Official USC - Michigan "Rose Bowl Discussion thread"

Collapse

Recommended Videos

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • bkrich83
    Has Been
    • Jul 2002
    • 71572

    #151
    Re: Official USC - Michigan \"Rose Bowl Discussion thread\"

    </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
    Bill_Abner said:
    </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
    JoeBudden said:
    I am no way underestamating USC i think there a great team but i have a problem with people saying that its gonnna be a 17 or more point diffrence between Michigan and USC i will really be suprised if either of them go over 30 because both teams have solid d's but if they do have a shootout it would be really fun to watch. Remember if i am not mistaken Michigan the least they put up against a team was 27 i dont know the least USC has put up.

    <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

    Because it's a typical viewpoint that the Big10 is simply full of slow, farm fed country boys that cannot keep up with the elite players in Florida or California. Ohio State fans heard this exact same thing before last year's Fiesta Bowl and how Miami's "Florida Speed" would run them off the field. An ESPN "anaylst" even said McGahee would get 200 yards and 3 TDs on the OSU defense. Nothing ever changes. Michigan is playing as well as any team in the nation right now and has as much talent as any team in the country. Why people think this will be a USC blowout makes no sense.

    Michigan will be, without question, the best and most complete team USC has faced all year and if the Trojans think they are just going to show up and claim 1/2 of the NC then they'll get their butts kicked. They better come to play because Michigan sure will. USC is loaded. No doubt. But I think a 31-27 game is much more likely than a 45-20 USC romp.

    <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

    It's sort of like the Big 10 fan's perception that the Pac 10 teams are soft and play no defense.

    USC is more physical and more ahtletic than any team Michigan played this year. If Michigan shows up like they did against Oregon thinking they will just physically dominate, they are in for a shocker.

    And if you saw the Oregon vs. Michigan game, the difference in speed was very apparent. To say it's not a factor is a joke, that would be like saying it wasn't a factor in USC blowing out Big 10 co-champ Iowa last year.

    It cuts both ways, and I have a feeling that the Big 10 fans think USC is just a speed based soft team that plays no defense.

    Tracking my NCAA Coach Career

    Comment

    • ATrillionaire
      Pro
      • Aug 2003
      • 839

      #152
      Re: Official USC - Michigan \"Rose Bowl Discussion thread\"

      </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
      PdiddyPop said:
      </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
      ATrillionaire said:
      Michigan 24
      USC 10

      USC beat only one team this year with fewer than 5 losses..and even Washington State loss 3 times.

      book it!!

      <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

      *looks out for the Pac-10 vultures circling around the area*

      <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">



      *sighs*

      Comment

      • ATrillionaire
        Pro
        • Aug 2003
        • 839

        #153
        Re: Official USC - Michigan \"Rose Bowl Discussion thread\"

        </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
        PdiddyPop said:
        </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
        ATrillionaire said:
        Michigan 24
        USC 10

        USC beat only one team this year with fewer than 5 losses..and even Washington State loss 3 times.

        book it!!

        <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

        *looks out for the Pac-10 vultures circling around the area*

        <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">



        *sighs*

        Comment

        • ATrillionaire
          Pro
          • Aug 2003
          • 839

          #154
          Re: Official USC - Michigan \"Rose Bowl Discussion thread\"

          </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
          PdiddyPop said:
          </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
          ATrillionaire said:
          Michigan 24
          USC 10

          USC beat only one team this year with fewer than 5 losses..and even Washington State loss 3 times.

          book it!!

          <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

          *looks out for the Pac-10 vultures circling around the area*

          <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">



          *sighs*

          Comment

          • JoeBudden
            MVP
            • Jun 2003
            • 916

            #155
            Re: Official USC - Michigan \"Rose Bowl Discussion thread\"

            I will say it again the only reason they lost is because of [censored you naughty boy] special teams and a bad game plan.
            They lost by a touchdown and almost can back. The reason the lost the two games is because of [censored you naughty boy] special teams basically all UM fans know that is the reason go on the message boards ask the fans the most likely will say special teams.
            They had 360 yards passing that is a hell of a lot of short passes to get that much so they had to go vertical atleast a few times and u have to have speed to go vertical.
            If i am not mistaken Michigan's defense was basically out the whole first quarter so that is antoher reason y and basically to achieve that u have to rush.
            The Big 10 is not a slow confernce Anthony Davis is fricken fast as hell. Steve Breaston fast as hell.
            Yes speed was a minor factor in that game but the whole fact was SPECIAL TEAMS AND DEFENSE ON THE FIELD TO LONG IN THE FIRST QUARTER

            Comment

            • JoeBudden
              MVP
              • Jun 2003
              • 916

              #156
              Re: Official USC - Michigan \"Rose Bowl Discussion thread\"

