07-30-2012, 01:59 PM
I read a lot of Barkley's replies. He actually seems like a cool dude. Can't wait to see him go 0-4 vs Stanford though.
Today in opponent attrition: SC edition
08-15-2012, 08:44 PM
the University of South Central just lost another DE - true freshman to an ACL tear. All those concerns about depth starting to become a reality...
http://es.pn/OyyDtB
http://es.pn/OyyDtB
Quote:LOS ANGELES -- the University of South Central Literature's Most Famous Losers defensive end DeVante Wilson has torn the anterior cruciate ligament in his left knee and will undergo season-ending surgery, Literature's Most Famous Losers coach Lane Kiffin announced Wednesday.
[more]
the University of South Central just lost another DE - true freshman to an ACL tear. All those concerns about depth starting to become a reality...
http://es.pn/OyyDtB
http://es.pn/OyyDtB
Quote:LOS ANGELES -- the University of South Central Literature's Most Famous Losers defensive end DeVante Wilson has torn the anterior cruciate ligament in his left knee and will undergo season-ending surgery, Literature's Most Famous Losers coach Lane Kiffin announced Wednesday.
[more]
08-15-2012, 09:31 PM
Wow. They already lost Madden and Kenard for the season. And all 3 starting LBs are currently nursing injuries. And their LT is currently injured. Maybe playing them in week 3 ends up helping us out. Minor injuries might not heal and younger guys don't have any game experience. Kiffin sure is lucky he landed Silas Redd from penn state.
Wow. They already lost Madden and Kenard for the season. And all 3 starting LBs are currently nursing injuries. And their LT is currently injured. Maybe playing them in week 3 ends up helping us out. Minor injuries might not heal and younger guys don't have any game experience. Kiffin sure is lucky he landed Silas Redd from penn state.
I don't think they're done with their attrition issues yet, either.
08-15-2012, 10:58 PM
I haven't been following the troubled trojans too closely, but the story also mentioned that three scholarship players have uncertain academic situations.Â
Attrition takes all kinds of forms.
Attrition takes all kinds of forms.
I haven't been following the troubled trojans too closely, but the story also mentioned that three scholarship players have uncertain academic situations.Â
Attrition takes all kinds of forms.
Attrition takes all kinds of forms.
08-16-2012, 06:09 AM
This is why crowning the Condoms before the season starts is a bit premature. Sure there is talent on that team, maybe more than any other amongst the starters. But lack of depth can impact in several ways.
1. You lose key guys and don't have the ability to plug in others without experiencing a drop-off in production.
2. You can't practice as hard as you want because you can't risk guys getting injured. This can make the team less physical.
3. You are forced to play inexperienced guys that will make mistakes at key times.
4. You can't play the schemes you want to play, the playbook gets reduced, and the team becomes more predictable.
5. Lack of depth means playing more starters more, which makes them injury prone.
6. Playing a team with lots of depth can where out a more talented team with no depth.
Stanford has the defense to slow the USC offense. And I believe will have the OL and RB depth to wear down a thin USC defense over the course of four quarters. Obviously, whether this happens remains to be seen.
One thing to keep in mind, USC has a history of losing its first conference road game of the season. Stanford is that game this year.
1. You lose key guys and don't have the ability to plug in others without experiencing a drop-off in production.
2. You can't practice as hard as you want because you can't risk guys getting injured. This can make the team less physical.
3. You are forced to play inexperienced guys that will make mistakes at key times.
4. You can't play the schemes you want to play, the playbook gets reduced, and the team becomes more predictable.
5. Lack of depth means playing more starters more, which makes them injury prone.
6. Playing a team with lots of depth can where out a more talented team with no depth.
Stanford has the defense to slow the USC offense. And I believe will have the OL and RB depth to wear down a thin USC defense over the course of four quarters. Obviously, whether this happens remains to be seen.
One thing to keep in mind, USC has a history of losing its first conference road game of the season. Stanford is that game this year.
This is why crowning the Condoms before the season starts is a bit premature. Sure there is talent on that team, maybe more than any other amongst the starters. But lack of depth can impact in several ways.
1. You lose key guys and don't have the ability to plug in others without experiencing a drop-off in production.
2. You can't practice as hard as you want because you can't risk guys getting injured. This can make the team less physical.
3. You are forced to play inexperienced guys that will make mistakes at key times.
4. You can't play the schemes you want to play, the playbook gets reduced, and the team becomes more predictable.
5. Lack of depth means playing more starters more, which makes them injury prone.
6. Playing a team with lots of depth can where out a more talented team with no depth.
Stanford has the defense to slow the USC offense. And I believe will have the OL and RB depth to wear down a thin USC defense over the course of four quarters. Obviously, whether this happens remains to be seen.
One thing to keep in mind, USC has a history of losing its first conference road game of the season. Stanford is that game this year.
