A Concern For Staying No. 1

Does it matter that if you analyze USC’s offense, there are really only three spots (tailback, left tackle, tight end) where there is actual competiton? The standard belief is players play better when they are pushed.
I think it is fair to say Matt Barkley, Robert Woods and Marqise Lee are the type of competitors that can thrive at the college level whether or not they have competition.
However, the real issue might be USC should worry if it suffers injuries on offense. Who replaces the offensive linemen, especially on the interior? If the fullback gets hurt, then what? How big a dropoff would there be if Woods or Lee gets hurt?
Those are the real questions when wondering if USC can go through a season ranked No. 1.

Share this post:Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on Google+Share on RedditShare on TumblrBuffer this pageEmail this to someonePrint this page
  • ianSC

    Well sure, but those kind of concerns are there for basically every team. Oregon has DAT and Barner, but after that it’s a bunch of freshman and unproven players. We’re putting LSU at #1 with a new QB, a star returning WR who would be fifth string at USC and without their ridiculous TEH HONEH BADGER, why are those not larger issues than if our fullback goes down or if we have to replace Woods or Lee with receivers like Farmer, Flournoy and Agholor who would start at every single SEC university?

  • Trojanfan

    Give it a rest Wolfman, every other team is in a similar situation….I bet our #2’s are a lot better than most other teams

  • Trojan Conquest

    WAFJ…name me a team that if their best players went down they wouldn’t have a problem? What would happen to GB if Rogers went down?

  • Swoll Francis da numba one ACE

    read between teh lines — scott is saying USC better start bribing the refs to call a tight game aginst opposing D. “You no touch cover boy!” Ha HAH!!!

  • usc50ucla0

    Hey Rerun…

    I’m still laughing at your “it a sad PLATE of affairs” comment.

    Roj’s sister Dee swooped your chicken nuggets gotcha thinkin crazy?

    btw Wolfie, competition isn’t solely within a position. O v. D Need I say more?


  • How does Scott Wolf keep his job?

    Wolf – you’re a complete moron. Do you even think before you write this crap?

  • firetedtolner

    I have taken all that I can with this sh*tty blog. I am officially jumping ship. After this, I will no longer visit this blog for late and inaccurate “information”. Scott, you will no longer have firetedtolner to torture with your arrogant, petty, and often boosted or plagerized postings. On to uscripsit and usc freedom blog (where Scott gets his information anyway).

  • Globe

    Yes Wolf, I hate the fact that we have All Americans returning at several positions. I wish we only had inexperienced guys battling for playing time.

    Who else could find a negative in having outstanding players retuning?

  • NJ Trojan

    I realy don’t understand why the Daily News pays this guy to write for them. The interior of the OT positions are thinner than the interior. Behind Walker at LT you have a true FR. Behind Graf at RT you have a WO. Behind the two OGs you have two competent SRs in Markowitz & Galten. Behind Holmes you have USC’s next great C in Hobbi. If Vainuku gets hurt then either Pinner will step up if he’s ready and the coaches want to burn his RS or the coaches will employ a combination of Burks and the big WO. Heck they used TEs & WOs last year while RSing Vainuku. Woods was hurt last year and the kid you wanted to play S stepped up & flashed all-American potential. Offensive depth is not the issue. Defensive depth & performance is the issue.

  • NJ Trojan

    Duh, second sentence above should read, “The OT positions are thinner than the interior of the OL.”

  • Ben Factor

    My impression is that the falloff behind the starter is severe at quite a few positions.

    I cannot say whether it’s less severe at other top football schools, such as Alabama or LSU, or even whether it was less severe at Carroll’s USC.

    I can say that this team has fewer players than any from the Carroll era, and fewer combined juniors/seniors. Why would that not present greater risks to winning every game?

    IMHO, Scott may not have all the details correct, but his instinct is correct.

  • sureshot

    But any great or even very good team is going to have a greater drop off from their ones to their twos than mediocre/poor teams. You don’t think the Packers have a greater drop off from their ones to the their twos than the Cleveland Browns or Jacksonville Jaguars? And it’s not necessarily that their twos are worse than the Browns or Jags twos it’s just that their ones are that much better.

    It’s a good thing that USC’s ones are so good. Of course there is a massive drop off. I’d be more worried if the ones were marginally better than the twos.

    Great players = bigger drop off from ones to twos. It really is that simple.