Hey Pete, You LOST!
Word to Pete Carroll- You lost to Oregon Sate you douche! Don't come on TV and say USC can't lose because you already did. You would not need a playoff if you didn't lose that game so STFU.
PS Brent- There is a better team than the Trojans....about 6 of them.
(I know they are hot right now and play well in SoCal, but the facts are the facts)
Why does this work me up so much? Maybe I should shut up and be happy that UofM didn't have to play this USC team.
January 1st, 2009 at 9:04 PM ^
usc is good really good, but every year they always seem to have a game that they choke and then at the end of the year the always seem to be brought up as one of the best teams... yes they are a good team and yes they play good at the rose bowl (its 11 miles away from their stadium so its basically a home game) but stop ur complaining. Your not the best team out there and if there was a playoff that would prove it.
ps... i hate usc so this whole thing might sound like a bit too much lol
January 1st, 2009 at 9:05 PM ^
USC always shows up against good teams, the problem I had was with ESPN/ABC's clear and evident bias towards USC and how the Big Ten is slow and blah blah and blah.
January 1st, 2009 at 9:07 PM ^
Taylor Mays is a man....He decleated 2 men. Taylor Mays has no regard for human life. I can only hope he ends up a Bronco, he's like John Lynch but taller.
January 1st, 2009 at 9:12 PM ^
Helmet-to-helmet was a vicious hit.
January 1st, 2009 at 9:19 PM ^
No kidding, that hit in the 2nd quarter was awesome. If you like hits.
January 1st, 2009 at 9:09 PM ^
Yeah, that was a pretty nice hit when Mays hit Norwood so hard that it gave Shane Conlan a concussion.
January 1st, 2009 at 9:14 PM ^
The ABC coverage was disgusting. Brent called the game over in the second quarter, and kept saying stupid things like "USC would have won four straight Rose Bowls if they hadn't lost." I never hated Brent more, and I never hated USC more.
January 1st, 2009 at 9:16 PM ^
A buddy of mine played with Mays in HS. He was two years older and I asked him what Mays was like as a sophomore in HS and he said "the scariest thing ever" said the athleticism and the attititude (loves to kill people on the field) are just scary. He'll be a Sean Taylor in the League.
January 1st, 2009 at 9:24 PM ^
and Mays takes a blatant cheap shot at Norwood's head. If I'm Paterno, I call a play that gets a crack-back hit on Mays and tell the kid to go helmet-to-helmet on his ass. An eye for an eye, motherfucker.
January 1st, 2009 at 9:28 PM ^
players like May. Would have love for him to have chosen Michigan when it came down to us and SC.
January 1st, 2009 at 9:44 PM ^
Pete Carroll mama
January 1st, 2009 at 9:40 PM ^
lost. Just like every other BCS conference team.
Anyone who thinks that USC couldn't hang with UF or OK is nuts.
Their one loss is to a ten win Beaver team in Corvalis...
January 1st, 2009 at 9:46 PM ^
My comments were just a culmination of Brent/Herbie/and Pete loving themselves too much tonight. Along with our Wolverines not playing at all. It just hurts all over I guess. I do not hate him or USC. In fact I respect how much they have won in the last 8 years or whatever.
PS- Keep an eye on Tyrod in the game tonight. I am convinced that he is a good example of what Tate will be. (TT may be faster, but Tate makes up for that in smarts) Just my opinion.
January 1st, 2009 at 9:59 PM ^
I disagree with you on this one Harbaugh. USC could beat Florida but not Oklahoma. The entire year I've said that Oklahoma is the best team in the country all season and I still believe that. USC has a great defense... but they can't stop Oklahoma's offense. USC is good but Oklahoma (and MAYBE Texas) is better.
January 1st, 2009 at 10:06 PM ^
Maybe I should have been more specific, USC would not be out of place if they were in the national title game rather than UF or OK.
January 1st, 2009 at 10:23 PM ^
Alright, 'tis more agreeable now.
January 1st, 2009 at 10:08 PM ^
everyone hates on usc cause they're sweet. i'm not a usc fan by an means but pete carroll is a stand-up guy. i'd put usc against florida or oklahoma and like their chances. they've had a combined 3-4 losses in the last 3-4 years. not bad.
