Can USC or Washington string together dynasties after huge 2016 seasons?

[AlaskaGuy]

Firstly, relax, I gave credit where it was due, you really excel at the posting obnoxious and unneccisary pictures thing. Secondly, you never defended me, no should you, it's bad enough that you pretend to be a UW fan, I'd prefer to not be associated with you as much as possible.

No, you put me on the spot. It was either defend you (Washington) or look like a cuck.

 

[TheDayMan]

No, you put me on the spot. It was either defend you (Washington) or look like a cuck.

Making a half assed attempt to set the forum jackass straight about UW hardly = defending me, dude's a dumbass. And you are a cuck, so don't worry about it.

 

[AlaskaGuy]

Making a half assed attempt to set the forum jackass straight about UW hardly = defending me, dude's a dumbass. And you are a cuck, so don't worry about it.

Don't be using Washington as an example in that forum because it puts the rest of us UW fans on the defense in there.

 

[TheDayMan]

Don't be using Washington as an example in that forum because it puts the rest of us UW fans on the defense in there.

If you didn't start a stupid/irrelevant thread, that in no way needed to be politicized, there wouldn't have been the need. I'm gonna do it even more now though.

 

[theboardref]

I'd say USC has a big edge. They are located in the center of possibly the most fertile recruiting grounds in the country, they have the history and they play in a weak division. They're holding all the cards atm other than in the HC dept.

USC has a questionable HC still. Can't judge a guy off of one year with another coaches talent.

 

[mcnabb7542]

What defines a dynasty in CFB? Feel like the definition should be different than what it is in professional sports.

Feel like at least 2 NC's is a must, with consistent Top 5-10 finishes in the national polls over a decent period of time.

InB4 Bama fans leave the " I slept with my cousin last night " thread and see this question and post pics of Uncle Nicky!

 

[mcnabb7542]

USC has a questionable HC still. Can't judge a guy off of one year with another coaches talent.

Been saying that for a while, and I got a feeling deep down some SC fans might have that going on in the back of their mind.....

 

[WizardHawk]

USC is always a spark away from a solid run given their built in advantages. It doesn't take much to light it, but we have seen over and over it also doesn't take much for it to burn out. The only consistent thing they had going in the last 20 years was a future hall of fame coach. The others have been up and down. Helton is a long long way from being able to claim anything like Carroll status, more or less is a dynasty a slam dunk. However their success last year, current depth, and where they appear to be in recruiting suggest they are certainly on the come and are to be taken seriously.

Petersen needs to hit on more of the national level talent and actually hold them through signing day. No doubt he gets a lot out of whatever level talent he has, but until he can become the killer recruiting agent that coldly takes the very top level talent here and there the ceiling is something lower than most of the blue bloods that do get that level.

Dynasty is a relative term. A pac12 dynasty doesn't have to be the same thing as a college football dynasty. You can use that term for both if you qualify the former with conference in front of it. True college football dynasties are the most exclusive club in the sport. Right now I'd say you can use that term for bama and maybe Ohio State. Not sure I'd put anyone else up there. But I could name quite a few more with conference ownership.

 

[socaljim242]

Been saying that for a while, and I got a feeling deep down some SC fans might have that going on in the back of their mind.....

I don't know . So far the only knock on him was that he took three games to put Darnold in. After that he pushed every button right. Sark and kiffin made every USC fan nervous because it was all about ego and about them and the offense. Clay knows defense has to be good and he recruits both side well. Sark and Kiffin wanted showtime offense and as long as they won really didnt care or emphasize defense. It's only been one year but already we can see he's not a child like those two.

 

[4down20]

 

[WizardHawk]

I don't know . So far the only knock on him was that he took three games to put Darnold in. After that he pushed every button right. Sark and kiffin made every USC fan nervous because it was all about ego and about them and the offense. Clay knows defense has to be good and he recruits both side well. Sark and Kiffin wanted showtime offense and as long as they won really didnt care or emphasize defense. It's only been one year but already we can see he's not a child like those two.

I don't think anyone is trying to take away from what Helton did in year one. It's just too early to project he's the next Carroll or something near that level. The staff under him is clearly competent outside of not exactly picking the right QB out of the gates last year and so far it looks like your next class is shaping up. Still, they need to close out that class high and keep that streak going well into next year before people will start giving him more credit.

I think everyone would say USC is in a much better position now than it has been since Carroll left so you can't ask for much more.

 

[4down20]

I don't know . So far the only knock on him was that he took three games to put Darnold in. After that he pushed every button right. Sark and kiffin made every USC fan nervous because it was all about ego and about them and the offense. Clay knows defense has to be good and he recruits both side well. Sark and Kiffin wanted showtime offense and as long as they won really didnt care or emphasize defense. It's only been one year but already we can see he's not a child like those two.

You really think a different QB would have made a big difference in the Alabama game?

 

[7Samurai13]

You really think a different QB would have made a big difference in the Alabama game?

Did he say that it would make a big difference in that game? I read it twice and I don't see it.

 

[4down20]

Did he say that it would make a big difference in that game? I read it twice and I don't see it.

Well if the knock on his HC is that he didn't change QB's for the 3 games, it seems to suggest to me they lost games because of their QB.

 

[7Samurai13]

Well if the knock on his HC is that he didn't change QB's for the 3 games, it seems to suggest to me they lost games because of their QB.

Yes, it definitely could be that they lost games because of a bad QB, but he didn't say that they were going to win that game, it could have definitely made the game closer, but he didn't say any of that.

 

[Hitman Hart]

InB4 Bama fans leave the " I slept with my cousin last night " thread and see this question and post pics of Uncle Nicky!

 

[socaljim242]

You really think a different QB would have made a big difference in the Alabama game?

No. Any QB USC would have lost the game. But Darnold is a better QB than the one USC started to begin the season.

 

[4down20]

Yes, it definitely could be that they lost games because of a bad QB, but he didn't say that they were going to win that game, it could have definitely made the game closer, but he didn't say any of that.

Well I'm asking because:

Their defense still gave up 52 points to a true freshmen in his very first college game ever.

And they did play the other QB towards the end of the game, and despite playing against some 2nd string players, his stats were actually worse.

QBR
Browne: 8.0
Darnold: 6.4

Because they get the shit kicked out of them at the line on both sides of the ball. They couldn't really rush either, they only managed 64 yards of rushing all game, 46 of that on a single carry.

What I saw from USC last year was a team that played it's tougher games up front, lost most of them, and then went on to cruise to the end of the year on a bunch of teams that didn't even have winning records combined with a good win against Washington.

That's basically what Tennessee has been doing for years.

 

[tducey]

I think Washington will, not sure about USC though.

 

[7Samurai13]

Well I'm asking because:

Their defense still gave up 52 points to a true freshmen in his very first college game ever.

And they did play the other QB towards the end of the game, and despite playing against some 2nd string players, his stats were actually worse.

QBR
Browne: 8.0
Darnold: 6.4

Because they get the shit kicked out of them at the line on both sides of the ball. They couldn't really rush either, they only managed 64 yards of rushing all game, 46 of that on a single carry.

What I saw from USC last year was a team that played it's tougher games up front, lost most of them, and then went on to cruise to the end of the year on a bunch of teams that didn't even have winning records combined with a good win against Washington.

That's basically what Tennessee has been doing for years.

If they sustain longer drives that means less offensive touches for Alabama and thus less scoring. Again, it was not the difference in the game and Alabama would have won it running away, but it COULD have made it a closer game.