Stanford Multimedia
The Trojans couldn’t put the bad memories of a blowout loss to Stanford behind them soon enough.
After the game the locker room was understandably somber, as players and coaches tried to figure out what went wrong.
Below: Photos, video highlights and player reaction from the game.
Photos: USC and Stanford
All photos by Jonathan Moore - (jjmoorephoto.com)
Video: USC vs. Stanford highlights
Video: Defensive player interviews
Video: Offensive player interviews
For the inside scoop on what is going on with Trojan athletics make sure you read The Peristyle!
Stay tuned to USCFootball.com for tons more coverage of the Trojans as they fight through the final few games of the season.
You can reach Ryan Abraham at ryan@uscfootball.com
Show your friends — and the nation — you know your college football. Sign up to play College Bowl Pick'em!
Updated Nov 16, 2:43 am EST
29 Comments
1 - 25 of 29
Report Abuse
just having a little fun since logic doesn't seem to work. i truly believe if USC played Bama or Florida and would somehow loose-(I know that's hard to fathom) the homer crowd would still find a way to blame it on the refs, injuries, play calling, sun spots, conspiracies, etc. Have you ever lived on another conference area, gone to a significant number of games that are not PAC1, or been to a major bowl or national championship that did not involve USC? If you have great, but it sounds like that might not be the case. Sometimes it helps to take the blinders off and expand a little bit. I used to live out in your area and attended many games in LA, Arizona (after they both were in the PAC1), and Wahington--and actually used to argue with folks from the east and southeast using the very same arguments you are using although more about the conference than the USC side of things. Probably have been to 40 pac1 games and a bigger number of ACC and SEC games. Really never thought about changing my thinking until I got heavily involved with going to SEC games in Knoxville, Baton Rouge, Columbia, Athens, Gainesville, and Nashville as well as many many bowl games in Florida, Arizona, and California---as well as quite a few national championship games. Believe me I'm not trying to throw my resume at you--but my point is this. I used to be a huge pac1 guy until I got a chance to see the teams out here. The depth of talent, the passion, the atmosphere is unmatched top to bottom. No one could watch college football and not be impressed with USC---especially the P. Carroll era-but in my humble opinion the SEC is stronger year in and year out and I tried (in vain) to support that with stats on recruits, NFL draft picks, overall records, national fan opinions, etc. etc. USC does very well because they are able to pick up most of the quality kids from California, and over the years have had excellent overall coaching to support. Much the same conditions apply out here--whatever Florida school wins the Florida recruiting battle (Miami, FSU, or now the gators) will be in high in the national polls. Beyond that is where the pac1 runs into trouble and why in most years (probably not this one---as the SEC is top heavy) I see the weakness in you stance on the pac1. There is far more home grown talent in Georgia, Louisiana, the Carolinas, Mississippi, Tennessee, and yes Florida--than you are ever going to find in Arizona, Utah, Washington, and Oregon. Since USC consistently wins the California battle, the schools out there (other than USC and UCLA) have to recruit much more on a national basis which is very hard to do. California, Texas, Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and the Florida schools tend to keep their kids--which really makes it difficult to be a national power consistently if you are recruiting against USC, UCLA, Texas,Ohio State, the three Florida schools, etc. How can anyone possibly argue against quality recruiting talent will usually deliver solid programs. Now the SEC has the same problem at Vanderbilt, Kentucky, Mississippi State, and S. Carolina over the years. But the list is longer in the Pac1. The Oregon schools are getting much stronger but will never be consistently in the national picture, Washington State is pretty much always on the bottom, Washington has not been really good since Don James had his run there, and both Arizona schools will be in and out of the top 25 occasionally--even though ASU has in the past won the rose bowl and when John Cooper was there they were very good, and Stanford has the same admissions issue that Vanderbilt has for football players. Another thing that works against the PAC1 is the time zone issue---it's unfair but it is what it is. If you are a strong recruit that is being recruited by anyone other than USC you are going to be playing many of you games at 10pm eastern time. I know for a fact that this is used in the recruiting process to keep some of the top recruits east of the rockies to enhance their national exposure. I did not see you respond to the coaching comparison which is the next level of this. Meyer, Miles, Spurrier, and Saban have all won national championships. I believe the new coach at Tennessee (a USC guy) will begin to consistently reel in the recruits. Other that P. Carroll--I don't see anything near that kind of coaching depth. That's not to say it won't get there or that they are bad coaches but I never hear anyone but Carroll being touted on a national level. I believe that living in different areas helps build your perspective--plus going to various regional games frequently gives you a much deeper appreciation. If you've done that--great and I'll stand corrected--but I don't get that sense from you postings.
