Here you go. Pete Carroll had 3:45 to make the comments you quoted above and he never did. He did say he'd like for USC to have a shot at playing for the title game as would many other coaches. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J69w0H2mI_A
i'm having mrs kcal flashbacks with the really high-pitched screaming that only dogs and i can hear...
I'm not trying to be a jerk; BUT I guess you missed the part in that post where he used the word "dynasty." Dynasty = more than one title in a set limited period. USC has ONE BCS Title. Since ONE is not "more than one in a set limited period" there is no dynasty. I was saying they have claimed dynasty. They are not dynasty. They have one BCS trophy, just like Texas, Florida, LSU, etc. etc. Especially odd that you missed this, since you specifically quoted the dynasty ["misspelled in original as 'dinasty'] statement in saying what did they [USC] have to do with this. I apologize if this was inarticulate to you. I said in 2005 (as in the 2005 football season, commonly understood to begin in September 2005 and end in 2006). I also said "the year Texas won the BCS title by beating USC." Yet you take that to mean "Oklahoma." Funny how I type "Texas" on my keyboard and your eyes read "Oklahoma." I am referring to Leinart's repeated and frequent "post game comments" made from January to July in the calendar year 2006 as he appeared on ESPN, the Draft broadcasts, the NFL network, and so on. He did not say the best team did not win -- he said USC was the best team in the country during the 2005 football season begun in Spetember 2005 and ended in January 2006 when USC lost to Texas. That's T-e-x-a-s NOT O-k-l-a-h-o-m-a, which is close in proximity to Texas but is not, itself, in fact, Texas. I am not saying you live on the West Coast, but I understand that for lots of people from California, both Texas and Oklahoma are viewed as "that junk in the middle somewhere," and easily confused with not just each other but also with the other "junk in middle somewhere" that makes it a pain to fly to NY/Boston. Ok I gave you many, but I will enlarge the class by many more. The COVER of the USC Football Media Guide for the 2005 season claimed (in large headlines) that USC was going for three in a row (after they had won ONE in a row). Unless the 2005 football season was double-coupon day at the local Ralph's it was going to be pretty impossible for them to win TWO pieces of crystal in one season, so clearly the USC Media Dept, if not the entire Athletic Department, is implicated here. I think that constitutes "many" non-journalist USC employees and associates. I am not sure, but I think that cover even says "Dynasty" on it. I don't "hate" Leinart. Or any other USC players. I just got aggravated that Leinart made some moronic statements I know anyone can make silly comments. But Leinart was touted as the "smart" quarterback that year. Give me "smart" for myself and my point would be this. I have made silly statements, but I do not repeat them time and again as sincere belief in the face of all evidence. Or, if winning the game does not make you the best team, then I look forward to USC boycotting the Rose Bowl, because who is to say , , , lots of UW players probably would say the best team lost in the games they did not win? "You play to win the game. You play to win the game." Herm Edwards Yep. And Oregon lost their QB for the season or you might not be in the Rose Bowl. West Virginia lost their QB earlier in their conference championship game or they might be in the BCS title game instead of us. Those teams probably had other injuries I do not know about. LSU played SEC title game without QB, and with a severely injured and hobbling best DL (when he was in the game on limited occasions). Also lost QB one other time during season, best WR for five games, etc. etc. Here's a shocker: Football is a TEAM game played by INDIVIDUALS. When an individual is injured or fails to perform the quality of the team is diminished, It's part of the game. Boo-hoo into an EA computer simulation or agree that you play the game to win . . . weather, bad calls, freaky plays, injuries, loss of concentration, poor preparation, apathetic key players , , , it's all part of the game. Play it. Win it. Lose it. Come back to play again. . . . . or QUIT.[/QUOTE] No. I don't bother searching for ESPN links. Pete Carrol said it on a talk show, not the bowl selection show. But go to ESPN. Call up the article about Miles calling Michigan to re-open head coaching job. Click on that link. Surprise, it connect to an article saying Miles is staying at LSU. Links and posts on the ESPN web-site have a funny way of . . . evaporating and condensing into something else when those reports become inconveniently untruthful. Again, I'm not meaning to be a jerk. Cheer your ass off for USC. I'll cheer my ass off for LSU. But until we get another chunk of crystal, I am not going to say we are two-time champions and I will flame any person in the LSU Athletic Department who makes that claim. USC and alll its associates should do the same. Finally, look, USC, Ohio State, Florida, LSU and Oklahoma have pretty clearly been the consistent five classiest football schools over the last five years. I have no idea where I would rank them if I had to put them in order. They all have arguments for and against (Anyone care to bring up LSU-Iowa in the Peach Bowl?).
