USC In Athlon Top 5

Posted on by

Athlon’s college football magazine ranks USC fifth. The interesting part is Washington is ranked No. 4. The top five: 1. Alabama; 2. Ohio State; 3. Florida State; 4. Washington; 5. USC.

Share this post:Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on Google+Share on RedditShare on TumblrBuffer this pageEmail this to someonePrint this page
  • 04Trojan

    As a continuation of my confusion from last season: I still just don’t get the Washington hype.

  • Ignore_the_trolls

    Has Athlon ever been right? — I mean other than picking the same front runner that everybody else picks?

  • Pasadena Trojan

    Don’t worry, this is the beginning. What matters is the end. SC wants to be No. 1, whereas, the gutless ruins want to finish no better than 500. That would be a 2 game better finish than last year.

    • Ed Garrett

      UCLA is always on usc’s mind isn’t it?. I guess it makes sense tho if you are striving for perfection and grateness.

      • Ignore_the_trolls

        Then why are you hanging out on an SC board?

  • RoseBowlBound

    UW’s schedule is cake. Could easily see them undefeated when we play them in Championship

    • Alvarado

      Too true – the only tough road game they have is 10th November @ Stanford – they don’t play anyone else outside Husky Stadium that is in any way a threat ‘maybe’ CO but Rutgers, OR St. and AZ St.?

      • Laker Rod

        Back in 1990, UW was ranked No 2 in the nation and had an 8-1 record and already had beaten USC 31-0.

        UCLA came into Husky Stadium with a 4-5 record and ended up winning 25-22.

        It’s hard to count anybody out and no game is really a given within the Pac-12 which is why it’s so difficult for them to produce a national champion. It is especially tough for any undefeated Pac team. The pressure mounts.

        In 1988, a 4-3 Washington State team came into the Rose Bowl and beat No 1 ranked UCLA 34-30.

        We all know what happened in 2006 also with USC vs UCLA.

        Even in 1991 when Washington went undefeated they were lucky they didn’t have to face UCLA that year. You go back through the years for UW and you will often see that in any given year it was rare for UW to beat both USC and UCLA.

        I’m hoping it’s USC vs UW in the Pac-12 championship game and I see USC winning it. USC needs to solidify their interior defense though. I’m worried about true frosh DT’s potentially starting.

        • Alvarado

          Rod appreciate your post but fraknly I don’t think the Pac-12 is that tough – it certainly seems to lay eggs every time it has a national telecast in a regular OOC against other opponents although it had a decent showing this past year in bowl action. Aside from USC historically I don’t see any team in the conference that consistently is a threat when they play outside the conference. Admittedly it is tough to win out but the same can be said for any conference. Big 10, SEC, ACC even the Big 12.

          I hope WA is waiting at the end of the season and I also hope they are undefeated because then the winner will have that much more ‘mojo’ going into the next playoff game.

          OK is really pushing for either expansion of the Big 12 or leaving it and the rumor mill is rife with a proposed ‘super conference’ of major programs only because of what the Big 12 has endured since both CO and NE split i.e. TCU and WV ain’t CO or NE.

          • Pudly76

            The biggest hold up will always be Texas and their tv deal. What conference would take that deal separately within their own deal? Just can’t see Texas giving up that kind of money.

          • Alvarado

            Pudly frankly TX is most overrated team in the any discussion of a ‘legacy team’. Three ‘nc’s – 1963, 1969 and 2005. They act like they’re ‘The Princess’ that they have this huge national following – outside of metro Austin and a few pockets statewide they’re nothing. TX had better realize whatever deal they have isn’t credible long term esp. with the foolish deals ESPN made with ABC telecasting bowl games, NBC w. ‘The Princess’ or LAD with Time-Warner/Spectrum.

            You’re right no one in a position of strength is going to have anything to do w. TX until TX changes it’s current deal.

            Ducks won in OT! Tied the series 2 – 2 w. NSH. game 5 from ANA Saturday evening

          • Laker Rod

            I didn’t necessarily say that Pac-12 is “tough” but what happens in the Pac-12 is parity. There really are no “gimme” games like the SEC has.

            In the Pac-12 South alone since the start of the Pac-12 look at who has won the South Division:

            2011 – USC but UCLA went
            2012 – UCLA
            2013 – ASU
            2014 – Arizona
            2015 – USC
            2016 – Colorado

            Even the Pac-12 North has experienced 3 difference winners in Oregon, Stanford, and UW now. Washington State ended up 7-2 themselves where in the past they were usually at the bottom. Colorado was at the bottom of the South at one point too.

            In addition, USC wasn’t even in the conference championship game but yet both teams in it.

            UCLA didn’t win in 2013 or 2014 and finished 2nd but beat both ASU and Arizona in those respective years.

            A team often loses to a team unexpectedly. Just like how a 6-5 Stanford slaughtered 9-2 UCLA 31-10 in 2014 to knock UCLA out of the conference championship game.

            Arizona was 1st in 2014 and ended up last in 2016 with a 1-8 conference record.

            You don’t see the SEC turning upside very often.

          • Alvarado

            Yeah but let’s be frank – no sanctions and how many times would USC have won the Pac-12 South? A lot more than ‘one-plus-one’ that’s for sure.-sorry Laker Rod but again our conference ‘OOC’ is not impressive although last few years our bowl performance has been decent.

          • Laker Rod

            Let’s face it…sanctions or no sanctions…USC wasn’t going to win anything with Lane Kiffin and Steve Sarkisian as head coaches. Those disruptions in itself caused USC to lose. It was not due to lack of players.

            Kiffin was a terrible head coach. His recruiting style was the equivalent of that of Rick Neuheisel. His methods in securing 5 star recruits was through the enticement of early playing time and giving certain true freshmen players early playing time and those players failed miserably.

            The key difference with Pete Carroll is that he knew which true frosh to play and Carroll did a fantastic job of developing guys who were only 3 star recruits and even some walk ons. PC put guys in the right positions also.

            What you cannot deny is that there is more parity in the Pac-12. Everybody beats up on each other. I’ve proven that to you.

        • Sas

          UW was a giant then.

  • Sas

    For the record my eyes are bad, was sucla in the top 5????

    #Burn

  • Pete

    SW. You should know that these rating services are a made by a bunch of wanna bees that never played sports at a high level. Actually most sports journalists fall into this category. Does that resonate with you?

  • Eastern Ave.

    Yawn…