Sanchez played quite well, even with the 2 picks. The major problem seemed to be play-calling. Oregon has a porous defense against both run and pass - why didnt we exploit that throughout the game? Is our offense so much worse than what their defense on aveage has played against?

Hey JD you big Girly Man,
I have an extra purse or two I am not using do you want me to bring you one for the UCLA game? You have to big the biggest wussy in town! Get a clue.

What bothered me was the way Booty stood on the sideline, seemingly disinterested. When Sanchez talked with Sark with the USC defense on the field, you could see on TV that Booty was listening in, but not participating or helping. If you want to win, John, why not help out your fellow teammates and at least pump them up - why stand their like a lamp post? That was a pathetic showing by the supposed "leader" of the offense. Next year will be different.

I just finished reading all of the SC sports pages/blogs, national press, etc., and am pissed that the "press" or casual fan don't get it. But, they don't live deep enough in the game to get it. Mark played well, and probably saved us -80 yards in sacks. His two TD drives/passes were beautiful. The press, and EVEN PC, are saying cavalierly that the ONLY reason we lost was TOs. Well, isn't that easy and barely scratching the surface analysis?!? The Havili fumble was CAUSED be UO because they hit Stan right after hand-off 3 yards DEEP in our backfield. The 2nd Sanchez pick was CAUSED by UO because their safety was playing a phantom shadow on Fred, lined up on the other side of the field, and made a great play to run THROUGH Fred to make a pick with 20 seconds left and Sanchez knowing that he had only 1 or 2 plays to make something happen. UO CAUSED 2 of 3 TOS, and took advantage of them. USC could NOT convert TOs. And, PC refusing to kick FGs on 4th down may have cost us a chance to tie the game at the end.

This is NOT a Sanchez or Booty issue.... I think Mark played admirably and was one of the only reasons we had a shot at the end.

HARDLY any stories are hitting the real reasons for the loss. 3.3 Yards per Rush avg and a predictable, familiar, overly conservative offense! Pete, kick a fkn FG, and Sark, evolve the offense with something more creative, aggressive, and consistent. We could NOT run consistently on UO, and that is the PRIMARY reason for the loss, along with TOs, penalties, and a weak offensive scheme in general.

Keep your head up, Mark, great game Defense. And....awesome game for the Ducks. They played great and are a legit national championship contender. Their Defense played the game of their lifetimes. Alas! Here's to 2008 with Stafon, McKnight, Vidal, and Sanchez/Mustain, but ONLY if we IMPROVE our offensive scheme!

I thought the playcalling was atrocious at critical points. The 4th down play with McKnight in the first quarter. The 2nd and 1 call for a pass when USC was driving for the tieing TD. It looked like the Trojans could have pounded the ball with runs and short passes.

I realize that Sark tries to outguess the Defense, but geez.

Also only getting 3 points off the Ducks early turnovers was the kiss of death. A back breaker in the 2nd half was Stewarts 3rd and 15 first down run. Ridiculous!

It is now early Sunday morning, so I bet all the Monday-morning quarterbacks have placed their nasty little tongues back in their faces, and are discontentedly sleeping, but sleeping nonetheless.

I used to think UCLA fans were the biggest crybabies, but these days, based on behavior, I cannot tell a Bruin from a Trojan.

And, no, Scott Wolf, the Carroll Dynasty will go down in history as 2001-2010, unless the SC "fans" turn Carroll off so much that he bolts before then. Carroll turned the team around in 2001, won a couple of national championships in the middle of the decade, and I predict will win one more by 2010. Look it up, Texas was the team of the 60s, Alabama and SC of the 70s, Miami of the 80s, and Nebraska of the 90s. All won 3 national titles during "their" decade. SC is the frontrunner to be the team of the '00s, and they have 3-more years to continue to show their mettle. The dynasty is not over, there are some more chapters to be written.

Now, as for this year's team, I think we can safely say that it will not be playing in the Rose Bowl or a BCS game. But it is still a pretty good, although not great, team. Expectations in 2007 were freakish-- the "star" running backs and receivers were either brand new or had played sparingly, so it figured to be a defensive-oriented ballclub with a struggling offense, and that is exactly how it has unfolded.

And as for the playcalling, I trust the coaches and not the fans. I don't have a problem with it. Oregon displayed a more stout defense than what had been expected, according to Carroll, and it made the going difficult. And, besides, the bottom line is that it comes down to the players, not the plays. And Oregon was a little bit better, which was how the oddsmakers handicapped the game, so the loss should not be unexpected. Or looked at from another perspective, if Oregon and SC were to play 10 times, what would be the outcome?-- 8 to 2 or 7 to 3 Oregon, right? I thought our boys put up a pretty good fight!

Now, I wonder what the blog writers down in ol' Florida are whining about today?-- their national champs got beat for the third time...or in Penn State, or South Florida, or Cal, or across town at Westwood High (actually I know what the Bruins are saying, having just reviewed their blog): Why couldn't that kid have hung on to the ball; the stupid interception; the assinine playcalling etc etc.

Sound familiar? Strip a college football fan of his favorite college t-shirt and hat, and they all look alike. Worse, they all sound alike.

Holy Crap! Now Booty is being "ragged on" for not telling Sark and Sanchez what to do. A couple weeks ago, he was "criticized" for, allegedly smiling. Ask Sanchez if he (Booty) has been helpful to him. Sarkisian belongs in the coaches box, like his mentor, Norm Chow was.

ex sports wrtr you are right on the money dude,i second everything you said, and to all the casual fans you need to shut yo mouth and learn the game bitches.

oops not ex, i meant trojan man

Thank you, Captain Obvious. (aka JDB)

I also concur with trojanman.

I am proud of the team - they kept fighting even when down 2 TDs. They didn't give up. They showed a lot of heart. I'll take this struggling but exciting and hungry team any day. I love my Trojans! Fight on!

SANCHEZ WAS NOT THE PROBLEM!
What more could he have done? If it was Booty with his immobility against OUs defense he would have been sacked 6 times and intercepted 3-4 times.
PLAYCALLING! PLAYCALLING! PLAYCALLING! PLAYCALLING! PLAYCALLING!
Never in this game did SC use its strength to its advantage with the proper personnel and playcalling.
All week I thought to myself, all SC has to do is run the damn rock down Oregon's throat with Stafon getting majority of reps and the game is in the bag.
Oregon would not be able to stop it with a 85-90% healthy O-Line.
What did Sark do? He relied heavily on his inexperienced QB to win the game.
41 pass plays to just 33 running.
Carroll's assistant coaches don't have clue!
PLAYCALLING and another game with too many costly penalties! Reminds me of the dreadful Hackett days.
Undisciplined team and horrible PLAYCALLING. These aren't player mistakes.
THESE ARE COACHING MISTAKES!!!!! Things need to shake up and change.
And Carroll acts like nothing is happening. His typical postgame response is "were not going to change a thing. We are going to keep doing the things we know how to do and focus on the next game."
Good coach! Focusing on the next game is good cause, duh, its next BUT YOU MIGHT WANT TO SHAKE THINGS UP A BIT OR TRY SOMETHING DIFFERENT TO GET THAT MENTAL TOUGHNESS AND SWAGGER BACK INTO THIS PROGRAM!