January 1st, 2009 at 10:23 PM ^
People don't hate USC because of the number of losses/success of the past few seasons - it is the media barrage that goes on every January 1st when USC beats the Big 10, declares itself "the best team in the nation", and people forget the fact that the team lost at least 1 game during the season that they shouldn't have. Yes, USC has been consistently "very good" each year, but they have not been "great" since the days of Leinart and Bush. Carroll is a good guy by all accounts, but that doesn't take away from the fact that his supremely talented teams have failed to live up to their own billings the past few years. If people are going to deservedly bury Tressel for his team's foibles every year, USC deserves the same treatment. The fact they don't is why I think most people are annoyed with the media's treatment of the USC, and by extension USC as a team.
January 1st, 2009 at 10:33 PM ^
"they have not been "great" since the days of Leinart and Bush"
That wasn't that long ago.
January 1st, 2009 at 10:49 PM ^
I know, but every year Mark May or Brent Musberger crown them MNCs as soon as the season starts, then wheel out a string of excuses for why they lose every year and why they still deserve to play for the MNC, etc. I guess USC just feels like college football's version of the Dallas Cowboys - a team replete with stars but one that gets far too much credit considering they haven't been on top for a number of years. People are seduced by the names, the on-paper talent, and don't see that while this team is very good, they haven't lived up their own billings for some time.
I'm not trying to make light of USC's accomplishments, but they have always had a chance to play for the NC, and the past few years they have failed to rise to the occasion. Plus, they have played a "home" bowl game for the past 4 years, another advantage come bowl season that nobody ever seems to recognize.
January 1st, 2009 at 10:36 PM ^
i don't get it. b/c espn gives them attention that's why you hate them? that just seems like jealousy. and they haven't been great since leinart/bush? they've won their conference every year since and have had at least 11 or 12 wins/year. and during the game it was pointed out how usc, although they win the big games have had a tendency to overlook some of the weaker competition.
also, a theory on the love given by the announcers. they go to LA or down to Florida during a cold period of the year and are pumped to see the sun again and that happiness indirectly elevates their admiration for a school/coach which otherwise wouldn't normally be there. that's a just a theory.
January 1st, 2009 at 11:07 PM ^
Interesting theory on the weather factor - it wouldn't surprise me. I just got back from Maui, and just feeling the sun made me completely forget how much money I was spending.
I'm not jealous about the attention USC receives, provided it is deserved. I'll be the first person to admit that UM receives a disproportionate amount of respect considering how mediocre they have been in big games since the MNC in '97. But people seem to be seduced by teams like USC and Oklahoma in a way that just doesn't always make sense considering how those teams have actually played during a given season. Oklahoma has been destroyed in its past few BCS games, yet OSU, UM, and the Big 10 are the ones dragged through the mud when the postseasons are analyzed. USC may have won its conference for a number of years straight, but outside of Cal and Oregon I don't think any other team in that conference would be in the top half of the Big 12, SEC, or even the Big 10 most years. Plus, I think USC has been the only BCS representative from that conference over that span (I may be off by a Cal team one of those years).
USC is a very good team, but they have shown an inability the past few seasons to make that next step forward, despite all of the talent, recruiting, etc. advantages they enjoy. Plus, and this is purely personal and has no objective relevance, I lost some respect for USC when guys like Leinart and Bush acted like they were the better team even though they lost to Texas in 2005. I'm all for complaining to the media if you lost a shot at the MNC because of politics, but not when you just were beaten on the field by another team. It showed a lack of class and a disconnect from reality that just bugs me about USC.
I'm not going to try to defend my feelings about USC anymore, though - they are irrational, and the beauty of the Internet is that it is one of the few places where illogical hatred can exist without repercussions.
January 1st, 2009 at 10:39 PM ^
...with one part. "Carroll is a good guy by all accounts" I disagree only because he goes out late at night to talk to big strong gangsters. 60 Minutes says he gets nothing out of it but I say he gets support and recruits out of it. It may be a bit far out but somethings not right about this guy. He is Shady IMO.
January 1st, 2009 at 11:09 PM ^
I see your point, but I doubt that is the case. He has sunny weather, LA, attractive coeds, and a history of winning on his side - he doesn't need much more help convincing kids to play for him if they want.
January 2nd, 2009 at 10:44 AM ^
'Tis true.
January 1st, 2009 at 11:10 PM ^
What is "shady" about him? This is like when I see people who actually believe Jim Tressel is a child molester.
January 5th, 2009 at 12:30 AM ^
I'm pretty sure he is. Check your facts, jack.