No need to respond because I think I know where you stand on all of this. I'll even pause to give you a thought when I'm out in California for the Bama/Florida vs. Texas game. If Texas does not pull it out I'll be sure and look for your posts after SC wins whatever bowl they are going to be in--probably complaining that SC should have been in a better bowl even though they had 3 or 4 losses.
Report Abuse
The mark of a true homer! You though you could do what, convince me that the SEC is so great? No doing, guy.
Yeah,, we'll have to agree to disagree on this one, There's really no way ANYONE can sell me on how grand the SEC is, not after what I've sen over the past few years. Maybe if you want a decent conversation with me, let's talk medical, that's where I have more in depth knowledge.
And as far as the SC fans having our...uuuh...Knickers...up in a bunch...
Not really. Those of us who grew up close to the program actually expected this, so no real reason to get bent out of shape about it. Only the lamer bandwagon fans who need something to talk crap on message posts are all bent out of shape.
So that's for showing me what you are. Guess I am the better one here because at NO TIME did i ever insult you or your intelligence, I'm bigger than that, but I guess you aren't. It's cool, I do expect that from people. Trailer Park...naaah, never lived in one and don't ever plan on it. Dropping my parting signature...naaah, my nephew would kill me.
Nice try on all fronts though.
Peace and Chicken Grease
Report Abuse
You certainly have consumed the kool-aid.....or maybe it's just the smog in that wonderful place called SoCal. You know I thought we MIGHT be able to have a decent conversation once we settled in but I now see that that's a stretch. Like I said--usually when someone says they are not a homer and they are looking at things in a balanced way--it actually means they are the biggest homer--and that you are. I really wasn't looking for a way to change your mind--but maybe just a couple of thoughts that might lean you in a more open direction. Rather than debate the merits during a give and take--just hide behind things like CNN sucks, or this is all planned to ensure CBS get ratings. Those are the arguments of conspiracy theorists that do not move the conversation along--and really show weakness of thought and conviction. The CNN deal was just an interesting little survey that pretty much supported some of the points I was making about conference strength that happened to come out today ironically.........but I know as he commish you are the only one that can decide what data is used. Additionally, I'm sure that if USC or any of the rest of the powerhouses in that 2nd tier conference had won two or three national championships in the past 3 years you may have brought it up.
After all this it really comes down to SC fans have the knickers all bunched up because this season turned out to be an absolute disaster and it brings up all the old wounds from the last 3-4 years about the SEC--because you didn't make the big dance. Plain and simple. I'm quite sure that when and if a playoff is developed the SEC crowd will somehow hold it's own against the storied programs at Arizona State. Arizona, Washington State, Stanford, and Oregon State--Question have they ever won anything significant? a national championship, heisman, a huge bowl win?
So homer-- peace, and chicken grease--keep drinking the kool-ade and believing what you believe. A good part of the rest of the world is in a whole different place. USC has had a great run--it's coming to a slow and painful conclusion. When fans start talking about play calling and debating defensive schemes that's the first sign that things have started on a downhill slide. Pretty soon you will go back to those decades where eight to nine wins and a spot in the homer rose bowl ( a game that no one gives a **it about) will be all that's achieved.
PS do you want to talk what's really weak--ditch the peace and chicken grease--it sounds like you need to add to your trailer handle and make it 'trailer park"----out for good. Have a good holiday season.
Report Abuse
I dont see such a fleeting grand prize as the National Championship as the mark of greatness, because some of the best teams often get looked over for other less worthy programs. So arguments about who won more NC's are pretty much moot.
