T1B

We're now into the 4th round, and not even Zach Follett has been picked yet. Meanwhile, USC's entire LB corp (plus Clay Matthews, Jr, who's projected to be a LB in the NFL) have already been drafted, including two 1st rounders and a high 2nd rounder.

Maualuga should've gone in the 1st round as well, according to the analysis of most of the "experts."

Where are the Cal LBs?

Oh, at some point he'll be in, wtih his usual bullshit. He'll talk about "students vs thugs," as if Cal is really any different than anybody else. He'll talk about steroids, as if USC is any different than anybody else. He'll talk about how Cal is going to kill USC this year, which they never end up doing.

Then we'll get some oddball pics.

I'll give him this, though. I definitely fear three games this season: @ Ohio St, @ Oregon and @ Cal. USC is going to be very vulnerable this season, especially early. They're breaking in nearly an entire new D, and with Sanchez bolting early they lose continuity at the one place where they were otherwise going to be dominant this season.

It also appears that Mitch Mustain is no longer the presumed starter. It looks like Aaron Corp is now #1, with true freshman Matt Barkley #2, having already supplanted Mustain. (Barkley will end up being a #1 pick in the NFL draft, wait and see.)

So, no, USC's O isn't going to be nearly what it would've been, and its O was going to be the anchor this season.

Ohio St, in Columbus, early, with revenge on their minds, that's going to be a hornet's nest. There aren't a whole lot of BCS conference elite teams who'd even schedule such a risky game, much less win it.

Oregon in Autzen is always a bitch, and if they stay healthy they'll have one of the few experienced QBs in the conference.

Cal didn't lose a game in Berkeley last year, and they're also returning experience at the QB position. Despite all our joking around, Cal should be strong this year.

I wouldn't be surprised to see USC lose two of those three games, and the Cal game could easily be one of 'em. Thing is, even if they do beat USC, they'll still manage to somehow not win the conference.

They're Cal.

7th round and still no Follett. However, the Dolphins just nabbed a LB from Weber St

Wait, where is JON to tell us that some dude RB from Iowa should have gone #1???????????

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:7th round and still no Follett. However, the Dolphins just nabbed a LB from Weber St

Bwaaaahaaa!!

The 7th round is nearly complete, and still no Cal LBs. Not only that, aside from Alex Mack there hasn't been a single other Cal player drafted.

Btw, no UCLA players drafted, at all.

Any guesses as to which team owns this draft, for the second year in a row, with the most 1st rounders, and the most players drafted (11 out of their their 13 eligible players)...so far.

Follett finally gets drafted...and it's Detoilet!

Ahhhhhhh, shit, there it is, yep, the 26th pick, in the 7th round, to Detroit.

Wooohooo!! Go Bears!!

(Cal's big stud...nearly Mr Irrelevant!!)

I was kind of hoping Cal would only get 1 player drafted, that way Abilene Christian could run smack on them.

Go through it, team by team, vs Cal. You'll find some comedic gems...

Daaaaamn, another Cal player, in the 7th round! Cal OWNS the 7th round now, bitches!

Van wrote:Daaaaamn, another Cal player, in the 7th round! Cal OWNS the 7th round now, bitches!

Van wrote: Btw, no UCLA players drafted, at all.

Karl Duhrrell - the gift that keeps on giving....

Van wrote:Oh, at some point he'll be in, wtih his usual bullshit. He'll talk about "students vs thugs," as if Cal is really any different than anybody else.

Academic honors for 11 Pac-10 players....

11 Pac-10 players. 3 from Cal.

http://myespn.go.com/blogs/pac10/0-8-85 ... ayers.html

Van wrote:He'll talk about steroids, as if USC is any different than anybody else.

EVERY single $C player in the draft tested positive for STEROIDS. (don't make me bust out the photos again)

Can you name a SINGLE Cal player EVER testing positive for roids ???


I'll be waiting.

Van wrote:Then we'll get some oddball pics.

You mean like this.... before the phantom $C TD that BOUNCED off the ground ???




Sanchez's worst game as a College player.





the truth

Blueblood wrote:Sanchez's worst game as a College player.

I think you put the wrong picture in there since his worst game was against Oregon State.

Blueblood wrote:

Van wrote:He'll talk about steroids, as if USC is any different than anybody else.

