LC's power rankings - week 3 (1 Viewer)

[Loose Cannon]

Wait? What are you even arguing then?

What on earth are you talking about?

I'm saying if backup Matt Mauck can do it under worse conditions against a much better team, then "backup" Corp should've been able to do it when he was named the starter at the beginning of the week.

So because it happened once, with a totally different team, in a totally different game, 7 years ago, that any team with QB injury issues should be able to overcome them...

Okay.

I'm not arguing about their placement. If you read back through these posts, I make no mention of where they place. I was responding to your assertion no championship team could've won without their starting QB when Corp in essence WAS the starter before an injury that is now healed.

Do you believe that any of the BCS champions could have? If so, why, and woh?

I'm also arguing that USC's loss shouldn't be excused due to the injury to Barkley because Corp was, by all accounts, equal to Barkley. USC didn't lose a Bradford or a McCoy and replace him with a Mauck. They lost a C+ and replaced him with a C+.

Except that had Corp had the full training camp and the early patsy game to prepare, he might be better than a C+

This loss tells me USC isn't a championship team. They ran the ball extremely well, they stuffed Washington's run, Locker didn't have a huge game, and none of USC's turnovers led to Washington points. They are much more talented than Washington and Washington didn't play a great game by any means. And USC lost 16-13.

Who said USC was a championship team? Why are you even arguing this?

What does the SEC have to do with this conversation? The only SEC mention had nothing to do with it being an SEC game and everything to do with the situation presented. The fact you bring it up tells me you have run out of argument.

Run out of argument? Not at all. The argument I made is that almost no team can overcome an injury to their starting QB and remain a national championship contender. And your sole point of rebuttal is that Matt Mauck once won a game as a backup QB.

Nice work

Anyway - I'm sure you'll twist this argument into some other tangent that has nothing to do with what we're talking about, so I'm going to consider myself done on this thread, because I'm about 5000% sure that there's no way you will allow yourself not to get the last word. So go ahead

 

[VVextreme]

Name a championship team this decade that would have won a national title with a major injury to their QB.

2001 Miami is probably the only one.

LSU won the SEC championship game with RP during the SECCG during their last national championship season two years ago. Can't get much more recent than that and the SECCG against UT was definitely a much higher profile + tougher game than against a regular season game versus a crappy Washington team. And the way we destroyed OSU in that national championship game, I bet we still would have crushed them even if RP started that game too. But USC wasn't playing in a national championship game, they weren't even playing in a conference championship game. They were playing in their conference opener regular season game against a crappy Washington team that has a new coach and that only won one game out of 6857658764768546754678 games...

Heck even THIS year, LSU's annointed starting QB was kicked off the team before last season, so we beat Washington with a 19 yr old kid who has only started two other college games in his life and he would be just a redshirt freshman this year had he redshirted last year like he was supposed too.

LSU sucks this year and they still beat that same team on the road that USC lost too, in a huge time zone different late game, etc etc etc

Bottom line: USC should have beat that crappy washington team even if the water boy started....

Quit yer whining. USC is not a national championship caliber team this year, end of story. But when does actually deserving anything ever stopped USC? Go through your fake little parade USC... They need to quit making excuses and they SHOULD be embarrassed about this loss. There is no excuse for this loss.

 

[Domination]

LSU sucks this year and they still beat that same team on the road that USC lost too, in a huge time zone different late game, etc etc etc

Bottom line: USC should have beat that crappy washington team even if the water boy started....

were the washington coaches ex coordinators for lsu?

its like when sean payton came into dallas and embarassed the cowboys a couple years ago...he knew what he was facing. just like with the washington guys, the head coach and defensive coordinator, they knew what they could do and run...

maybe thats just me though...

 

[NPs6724]

were the washington coaches ex coordinators for lsu?

its like when sean payton came into dallas and embarassed the cowboys a couple years ago...he knew what he was facing. just like with the washington guys, the head coach and defensive coordinator, they knew what they could do and run...

maybe thats just me though...

That doesn't make the Washington players better at football. It doesn't matter if you know what's coming if you can't stop it. I'm sure it played some part because how could it not, but if USC is as good as they are propped up to be, it wouldn't have mattered.

 

[NPs6724]

Wait? What are you even arguing then?

What on earth are you talking about?

So because it happened once, with a totally different team, in a totally different game, 7 years ago, that any team with QB injury issues should be able to overcome them...

Okay.

