On you? And the negative vibe that has permetated USC football since 2005 when you went from well-informed beat reporter to all-negative sensationalist journalist number 1.
You're like a poltergeist in the system. We need a cleansing. Where's that funky short lady to come and say, "This house is clean."

well, if JEFF BYERS PLAYED QB, AND THE INDIANS[THATS THEIR NAME TO ME] USED AN 8 MAN FRONT WITH 3 CLOSE UP SPREAD LINEBACKERS, THEN I DUNNO.

Stanford did not ruin the season. SC lost to a better team in Oregon, and thus was not going to play for any championship this year anyway. If Troy wins out, or even if they take 2 out of 3 for a 9-3 year, I won't consider that ruinous, just a tad disappointing.

The O-Line was decimated during the Washington game, and it showed against Stanford. Taking away Booty's run stats (which include sacks), we ran the ball 34 times for 124 yards, or 3.6 ypc. Booty attempted 40 passes (not including the four sacks).

I agree that we should have run the ball in the latter stages of the second half. Even Sark admitted that they should not have thrown three straight times, the last one of which was picked and led to Stanford's game-winning TD drive.

Of course, this would all be moot if we could just make an extra point, or not forego the FG at the end of the first half.

If, if, if ... if a frog had wings, it wouldn't bump its butt.

The Stanford loss left us no margin for error for the rest of the tough schedule. Without it, we are a Top 10 team in the BCS (assuming no further losses, of course).

USC has 4 Bowl Games on the Schedule:

#1 The Avoid El Paso Bowl against Cal in Berkeley this SAT.

#2 The BCS Bowl Play-In Game on Turkey Day vs ASU
in Tempe. Also known as Loser Goes to Sea World Bowl or Shamu Bowl.

#3 The 13-9 Revenge Bowl vs. UCLA at the Coliseum on 12/1.
Lose this game and who cares where USC plays in the postseason.

#4 ???????

Wow, all you guys have some pretty low expectations for a group of players that, grading on blue-chip talent, should get through the Pac-10 and the year undefeated. We lost to Stanford... at home. Just on its face, that is a joke and a utter failure by everyone ivolved in the program. Then, when you examine specific things about the game it becomes even more clear how much of abomination it was. Rankin could never sniff the field here and yet he gained 250 yards against Stanford. If you guys cannot realize how much of a problem that is then either a) you don't actually realize how much more blue-chip talent we have than other teams or b) you don't expect excellence. The truth is that anything short of a national championship this year is a failure. Period.

Did you see how far off the mark that first FG attempt was on Saturday? There's a reason Pete hasn't been attempting them...it's called accuracy.

The offensive line was so very thin the week of the Stanford game, however, everyone knows that run blocking is easier for a young/inexperienced line than is pass pro. When you start running down the depth chart, give your big people an advantage having them get off the ball on almost every play; which means run the ball alot, run quick screens, trap screens, draw traps, and go zone blocking and let the backs do the reading. If SC would have just RUN THE BALL at these teams and kept them on their heels, it would be 8-0 and the QB ratings would be through the roof.
HUGE bi-product of running the ball well: shorter games. More time of the defense to rest between series. They got tired against Oregon and it showed on longer drives when the pace of the Ducks dictated as opposed to the defensive pressure.

Hey Trojan4Life:

The FG that we didn't kick in the Stanford game would have been roughly the same distance as an extra point. (Washington was stuffed on the 2-yd line.) Who knows, maybe Stanford would've blocked that FG anyway. ;-)

I agree that anything outside of 40 yards may be tersting Buehler's accuracy, although he has a strong leg (and is the best damn tackling kicker in college football).

oops...testing Buehler's accuracy. If we can have an opinion poll on here, why not spell check?

Sorry, just gotta make one more comment. It has never been more apparent to me the scrambling difference between Booty and Sanchez until Saturday when Booty triped over HIS OWN FEET backing up. Give me a break! He has no pro potential at all.

I lied...last comment...how awesome would it be to see Notre Dame's only win of the season be at UCLA's expense?!!!

AF will beat them, can Duke play? We all know Stanford can play with anyone, right ;-p

Agree that if we don't make a BCS bowl, we have no one to blame but ourselves for that atrocity against Stanford. There was no excuse for that result, especially with the wake up call that should have been heard the week before against UW. Also, Buehler was 1-2 from 47 yards plus and is 11-13 on the season. He's one of our best offensive weapons, and for a team with a struggling offense, it was a positive sign that PC went to the FG twice in this game, which may be a harbinger of smarter, "take the points" decision-making going forward.

Lawyer John, I'm with you. Like anyone else, I would LOVE to see a 12-0 season and a national championship. But I think a 10-2 season will be good to build upon for next year. Anyone who's watched all the games this year would know that a horrific rash of injuries and the lack of threats on offense like Bush and/or Jarrett have been the main culprits this season, along with some horrid officiating. They could have called holding on every play last week against Oregon State, but still the Trojans won by 21 points, and then a lot of people still complained about the outcome (even the beat writer). It's not been the coaching, or the effort by the players. Fans who take some time to keep everything in perspective know that this just hasn't been USC's year. Too many people are spoiled by past success of recent seasons. Think Charlie Weis would like to switch spots with Pete Carroll right now?

Are we seriously resorting to excuses against Stanford with several injured players (who doesn't have them) and a new back up QB (which for Stanford basically means the kid who played JV as a senior last year.) And then we lost to Oregon who had injured players and one of their RB tandem out AND both starting wide receivers out. And then we blame six blue chip, 4 or 5 star receivers that EVERYONE wanted? Our coaching SUCKS! It's okay. It happens. We had a lot of losses there and it wasn't always their choice. And yes we did take a talented team, fail to develop a single running back or a reliable offense and secondary with tons of talent losing to horrendously under-talented OSU and UCLA. Recognizing coaching lapses doesn't mean we are pessimistic or down on the team. Hell, the team is taking shots at the coaches and they can have their scholies revoked for doing that. And the more you listen to PC he seems to agree. So let's just wait til next year and hope for the best this year. As long we keep dominating recruiting there is still a lot to be optimistic about.

Lawyer and Ex: You are right and more people who blog here should agree with you. Expectations are unreasonable, and seem to come from rather spoiled children who think that success is automatic. This year's reality check should make us appreciate the past couple of years all the more - it wasn't as easy as it looked.

Keith15...AMEN BROTHER!!!

leave scott alone he is only reporting the facts. its not his fault if you dont want to hear them.

leave scott alone he is only reporting the facts. its not his fault if you dont want to hear them.

leave scott alone he is only reporting the facts. its not his fault if you dont want to hear them.

Don't you guys get it. Scott is shunned by the 'SC Athletic office and football staff so he's resorted to being a tabloid writer vs the once terrific beat writer he once was. His distaste for the Trojan program is really his bitterness of being left out. Think the humpback guy from "300".

what a queen...

We were spoiled by recent success and the pre-seaon unanimous selection as USC being No. 1 (with LSU a close 2nd). If we can win out, and win a BCS bowl game, it can be counted on as a sucessful season in the grand scheme of things (and not the end of the "Ceaser dynasty" as Scott wrote after the Oregon loss). Neverthless, it is still a disappointment not to have a shot at the BCS title game, right?

It's all a matter of perspective. If we view this season against our recent past, it is a disappointment. If we view it against other programs (ND, Fla. St., Nebraska), or the Hackett or Tollner eras, then we don't have much to complain about.