EVERY single $C player in the draft tested positive for STEROIDS. (don't make me bust out the photos again)

While not EVERY $C player tested positive, a few did. They tested positive at a time they KNEW they would be tested. I find it laughable, Van, that you try to pawn it off as "everybody does it" when in reality, to the rest of the non-homer world, this is yet another black eye on this particular era for U$C. Unless, of course, you meant everybody AT U$C does it.

Indy, you're far too bright of a guy to think it's confined to USC. If it were, would all those guys get drafted as high as they did?

That famous pumped up pic of Cushing, do you seriously believe you couldn't find the exact same thing in just about every elite school in the country?

There's no way in hell USC is just running rampant with it, by themselves. Ludicrous.

2oolio - academic smack is your first reply, of course. Maybe Kal players are so smart that they'll wake up early and make some espresso before facing the likes of Mighty Maryland this upcoming season.

m2 wrote:EVERY single $C player in the draft tested positive for STEROIDS.

Umm, no, they didn't. USC had thirteen players eligible, and eleven were drafted. How's about you show us some confirmed proof that all thirteen (or even all eleven) USC players officially tested positive for steroids.

A reputable link would be nice. When you won't be able to produce anything, a retraction and/or your usual backpedal will suffice.

Blueblood wrote:

Academic honors for 11 Pac-10 players....

11 Pac-10 players. 3 from Cal.

http://myespn.go.com/blogs/pac10/0-8-85 ... ayers.html

The only school not to have a player named on that academic list?

Stanford

Keep this in mind, juicing is an individual decision, I know of no coaches that demand their guys juice up. The risk factor of such a thing is way too high and most coaches know this.

I see USC as having a much higher level of roid users mainly because the expectations and pressure to perform are probably greater there than in any other school. Over the last 7 to 8 years USC has out recruited everyone by such a far margin it's pretty much unheard of. Every kid that goes to USC is expected to be the next Reggie Bush or Troy Polamalu because they all have come in as big time recruits, even Clay Matthews came in as the son of the Great Clay Matthews, that's pretty big shoes to fill. So all those kids are looking for an edge. Then you have to factor in the Hollywood status given to the USC football team in Southern California and that increases the factor exponentially. Pretty much everyone in a town of 7 million knows your name and how good you are to the point that your as much a celebrity as Brad Pitt.

Lots of other schools has the pressure like Texas, Oklahoma, OSU, Florida, ect, but none have it like USC and that is why I think you are hearing more roid talk coming from USC than any other school.

I still think too many schools turn a blind eye to roid use, at Texas the late Shane Dronett was a huge roid monster and was probably the most hated guy on campus because of how the roids affected him. He was known for being a racist and picking fights with anyone that looked at him wrong. The roids served him well enough to get him an NFL gig for 7 or 8 years but in the end he committed suicide and when they opened up his head for the autopsy they found what amounted to the brain of a 70 year old guy in the body of a 39 year old.

The Seer wrote:

Blueblood wrote:

Academic honors for 11 Pac-10 players....

11 Pac-10 players. 3 from Cal.

http://myespn.go.com/blogs/pac10/0-8-85 ... ayers.html

The only school not to have a player named on that academic list?

Stanford

You do realize no one cares if a Stanford guy has academic honors, once they leave with that diploma they are still a Standford grad and will earn more with that degree than any of the academic honors guys will ever earn. (not counting the few that make it into professional sports)

Vito, try to keep something in mind here, 'k? Just because m2 says USC's guys were all caught juicing, well, that doesn't make it true.

Have you seen anything official which links "all of USC's players" to juicing? No, of course you haven't.

During the draft, when ESPN is just drooling for stories, did you see anything about USC's players failing juicing tests? Nope, you didn't.

Believe it, when you see proof of it. Until then, dismiss it as jealous gossip...especially when it's coming solely from m2.

Van wrote:Vito, try to keep something in mind here, 'k? Just because m2 says USC's guys were all caught juicing, well, that doesn't make it true.

Have you seen anything official which links "all of USC's players" to juicing? No, of course you haven't.

During the draft, when ESPN is just drooling for stories, did you see anything about USC's players failing juicing tests? Nope, you didn't.

Believe it, when you see proof of it. Until then, dismiss it as jealous gossip...especially when it's coming solely from m2.

I've seen stuff on the two linebackers Cushing and Matthews.