Any team with 2 QBs who are considered equals by their coaching staff, yes they should be able to overcome it. It's not that difficult to grasp nor should a big-time program like USC not be expected to overcome that. They didn't replace a star QB with a perennial backup; they replaced an inexperienced kid with another.

Plus, how could it not involve a totally different team, in a totally different game? That would be quite odd if it was the same team in the same game.

That is what is called an "example". See, an example is an occurrence of something. And Matt Mauck is probably the best example of this circumstance in the past 10 years. He had everything worse than Corp did. No week of practice as the starter. No full game of play to find a rhythm at settle down. No tie score when he comes in, LSU was losing so he was already behind the 8 ball. A much tougher opponent, #2 in the country Tennessee. Much more pressure, SEC championship game.

BTW, just because you started the thread doesn't mean you hold all authority to what is posted inside. Other people can post their own thoughts and opinions and don't need your permission. Thought you'd like to know

Except that had Corp had the full training camp and the early patsy game to prepare, he might be better than a C+

That has no relevance. The fact is he, with missing 2 weeks of practice and not playing in any actual games, was on par with Barkley. Thus, they lost nothing at QB. Whether Corp would've been better with a tune-up doesn't matter because in the end, they were still very much equals.

I love how you keep trying to make it sound like Corp missed a ton of time. He missed 2 weeks.

Who said USC was a championship team? Why are you even arguing this?

You made the statement "Name a championship team this decade that would have won a national title with a major injury to their QB" in response to a post made about USC. Seems like you're implying USC is a championship-caliber team. You also used the injured QB argument to keep USC ranked high. I would say a team in the top 7 would be a championship-caliber team in most people's eyes, especially this early when most of the top teams are still undefeated.

Run out of argument? Not at all. The argument I made is that almost no team can overcome an injury to their starting QB and remain a national championship contender. And your sole point of rebuttal is that Matt Mauck once won a game as a backup QB.

Your argument doesn't hold water for THIS case because the 2 QBs were equals. Yes if Colt McCoy gets hurt, his backup most likely won't keep UT in the title hunt. But Barkley isn't Colt McCoy. Matt Mauck is a perfect example (there's that word again) of a contender overcoming a QB injury in much worse conditions than what USC and Corp were under. In most cases, if you replace average for average, you won't suffer a dropoff in play. I'm willing to bet if Barkley had played, USC still loses. It was just like a lot of their losses. They go on the road and don't show up.

Anyway - I'm sure you'll twist this argument into some other tangent that has nothing to do with what we're talking about, so I'm going to consider myself done on this thread, because I'm about 5000% sure that there's no way you will allow yourself not to get the last word. So go ahead

If you could understand a simple point, I wouldn't have to reiterate it

It has nothing to do with "getting the last word". This sounds like you are just putting your fingers in your ears and screaming "I'M RIGHT LALALALALA".

But I'll be nice and break down my point for you again. You are defending USC's loss and their team due to an injury to Barkley. I am refuting that defense because the USC coaches felt Barkley and Corp were essentially equals and thus the injury shouldn't have a negative affect on them. And the fact Corp didn't do anything to hurt them too bad lends support to that.

 

[Crzycjunx76]

USC is a decent team and in the current environment it seems they may qualify as a top 10 team... but I do not think they are. Even without their starting quarterback most teams can beat an inferior opponent. Washington is not Sunbelt bad ... but just because my Tigers struggled against them does not mean I am going to glorify and call them a good team. They are well coached without a doubt, but they are to my mind anywhere from a 6-9 (my guess is 7)loss team this season and if you expect to be a top team you dominate that sort of competition not loose to them. Even if you just squeak by you can eventually work your way into the elite by just being the last undefeated standing ... but loosing is a one way ticket to show that you don't have it.

 

[VVextreme]

were the washington coaches ex coordinators for lsu?

its like when sean payton came into dallas and embarassed the cowboys a couple years ago...he knew what he was facing. just like with the washington guys, the head coach and defensive coordinator, they knew what they could do and run...

maybe thats just me though...

what, all the other teams payton beat that year just dumb luck then?