Peace and Chicken Grease
Report Abuse
and the last 5 years says USC had many 10 win seasons. And if your conference is so balanced, why do only 3 of your teams have decent in conference records? And more storied programs? If that's true, why is it that the only team that's mentioned on a historical level is the Tide? you have one...ONE (I just might give you 1/2 credit for Arkansas). the rest just recently joined the flight.
Anywho. you went to CNN.com. Big mistake. CNN.com is only good for...nothing!!! if you want real sports fans' input, go to SI.com. so once again, with all of that bogus Data, you don't convince me. Even with that TV ratings thing, because the Corporate Execs at CBS are only looking at winning sweeps...and this year, sweeps month ends the first week of December. Wouldn't it be nice for CBS to be able to close sweeps with a pseudo-national championship? I'll bet they will pay a pretty penny to make sure that happens!
So coome with a stronger argument. Let's put the SEC's finest Team (Bama) against the Pac-10's finest team (SC) and let's see who has won more conference championships (the more consistent measure of a team's overall program quality)
(hint: SC wins 38-25)
Peace and Chicken Grease
And you say you won more national Championships in the past few years? And...that's supposed to be sme measure of greatness? I once met Little Richard at 7-Eleven when he was in town for Florence Griffith Joyner's funeral. He is regarded as one of the greatest rock and roll artists of all time...despite NEVER having won a Grammy.
Report Abuse
No confusion in my mind. The fact that the SEC or Big 12 have championship games is irrelevant. The point was the offenses look explosive because of the weak offenses out there--just like the big 12--when USC has had a great team they had both. There is more balance in the SEC on both sides of the ball-that is what tends to separate the conference from the rest usually, even though I think this is a down year on conference depth.
Trailer---take a look @ CNN.com. In their sports segment they have just completed a college football survey. One question was--other that your conference which conference is the strongest? EVERY fan voting from a particular conference voted the SEC #1-by huge margins for the most part. In no case was the Pac10 voted number one and in many instances voted third or fourth. Remember you cannot vote for your conference which takes all the bias out of it. You would think that some group of fans from somewhere would vote the pac10 number one. Even big ten fans voted the SEC #1 and the Pac10 #3. The fact that USC plays Ohio State every year does not seem to sway anyone up there. A brief recap:
Big 10 SEC #1 79% PAC10 #3 6%
ACC SEC #1 87% PAC 10 #3 2%
Big 12 SEC #1 89% PAC10 #2 3%
PAC 10 SEC #1 75%
The two lowest totals the SEC received were from the the MAC @ 64% and the Mtn West @66%--with the SEC still #1 in there eyes. The mountain west fans had the pac10 in #3 and the WAC had the pac10 @ #2.
In the article the writer stated that people accuse the writer of being biased but the poll supported the SEC overwhelmingly.
So, better recruits, better NFL drafts, better balance, stronger defenses, stronger overall coaches, the last three national championships, more fan interest via better tv ratings, leading the nation in attendance, more depth in storied programs (Georgia, LSU, Alabama, Tennessee, Florida, and even 'Ole Miss)--I'm still waiting for the definitive reasons the pac10 is in the same league. By the way I was surprised to read that USC had 1 TEN WIN SEASON BETWEEN 1980 and 2001. ONE
Report Abuse
Way to talk in circles! Now I have to go to work a little more confused than normal. You do know the inverse of explosiv e offense/weak defense is weak offense/stout defense, right?
Anyhow, i think you missed my point. I'm not here saying the Pac-10 is better than anyone. I'm just saying that people who say the SEC is better than the Pac-10 are misguided. I dont think there is a premier conference in the FBS, it's been proven week after week that any team can beat another team. No team can go stomping through the FBS because there is always another team that can beat them.
I'm not trying to justify USC. I know what the problem is there, and there's no excuse for it. If you read any of my posts on the other boards, I spend a lot of time ripping into USC, and the other USC fans get pissed at me. I don't care, reality is reality. And yeah, i may be a omer, but not the biggest, Trust me. I used to ride the Metrolink with a paralegal who was a bigger homer than I will ever be.
If any conference looks like the Big 12, I would say it's the SEC. Two divisions, only a couple of good teams you know the deal.
And last point, and i'll close with this, is that you can't dismiss the preseason polls. It's there as a baseline in which to measure a conference's performance troughout the season. If a team is ranked highly in the preseason, it's because the guys who are giving the input look at things like returning players, coaching, performance the previous year, etc. I don't have to tell you this, you already know. What I see, however, is that people think the SEC has so many strong teams, just to see them drop from the rankings. Amazing.
Anyway, that's my stand. I actually agree with you on a lot of points,and you taught me a few things about the SEC that i didn't know. For that I thank you.
Peace and Chicken Grease
Report Abuse
ps. When someone tells me they are not a homer for their school or conference that usually means they are the BIGGEST homer of them all--they just are a bit more subtle about it. Don't be ashamed. It's ok
Report Abuse
I know this year is a little difficult. Usually this time of year pac10 boys are trying to justify why their one loss isn't as bad as some other teams loss--so they can justify getting to the bcs championship. This year with 3 losses and maybe more coming the thought of the music city bowl is terrifying.
One other thought on conferece strength. A little challenge. If talent going in is clearly in the SEC's favor how about talent coming out. Take a look at the first round NFL picks for the last 10 years? I'll even let you throw out your two weakest teams in NFL draft picks and let you pick from your most difficult non conferece schedule two teams--so you might pick Ohio State, or Notre Dame from thiis years scedule--or you could go back a few years. Which conference on either challenge has had more first round picks? I think you know the answer before the data is pulled. By the way--if o were to pick two teams from the area they would be FSU and Miami.
How about this--next time you are on just give me 5 reasons the pac10 is the premier conference for the last five years. Please spare me the schedule strength argument because over time those things tend to even out...ie Florida schedule during the first championship user myer was rated top 3.
Otherwise better get ready for at least one more loss.
Report Abuse
Didn't say a whole lot better--just stronger. I don't care about where they start it's how the season ends- that's the real key year in and year out. I really don't get this notion that gaining teams or loosing teams is that important--are you kidding? It's how they stack up at the end. I'll give you that the SEC starts with more teams--ever think that is carryover every year from ending up with more teams in the top 25. Bias--USC could field 22 freshmen and they would still be in the top 10. If reputation sometimes carries the day for your trojan boys then why isn't reputation considered for a league in general. Once again your argument is total crap. THE SEC ENDS THE SEASON WITH MORE TEAMS IN THE TOP 10 AND TOP 25 EVERY YEAR. SO WHEN PRESEASON POLLS COME OUT, THAT'S TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION JUST LIKE IT'S TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION FOR YOUR TROJAN BOYS. IF THE PAC 10 HAD MORE TEAMS IN AT THE END OF THE YEAR MAYBE THEY WOULD START OFF THAT WAY, TOO. Try to stay on the point.
You talked about insider knowledge but throw out what a D1 coach told me personally. It's not black and white. Of course coaching is important--that's why I made the point of national championship coaches. But recruiting is also a big key. I'm not sure that USC has the best overall talent---I'm saying that there is just more talent in the big SEC programs. Why no comment on the SEC as a conference clearly winning the talent battle--EVERY YEAR. I know it can be difficult to stay on point--but the original discussion was about conference strength. If at the end of the year, all 10 pac10 teams were in the top 25 I know you'd be touting that and rightfully so---this argument about loosing teams from the ratings during the year is a non argument.
All that you are concerned about is using strange conference stats to justify USC. I was at the last three national championship games and somewhere in the 3rd or 4th quarter of all three games the fans on the SEC side started chanting--SEC, SEC. SEC. Does that happen when USC won a few years back? You and your pac 10 fans only have one thing to tout--ONE TEAM. This year it's not working out so well so let's talk about the conferences to make ourselves look respectable.
By the way you mentioned the SEC is known for defense and the PAC 10 is known for "explosive" offensive teams. Ever consider the reason for the explosive offense is because of WEAK defenses?