              I will say it again the only reason they lost is because of [censored you naughty boy] special teams and a bad game plan.
              They lost by a touchdown and almost can back. The reason the lost the two games is because of [censored you naughty boy] special teams basically all UM fans know that is the reason go on the message boards ask the fans the most likely will say special teams.
              They had 360 yards passing that is a hell of a lot of short passes to get that much so they had to go vertical atleast a few times and u have to have speed to go vertical.
              If i am not mistaken Michigan's defense was basically out the whole first quarter so that is antoher reason y and basically to achieve that u have to rush.
              The Big 10 is not a slow confernce Anthony Davis is fricken fast as hell. Steve Breaston fast as hell.
              Yes speed was a minor factor in that game but the whole fact was SPECIAL TEAMS AND DEFENSE ON THE FIELD TO LONG IN THE FIRST QUARTER

              Comment

              • JoeBudden
                MVP
                • Jun 2003
                • 916

                #157
                Re: Official USC - Michigan \"Rose Bowl Discussion thread\"

                I will say it again the only reason they lost is because of [censored you naughty boy] special teams and a bad game plan.
                They lost by a touchdown and almost can back. The reason the lost the two games is because of [censored you naughty boy] special teams basically all UM fans know that is the reason go on the message boards ask the fans the most likely will say special teams.
                They had 360 yards passing that is a hell of a lot of short passes to get that much so they had to go vertical atleast a few times and u have to have speed to go vertical.
                If i am not mistaken Michigan's defense was basically out the whole first quarter so that is antoher reason y and basically to achieve that u have to rush.
                The Big 10 is not a slow confernce Anthony Davis is fricken fast as hell. Steve Breaston fast as hell.
                Yes speed was a minor factor in that game but the whole fact was SPECIAL TEAMS AND DEFENSE ON THE FIELD TO LONG IN THE FIRST QUARTER

                Comment

                • Bill_Abner
                  MVP
                  • Sep 2002
                  • 1285

                  #158
                  Re: Official USC - Michigan \"Rose Bowl Discussion thread\"

                  </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
                  bkrich83 said:
                  It cuts both ways, and I have a feeling that the Big 10 fans think USC is just a speed based soft team that plays no defense.

                  <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

                  Oh, absolutely. No debate there. But the stereotypes don't fit for either team. Conferences aren't molded by a certain philosophy anymore. This isn't 1970. I do think that the Pac10 was a weaker conference as a whole this year, but saying that the Pac10 is all offense and the Big10 is 3 yards and a cloud of dust is just ignorance talking, regardless of whose side you're on.
                  Co-Founder - No High Scores
                  http://www.nohighscores.com

                  Editor in Chief Gameshark.Com
                  http://www.gameshark.com

                  Comment

                  • Bill_Abner
                    MVP
                    • Sep 2002
                    • 1285

                    #159
                    Re: Official USC - Michigan \"Rose Bowl Discussion thread\"

                    </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
                    bkrich83 said:
                    It cuts both ways, and I have a feeling that the Big 10 fans think USC is just a speed based soft team that plays no defense.

                    <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

                    Oh, absolutely. No debate there. But the stereotypes don't fit for either team. Conferences aren't molded by a certain philosophy anymore. This isn't 1970. I do think that the Pac10 was a weaker conference as a whole this year, but saying that the Pac10 is all offense and the Big10 is 3 yards and a cloud of dust is just ignorance talking, regardless of whose side you're on.
                    Co-Founder - No High Scores
                    http://www.nohighscores.com

                    Editor in Chief Gameshark.Com
                    http://www.gameshark.com

                    Comment

                    • Bill_Abner
                      MVP
                      • Sep 2002
                      • 1285

                      #160
                      Re: Official USC - Michigan \"Rose Bowl Discussion thread\"

                      </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
                      bkrich83 said:
                      It cuts both ways, and I have a feeling that the Big 10 fans think USC is just a speed based soft team that plays no defense.

                      <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

                      Oh, absolutely. No debate there. But the stereotypes don't fit for either team. Conferences aren't molded by a certain philosophy anymore. This isn't 1970. I do think that the Pac10 was a weaker conference as a whole this year, but saying that the Pac10 is all offense and the Big10 is 3 yards and a cloud of dust is just ignorance talking, regardless of whose side you're on.
                      Co-Founder - No High Scores
                      http://www.nohighscores.com

                      Editor in Chief Gameshark.Com
                      http://www.gameshark.com

                      Comment

                      • bkrich83
                        Has Been
                        • Jul 2002
                        • 71572

                        #161
                        Re: Official USC - Michigan \"Rose Bowl Discussion thread\"

                        </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
                        JoeBudden said:
                        I will say it again the only reason they lost is because of [censored you naughty boy] special teams and a bad game plan.
                        They lost by a touchdown and almost can back. The reason the lost the two games is because of [censored you naughty boy] special teams basically all UM fans know that is the reason go on the message boards ask the fans the most likely will say special teams.
                        They had 360 yards passing that is a hell of a lot of short passes to get that much so they had to go vertical atleast a few times and u have to have speed to go vertical.
                        If i am not mistaken Michigan's defense was basically out the whole first quarter so that is antoher reason y and basically to achieve that u have to rush.
                        The Big 10 is not a slow confernce Anthony Davis is fricken fast as hell. Steve Breaston fast as hell.
                        Yes speed was a minor factor in that game but the whole fact was SPECIAL TEAMS AND DEFENSE ON THE FIELD TO LONG IN THE FIRST QUARTER

                        <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

                        I don't think you get the concept of team speed. I saw the game. And the difference in speed was very apparent.