No. I don't bother searching for ESPN links. Pete Carrol said it on a talk show, not the bowl selection show. But go to ESPN. Call up the article about Miles calling Michigan to re-open head coaching job. Click on that link. Surprise, it connect to an article saying Miles is staying at LSU. Links and posts on the ESPN web-site have a funny way of . . . evaporating and condensing into something else when those reports become inconveniently untruthful. [/quote] My initial comment about what USC had to do with it was a reply to the OP (original poster). He didn't use the term dynasty but I did quote another poster later in the thread when the word was used. You just got confused. Funny how you are so sure that the 2005 Media Guide claimed "in large headlines" that USC was going for 3 in a row. But then you weren't sure if it used the word "dynasty". Let me help: http://usctrojans.cstv.com/auto_pdf/p_hotos/s_chools/usc/sports/m-footbl/auto_pdf/05-mg-front-covers I'm well aware that injuries have an impact on ALL teams. True if Dixon didn't go down, they may be playing in the RB but if Pitt.....nevamind. However, this season USC was hit particularly hard, early, and to key players. Here's a good summary of USC's situation from Jeremy Hogue, a former Olineman: Offensive Line Depth and Pat Ruel: Here’s the reality: Young men – some still kids in more ways than one – fill-up college football rosters all over the country, and coaches have a limited amount of time to try to prepare a subset group of those men for taking the field on Saturdays. When it comes to the offensive line, all teams will have a two-deep roster of ten guys they say can play, but some of them will be young and physically can’t compete, others won’t have the technique and footwork to compete against college players (offensive line is the hardest position to evaluate in recruiting) and others won’t mentally understand the game at the level they need to in order to give themselves a chance. The result is that offensive line coaches hope to have 7-8 linemen who can play, so that if one or two go down, they can move people around and still produce. Let me say another thing – offensive line is not easy – second in difficulty only to quarterback. Wide receivers can come in out of high school and be physically ready to play (i.e., Ronald Johnson) and each play tells them exactly what to do (they may have two alternatives depending on the coverage, but that’s it). When you are an offensive lineman, there are six-ten different defensive fronts that you may see in a given night, depending on who you are playing. And then there are a half-dozen blitzes that you might see out of each of those fronts. Depending on which combination you see, linemen need to be ready to do different things. For many kids – learning the fundamentals of that chess game never happens, and they rely on some others around them making the calls and making sure each defender is blocked. For others, even if they get it, it takes a lot of reps for things to become instinctual to the point that you don’t recognize what’s happening too late into the play – after a linebacker has already run right past you. Believe me – by the time I was starting my 25th, 26th and 27th games at USC, I was light years ahead mentally of where I was in the earlier stages of my career… and I’d like to think I was a pretty smart guy. My point is this - - for Pat Ruel to have 6 linemen he can really count on is too few As for the PC comments. You flat out quoted him. There should be a link. If you simply heard it on a talk show (and I never said it had to be ESPN) then paraphrase because I doubt you recorded it or were taking notes. I provided a link where PC had nearly 4 minutes to make the type of comment you quoted and yet he never did. If you quote somebody then you should make the effort to be accurate.
Not taking notes. Just burned into my memory because it was so recent and so aggravating. I won't remember it in exact quote form next month but I do now. I also remember the dark haired guy in the passenger seat of a car/truck who yelled out "You need to lose weight you fat -------" OVER THREE YEARS AGO. That is an exact quote. Can't tell you color, make or model of car. Can't tell you time of day it happened. Couldn't pick the guy out of a line-up of one. But I can show you the spot on the sidewalk where I was walking. I can remember exact quotes I hear spoken for some time if I am paying attention. This has been shown, in court, when transcripts were read back in which I represented a party and quoted a witness without notes, only to be challenged, and proven correct, when the sworn transcript was read. Here's one: "I did not take the letter from the mailbox. I opened the letter after ------ [unnamed to protect privacy] got the letter and I opened it and read it in the car." It was a trivial point over ten years ago, but I remember it for some stupid reason and this has been shown twice in hearing with transcripts. It's stupid, but idiotic trivia sometimes sticks in my head. I can show you the exact seats I was sitting in when I saw Star Wars and Rocky, not just the theater number or side of aisle. It's more frustrating than anything because it ends up being a diversion from the real issue -- as has happened here. However the quote is accurate. I know it like a Bible-verse. So the effort to be accurate was there.
Convenient but it doesn't pass the common sense test. I gave you a link where PC had nearly 4 minutes to make that comment. He was even prodded by the ESPN anchor.....asked to lobby for his team........and he NEVER said that USC was the best team in the country right now. That is not idiotic trivia. It is public record. You have an understandable bias. In this case and until you can PROVE otherwise, you heard what you wanted to hear and not what was said. If you can provide a link I will apologize and proclaim you the new Kreskin. :yelwink2:
