Media Instigates USC/LSU Rivalry

Their is one thing that doesnt get brought up by the Pac 10 when talking about conference strength that is a key component in making the SEC such a tough conference and that is the fever and loyalty that each team brings to the table.

There is a reason that the SEC leads the attendance numbers every year.

And if you dont think playing in hostile places with very loud fans is tough then i challenge USC to play Fla, Auburn , Tenn, LSU on the road and then let them go undefeated in those games. Even with the best players money can buy that is tough. SEC teams have to do it every year and also play a Championship Game in the conference.


USC is a title contender no matter what conference they play in but the Pac 10 has been down and they have to schedule tough out of conference teams.


The thing that gets me is all the magazines have the Pac 10 teams rated high for strength of schedule this year and that is such a joke.

It is USC, Improved UCLA , Decent Cal. and Oregon and that is pretty much it.

Lets face it . The Southeast has more die hard fans. Sure everybody has jumped on the USC bandwagon lately but USCVBALL can you give us a attendance breakdown of USC home games before Pete C. got there.

And what happens when USC is stripped of every win for about 3 years.

You think this OKLAHOMA penalty is by accident.

The writing is on the wall that see what we did to Ok. USC is next. They are just laying the groundwork.

And if they dont punish USC even harder because at least OK reported themselves. Then everyone should refuse to play USC even the Pac 10 teams.

 

Punish USC harder because OU self reported? OU only did that when there was no way the truth could be hidden anymore. They originally said that there was nothing wrong.

Plus, even if every allegation in the Bush situation turns out to be true, it's not the same. OU guys were getting paid by a Booster for no show jobs. The accuser in the Bush family rent situation wasn't, isn't, and never has been a USC Booster. He was a wannabe agent (he wasn't and isn't an agent). OU didn't properly monitor their players' work situation even after there was problems with that place before.

A Boosters pays a player to play for their school. A wannabe agent (alledgedly) let's a player's parents live rent free in a house because he wants him to leave school so he can cash in. One benefits the school, one goes against the school's interest.

The NCAA makes a clear distinction between Boosters and agents. If you don't like it, talk to Michigan as it was the Charles Woodson case that is the precident.

 

I think what Bush did was even worse. Give me some of the stuff your smoking there guest.

It has been acknowledged that USC was letting agents in their locker rooms. How do you deny losing institutional control. Some of us live in the real world and some of us live in an imaginary place called Hollywood.

 

Paying a guy minimum wage for a job he didn't do is obviously much worse than giving a guy a 3/4 of a miilion dollar home for a job.....oh wait, Bush didn't even ACT like he had a job.

 

i don't think it was minimum wage, but way over. but either way, as far as i am concerned, both programs need to have the bejeezus slapped out of them.

ou didn't get it hard enough, and who knows if usc will see any punishment at all.

 

http://www.philsteele.com/Articles/mostimprovedtms.html

Yes the SEC is a tough conference but it is not the toughest year in and year out.

2001
1) SEC
2) Big 12
3) Big East
4) Big 10
5) Pac 10
6) ACC

2002
1) Big 10
2) Big 12
3) Pac 10
4) SEC
5) Big East
6) ACC

2003
1) SEC (narrowly over)
2) Big 10 + Big 12
4) Pac 10
5) ACC
6) Big East

2004
1) Pac 10
2) Big 12
3) SEC
4) ACC
5) Big 10
6) Big East

2005
1) SEC
2) ACC
3) Big 10
4) Big 12
5) Pac 10
6) Big East

2006
1) SEC
2) Big East
3) Big 10
4) Pac 10
5) ACC
6) Big 12

2007 (PROJECTED)
1) SEC
2) Pac 10
3) Big 12
4) Big 10
5) ACC
6) Big East

 

I guess that settles it. If Steele says it I guess it's true. If only you had posted this sooner you would have saved a lot of arguments.

 

Read the entire article, it's not just an opinion. It's facts, but then again he does state.

At least it's a form of validity.

 

It's an opinion based on facts. If you put 10 people in a room with the same set of facts they will all come out with different opinions. Sagarin works with facts too.

 

yeah I suppose .. put a rock in the room 5 might say it's a rock 5 might say it's not ... 5 are right .. 5 are wrong. That's about the gist of your argument here. He's giving some facts , while you are just saying . no. Good point!