Ryan,
Seriously I hope that half of your reply was meant as fun jestering. Some of the comments are quite comical.
First and foremost, as a lifelong SC fan I did not buy into the hype. The hype perpetuated caused many regular CFB football fans to hate the USC program, and most for really no reason other than the ridiculous hype.
As for the Arky game, my point was not about the fact that LSU and USC both played them and they had different results, but to point out that they actually are a decent OOC from the supposed best conference in america. You say that "The team LSU faced was not the same team USC faced! Also it was a day game and LSU does not traditionally play well in day games. Well I say they if they are that improved to now being a decent opponent for LSU by year end, and knowing how young that Arky team was, that maybe just maybe, they may be better next year. The argument can't only work in your favor.
I absolutely despise ND, because my dad went to USMA and my family has strong SC ties, but the comment that they were better than Tenn is unbelieveable. Should I be sitting here saying that USC was better than Texas because USC had ton of defensive injuries. No I accept that on Jan 4, Texas was a better team and beat USC, and even worse, in our backyard. SC fans acknowlege that Texas was the better team. Discussion closed about that. ND absolutely spanked Tenn, and just because Tenn was preseason #3 doesn't mean that stay there. And I heard about your domino theory and implosion.
Furthermore, I live in SEC country and and see the passion and also was affected by Katrina. If you were to search the other threads I am quite complimentary of the SEC and especially LSU. I think that LSU program was exemplary and when I attended the Peach Bowl I cheered heavily for LSU. The team was somewhat inspirational in the manner they handled themselves.
Also, you will not find one Pac 10 fan who will tell you that we really believe that our conference is better than the SEC. We are not stupid. What we do though is schedule decent OOC games against teams that are either in BCS conferences or at least 1-A competition. In the last year, the Pac 10 frowned heavily on the OOC that included a few OOC 1AA teams. We cannot control the teams that we play in conference, but SC makes an honest attempt to schedule to BCS OOC, as does the entire PAC.
The SEC cannot say the same thing. In another thread I have commended the SEC for upgrading their scheduling and working towards eliminating the 1AA opponent. I also understand that much of this OOC scheduling is due to money and the internal SEC perception that the conference is so difficult to navigate.
Maybe we can do a compare and contrast of the 2006 OOC and let the board decide who schedule tougher competition OOC.
"USC plays 2 quality opponents per year, ND and their bowl opponent. " Now this is the best of all. In your logic here than that means that USC is then 7-1 in the last 4 years, with the lone loss coming by 3 pts to the National Champions. There average margin of vistory in those 7 wins is 23 pts per game. Also, SC did not consider ND to be a great OOCfrom 2002-2004. We do now though. Lets also consider who they played OOC:
2002-Auburn, Colorado, Kansas St, ND, Iowa
2003-AU, BYU, Hawaii, ND, Mich
2004-V Tech, CSU, BYU, ND, Oklahoma
2005-Hawaii, Arky, ND, Fresno, Texas
So I ask you who are they supposed to play?
