Wednesday, January 02, 2008

USC to win "split" title?

Here it comes. We didn’t have to wait as long as I thought.

The drumbeat for a “split” national title in favor of USC is already on.

This screenshot was captured from Yahoo at about 2:30 today –

While the underlying article isn’t quite as favorable for USC as the headline suggests, clever writers know that most of the public doesn’t read the article, only the headline. And look at that headline – “A split championship?”

It goes even further below, stating “Voters could give USC split national title”

The suggestion has been made, the idea implanted. Look for it to grow as sports media types ask coy questions of Pete Carroll and his Trojans in days ahead. “We think we could play anybody now”, they will say.

Last season Urban Meyer was widely criticized for merely suggesting his team ought to have a chance to play the presumptive number one team on the field for a national title.

USC’s most effective method of winning “national titles” seems to be to lobby AP voters after the fact.

Update: If the above is true, then why not Georgia?

Bowl Game Scores –

UGA – 41-10 over Hawaii
USC – 49-17 over Illinois

Bowl Teams Defeated (excluding bowl game)

Georgia – 7
USC – 4


UGA – South Carolina 16-12, at Tennessee 35-14
USC – Stanford 24-23, at Oregon 24-17

Last Loss

UGA – October 6th
USC – October 27th

Strength of Schedule (including bowl game)

UGA – 11th nationally
USC – 77th nationally

I dare Mark Richt to suggest the Dawgs ought to win the AP title – the press will rip him apart.


Henry Louis Gomez said...

USC’s most effective method of winning “national titles” seems to be to lobby AP voters after the fact.

Again, I don't blame them one bit. The current system in fact encourages this.

Anonymous said...

It's real simple. USC has more of a case than Georgia in the media's eyes because they beat a more credible foe (again, in the media's eyes)in Illinois who was only more credible because they're in the Big Ten instead of the WAC.

Georgia is in a no-win situation because everyone sees their thrashing of Hawaii as just a big bully beating up on a team that never belonged in the BCS to begin with, when the truth is Illinois was really the team that didn't belong.

Plus you've got to consider that ABC/ESPN, which somehow gets to broadcast the Rose Bowl independently of the other BCS bowls, has a clear agenda. By pushing USC as the "real" champ, they undermine the credibility of rival Fox, who just happens to be broadcasting the other BCS games. But I'm sure that's just a coincidence...

Anonymous said...

BTW I certainly have no qualms about Richt being ripped in the media. I'm hating that guy more and more as time goes by. I say rip away!!!

Henry Louis Gomez said...

USC also has more of claim than Georgia because they won their conference and played every team in their conference.

Anonymous said...

No team that loses to Stanford has any claim. End of story. And UGA got thrashed by UT. There is no National Champion this year. USC won their conference because Dixon got injured.

Anonymous said...


What if Ohio State beats LSU? They'd be the only 1-loss conference champion besides newly-discredited Hawaii, and they'd have defeated the champ of the consensus toughest conference. Would that be enough to be a national champion?

Anonymous said...

If OSU can get by LSU I'll give credit where it's due. I still think they need to beef up the schedule and stop playing teams from the state of Ohio. But for this wacky year, I wouldn't argue with them being "National Champions."

Anonymous said...

This was OSUs rebuilding year after losing all those players to the NFL. Don't think they expected things to end up like this. Next two years they play USC non conference, wish we could see UF play out in California just once. Wolverines ran up 500 yards on us but could muster only 90 yards against the OSU D, enough said.

Gator Duck said...

If only we had a playoff of the consensus top 16. None of the games would be meaningless and the players would take the games more seriously. We would have found out who had the cajones to win it all.

Anonymous said...

So when did yahoo suddenly become ESPN/ABC owned that people claim it's their doing?

USC stands no chance at a title claim.

Anonymous said...

USC wasn't even the best team in their conference, that was Oregon with Dixon, and they lost at home to Stanford. Georgia also lost to a non-bowl team and didn't even win their own conference. So LSU>Georgia. And if OSU beats LSU, OSU>LSU>Georgia.

It's absurd anyone would even think of voting USC #1 because they beat a 3-loss Illinois team. West Virginia's win over Oklahoma was 1000 times more impressive because OU was actually good. Why no West Virginia love then? I bet Pitt would beat Stanford.

Henry Louis Gomez said...


Regardless of your opinion USC is the best team in the PAC 10. They won their conference in a full round robin. If the conference champion is not the best team in the conference then why even play games. We should just have paper champions. By the way injuries are a part of sports. Booty was hurt and USC had to muddle on without him. I'm no fan of USC, mind you.

And here's another thing, USC can sure as hell make a claim to the national championship because this system is completely based on claims (See our series on the national championship linked in the side bar of this blog).

And that's the problem with it. It's all based on claims. Ridiculous.

jj gator said...

Good comment, Henry, and you've only justified the need for a playoff even more. Not only is the current BCS system based on claims, it's for all intents and purposes a consortium of coaches' opinions which send the top vote- getters in these "polls" to the elite games and national championship game. It's bullshit, but sadly the BCS won't and refuses to see beyond this absurdity.

Anonymous said...

This just in:

BCS cancelled on grounds of lacking teams deserving to be #1 and #2.

This also just in:

Kansas crowned AP #1.