Hey Trojans ... splain this nonsense

[craigk217]

I wasn't gonna do this, but I could not stand being vexed and gnawed at any longer, so I'm starting this thread demanding an explanation as to why your damn team cost me Sat nite.

Specifically, this, from another thread ...

I look at this as the season SC is finally 'clear & free' of any more sanctions <read: excuse not valid no mo> and have a full up recruiting class loaded with big time players (4/5* studs). Correct me if I'm wrong on that account.

They are highly touted/ranked (as usual w/hype) and I thought it was legit this year with the O weapons they have and a good QB.

They took care of biz rolling the two cupcakes (Arky St & I-da-hoe) as expected, while Stanford was beaten by an 'iffy' NU 16-6 at Evanston ... a game I watched and was totally underwhelmed with Furd's O ... totally feckless.

I see a night game at the Colosseum with something to prove for SC and figured them to come out firing on all cylinders to prove legit #6 ranking while Furd seemed to be struggling.

Welp ... we saw what happened, once again with these two, even after SC was favored +10 @ home. I honestly thought this game was a lock (lost $300v btw). Nope ...

along with this ...

I just can't believe Hogan lit up Toejam's DBs like he did, and ran all over SC, after seeing how utterly atrocious they were against NU. Jeeezus ... it was like the parting of the Red Sea Sat nite.

I, as a Domer, shoulda been loving what I was seeing, but oddly wasn't. Might have been the 10 Confidence pts and 300v I had on SC? lol

I was so bewildered with SC's defense, I thought really hard about starting a thread to 'ask' SC fans to splain it to me ... so, here it is.

Explain the stats below how Stanford was pretty much held in check by Northwestern only getting 2 stinkin FGs and then march into the Colosseum to light yall up. I don't get it. See below, the comparison in offensive game stats.

​

Team Stats

427 Total Yards 474​

272 Passing 279​

155 Rushing 195​

To this ....


Team Stats

330 Total Yards 240​

105 Passing 155​

225 Rushing 85​

Now, I know yall's defense can't be this bad ... is it? Was it just an aberration ... a hiccup ... a blip?

 

[Wild Turkey]

They didn't want to be there and the seniors were looking at their draft status.

 

[963BUSC]

Not sure of the question. Stanford won and looked like the better team. SC run defense looked poor.

 

[trojanfan12]

What kinda pheg uses the word "feckless" on a sports message board?

 

[Olyduck]

Sark

 

[craigk217]

What kinda pheg uses the word "feckless" on a sports message board?

Well, I guess that splains SC's woeful showing.

 

[trojanfan12]

Sark

Pffft. Like Sark would ever be sober enough to type feckless.

 

[craigk217]

Pffft. Like Sark would ever be sober enough to type feckless.

Ok ... now ya did it ....

Spoiler

pops first

 

[trojanfan12]

In all seriousness, my biggest concern going into the season and why I haven't jumped on the "We're back" bandwagon is the inexperience on defense. I actually picked Stanford to beat the spread in the PAC-12 pick 'ems because of that. I didn't think Stanford would win, but I knew we weren't covering a 10.5 point spread.

The effect of the sanctions as far as numbers goes, are over. We had, I believe, 77 scholarship athletes to start the season. The most we've had since the start of the schollie reduction part of the sanctions and more than enough to rotate players in and out keep fatigue from being an issue.

However, because this is the first season where we've had a full complement of scholarships, there are a lot of true freshmen starting or playing key roles. Stanford is the most experienced team in the PAC. I saw a lot of plays where the defense seemed confused, slow to react or was in the wrong spot. Stanford showed things they hadn't seen and it showed.

End of the day, our defenses inexperience showed and Stanford took advantage. Fortunately, the freshmen are very talented so they should learn from what happened and get better. I didn't see any issues that weren't coachable. Coaches just need to teach them and the players need to respond.

 

[B_dub]

They didn't want to be there and the seniors were looking at their draft status.

Well played sir. Well played indeed.

 

[mrwallace2ku]

Lost vCash Sat nite on the USC Trojans?

You can make it all back on USC when they beat the snot outta your Golden Domers latter this year.

Bookmark that future wager Craig.

 

[craigk217]

In all seriousness, my biggest concern going into the season and why I haven't jumped on the "We're back" bandwagon is the inexperience on defense. I actually picked Stanford to beat the spread in the PAC-12 pick 'ems because of that. I didn't think Stanford would win, but I knew we weren't covering a 10.5 point spread.

The effect of the sanctions as far as numbers goes, are over. We had, I believe, 77 scholarship athletes to start the season. The most we've had since the start of the schollie reduction part of the sanctions and more than enough to rotate players in and out keep fatigue from being an issue.

However, because this is the first season where we've had a full complement of scholarships, there are a lot of true freshmen starting or playing key roles. Stanford is the most experienced team in the PAC. I saw a lot of plays where the defense seemed confused, slow to react or was in the wrong spot. Stanford showed things they hadn't seen and it showed.

End of the day, our defenses inexperience showed and Stanford took advantage. Fortunately, the freshmen are very talented so they should learn from what happened and get better. I didn't see any issues that weren't coachable. Coaches just need to teach them and the players need to respond.

Well, that's just great ... you tell me this shitty shyt now after climbing to #6 in the legit poll for that game!

Hard to believe yall still got issues when I look at stuff like this.

