January 01, 2007

USC's John David Rips Booty in 93rd Rose Bowl: And in the process, dispels a popular notion that Michigan may have been the #1 team in the land.

posted by mjkredliner to football at 08:22 PM - 48 comments

A great season for both teams though, and a well played game.

posted by mjkredliner at 08:23 PM on January 01, 2007

Yeah, Booty put up some grand numbers on Michigan today. Though, I have to say that it looked like UofM got their crap together early in the fourth. It was exciting when they converted the 2 point PAT, but USC killed any hopes just a mere two minutes later. I guess the question now is: are Lloyd Carr's days numbered in A-squared?

posted by NoMich at 08:29 PM on January 01, 2007

Who changed the headline (on my page it said "USC's John David Rips Booty!")? I was going to give major kudos (it made me laugh.)

posted by forrestv at 08:31 PM on January 01, 2007

I guess the question now is: are Lloyd Carr's days numbered in A-squared? I don't think so, it was a great season despite the bowl loss.

posted by tron7 at 08:35 PM on January 01, 2007

great season??? did you see the same team i saw.. are you nuts... Lloyd needs to go.. he cant win the big games... what is that 4 in a row on bowl games.. pretty pathetic!

posted by devildog37 at 08:52 PM on January 01, 2007

The Detroit Free Press's Michael Rosenberg is not amused.

posted by NoMich at 08:55 PM on January 01, 2007

When is the last time Michigan won a championship? Why should Lloyd Carr be fired or rumoured to be fired every year he doesn't win one? He put a great team out every week. He recruited those great players and put them in a hunt for the title until today. Played OSU to the final minutes and played in the Rose Bowl. What is the disgrace in that? Maybe I am missing something. I am a USC fan and do not hear people calling for Pete Carroll's head because they lost to UCLA and missed a shot at another Championship. True Fans are happy for the Rose Bowl or a chance to win one. You can't be number one every year. Good luck to OSU, they have clearly been number one all year.

posted by urall cloolis at 08:58 PM on January 01, 2007

i am not saying fire him because he isnt number one.. all i am saying is that he cannot win in big games... the same reason ohio state got rid of cooper.

posted by devildog37 at 09:00 PM on January 01, 2007

As for Michael Rosenberg's article. When is the last time he called a play in a competitive sport? When has he ever played a competitive sport at a high level? I believe answer would be NEVER! Easy to judge from the sidelines.

posted by urall cloolis at 09:02 PM on January 01, 2007

forrestv, the title came easily, as my friends low down backsliding poker buddy's and I have tired of playing Texas Hold'em and have been playing an exciting a truly fucked up game called Oklahoma Rip Booty. I don't recommend it.

posted by mjkredliner at 09:30 PM on January 01, 2007

USC made the adjustments at halftime and Michigan did not. For the SpoFites who've belittled Pete Carroll, please take notice.

posted by billsaysthis at 09:37 PM on January 01, 2007

I must say that the Rose Bowl showed just how good USC is. As for Michigan, do they just choke on the big games? I was expecting more of them. Also as for Carr, I would think his days are numbered. He hasn't won a bowl game in a while and has only beaten Tressel's Buckeyes once in 5 years. Look what happened to Minnesota's coach, he was fired after losing badly to Texas Tech and it was his only season below .500.

posted by lil'red at 09:48 PM on January 01, 2007

what i dont understand is that the sports announcers say that michigan will be a preaseason top 5. how could that be they are just horrible. who cares who stays.. it wont make them any better.

posted by devildog37 at 09:50 PM on January 01, 2007

and what about their great defense? i guess they aren't so great when they face quality opponents.. should i dare say.... OVERRATED

posted by devildog37 at 09:53 PM on January 01, 2007

Oh come on. Stop embarassing the rest of us Gator fans. I'm glad to see them lose and silence the people whining about the Gators getting the nod, but to call them horrible is simply idiotic. Impressive game by USC.