I just saying that from the prospective of the kids that are coming to USC. All these kids are coming in as elite level athletes with huge expectations about playing in the NFL. And yes I know that every campus has kids with that expectation but not all of them are being ranked as 5-star can't miss kids. Well they get to USC and realize that just about everyone there is just as elite as they are. Then you have the whole hollywood scene which most of these kids are thrown into just because they are USC football players. It's like peer pressure for these kids, perform or get out, I'm surprised you don't have more transfers, but that is a credit to Carrol and his staff.

I've seen stuff on the two linebackers Cushing and Matthews.

Right. The stuff m2 linked, which has never been corroborated.

He went from one unsubstantiated link about two players, to a blanket statement saying every USC player in the draft got nailed for steroids.

Meanwhile, those same two players were both taken in the 1st round, with no mention from anybody about any drug testing failures.

Van wrote:

I've seen stuff on the two linebackers Cushing and Matthews.

Right. The stuff m2 linked, which has never been corroborated.

He went from one unsubstantiated link about two players, to a blanket statement saying every USC player in the draft got nailed for steroids.

Meanwhile, those same two players were both taken in the 1st round, with no mention from anybody about any drug testing failures.

Van, I actually saw an article on nfl.com about Matthews and Cushing failing a test. No one should question what the league publishes. Then they pulled it. So, I will stand corrected on these two. And I would not chastise ANYONE for running with a story published on nfl.com.

[tinfoil hat]And I would not put it past the NFL for making this story go away after seeing what "coming out" on steroids has done to baseball.[/tinfoil hat]

IndyFrisco wrote:

Van wrote:

I've seen stuff on the two linebackers Cushing and Matthews.

Right. The stuff m2 linked, which has never been corroborated.

He went from one unsubstantiated link about two players, to a blanket statement saying every USC player in the draft got nailed for steroids.

Meanwhile, those same two players were both taken in the 1st round, with no mention from anybody about any drug testing failures.

Van, I actually saw an article on nfl.com about Matthews and Cushing failing a test. No one should question what the league publishes. Then they pulled it. So, I will stand corrected on these two. And I would not chastise ANYONE for running with a story published on nfl.com.

[tinfoil hat]And I would not put it past the NFL for making this story go away after seeing what "coming out" on steroids has done to baseball.[/tinfoil hat]

It was a report from a TMZ type site. It also said that others tested positive. Yet, the NFL never validated the website or the reports that the positive tests happened at the combine where they were reported to have been tested. Just because it is on a website doesn't make it true. If that were the case I would have 11 millions dollars in my checking account for helping out a nice family member from Nigeria.

If it were true and it could be corroborated it would be all over every sports news site in America. ESPN would've been ALL OVER IT during the NFL draft, especially when those two players were being mentioned.

Beyond that, even if it were true, two players are hardly the same thing as "every single USC player in the draft," which was m2's insane claim.

You mean M200l was wrong on this one too? Dammit I was starting to believe him.

You don't have to be a doctor or fail a test to know that Kushing was on roids just like you don't have to be a doctor to know the Ohio State backers from a few years ago were all on roids and hormones. The effects generally show up on the face and body and there is enough picture evidence to show they were juicing.

Vito, you don't know any such thing. Sure, that one pumped up pic of Cushing has us all believing he's on 'roids, but don't pretend to act like you can tell for certain, just from a pic or two. You can't. You're just assuming it. There was nothing about his face that said "'roids." All he had was a hugely ripped body, which doesn't necessarily mean he was on 'roids. People did manage to get that way, long before 'roids came into being. Cushing is a well known workaholic, with one of the biggest motors going. He puts in the work.

Do I also suspect he's on something? Yep, I do. I suspect he is, and I suspect the vast majority of "unnaturally" huge, ripped football players of being on something.

It's merely a suspicion, however. I don't know. I couldn't possibly know, and neither can anybody else here.

From:



To:



I think the latter picture is what most are looking at. Nice rack, btw.

Indy, I believe the second pic is the much older pic. I wanna say that was from his freshman season, and the pumped up pics are the more recent ones.

(Edit: Actually, I have no idea when that first pic is from. I'm referring to the other, more infamous pic of Cushing, where he looks like the Hulk. In that first pic you linked, his hair is so short that I have no idea how old it is.)

The first pic I linked was him in high school. Yeah, that's natural. The second pic is no doubt the result of using some kind of hormone accellerator without using the estrogen blocker.

What? No comment on his hooters?