Rivals 247
#2 recruiting class in 2015 (four 5* ... fourteen 4*)
#10 recruiting class in 2014 (two 5* ... nine 4*)
#13 recruiting class in 2013 (five 5* ... seven 4*)
#8 recruiting class in 2012 (three 5* ... ten 4*)
#4 recruiting class in 2011 (one 5* ... fourteen 4*)

That averages out to pretty close a Top 5 recruiting class over the last five years ... even with sanctions. I'm sure Scouts and others would be somewhat different, but USC has still consistently recruited well above others.

Now, I know there's also been musical chairs with coaching since Petey left in '09, so I guess Sark could be a valid reason as long as the liquor cabinet is shut?

I dunno, I was just totally beside myself watching Furd have their way with yall and comparing it to the piss-poor showing in NU game. I expected better, dammit!

 

[bksballer89]

Made a shitty Stanford offense look good

 

[GeekSportsFan]

Our offense can keep up with anyone in CFB, but our defense is a disaster. You know, it goes to the old saying, "Defense wins championships." In the past two years, Wilcox has failed to make the adjustments necessary to win games. Two things stuck out to me. One, when it became evident that rushing four linemen was not going to put pressure on Hogan, why didn't SC send in some blitz packages? Two, when Hogan sprained his ankle and it was evident that his ability to scramble out of the pocket was going to be limited, why did we waste time blitzing our DEs? Blitz up the middle and at worst, disrupt his passes, and at best, sack Hogan. This is a great example how subpar coaching makes great players look very average, which right now is what our defense looks like.

 

[trojanfan12]

Well, that's just great ... you tell me this shitty shyt now after climbing to #6 in the legit poll for that game!

Hard to believe yall still got issues when I look at stuff like this.

Rivals 247
#2 recruiting class in 2015 (four 5* ... fourteen 4*)
#10 recruiting class in 2014 (two 5* ... nine 4*)
#13 recruiting class in 2013 (five 5* ... seven 4*)
#8 recruiting class in 2012 (three 5* ... ten 4*)
#4 recruiting class in 2011 (one 5* ... fourteen 4*)

That averages out to pretty close a Top 5 recruiting class over the last five years ... even with sanctions. I'm sure Scouts and others would be somewhat different, but USC has still consistently recruited well above others.

Now, I know there's also been musical chairs with coaching since Petey left in '09, so I guess Sark could be a valid reason as long as the liquor cabinet is shut?

I dunno, I was just totally beside myself watching Furd have their way with yall and comparing it to the piss-poor showing in NU game. I expected better, dammit!

You have to remember though, despite the rankings of those classes, for 3 of the 5, USC was only allowed to recruit 15 while everyone else was recruiting 25. Those rankings are based on an average of stars per player without consideration to the actual number of recruits.

The fact that we were still able to recruit such talented players is why we never suffered a losing season during the sanctions, but it's also why we lost more games than we normally would with full recruiting classes.

Also, 4 and 5 star kids tend to go to the NFL after 3 years instead of 4. So, a lot of those players were gone after their junior year. For example, Leonard Williams still had a year of eligibility left. I think still having him may have helped a bit vs. Stanford, but he's a New York Jet now.

End of the day, the sanctions did what they were supposed to do as far as making it more difficult to compete. We were just fortunate to be able to recruit well enough that they didn't set us back as far as they would many other programs.

I have said all along that USC won't truly be back until next year at the soonest because of the inexperience. I'd love for these guys to get it together more quickly and prove me wrong though.

 

[MarkOU]

What kinda pheg uses the word "feckless" on a sports message board?

That's a sharp lookin avatar you gots there.

 

[Lakers+USC=#1]

That's a sharp lookin avatar you gots there.

Well, everybody likes Christmas trees.

 

[ElTexan]

I wasn't gonna do this, but I could not stand being vexed and gnawed at any longer, so I'm starting this thread demanding an explanation as to why your damn team cost me Sat nite.

Specifically, this, from another thread ...

I look at this as the season SC is finally 'clear & free' of any more sanctions <read: excuse not valid no mo> and have a full up recruiting class loaded with big time players (4/5* studs). Correct me if I'm wrong on that account.

They are highly touted/ranked (as usual w/hype) and I thought it was legit this year with the O weapons they have and a good QB.

They took care of biz rolling the two cupcakes (Arky St & I-da-hoe) as expected, while Stanford was beaten by an 'iffy' NU 16-6 at Evanston ... a game I watched and was totally underwhelmed with Furd's O ... totally feckless.

I see a night game at the Colosseum with something to prove for SC and figured them to come out firing on all cylinders to prove legit #6 ranking while Furd seemed to be struggling.

Welp ... we saw what happened, once again with these two, even after SC was favored +10 @ home. I honestly thought this game was a lock (lost $300v btw). Nope ...

along with this ...

I just can't believe Hogan lit up Toejam's DBs like he did, and ran all over SC, after seeing how utterly atrocious they were against NU. Jeeezus ... it was like the parting of the Red Sea Sat nite.

I, as a Domer, shoulda been loving what I was seeing, but oddly wasn't. Might have been the 10 Confidence pts and 300v I had on SC? lol

I was so bewildered with SC's defense, I thought really hard about starting a thread to 'ask' SC fans to splain it to me ... so, here it is.

?​

​

I am forced to agree with this motherlickin' dunce.