This certainly isn't major, crushing college football news, but it interested me....I was really liking USC to run for the NC this year and de-throne the SEC. But they just lost their second defensive lineman for the season. All reports seem to indicate that USC's two "weak" spots were there DL and depth in general, both took another hit:
Not TOO familiar with USC, but I gotta think this could be a problem in some games where depth on the DL is needed (i.e. against fast teams like the Ducks).
We'll see what happens, though.
It'll be a major issue against an SEC team, too. Bummer.
Man, this kid just got back from tearing his right ACL and now he tears his left ACL. Ouch. I still think USC is a threat to win the NC, but depth is a concern for them. Did you catch this part of that write-up?
@ Bucksfan: Good point. SEC = fast and can tire out a defense too.
@ Tenn: Yeah, kinda crazy. They have wicked, wicked talent, but having possibly only 64 "playable" guys? Yikes.
They still have an offense that can outgun an opponent. Auburn won on that, not a stiffling defense.
Auburn 22 Oregon 19.. Wouldn't call that "out gunning" anyone, especially it being Oregon. They had a pretty solid defense that year. And having lack of depth is the reason I say USC won't be contending for a NC.
@ Steensn - agreed, their offense will be something special. However, I can't recall many chapionship teams that won in shoot-out type games. Tough D always seems to be the common factor in the NC games and in the champions.
I REALLY want to see USC contend. I think if the final few Pete Carroll USC teams (like the one that manhandled us) would have taken on the SEC we'd have seen some phenomenal NC games. But IF USC doesn't get that chance this year, I think it will be becasue of depth, specifically on D.
HA! @ Steensn....just read Mike Huguenin's article on USC, as he is ranking them #1. Read this paragraph, as it makes both of our points exactly, but he ultimately concludes that USC's offense will be great enough:
Overview
USC's offense should be a thing of beauty – well, a thing of beauty if you like watching points being scored. Barkley. Woods. Lee. Redd. Holmes. There is talent aplenty on that side of the ball, more than enough to bring home a national title. And whether or not you like Lane Kiffin, you have to admit the guy is a good play-caller, and he certainly has the tools to use this season.
The defense? That unit is a long way from being as good as the defenses at Alabama and LSU – and it doesn't appear to be in the same class as Oregon's, either. It won't be a bad defense; it's just not going to be elite.
For USC to win it all, then, its offense has to be at peak efficiency in the big games. The game(s) with Oregon could be an epic shootout.
The depth factor also is huge. Even with Kennard's injury, a case can be made that USC has the best starting 22 in the nation. But the NCAA-imposed scholarship limits hurt, and there is little experienced depth. Most of the backups are young and inexperienced – talented guys but still inexperienced. Alabama and LSU (and Oregon) can overcome some injuries. USC cannot.
Still, we have USC at No. 1. Why? It's all about the offense.
Please, anything but SEC vs SEC. I didn't watch a single minute of last year's NCG and won't this year too if it happens again.
#fistpumpgobuckeyes
It's not that SEC = fast. Neither LSU or Bama are uptempo offenses like Oregon. It's about the DL being so vital. They're key in stopping the run and putting pressure on the QB. It's like Meyer said the other day, something about if you want a bad team start with a bad d-line.
Bad news for USC. Guess Kiffin should have publicly recruited some DL from PSU as well.
I agree with the above comment about the Dline... superior dlines make teams APPEAR slow. OSU's 2006 team was super, super fast...in fact, id say faster than Florida, but Florida D line embarassed out Oline so we looked slow and stagnant... Pac 12 teams arent all like Oregon so I still like USC's chances, but come BCS bowl time, itll depend on who they play but Im not so certain... if they went up against Bama's defense, I dont think Barkley and Co. would be that productive.
@MJB15 Don't focus on the championship game. Focus on the season. Cam Newton orchistrated no less than 3 steller come from behind victories, was ranked 6th in pts scored (46.7 pts/g), and ~54th in pts allowed (24.5 pts/g). They had a not so good SEC defense but still not terrible. The point is, they won on Cam Newton, not the defense and I think that USC cna be that good on offense that going from a top defense to an ok defense with some personel loses still can net them a national title.
@ Steensn...oh, definitely still possible. Again, their offense will be something special (possible Heisman QB, and arguably the two best receivers in the country etc..). But I do also agree with the D-line argument, and ultimatley, we'll have to wait and see how it plays out. It'll be fun to follow!!
Good point on Auburn, too, riding Cam Newton. But I still think they had a really good defense. Not a GREAT defense, but it was good enough to slow down Oregon to 19 points (they averaged 40-some that year?).
Good enough for one game to slow down a great offense, yes. The question still has yet to be answered, does USC have at least that good of a D still? I don't see why not...
USC will be highly overrated this year. Mark words!
Run_Fido's favorite word is strawman.