If the PAC 10 teams faced real defenses every year their offensive stats would go way down. Once again--look at Oklahoma last year. If Bama or Florida get into the nat'l game this year--they might not win but I would be willing to bet the Texas will score way below their season average. If Oregon or Stanford play in it the game will be 56-42. Nothing wrong with that -but pac 10 boys are looking suspiciously like Big 12.
Report Abuse
My count goes like this, and I'm talking about total top 25 rankings, not just top 10...
2008 SEC 4 (started with 6) Pac 10 3 (started with 3)
2007 SEC 4 (started with 6) Pac 10 4 (Started with 4)
2006 SEC 5 (Started with 5) Pac-10 3 (started with 4)
2005 SEC 5 (started with 5) Pac 10 4 (started with 3)
As you can see, the SEC loses teams from the top 10, Pac 10 gains (expept foor 06). I wonder why that is...
You say that coaching is overrated if you have gobs of talent? really? then why is USC onn the skids, they're supposed to have the most talent anywhere...I mean come on. Just because the Army has the most technologically advanced weapons in the world, that means they don't need NCOs?
and OBTW...USC has won (or shared) 7 of the last 8 (counting this year) conference championships. how many SEC teams have done that?
Don't get me wrong, I like SEC football, but this whole "better than the Pac 10 top to bottom" thing gets old.
Peace and Chicken Grease
Report Abuse
Go to Stuart Mandel column on CNN.com and read, He gives praise to pac 10 conference end of season excitement and later on says almost exactly what I've said above.
Report Abuse
Another thing often heard is we have a solid recruiting class coming in that will help in the future. I agree with that at it is a predictor of things to come. USC is a mainstay in the top 20 recruiting classes (rivals) every year--top tens and winning some years. I believe there is a correlation between who's in the recruiting top ten and future success. I had a division 1 coach tell me personally once--"coaching is a bit overrated--recruiting success is the most important". So if that works for USC it must work for other teams and leagues also. Here's where I get to SEC vs. PAC 10. Since 2002, the score would look like this as to number of times in the top 20 rivals recruiting scorecard. Remember, USC is in this every year.
SEC 50 PAC10 20. This is only a predictor and a very general picture as many rival top 100 kids don't pan out. But the shear trends would say the SEC is on balance stronger as they a 2 1/2 times more often getting superior talent. How could anyone say that they could be developing a stronger program without the players to do it? It works for USC--seems to me the logic would flow for other teams, too.
Then if you go to coaching--the SEC has 4 coaches that have won national championships: Miles, Myer, Saban, and Spurrier---how many in the pac10 other than Carroll?
Nuff said
Report Abuse
Least you say I was dodging better years for pac 10 boy---if you go all the way back to 2001 the number of teams ranked in AP top 25 would look like this SEC 37 PAC10 23. The more I look at this the more I'm convinced that it's USC fan whining about rankings because they have not been on top since 2004. It's not because the SEC is better or worse--it's because the rest of the PAC 10 has caught up and the intimidation factor is gone. Out of conference schedules and bowl records are meaningless. Bowls are just bragging rights and out of conference schedules are shear conjecture as to what they mean. This is about winning your conference championship and putting your team in the National Championship picture--the latter is something USC has not done lately and now their world is coming down on them with a 3 loss season. They will be in the same pile with Nebraska, Miami, Notre Dame, anyone in the Big 10, Florida State--rebuilding but never what they once were.
Report Abuse
You are going to loose your status as commish on this one. Once again PAC 10 fan continues to let emotion rule the day VS. the FACTS. I guess if you say things so many times you begin to believe them after a while even though it's wrong. NO TEAM gets more benefit of the doubt on preseason polls that USC. This year is the best example of that. Your team is ranked appropriately now. How could a team with a freshman qb and a totally new defensive crew even sniff the top 15---crazy?
With regard to the polls at the end of the year you are off in another galaxy. Preseason rankings ARE bogus--ratings do not mean a thing until towards the end of the season. So taking a look at the FINAL AP top twenty five---how many are in from each conference?