1. The NFL is an ENTIRELY different game than college football. The talent level in the NFL is pretty darn close accross the board and it's no secret that in college football, you win based on athletes.
2. You act like these types of losses aren't the trademark for USC.
3. Even if Pete Carroll called up his old buddy and said hey, here is a play by play of EXACTLY what I'm going to do, USC STILL should have won that game based on talent alone. Shoot, LSU barely even threw the ball the entire game and just ran over washington for a hardly ever in doubt win.
4. Pete Carroll also knows his ex coordinators better than anyone, so it goes both ways. He should have game-planned accordingly, but he didn't.
5. He did a piss-poor job motivating his team to get them up to play a crappy appointment.
6. If he can't handle going to play a semi-decent (yet vastly overrated team) on the road and then going to play a crappy team on the road the next week, then thank you for proving SEC superiority and how they wouldn't be able to hang in the SEC week-in and week-out. You (the poster that said that) just gave us that point in a gift-basket. How many times does someone in the SEC have to go play a top ten ranked team on the road and then go play another top ten ranked team, etc in the SEC? Or they go play a #1 ranked team, then follow that up by playing a vandie (which would be our equivalent to washington, cept vandie is better... Hell they even went to a bowl game last year.)

And why can't USC fans just admit their team sucks? I mean crap, I'm a huuuuge LSU fan and we are undefeated, ranked around 7ish in the country, beat that same Washington team and I flat out said we suck this year. Do we have the potential to be and/or play like the best team in the country? Sure... But as of right now, all that is is just potential. We're playing like crap and winning based on a couple of plays a game where our athletes are just flat-out better than theirs. I can admit this, why are USC fans and/or apologists so delusional? Give it up already. I've never seen a team actually do so little on the field get soooooo much praise before. Yea, they have done some good things, but they are massively overhyped this decade relative to what they have actually accomplished on the field. Beating highschool teams every year is not that impressive, and losing to a couple of highschool teams every year is just embarrassing.

I'm sorry, USC should not even be able to even smell the top ten right now at this point of the year after that loss. Not with so many undefeated teams still out there.

How many possible friggin excuses can you make? USC got beat, deal with it.

 

[BoNcHiE]

Name a championship team this decade that would have won a national title with a major injury to their QB.

2001 Miami is probably the only one.

They just needed to beat Washington, not win a national title.

I'd agree more if Barkley didn't look like crap in the tOSU game. I think he's getting a little too much credit for his injuries impact on the USC's offense.

 

[MLU]

name a championship team this decade that would have won a national title with a major injury to their qb.

2001 miami is probably the only one.

2006: Uf
2007: Lsu

 

[Domination]

what, all the other teams payton beat that year just dumb luck then?

did payton coach at all freakin 32 teams before making his stand at nola? no. he had a couple years at dallas of EXPERIENCE with the players, especially the qb, and knew what to expect. geez...

[1. The NFL is an ENTIRELY different game than college football. The talent level in the NFL is pretty darn close accross the board and it's no secret that in college football, you win based on athletes..]

-yes, i know its a whole different league...no crap...but theres no difference between an advantage between ex-coaches...

[2. You act like these types of losses aren't the trademark for USC.]

oh really tell me more

[3. Even if Pete Carroll called up his old buddy and said hey, here is a play by play of EXACTLY what I'm going to do, USC STILL should have won that game based on talent alone. Shoot, LSU barely even threw the ball the entire game and just ran over washington for a hardly ever in doubt win.]

if talent won games alone, usc wouldve won countless championships already...things happen like turnovers...like 2 turnovers inside the opponents redzone...just good coaching by washington

[4. Pete Carroll also knows his ex coordinators better than anyone, so it goes both ways. He should have game-planned accordingly, but he didn't.]

if barkley started and lost, then itd be a whole different story imo and all on carroll...but since it was corp, who the washington coach knows, its kind of different imo...i guess its just me the fsu fan...

[5. He did a piss-poor job motivating his team to get them up to play a crappy appointment.]

upsets happen...its not like washington lost by 40 to lsu....

[6. If he can't handle going to play a semi-decent (yet vastly overrated team) on the road and then going to play a crappy team on the road the next week, then thank you for proving SEC superiority and how they wouldn't be able to hang in the SEC week-in and week-out. You (the poster that said that) just gave us that point in a gift-basket. How many times does someone in the SEC have to go play a top ten ranked team on the road and then go play another top ten ranked team, etc in the SEC? Or they go play a #1 ranked team, then follow that up by playing a vandie (which would be our equivalent to washington, cept vandie is better... Hell they even went to a bowl game last year.)

And why can't USC fans just admit their team sucks? I mean crap, I'm a huuuuge LSU fan and we are undefeated, ranked around 7ish in the country, beat that same Washington team and I flat out said we suck this year. Do we have the potential to be and/or play like the best team in the country? Sure... But as of right now, all that is is just potential. We're playing like crap and winning based on a couple of plays a game where our athletes are just flat-out better than theirs. I can admit this, why are USC fans and/or apologists so delusional? Give it up already. I've never seen a team actually do so little on the field get soooooo much praise before. Yea, they have done some good things, but they are massively overhyped this decade relative to what they have actually accomplished on the field. Beating highschool teams every year is not that impressive, and losing to a couple of highschool teams every year is just embarrassing.