January 1st, 2009 at 11:27 PM ^
He gets nothing out of visiting gangsters.....except PR. There was an article, I think I linked to it through here, about how Pete Carrols recruiting skills have thoroughly depleted the entire PAC 10 of talent. I mean, the article said something like he gets 13 of the top 15 players in California. He just stockpile talent. His third-stringers would start on any other team in the PAC-10. He is a talent hoarder. He rest of the PAC 10 is weak as a result, and so when he loses to one of them, he is rightly penalized. THen he goes on TV with his nice-guy, aw shucks "What more could we do?" In reality, any decent coach with one-half the talent he has could slay the universe. Please, the guy is like the seemingly harmless, non-threatening hippie dude that gets all the pussy. He kills them with kindness, and that great hair.
January 1st, 2009 at 11:42 PM ^
So is he supposed to apologize for dominating the rest of the conference on the recruiting trail? He's "shady" because he's just so much better at? I don't understand your point.
January 2nd, 2009 at 10:49 AM ^
I pretty much agree with you Maximinus Thrax.
January 2nd, 2009 at 12:09 PM ^
What, exactly, is wrong with "talent-hoarding"? Are you saying that if Rich Rod were to suddenly pull in like 15 5 star recruits next year you would call him an asshole for taking all the good players?
And, what's wrong with good PR for good things? By this logic, Lloyd's Car Wash and his work for Mott's is disgusting because it built a good image for him as a guy you'd want your kid to play for.
January 2nd, 2009 at 12:03 PM ^
Lest I misunderstand you, what do you mean by "he gets...recruits out of it (going to South Central and talking to gang members)"?
January 1st, 2009 at 11:09 PM ^
You know, most people around the country say ESPN does the same thing to the Big Ten.
January 2nd, 2009 at 8:50 AM ^
They had 8 shutouts. Eight!
January 2nd, 2009 at 1:12 PM ^
Yes they have been on a roll against Big 10 teams. But the two previous years, the top PAC 10 team(USC) played the Big 10's second best team(OSU playing in the NC game)
January 1st, 2009 at 10:14 PM ^
I agree that USC is a really good team, but you can't say you are unbeatable when you lose at least 1 game a season for the past couple of years, then turn it on during the bowl/home game. USC could hang with any team in the nation, but those early '00 USC teams didn't piss away their seasons with losses to UCLA or OSU, and that's why they were great teams and the current USC teams are merely good. I also cry shenanigans on the whole "Most Dominant Defense Ever in Any Sport" argument that ABC was force-feeding the viewers during the telecast.
Here are some numbers:
104, 106, 118, 100, 111
What they represent: The offensive rankings of Virgnia, Washington, Washington St., Arizona St., and UCLA.
To put this in perspective, UM's abomination of an offense was ranked 109th, which was almost 18 spots worse than the next-closest B10 team (Minn). So before you start crowning USC as the greatest defense of all time, let's see them play a moderately-tough collection of offenses, not the crap that littered half of the Pac-10.
I have no idea why USC makes me so angry, but they just do.
January 1st, 2009 at 10:19 PM ^
You mean to tell me the Pac 10 has two teams with worse offenses than Michigan? I can't believe that's possible.
January 1st, 2009 at 10:29 PM ^
And 4 (nearly half the league!) that are within a dozen or so places of UM. And while the defenses in the Pac-10 are better than, say, the WAC or C-USA, these teams didn't play against the Steel Curtain and the Purple People Eaters each week.
January 1st, 2009 at 10:31 PM ^
but I think they're the best team out there. They'd bitch slap OK the way they did a couple of years ago, and with their size and speed they'd match up no problem with Florida. If nothing else, a USC-FLA game would be a hell of a game to watch, which is something our current lamebrain setup makes impossible.
January 1st, 2009 at 10:36 PM ^
agreed. usc-fla would be awesome.
January 1st, 2009 at 10:36 PM ^
Disagreed. Oklahoma's offense is far superior to USC's Defense. I agree that USC would maul the Gators but Oklahoma has THE best offense in the country and if you match it up player by player Oklahoma wins.
January 1st, 2009 at 10:38 PM ^
i just don't buy oklahoma. they always look good during the year and manage to really suck in the bowl games. i think fla will win but i'm just hoping it's a good game.
January 1st, 2009 at 10:48 PM ^
sounds like class warfare man. youre hating up. USC from 2002-2004 lost 3 games and scored roughly double of what they gave up in points. from 2004-2008 the trojans have lost 6 games total. that's less than 10 loses in almost a decade. what part of that lineage does not translate into feeling like you are unbeatable? Carroll has every right to tell any reporter he wants that he is unbeatable. If you disagree youre just a hater. As Michigan fans, we have nothing on them. 10 wins next year would be a miracle for Michigan. Hell a bowl game would. The last time we played them, this was the article from the USC paper:
But these Wolverines didn't look as good as the ones who lost that heartbreaker in November. And they hardly looked like champions.