posted by Bernreuther at 10:04 PM on January 01, 2007

i call it how i see it

posted by devildog37 at 10:10 PM on January 01, 2007

and by the way bernreuther.. i had to stand by and listen to all these michigan fans talk about how florida would be no match for their precious wolverines, i now see it as my turn to rub it in their face and remind them that michigan wasnt as good as they all saw them as.. the right teams will be facing each other for the national title.

posted by devildog37 at 10:18 PM on January 01, 2007

how could that be they are just horrible. i call it how i see it Then I suggest you get some corrective lenses because 11-2 is never, EVER, going to be considered "horrible" by people who have the ability to see past their favourite team's jersey. You don't like a team? Fine, just say you don't like them. Just don't insult those around you (and your fellow fans) by making outrageous statements about Michigan being "horrible".

posted by grum@work at 10:23 PM on January 01, 2007

Thanks Grum. Michigan screwed up by the numbers today, and against OSU (and several other times this year), but somehow this "horrible" team managed to get past the other 11 teams they played (which included the Wisconsin squad that handled Arkansas today and an overlooked Penn State team that smacked Tennessee around pretty good as well). They are far from horrible. I do have to question the coaching staff though. I like Lloyd Carr, but he got schooled today. Both teams made adjustments for the second half...and we know how that turned out. If it was an exception, I'd shrug it off, but it seems to happen in most big games. I think Carr's a good recruiter, a good strategist, and a decent motivator, but he doesn't adapt well on the fly. I never thought I'd say it , but discipline seems to be a problem, too. You'd think that after shoddy tackling cost them so much in Columbus that the coaching staff would have drummed proper technique into those kids until their heads exploded. Apparently not. Carr certainly doesn't have a dismal record as a coach, but I'm starting to think that his success has a lot more to do with the quality of the athletes than it does with his coaching skills. Maybe it is time for him to go.

posted by ctal1999 at 10:52 PM on January 01, 2007

USC played a great game. USC may in fact be the best team when they really come to play. Instead of killing their own momentum by trying to take the air out of the ball, like most teams would, USC kept on the attack, and put UM away. Rule #1 in any sport: keep doing what got you the lead, instead of going into a shell and running the clock when there's still plenty of time remaining. Too many teams blow big leads this way (paging Minnesota ...). But Michigan has NEVER played up to their potential against USC in a Rose Bowl. Too close to home for USC: not an even playing field, by any stretch. The crowd noise when Henne was calling the signals shouted the story. I personally don't think there should be ANY bowl games too close to home for one team or the other, if it can be avoided. Still, I think USC would beat UM this year 9 out of 10 times on a neutral field: too quick, too imaginative, poor matchup for slow, dull, and predictable Michigan. How many times did UM run into the center for no gain on 2nd and long? AWFUL strategy. As for UM vs. Florida, it could be a totally different matchup. The only way to tell would be for the teams to play.

posted by ballhawk at 10:53 PM on January 01, 2007

Look what happened to Minnesota's coach, he was fired after losing badly to Texas Tech and it was his only season below .500. Oh my, I hadn't heard. Well it wasn't his only sub .500 season but Minnesota was awful before he got there, I'm a little surprised they fired him.

posted by tron7 at 10:55 PM on January 01, 2007

hey.. all you retarded michigan fans said how horrible florida was to get the shot at something you couldnt do.. glad to see you are still whining!!!!

posted by devildog37 at 11:02 PM on January 01, 2007

Ok dude, I think you've crapped on this thread enough now.

posted by tron7 at 11:09 PM on January 01, 2007

ok.. my last post... i have a question for all you wolverine fans out there... do you still think that you're michigan team deserved to play for the title over florida after watching them get handled pretty easy by usc? can you guys admit that you were wrong? and that the two top teams are playing for the title?

posted by devildog37 at 11:13 PM on January 01, 2007

Carr certainly doesn't have a dismal record as a coach, but I'm starting to think that his success has a lot more to do with the quality of the athletes than it does with his coaching skills. Anybody thinkin what i'm thinkin? Two words: Mack Brown.

posted by brainofdtrain at 11:51 PM on January 01, 2007

Y'know, it's perhaps digging for excuses, but Michigan's last game was at Ohio State on November 18th. USC's last game was the loss to UCLA on December 2nd. I'm not saying that Michigan was rusty, but that's a long time without a game, and it makes me wonder whether OSU may show similar rust against a Florida side that deserves to be shellacked. An argument for a proper playoff? Oh yes. Still, USC played by far the better game, and Michigan's weaknesses were the same ones that undid them against OSU. In the meantime, Boise State's playbook is made of gold.

posted by etagloh at 12:01 AM on January 02, 2007

Congratulations to USC. They were obviously the more prepared team on the field, and they definately had the crowd behind them. Jarrett stuck the dagger into our hearts when he handed Barringer the ball after that spectacular catch in the 4th quarter. USC made the adjustments, Michigan didn't. They took the Hart of our offense away, and made us one dimensional. I'm crushed, and my pride is bruised right now. Congrats, USC.

posted by wingnut4life at 12:29 AM on January 02, 2007

the right teams will be facing each other for the national title. No they will not! An argument for a proper playoff? There were two perfectly good examples tonight for a playoff. USC and Boise State. I am not too sure BSU would last too long in a major playoff system, but proved they deserve a shot. Had USC not lost that UCLA game, I believe it would be OSU vs. USC on the 8th. I sure am glad as a Buc's fan we are playing Florida, and not USC. USC is the team who got screwed the most by not having a playoff system in division 1, imo.

posted by jojomfd1 at 12:53 AM on January 02, 2007

Two words: Mack Brown Two words: Fat chance. Two more: Wild guess.

posted by mjkredliner at 01:26 AM on January 02, 2007

Oh, I see, I totally misunderstood you, brain. You were implying that Mack's "success has a lot more to do with the quality of the athletes than it does with his coaching skills." pokes head outside, listens for signs of natives being restless. Nope, not many grumblings on this side of the Red River...

posted by mjkredliner at 01:38 AM on January 02, 2007

One question concerning Michigan and Ohio State. What quality out of conference opponents did each team play? I know that they one played Notre Dame and I think both played Penn State, but the gold domers and the Lions appeared suspect during the season. It the bowls prior to Wisconsin beating Arkansas, the Big Ten was something like 0-4 while the SEC was something like 3-1.

posted by Cave_Man at 02:52 AM on January 02, 2007

Watching the local news last night I saw Michigan fan say, "They haven't played in fifty days." Oh, brother. Next week will be 57 days for Ohio State. With Jim Tressel as coach, I don't think it will hurt them too badly. Credit to Brent Musburger for his comment about Dwayne Jarret's behavior. The NFL does not need another Terrell Owens, even if ESPN does.

posted by Newbie Walker at 04:47 AM on January 02, 2007

Only one comment on this one. Let's play the next Rose Bowl at the field of the Big Ten champion, be it any of the teams. Home field advantage is more is more of an advantage in college than the pros.

posted by coach at 05:39 AM on January 02, 2007

Cave_man before you start going on about the superiority of the SEC I would just like to point out that the Big Ten was 2-0 in its head-to-head matchups this bowl season against the SEC.

posted by Ying Yang Mafia at 05:59 AM on January 02, 2007

Let's play the next Rose Bowl at the field of the Big Ten champion Oh Good Lord, man, they've only been playing the game at the Rose Bowl since 1923, and you're going to start bitching now? Grow up. i had to stand by and listen to all these michigan fans talk about how florida would be no match for their precious wolverines, i now see it as my turn to rub it in their face and remind them that michigan wasnt as good as they all saw them as... Well, way to not sink to their level by acting like an ass or anything. Thanks for maintaining your composure, otherwise, you might have embarrassed the rest of us Florida fans. U of M fans, you had a great season, congratulations, but it should be clear to everybody out there, maize-and-blue glasses or not, that the Wolverines did not deserve another shot at Ohio State. I have no idea how the UF - OSU game will go, but I'm glad we're getting to see a matchup that hasn't already been played this year.

posted by The_Black_Hand at 06:32 AM on January 02, 2007

I do think the layoff these teams have between their last competitive game and the bowl games, while unavoidable, are tough to deal with. I'll always give a guy like Pete Carrol the nod when he's given that long a time to prepare for an opponent. That being said, USC losing to UCLA, then turning around and taking care of Michigan, shows anything can happen at that level in college football. While I think it may be a bit unfair to judge Lloyd Carr on his last two games, his recent history against Ohio State, and losing this Rose Bowl in such a decisive manner, won't sit well at Michigan. The Wolverines' year will always be judged, overall, on the result against the Buckeyes. I guarantee nobody in Ann Arbor is sitting back fondly recalling their other wins throughout the season, but rather the two straight losses to end the season that bring all the other wins into question. Fair? Probably not, but that's the way it goes in big-time football.

posted by dyams at 08:49 AM on January 02, 2007

All the Big Ten teams that lost bowl games (except arguably Purdue) and winner Wisconsin were playing teams that finished higher in their respective conferences than they did -- sometimes MUCH higher, as in the case of the very close Texas/Iowa game. And the main reason Purdue finished as high as they did in the Big Ten was the fact that they played neither Michigan nor Ohio State. I don't think the bowl results prove the Big 10 was stronger than the SEC this year, but they certainly suggest the SEC was not the far superior conference many thought. There does appear to be a ratings bias favoring certain programs, as demonstrated last year when Wisconsin tore apart Auburn and still ended up ranked lower afterward. But the Pac 10 certainly appears better than many thought, just as the Big 12 did last year. And the WAC and Big East are looking WAY better than most people expected going into the bowls this year. As for the "home field advantage," a computer analysis by the fellow who does the very good "Bow Down to Entropy" computer ratings does show a definite home advantage for USC in Pasadena, based on expected performance vs. Rose Bowl results. He was also also one of the few who favored USC over Michigan going into this year's game. And it's obvious to anyone who's been paying attention that Big Ten teams have recently done much better down there against non-California teams. But again, I don't think the home advantage can account for THIS year's lopsided Rose Bowl result. Nor do I think layoff was an advantage for either team. Decades ago the Big Ten was considered so superior to the then-Pac 8 they didn't let the Big Ten Conference winner go to the Rose Bowl 2 years in a row until it became obvious that was not the case. They may have intended a Pac 8 home field advantage to that end, too. Of course that has all changed.

posted by ballhawk at 09:11 AM on January 02, 2007

ok.. my last post... i have a question for all you wolverine fans out there... do you still think that you're michigan team deserved to play for the title over florida after watching them get handled pretty easy by usc? can you guys admit that you were wrong? and that the two top teams are playing for the title? I have a question for you: if, by chance, OSU drubs Florida by more than say, 20 points, is there any chance you'll poke your head out of your cave to say anything? Or will you disappear, never to be heard from again?

posted by grum@work at 12:17 PM on January 02, 2007

USC beat Michigan. USC lost to Oregon State who lost 42-14 to Boise St. So if Ohio State loses why shouldn't Boise St be the national champs? I don't believe anyone can truly make an argument that FL had a stronger schedule then Boise. Up till FL plays Ohio State their schedule is mostly conference games. With the SEC losing the majority of their bowl games can anyone truly say that conference is truly that much better than any others? I think it makes for a good argument. When LSU won their BCS National Champs USC still claims they are that years National Champs so just an argument.. if OSU wins then this will all be said for nothing.

posted by warstda at 02:36 PM on January 02, 2007

USC beat Michigan. USC lost to Oregon State who lost 42-14 to Boise St. So if Ohio State loses why shouldn't Boise St be the national champs? Because, UCLA beat USC. UCLA lost to Florida State. Florida beat Florida State.

posted by tselson at 03:20 PM on January 02, 2007

I don't believe anyone can truly make an argument that FL had a stronger schedule then Boise. Up till FL plays Ohio State their schedule is mostly conference games. Yes I think people can make that arguement. From top to bottom, the SEC is a better conference than the WAC. Teams like San Jose State and Idaho who were mid-tier teams in the WAC don't have the same talent as teams like Georgia, Alabama, or Tennessee. With the SEC losing the majority of their bowl games can anyone truly say that conference is truly that much better than any others? 3-3 in bowl games ia hardly the majority. And while the SEC is not vastly superior to the other BCS conferences, it is certainly a better conference than the WAC.

posted by Ying Yang Mafia at 03:30 PM on January 02, 2007

I don't believe anyone can truly make an argument that FL had a stronger schedule then Boise. Frankly, I can't believe anyone can make the argument that it wasn't. Fact check, the SEC is 4-3 in the bowl games as of the time of this post, with the three losses coming by a total of 16 points against far better opposition than the WAC has faced this bowl season. The best meter I can quickly come up with is #2 in the WAC, Hawaii, lost to #4 in the SEC-West, Alabama (25-17) early in the season. With all due respect, you're allowing the amazing game BSU had affect your judgment. That said, I suppose there is some basis for awarding them a title of co-champions, but certainly not by the logic employed by that post. Though personally, while I have defended Boise State's chances against top-tier programs, I think declaring them split champions - or in warstda's case, sole champions - is really just pushing things a little bit. A great win indeed, but there is still enough skepticism that Boise State can't hang with the premier teams (top-3) to disallow a wide-acceptance of them as co-champs.

posted by PublicUrinal at 03:32 PM on January 02, 2007

Ying Ynag Mafia wrote: Cave_man before you start going on about the superiority of the SEC I would just like to point out that the Big Ten was 2-0 in its head-to-head matchups this bowl season against the SEC. posted by Ying Yang Mafia at 5:59 AM CST on January 2 The Cave Dude retorted: The question was not abour superiority. Where did I make that claim? I asked for the records of non-conference opponents of Michigan and Ohio State. Seemed like a straight forward query at the time. I favor a tournament to decide the national college football champion. A football tournament will be an instant fan draw and a massive money maker for colleges. I will let the play on the field on January 8 decide the national champion. In my mind, the title should go to one of two teams at this point, either Ohio State or Florida, their play should decide it, not armchair analysis of the sort that is in rich supply in many posts on this site. But it is fun to debate you, even when your logic is inherently flawed.

posted by Cave_Man at 04:43 PM on January 02, 2007

the Big Ten was something like 0-4 while the SEC was something like 3-1. Senor Cave Man, the comment above was what I was replying to. I assumed you were making the point that the SEC had done much better than the Big Ten, to which I pointed out that the Big Ten was superior in head to head matchups.

posted by Ying Yang Mafia at 05:00 PM on January 02, 2007

Since everyone bashes me when I get off subject I find it my duty to respond in like... This thread is about USC and JD Booty beating Michigan (quite handily). It is not the thread for Fla, the SEC, Big Ten v. SEC superiority, Boise State, OSU, etc... There are and will be many more threads that will contain that subject matter.

posted by urall cloolis at 05:21 PM on January 02, 2007

If every thread stayed exactly on the topic that is mentioned in the link then SportsFilter would miss some very good discussions. Also, comments that pertain to college football are much closer to the subject than a comment bashing people for their comments.

posted by Ying Yang Mafia at 05:56 PM on January 02, 2007

Go Buckeyes

posted by luther70 at 08:34 PM on January 02, 2007

Thanks Ying Yang for following the college football topic, nothing personal there at all.

posted by urall cloolis at 10:36 PM on January 02, 2007

You're not logged in. Please log in or register.