1. You lose key guys and don't have the ability to plug in others without experiencing a drop-off in production.
2. You can't practice as hard as you want because you can't risk guys getting injured. This can make the team less physical.
3. You are forced to play inexperienced guys that will make mistakes at key times.
4. You can't play the schemes you want to play, the playbook gets reduced, and the team becomes more predictable.
5. Lack of depth means playing more starters more, which makes them injury prone.
6. Playing a team with lots of depth can where out a more talented team with no depth.
Stanford has the defense to slow the USC offense. And I believe will have the OL and RB depth to wear down a thin USC defense over the course of four quarters. Obviously, whether this happens remains to be seen.
One thing to keep in mind, USC has a history of losing its first conference road game of the season. Stanford is that game this year.
08-16-2012, 07:55 AM
Quote:How many losses to other teams would you trade for an upset of U$C and ruining their national title hopes?
This year, I would trade up to 3 losses. Nothing would be better than sending Matt Barkley, who will top the U.SC record books when all is said and done, to 0-4 against Stanford.
Derailing their national title hopes is secondary, because I don't believe they are a realistic contender. They'll win between 9 and 11 games, but I don't think they've got the depth or mental fortitude to run the table. This is the same team that lost to ASU, almost lost to Utah and only beat Minnesota by 2 pts.
Quote:How many losses to other teams would you trade for an upset of U$C and ruining their national title hopes?
This year, I would trade up to 3 losses. Nothing would be better than sending Matt Barkley, who will top the U.SC record books when all is said and done, to 0-4 against Stanford.
Derailing their national title hopes is secondary, because I don't believe they are a realistic contender. They'll win between 9 and 11 games, but I don't think they've got the depth or mental fortitude to run the table. This is the same team that lost to ASU, almost lost to Utah and only beat Minnesota by 2 pts.
08-16-2012, 11:37 AM
Even Kiffen is acknowledging depth is a problem now. They could be in big trouble on the lines...
http://usc.ocregister.com/2012/08/16/lan...ed/110187/
http://usc.ocregister.com/2012/08/16/lan...ed/110187/
Even Kiffen is acknowledging depth is a problem now. They could be in big trouble on the lines...
http://usc.ocregister.com/2012/08/16/lan...ed/110187/
http://usc.ocregister.com/2012/08/16/lan...ed/110187/
08-16-2012, 11:42 AM
In an outdated ESPN preseason CFB issue, they give Stanford a 50.8% chance of beating $C. Why they favored Stanford by 0.8% is beyond me, but surely that percentage has gone up by now. Of course, in the same issue, $C was touted as the most likely team to upset the $EC (presumably in the natl champ game?)...
In an outdated ESPN preseason CFB issue, they give Stanford a 50.8% chance of beating $C. Why they favored Stanford by 0.8% is beyond me, but surely that percentage has gone up by now. Of course, in the same issue, $C was touted as the most likely team to upset the $EC (presumably in the natl champ game?)...
ChicagoCard
Unregistered
Unregistered
08-18-2012, 05:44 AM
(08-17-2012, 05:24 AM)Publius link Wrote:I never embraced the hatred for Kal. To me it's a friendly rivalry. Kal is the only school that is even in the same league as Stanford in terms of breadth and depth. Harvard could merge with MIT, and we'd still kick their ass in every sport except squash. I can understand why Kal hates us. They wish they got in. I would have been one of those people had I not gotten off the waiting list. Their only blemish is how far they have bent their academic standards for athletes ie Prop 48 players.
U$C is the real enemy. The embodiment of everything Stanford stands against: cheating, academic mediocrity and inherited privilege.
As a non-SU grad who grew up in the area (with family members on both sides, Kal and SU), this has always been my impression of the two rivalries. With the one there's generally mutual respect while with the other... when Bill Walsh addressed becoming head coach again, he said something about how meaningful it was to be a college head coach again, then paused and said "unless it's U$C."
(08-17-2012, 05:24 AM)Publius link Wrote:I never embraced the hatred for Kal. To me it's a friendly rivalry. Kal is the only school that is even in the same league as Stanford in terms of breadth and depth. Harvard could merge with MIT, and we'd still kick their ass in every sport except squash. I can understand why Kal hates us. They wish they got in. I would have been one of those people had I not gotten off the waiting list. Their only blemish is how far they have bent their academic standards for athletes ie Prop 48 players.
U$C is the real enemy. The embodiment of everything Stanford stands against: cheating, academic mediocrity and inherited privilege.
As a non-SU grad who grew up in the area (with family members on both sides, Kal and SU), this has always been my impression of the two rivalries. With the one there's generally mutual respect while with the other... when Bill Walsh addressed becoming head coach again, he said something about how meaningful it was to be a college head coach again, then paused and said "unless it's U$C."
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »