, and 'athletes/playmakers' second.
Of those four QBs (Sanchez-Tebow-Bradford-McCoy), Sanchez is that guy. He's the only one who took the majority of his snaps from behind the center, and he's the only one who's had to do the typical three/five/seven step drops which are mandatory for success in running most NFL offenses.
He's also the only one who wasn't running a gimick offense which has little to no bearing on what's going on in the NFL.
Bradford may have still gone ahead of him, because the pro scouts just love that guy, but he's the only one.
Re: USC-Washington in game...
Posted: Thu Sep 24, 2009 12:49 am
by GreginPG
Yes I forgot about McCoy. I knew I was forgetting someone. Those guys staying helped make Mark's mind up very quickly.
It was never a question about tools or talent. It was always about experience, or his lack thereof.
Re: USC-Washington in game...
Posted: Thu Sep 24, 2009 12:54 am
by indyfrisco
Van wrote:Indy, you don't watch a whole lotta NFL football then, I take it?
Sanchez, the 4th or 5th QB taken, had McCoy, Bradford and Tebow also come out?
No chance in hell. Sanchez was nearly the #1 QB taken, and the #1 pick in the draft. The only reason Stafford was taken above him was the worry over the sixteen college starts being too few for Sanchez.
There would've been not a chance in hell that either Tebow or McCoy would've been taken ahead of Sanchez. Bradford is the only one, and that would've been iffy, since Sanchez ran a pro-style offense and Bradford runs a gimick offense which isn't utilized in the NFL.
Tebow?? Tebow may end up not even getting drafted to play QB in the NFL. He sure as hell will not be a high 1st rounder. Nobody's going to waste a high 1st round pick on a guy about whom they don't even quite know his position.
If Tebow isn't willing to play another position he may end up never even getting to play in the NFL, and he just may be unwilling to play another position. It's not like the kid needs the NFL, and he sure as hell has no great desire to be an H-back for the Seattle Seahawks.
That's why I said 4th or 5th. Bradford and Stafford for sure ahead of him. McCoy, I was counting ahead of him. You can coin flip them if you want. I don't give a fuck. I figure him ahead of Tebow, but I can see some team being in the lovefest for Tebow. That's why I say 4th or 5th. If you want to go with 3rd or 4th, so be it. I won't agree with you. But I won't write a novel arguing a spot, maybe 2 because we differ in opinion. Then again, because you say so...it must be so.
Re: USC-Washington in game...
Posted: Thu Sep 24, 2009 1:07 am
by Van
I'm glad we got that settled.
"Come on Eileen..."
Re: USC-Washington in game...
Posted: Thu Sep 24, 2009 1:41 am
by TheJON
No way would McCoy have gone ahead of Sanchez. Stafford and Bradford, yes. And no NFL team will fall in love with Tebow once he makes his way to the combine and/or his pro day. He will be a 3rd rounder. NFL teams couldn't give a fuck about who ESPN jerks off to. They're out to scout the best players and Tebow is not amongst the best NFL QB prospects.