"Even though we're willing to go on the road and play them all, it's very hard to get those games," Hill said. "That's what I appreciate about SC. SC does not play a sugarcoated schedule. That's why they deserve to be where they are. They play all comers." http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=2228359
Yeah.. like an Arkansas team they know is rebuilding (to simply get back to the middle of the pack)...
Its not like they knew Arky was going to suck when they scheduled them, remember schedules are determined far in advance. USC does a decent job in non-conference scheduling. But that's a lot easier to do in the Pac-10 when you dont have to have 7 home games to be able to compete financially with other schools.
Well before you start ripping on how bad the pac-10 is: 1) be glad you're LSU, cuz you are 3-0 against the Pac-10 since 2002. 2) The rest of the sec is 0-5 against the pac 10 since 2002. USC plays ND every year... and has also played both Auburn and Arkansas lately... so knocking their ooc schedule is fairly hard to do, imo.
I agree about the entire schedule being the thing that matters. It is admirable that USC schedules some tougher opponents for the OOC games but across the board you have to admit, they play some cupcakes.
The problem I have is that USC NEVER plays against a really good defense, and never plays against a really good running team, which is exactly why I think they are a 2 loss team in the SEC
usc gets more credit for playing one SEC game, no matter the opponent, than LSU,AU, UGA, or BAMA receive for playing the entire SEC schedule, PLUS the SECCG. And that is just WRONG. :angryfire :angryfire :angryfire
Hell yeah! Of course I'm naturally a little biased but our conference kicks ass. Our teams are constantly having slugfests for games and are ranked throughout the top 15 teams in the polls. I just thought it was an odd thing for the coach to be complimentary of their schedule. Maybe it was just talk.