I'm sorry, USC should not even be able to even smell the top ten right now at this point of the year after that loss. Not with so many undefeated teams still out there.]

i said nothing about the sec. check yourself.

[How many possible friggin excuses can you make? USC got beat, deal with it]

every team gets beat yet every fan has an excuse...but MY team, fsu, beat the hell outta byu thank you very much...

 

[Crzycjunx76]

if talent won games alone, usc wouldve won countless championships already...things happen like turnovers...like 2 turnovers inside the opponents redzone...just good coaching by washington

Ha ha that is funny "countless championships" USC is not the most talented team year in and year out... despite what the media has had to say I would accept that USC might have been the most talented team twice at the most in the last 10 years. LSU has had some pretty talented years and there have been some seasons I have known we could hang with anyone in the nation talent wise, but there has really only been two seasons since I really became aware of these things that I felt were hands down the most talented team in the nation. One of them was a national title team the other was not, and the other national title team had enough talent to hang with anyone in the nation ... but not hands down the most.

if barkley started and lost, then itd be a whole different story imo and all on carroll...but since it was corp, who the washington coach knows, its kind of different imo...i guess its just me the fsu fan...

If they truly had USC well scouted and Carroll was outcoached it still should not have made a difference. This is the type of team that a dominant squad... a top tear team ... should blow out of the @#&$ water and be giving playing time to the subs in the second half. Of course Washington does not play a potentially dominant team again until the last week of the season so they might manage to look half respectable until then.

upsets happen...its not like washington lost by 40 to lsu....

If LSU wanted to claim to be a truly elite team they should have won by three touchdowns plus, Washington is a BAD team they may manage at best a .500 pac 10 record but they are still a bad team. LSU or USC could still get it together and finish as a championship caliber teams ... they both have the talent, but for now they both look like "good but not great" type teams so until further notice that is what I consider them. Hope my Tigers get it together today cause next week it will be too late to be working out the kinks.

 

[VVextreme]

did payton coach at all freakin 32 teams before making his stand at nola? no. he had a couple years at dallas of EXPERIENCE with the players, especially the qb, and knew what to expect. geez...

[1. The NFL is an ENTIRELY different game than college football. The talent level in the NFL is pretty darn close accross the board and it's no secret that in college football, you win based on athletes..]

-yes, i know its a whole different league...no crap...but theres no difference between an advantage between ex-coaches...

[2. You act like these types of losses aren't the trademark for USC.]

oh really tell me more

[3. Even if Pete Carroll called up his old buddy and said hey, here is a play by play of EXACTLY what I'm going to do, USC STILL should have won that game based on talent alone. Shoot, LSU barely even threw the ball the entire game and just ran over washington for a hardly ever in doubt win.]

if talent won games alone, usc wouldve won countless championships already...things happen like turnovers...like 2 turnovers inside the opponents redzone...just good coaching by washington

[4. Pete Carroll also knows his ex coordinators better than anyone, so it goes both ways. He should have game-planned accordingly, but he didn't.]

if barkley started and lost, then itd be a whole different story imo and all on carroll...but since it was corp, who the washington coach knows, its kind of different imo...i guess its just me the fsu fan...

[5. He did a piss-poor job motivating his team to get them up to play a crappy opponent.]

upsets happen...its not like washington lost by 40 to lsu....

[6. If he can't handle going to play a semi-decent (yet vastly overrated team) on the road and then going to play a crappy team on the road the next week, then thank you for proving SEC superiority and how they wouldn't be able to hang in the SEC week-in and week-out. You (the poster that said that) just gave us that point in a gift-basket. How many times does someone in the SEC have to go play a top ten ranked team on the road and then go play another top ten ranked team, etc in the SEC? Or they go play a #1 ranked team, then follow that up by playing a vandie (which would be our equivalent to washington, cept vandie is better... Hell they even went to a bowl game last year.)