                        Tracking my NCAA Coach Career

                        Comment

                        • bkrich83
                          Has Been
                          • Jul 2002
                          • 71572

                          #162
                          Re: Official USC - Michigan \"Rose Bowl Discussion thread\"

                          </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
                          JoeBudden said:
                          I will say it again the only reason they lost is because of [censored you naughty boy] special teams and a bad game plan.
                          They lost by a touchdown and almost can back. The reason the lost the two games is because of [censored you naughty boy] special teams basically all UM fans know that is the reason go on the message boards ask the fans the most likely will say special teams.
                          They had 360 yards passing that is a hell of a lot of short passes to get that much so they had to go vertical atleast a few times and u have to have speed to go vertical.
                          If i am not mistaken Michigan's defense was basically out the whole first quarter so that is antoher reason y and basically to achieve that u have to rush.
                          The Big 10 is not a slow confernce Anthony Davis is fricken fast as hell. Steve Breaston fast as hell.
                          Yes speed was a minor factor in that game but the whole fact was SPECIAL TEAMS AND DEFENSE ON THE FIELD TO LONG IN THE FIRST QUARTER

                          <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

                          I don't think you get the concept of team speed. I saw the game. And the difference in speed was very apparent.

                          Tracking my NCAA Coach Career

                          Comment

                          • bkrich83
                            Has Been
                            • Jul 2002
                            • 71572

                            #163
                            Re: Official USC - Michigan \"Rose Bowl Discussion thread\"

                            </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
                            JoeBudden said:
                            I will say it again the only reason they lost is because of [censored you naughty boy] special teams and a bad game plan.
                            They lost by a touchdown and almost can back. The reason the lost the two games is because of [censored you naughty boy] special teams basically all UM fans know that is the reason go on the message boards ask the fans the most likely will say special teams.
                            They had 360 yards passing that is a hell of a lot of short passes to get that much so they had to go vertical atleast a few times and u have to have speed to go vertical.
                            If i am not mistaken Michigan's defense was basically out the whole first quarter so that is antoher reason y and basically to achieve that u have to rush.
                            The Big 10 is not a slow confernce Anthony Davis is fricken fast as hell. Steve Breaston fast as hell.
                            Yes speed was a minor factor in that game but the whole fact was SPECIAL TEAMS AND DEFENSE ON THE FIELD TO LONG IN THE FIRST QUARTER

                            <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

                            I don't think you get the concept of team speed. I saw the game. And the difference in speed was very apparent.

                            Tracking my NCAA Coach Career

                            Comment

                            • bkrich83
                              Has Been
                              • Jul 2002
                              • 71572

                              #164
                              Re: Official USC - Michigan \"Rose Bowl Discussion thread\"

                              </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
                              Bill_Abner said:
                              </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
                              bkrich83 said:
                              It cuts both ways, and I have a feeling that the Big 10 fans think USC is just a speed based soft team that plays no defense.

                              <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

                              Oh, absolutely. No debate there. But the stereotypes don't fit for either team. Conferences aren't molded by a certain philosophy anymore. This isn't 1970. I do think that the Pac10 was a weaker conference as a whole this year, but saying that the Pac10 is all offense and the Big10 is 3 yards and a cloud of dust is just ignorance talking, regardless of whose side you're on.


                              <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

                              I completely agree. And the Pac 10 was definitely down this year. But USC would have competed for a Conference Title in any conference in the country.

                              Tracking my NCAA Coach Career

                              Comment

                              • bkrich83
                                Has Been
                                • Jul 2002
                                • 71572

                                #165
                                Re: Official USC - Michigan \"Rose Bowl Discussion thread\"

                                </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
                                Bill_Abner said:
                                </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
                                bkrich83 said:
                                It cuts both ways, and I have a feeling that the Big 10 fans think USC is just a speed based soft team that plays no defense.

                                <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

                                Oh, absolutely. No debate there. But the stereotypes don't fit for either team. Conferences aren't molded by a certain philosophy anymore. This isn't 1970. I do think that the Pac10 was a weaker conference as a whole this year, but saying that the Pac10 is all offense and the Big10 is 3 yards and a cloud of dust is just ignorance talking, regardless of whose side you're on.


                                <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

                                I completely agree. And the Pac 10 was definitely down this year. But USC would have competed for a Conference Title in any conference in the country.

                                Tracking my NCAA Coach Career

                                Comment

                                Working...