"I'm as disappointed as you can be," Michigan coach Lloyd Carr said.
Henne didn't get the Wolverines past the USC 20 until they had fallen behind 19-3. When Michigan finally did reach the end zone to cut its deficit to 19-11, the Trojans came right back with the drive capped by Jarrett's long touchdown.
Carr's team lost its fourth straight bowl game and ended the season on a two-game losing streak for the third consecutive year. These late-season swoons are becoming a serious problem for a team that has lots of juniors returning next season and, like USC, could be a title contender.
January 1st, 2009 at 11:19 PM ^
I never said USC was a fraud, and I'll openly admit that UM played poorly during the last few years of Carr. But I hate when people presume that just because you dislike a team, you are a jealous "hater". I simply pointed out that USC may not be the GOAT every year, that some of the offenses this Unstoppable Steel Curtain of Purple People Destroyers played against this season may leave something to be desired, and that they have the same number of NCs the past 10 years as Miami and LSU. USC has been one of the best teams in college football for the past decade, but I'm tired of them (and the media) acting like they've won 10 straight MNCs.
As for your claim that Carroll has a right to say that his teams are "unbeatable" - well, that just isn't true. His teams have lost at least 1 game every year since 2005, and while that is an amazing stat, that is by definition "beatable".
I agree that UM has struggled, and I would love to enjoy the prolonged success USC has had the past seasons. But don't forget that as recently as 2001, USC was .500 or below. UM has had 1 losing season in the past 30+ years; USC is great now, but not too long ago they were struggling as much as any major program.
January 2nd, 2009 at 12:17 AM ^
It's not that they have lost a game every season or two games that makes the unbeatable comment true. Its the body of work. If they were an investment, investors would tell you this,"it's about as close to perfect as you can get for a 10 year return. well in todays world it is perfect." we can get into semantics or whatever you call it, the semiotic meanings of the word,"beatable." USC destroyed Penn State, Illinois, Ohio State, and Michigan in the last couple of years. Listen, if something is undeniable and you have no real argument against it or any real angle, you dont have to hate it. Because hating it gives it more power. Tradition is a funny thing, I think we at Michigan learned that over this season.
January 1st, 2009 at 11:04 PM ^
USC and the stats they put up on defense are bogus. Look at the offensive powerhouses they shut down; Washington, Washington State, Arizona State, Arizona, Nutter Damn, Virginia. Now just think if a real "All Time" defense (1992 Alabama , Larry Coker's Miami teams) would have done to a schedule like that.
January 1st, 2009 at 11:18 PM ^
i was wondering today why USC had no talk in the national title picture. they have a very similar resume to florida. everything is based on preconceptions about conferences. i really think that if there was a playoff USC wouldve won several times in the last few years
January 1st, 2009 at 11:20 PM ^
We need to resurrect the old Airplane Conference idea. USC, Texas, Oklahoma, Michigan, Ohio State, Miami, Florida, LSU, Virginia Tech, West Virginia, Oregon, Nebraska.
January 1st, 2009 at 11:27 PM ^
It's weird how there's always one program that's a cut above even the other elite schools for an extended period of time. There was Miami winning four titles from 1983 to '91, FSU finishing in the top 5 fourteen (!) years in a row (but somehow only winning two national titles), and now USC. Everyone celebrated when FSU's run finally ended, since the Noles made the same "We're playing the best at the end of the season" argument every year. But then USC emerged.
January 2nd, 2009 at 12:10 AM ^
This is totally random...I dusted off an old vinyl this afternoon and tossed it on my record player. The album: "Live at the Fillmore East", which along with "Band of Gypsies" is Jimi's best (IMHO). However, on a track called "Power of Soul", and I just noticed this today...he opens by saying, quote, "Right now I'd like to say, uh, congratulations, to the uh, what do you call that, Southern California Trojans. I'm so glad they beat the hell out of Michigan. I'm very glad."
WTF?! I may have taken this better had the album been live at the Fillmore WEST, but Jimi is saying this to a live audience in MANHATTAN on the lower east side! Why was Jimi such a douchebag? Goddamned hippies.
Also, I hate USC as much as the next guy posting. Pete Carroll couldn't win a single meaningful game with the Jets, but send his surfer-boy ass to Southern Cal and all of a sudden he's an uber-confident, win all the big games, get all the big recruits, head coach. The Pac-10 goal-game bowl-game is 11 miles from his house. That is such BS. Imagine if the Big-10/Pac-10 champs played their bowl at Michigan Stadium. F Pete Carroll.