And why can't USC fans just admit their team sucks? I mean crap, I'm a huuuuge LSU fan and we are undefeated, ranked around 7ish in the country, beat that same Washington team and I flat out said we suck this year. Do we have the potential to be and/or play like the best team in the country? Sure... But as of right now, all that is is just potential. We're playing like crap and winning based on a couple of plays a game where our athletes are just flat-out better than theirs. I can admit this, why are USC fans and/or apologists so delusional? Give it up already. I've never seen a team actually do so little on the field get soooooo much praise before. Yea, they have done some good things, but they are massively overhyped this decade relative to what they have actually accomplished on the field. Beating highschool teams every year is not that impressive, and losing to a couple of highschool teams every year is just embarrassing.

I'm sorry, USC should not even be able to even smell the top ten right now at this point of the year after that loss. Not with so many undefeated teams still out there.]

i said nothing about the sec. check yourself.

[How many possible friggin excuses can you make? USC got beat, deal with it]

every team gets beat yet every fan has an excuse...but MY team, fsu, beat the hell outta byu thank you very much...

Ok, wayy too many different points to discuss here, so this is getting messy.

1. The coaching advantage goes both ways. The head coach is just as familiar with his staff as they are of him. Any advantage washington might have had from that is undone by being the new guy on the block, having to implement his system, recruit his players for his schemes, etc. Carroll already had his system installed, had his type of players, had an established program and new his former assistants like the back of his hand. I'm sorry, but the familiarity the helped washington also hurt them. And guess what, LSU was the first to play washington this year with their new head coach who never coached before. They had almost NOTHING to go on, but still were able to beat them even though Washington has a ton of tape on LSU. This is just a silly excuse.

2. If you recognize there's a huge difference between the college game and the NFL game, then you would realize that college is wayyyy more about the talent and the NFL is more about the coaching. In the NFL, very rarely you will see a team just run the ball the entire game and win like LSU did that first game. Our game plan was friggin TERRIBLE for that game and we won based on talent alone. We bullied our way to the win and USC should have easily been able to do that as well. Their QB might have been their backup, but they didn't need him. They have a really powerful running game. They should have just pounded it into the end-zone each time. They didn't even need a QB to do anything but hand it off over and over again. Perhaps do the occassional short pass to the sidelines just to keep things interesting. The best coaching in the world should not be able to overcome the huge talent disparity between the two teams. Washington only has like two guys that are semi-dangerous. One would think that the "all knowing and all seeing" pete carroll could have devised a plan to shut those two yahoos down.

3. I really don't feel like going through the last ten years of USC's schedule to pull out all of the teams they lost too that they should have killed. But every year, there are at least one or two nothing teams that embarrass USC like this bad washington team or stanford or the 6th grade john madden football camp for the special olympics... Someone who actually cares about this can pull their losses over the last ten years.

4. USC has not been the most talented team every year, so that's mentally challenged. There's a strong coorelation between recruiting success and winning on the field success. Want a great example of talent overcoming an adversary to win a game? See LSU this year in every single game. Their game plans have sucked. They just outran and outmuscled teams on a few key plays.

5. Who cares who started at QB? USC could have just pounded the ball for the win like LSU did. And who cares that LSU didn't beat them by 40? I already admitted LSU sucks this year to date. Our game plan was to run the ball anyways, which eats up a ton of clock. We weren't trying to blow them out. I mean, how many times did we throw it down the field? Why are ya'll talking like USC's QB that was injured was Sam Bradford or something? He would not have made a difference in this game and if USC really was as good as everyone gives them credit to be? They could have started their water boy at QB and just pounded the ball on the ground for the win the way LSU did.

6. What, your back-up QB's don't practice too? The starting QB is the only one who ever practices?

7. You weren't talking about the SEC, but other posters in this thread were. I was just too lazy to go and grab their quotes, etc. They know who they are. That's why I put (the poster that said that) after you, tried to make that clear, but oh well, it was late. sorry.

8. Have an excuse when its real and quit pretending like your team is national championship caliber when its clearly not.

LSU is actually undefeated and within striking distance of the top spot. However most Tiger fans are realistic and admit we aren't playing like a national championship caliber team at this moment.

OU might have a legitimate excuse as they lost Bradford. You can't just replace heisman winners with their backup. USC's two QB's this year are interchangeable as they both suck. Rebuilding year for you guys. That's ok, happens to everyone. Just accept it and quit throwing parades pretending you are something you are not USC and USC apologists. It's just mentally challenged.

 

[Treybad]

Now everyone can get off the hurricane high horse.... never seen a team jump so high in the rankings, because a team they barely beat, stomped a team that beat a good team without there starting QB for an entire second half.... If the score holds up, VT has to be considered a top 5 team, even with an LSU and Penn St win....