How can you even say that? There isn't a SINGLE TEAM FROM THE PAC-10 IN THE TOP 25 IN TOTAL DEFENSE. http://web1.ncaa.org/d1mfb/natlRank.jsp?div=4&rpt=IA_teamtotdef&site=org Fresno is the top defense they've played at #33. USC is the top Pac-10 defense at #46. They don't recruit defensive players in the Pac-10.
Total Defense Rank USC Schedule 28. California 26. Fresno St. 46. Notre Dame 48. Oregon 54. Arkansas 68. Arizona 83. Arizona St. 92. Stanford 93. UCLA 94. Washington 102. Washington St. 111. Hawaii Yeah.. with all of the top defenses they have faced. I think Bush & Co. would encounter a bit more resisitance in the SEC. SEC 2. bama 4. LSU 5. Georgia 6. Auburn 17. Florida 20. Tennessee 31. South Carolina 34. Ole Miss 45. Miss. St. 54. Arkansas 85. Vandy 110. Kentucky
Awesone...so what? He is THAT good. I know we are supposed to hate USC but some of our bitching about them is comical
No disrespect to Bush, he's a damn good player, but I would sever a limb to watch him play against a real defense. I'm tired of hearing about how great these offensive players inb the Pac-10 are and that the SEC has no offense at all, but look at the NFL SEC players dominate both sides of the ball. Bush running wild against high school type defenses in the PAC-10 is not as impressive as what everyone seems to think it is. Hell you have to go all the way back to Corey Dillon to find a back who was better than average at the next level. (jury is still out on Steven Jackson)
Bush is a great back, but playing against inferior defenses is of course going to make him look better than he is. Bush is a playmaker & very dangerous in open space. Pac 10 defenses give him that space, the SEC wouldn't. He would bust out the occassional long run in the SEC, but would be contained much better than he is now. It's not just that SEC defenses are better, which obviously they are, but they are more aggressive & would meet Bush in the backfield a lot more often that he is now.