2008--SEC--4 PAC 10--3 (Florida 1, USC 3, Alabama 6, Oregon 10)
2007--SEC--5 PAC 10--3 (LSU 1, Georgia 2,USC 3)
2006--SEC--6 PAC 10--3 (Florida 1, LSU 3, USC 8, Auburn 9)
2005--SEC--5 PAC 10--3 (USC 2, LSU 6, Alabama 8, Georgia 10)
In not one of the final ap poll did the pac 10 have more top 10 or top 25-----Not one year!
Over this period SEC 20 PAC 10--12!! Facts are facts---not emotion that clearly comes back to USC fans are all in the jealous mode because they have not been in the national championship game in a while (and they lost the last one) so you have to run to the conference strength or the bowl records--or whatever takes away that SEC envy. Nuff said
Report Abuse
As far as the refs...I rib the SEC fans about their referees because even though bad officiating is a part of football, the SEC has actually managed to get a lot of attention nationally. Way to go, SEC refs.
Also, the SEC starts with a good amount of teams that are ranked. How many are ranked at the end? The PAC-10 keeps their ranked teams and always addss one or two more a the end. 'Nuff said.
Not envy, just setting the record straight.
Peace and Chicken grease
Report Abuse
Why is it that many (not all) PAC 10 fans have "SEC Envy" problems? Does it have to do with not being in the National championship game? When Florida beat Ohio state with one of the tougher schedules a few years back there was constant howling from the left coast about whether they deserved to go. Last year it was the same thing--plus oklahoma's offense was going to rip them up. This year it's the referees or the schedule. I used to live on the left coast and developed a solid appreciation for PAC 10 football. I don't get this envy problem. Ps. Like no questionable call EVER went USC's way and helped them once and a while. Bad refs are bad refs in every conference and there are plenty around. Just asking. I do know the facts on one thing. The defenses in the SEC most years are clearly what set the league apart. Other than bama and florida I think this is actually a down year for sec depth on all fronts even the defensive side. That's not to say USC hasn't had great defenses over the years but the PAC 10 to me feels more like the big 12 on defense. If they played Oregon, Stanford, or USC in a normal year those teams would be held considerably below their season average.
Ok commish let's hear some of your famous analysis.
Report Abuse
But I'm sad to say that USC just says "on" now...the "fight" is gone. The SEC still sucks though. Two good teams that are only unbeaten because of the referees. Wow.
So rah rah rah.
I do like the title of Message Board Commissioner, but I think the only person who I'll have to answer to is Dawgmeat, He OWNS these boards. I struggle to keep up.
Peace and Chicken Grease
Report Abuse
Fight On! rah, rah, rah,
Now do get it? Commish!
Oh yeah, the SEC sucks rah, rah, rah!
Report Abuse
You get it.
Peace and Chicken Grease
Report Abuse
Fight on!
Report Abuse
They didn't euthanize you yet? Well, at least they should neuter you to prevent human contamination!
J/K
Honestly though, I hope all is well with you. Looking forward to whatever insight you can bring!
Peace and Chicken Grease
Report Abuse
All those listed never done B4 Ever ! By anyone . And all you armchair coaches think you can do a better job. You are a joke and make me wanna PUKE !!
Coach Carroll is one of the top recruiting coaches in the nation now everyone says he sucks after losing two thirds of the defense to the NFL and having a couple rough games . Clueless and ignorant . Bunch a pud wackers ,
FIGHT ON !!
Report Abuse
I see the commissioner is back with all the answers...........
Report Abuse
I would like to keep hope in the Trojans, I really would, but Pete is making some HUGE coaching blunders. As a coach, you have to know which parts of the team are strongest and weakest, and adjust accordingly. I watched angrily as he ran the 5-2 over and over knowing the d-line was inept. Why stack the line with more inept linemen? At least the 4-3 would have put an extra LB out there, or the 3-4 which would have practically snuffed out the running game.
If that d-line is coming back next year, what is there to hope for? More games giving up 300+ yards?
What they need to do is get someone else who knows football to help Carroll out, because He obviously can't do the defensive coordinator thing. Maybe then we can start holding on to hope.
Peace and Chicken Grease
1 - 25 of 29