USC’s two losses this year were to Kansas State and Washington State.
And both games were very early in the year.
Right now, I think USC is the best team in the game. It took them a while to get up and running, but MAN, how dangerous did they look. They dismantled a good Iowa team, running and passing it.
One of the things I like about college football, as opposed to college basketball, is that every game counts in football. If you lose games during the regular season then you can’t make it up later. In basketball you can screw up during the season and then still get hot in the tournament and win it all, such as for instance NC State in 1983 and Villanova in 1985. USC can claim it was the best team at the end of the year all it wants, but who cares? The Trojans had their chance, but didn’t take care of business against Kansas St. and Washington State, so too bad for them.
As for the OP, there are always bad calls but only losers gripe about them. I know a St. Louis Cardinal fan who’s still convinced that his team was robbed of the 1985 World Series, for instance. The rest of us don’t want to hear about it.
Actually, I think 'SC is proof that you can, to a certain extent. They had two losses early in the season and are poised to finish #3 in the nation (some columnists say they may finish #2 in the polls, but that’s besides the point). If those two losses came towards the end of the season, however, you can bet that they’d barely be ranked in the top 10.
That being said, I think that they really could take Ohio State now, but, sadly, we’ll never know. (But look out for them next season - with the offensive scheme in place now, I don’t think there’s a dire need for a Heisman caliber QB - as long as they pull together a decent secondary, they should be in the hunt.)
Wow, it appears that I’m the only one who thought the call, although mis-stated, was right. I thought it was clearly a penalty, although it shoulda been defensive holding and not pass interference. And blaming the loss on one call is always silly.
Only one team has won every game they played this season, and they did so in the Big Ten, and they beat a great team in Miami. Saying they don’t deserve the national championship is silly. If you want to say they aren’t the best team, well, make your arguments, but they deserve to be #1.
Hamlet, it sure looked like a good call to me, too. It wasn’t exactly blatant, and it was hard to tell if it was holding or interference, but when I saw it in real time, it looked like a penalty to me. I think people are unduly influenced by ABC’s multiple replays from a bad camera angle; the original shot, although wider angle, shows the interference more clearly. Of course, Dan Fouts blustering in the booth doesn’t help either.
Shut up, Miami! You lost!! The call was appropriate. Be glad you didn’t have to play USC and get crushed badly like Notre Dame! Ohio deserves the title for going unbeaten, period. (With SC second, due to record/schedual, in my humble opinion)
I’m perpetually amazed at the ignorance people display all the time about team sports. Hey, there’s only ONE stat that counts in the end: the final score. If OSU had averaged 10 yards of offense in every single game and won each of them by an average score of 3-0, they’d still be undefeated, and the best team out there.
No, it was not a bad call. A defender bear-hugging a receiver who is trying to catch the ball, instead of going for it themselves or batting it away is a penalty on every level of play - high school, college, or pro.
And as too few people have already mentioned, it took a Miami field goal with no time left just to TIE the game and send it into overtime. To win a game, you must score more points than the other team. That is the goal of the contest. It doesn’t matter if you only get a safety, but then shut the other team out. You are still the victor. Arguing about which team is still “better” after the game is over is ridiculous. If the other team was “better,” than they should’ve accomplished that by which victory is measured: i.e., outscoring the other team. Miami had as many chances to score as OSU did; hell, they even had the ball last. And they couldn’t do it.
And this talk of USC taking on OSU is garbage. OSU’s D beat up Dorsey, and they’d beat up Carson Palmer the same way. When all your receivers are covered and the line is getting dominated by the defense, than it doesn’t matter HOW great your quarterback/receivers/running backs are. THAT’S why Miami lost. And USC would too.
And the Big Ten a “weak” conference? Consider the following: Ken Dorsey and Willis McGahee both led the Big East in passing efficiency and rushing, respectively. Neither would’ve led the Big Ten. (In fact, before the Fiesta bowl, Dorsey even had a lower QB rating than Craig Krenzel.) Miami’s stud receiver, Andre Johnson? He would’ve finished third in the Big Ten in recieving yards, seventh in catches.
Miami only averaged 17 more yards per game than the Big Ten’s best offense, Purdue, and only 3 yards more per game passing than the best passing offense in the Big Ten, Illinois. (Remember how everyone clucked when when OSU didn’t dominate either team? Hmm.)
Miami opened its season with a blowout of a 1-AA team; OSU beat bowl-bound Texas Tech. Miami was losing in the fourth quarter to 1-11 Rutgers; Ohio State didn’t play anyone who won fewer than 3 games. Miami’s defense, tops in the Big East, gave up 18.1 points a game. this would’ve put them at third in the Big Ten, by about .1 point.
The point of all this? If the Big Ten is weak, than the Big East is weaker. In fact, Miami proably wouldn’t have made the Fiesta Bowl at all, had it played Ohio State’s schedule.
All stats courtesy of www.cnnsi.com
I dunno about this. I didn’t watch a whole lot of 'Cane football this season, but it seems to me like SC and Miami have pretty different offensive schemes.
Miami’s passing game, AFAICT, concentrates largely on 10-15 yard passes, with the occasional long ball and/or screen to McGahee. A lot of Miami’s passing woes in the Fiesta Bowl seemed to come from an unwillingness to settle for the five and ten yard passes that they could have gotten fairly easily with the cushion the OSU secondary was giving their receivers.
SC, OTOH, lives off the short game, with probably 60% of their passes coming off a three step drop (especially on third and short). This offense takes the safeties out of the equation as far as coverage is concerned since the receivers don’t go deep enough into the secondary, and the opposition’s corners have simply given up the 5 yard passes, lest they get too aggressive and get burned deep. Maybe the OSU corners are good/psychic enough to stand around flat-footed five yards past the line of scrimmage, rather than heading upfield as corners tend to do, but this sounds like a fun way to get burned by the SC track team, if you ask me.
Really, I’m not convinced OSU would have had the time to really bang up Carson before he got the pass off. But, alas, we’ll never know.