T1B

If not for injuries, USC probably would have beat Stanford, and would probably be playing in the MNC game. But rationale for losing a game isn't exclusive to USC. Lots of teams would be in the MNC game if it wasn't for ___________. Sup Cal?

The only thing that irks me is the percentage (albeit a small one) of folks who feel USC should be in the MNC game because they're the best team "right now." I don't even really disagree with that, I just think it's totally irrelevant.

Losing to Stanford at home is inexcusable. USC eliminated themselves from championship talk as soon as the Stanford receiver caught the final pass in the corner of the endzone. Too bad, but that's the way it goes. If I were voting for a #1 team several teams would get my vote before USC. That loss was a joke and they were at home. USC should have beat Stanford regardless of any injuries they had. USC lost the game because they were sleepwalking through it. Too bad.

It's funny, Kansas has gotten shit about their schedule all year; but at least they didn't lose to one of the doormats they played and Stanford is worse than all but maybe two teams on KU's schedule. YET, everybody seems just A-OK with the fact that USC lost to this team.

Such is life.

A playoff would theoretically give you the two best teams right now. Under the current system, it should be the whole body of work. USC and Georgia would not belong in that discussion.

i was so amazed at how quickly this talk about usc *playing the best now* began after their loss to oregon. i think they rolled oregon state and one other team before i heard it and started a thread that's pretty buried by now. ppl were clamoring for sanchez to play instead of booty, they got their wish, usc lost to oregon, and the excuse was revised to allow for "injuries."

Mook wrote:Losing to Stanford at home is inexcusable. USC eliminated themselves from championship talk as soon as the Stanford receiver caught the final pass in the corner of the endzone. Too bad, but that's the way it goes. If I were voting for a #1 team several teams would get my vote before USC. That loss was a joke and they were at home. USC should have beat Stanford regardless of any injuries they had. USC lost the game because they were sleepwalking through it. Too bad.

It's funny, Kansas has gotten shit about their schedule all year; but at least they didn't lose to one of the doormats they played and Stanford is worse than all but maybe two teams on KU's schedule. YET, everybody seems just A-OK with the fact that USC lost to this team.

Such is life.

Losing to Arkansas ay home isnt a joke? USC went 70-17 and 50-14 home and away to the pigs.

No loss is excusable with the current system. USC must be stupid for playing Virginia, Ohio State and Notre Dame OOC next year, they should play Northern Arizona, Utah State and Louisiana Lafayette all in LA

Should there be more weight added to wins and losses in November than October or september? who knows

Sudden Sam wrote:
I swear the BCS makes me miss the old bowl system...as unfair and dependent on regional bias as it was. All the major bowls mattered and you had to hope that everything fell into place to win a MNC. It was actually pretty cool sometimes.

Can't recall the year (and I don't feel like looking it up), but I recall one season where Arkansas had suspended their superstar RB and had no chance in hell of beating Oklahoma. The backup RB got like 200 yards, Arkansas kicked OU's ass and all the dominoes fell in place for Bama. The Tide clobbered Ohio State in the Sugar and we assumed we were NC. But Notre fuckin' Dame beat #1 Texas and leaped over 150 teams to win the NC. If I'm mixing seasons, tough. That's how I remember it! :D

1977 was the year Arkansas beat OU 31-6. I think that was the score*. the Arkansas RB was Roland Sales. similar thing (pieces falling into place under the old system) happened in 85 for OU. Miami, OU's only loss, had lost in the Sugar Bowl to Tennessee....and all of a sudden the OU/PSU game was for the MNC in the Orange.

*there's a story in Sooner lore involving Switzer and one of his assistant's wife....and depending on which version you hear, something like OU's game plan/field call terminology finding their way to Lou Holtz's Arkie staff courtesy of the cuckold (Larry Lacewell). but, who knows?

SoCalTrjn wrote:[
Losing to Arkansas ay home isnt a joke? USC went 70-17 and 50-14 home and away to the pigs.

No loss is excusable with the current system. USC must be stupid for playing Virginia, Ohio State and Notre Dame OOC next year, they should play Northern Arizona, Utah State and Louisiana Lafayette all in LA

Should there be more weight added to wins and losses in November than October or september? who knows

Yes, losing to Arkansas at home is a joke as well.........but the thread was about USC.

When people say the team who is playing best now what they really mean to say is "the team who is playing best now who was highly rated at the start of the year and suffered a couple of weird losses but we still think they're really good anyway so they should get a shot at BCS championship/AP national title in spite of those losses team"

I don't hear one soul uttering cries for a split national title or being screwed out of the BCS title game for West Virginia, Missouri or Kansas.......but the masses are rallying behind USC, LSU and UGA. Maybe they're right but the other three schools have the same claim.

No I think that when they say "the team that is playing the best right now" what they mean is the team that didnt limp down the home stretch of the season and if there was a playoff that team would be the favorite to win. Is that team USC? is it Georgia? as long as we have computer poll titles, we will never know

SoCalTrjn wrote:No I think that when they say "the team that is playing the best right now" what they mean is the team that didnt limp down the home stretch of the season and if there was a playoff that team would be the favorite to win. Is that team USC? is it Georgia? as long as we have computer poll titles, we will never know

How about 1 loss Kansas??

That's what I mean, because their name is Kansas they are totally dismissed........for the so-called "hot" teams.

Pretty sure beating the #3 BCS team isn't "limping" down the stretch.

no I dismissed them cause they lost their last game of the regular season and dodged the tougher teams in their conference. Put me in the category that thinks that wins and losses in november should mean more than wins and losses in october or september.