Draft analysis

I'd like to make a prediction. In 10 years, John David Booty will have taken more snaps, won more games, and will have more TD passes than Chad Henne.

Wow, I didn't think he could revive the ghost of Stanford, but no topic is too big of a reach for a quality "journalist" like Scott.

Viva Lobo

scott,
i usually agree with you...but you're confusing me here. you list jd booty as a loser, then put him in the winner category. based on his round selection?

Scott,

Please continue to hammer this point. Perhaps it will finally motivate Pete Carroll to get some decent coaches back on his staff so that they can win another title. If Pete does it just to shut you up, that is fine by me.

This past NFL draft proves that Pete has had the best talent in the country the past 3 years and wasnt able to get it done.

So again I ask, if this staff cannot win with the best players in the country, what the hell else do they want or need?

Cant you see the irony? Pete ensured after 2004 that he would get all the credit for winning by getting rid of all his best coaches and replacing them the inexperienced hacks. Then by doing so set himself up to never win again. Classic!!

Bosco, Matt Ryan and Chad Henne have 'bust' written all over them (did John Navarre teach us nothing?)

The best QBs in this draft could very well pan out to be Brian Brohm and Booty, who both got drafted into situations where they're behind young project quarterbacks that may or may not pan out. Booty sounds especially happy with where he ended up, and good for him. He'll have a chance to be a starter within a few years if Tavaris Jackson can't take the next step.

While elation abounds in the overall success of the Trojans in the draft, you realize that only Fred Davis, JDB, and Chauncey were acknowledged for their ability to put points on the board. No RBs or WRs. Thus experience was lacking, and injuries really hurt last season.
Now, this season, the experience curve should improve, yet with a new QB and still no WRs that have taken charge, it appears that 2008 could also have its share of disappointment as to the BCS.
Sure hope injuries don't hit like they did last season, as the depth is not great on either line.

John David Booty fell for no apparent reason this was a bad year for quarterbacks. Hopefully, he will have help that he never had at USC. Also, feel bad for Fred Davis, a first round quality player, going in the second round to Washington who already has a tight end, if he went to the Jets or the Raiders it would be better for him both teams need a player who can run. Also, next the rookie of the defensive rookie of the year will be Keith Rivers.

Scott,

Please continue to hammer this point. Perhaps it will finally motivate Pete Carroll to get some decent coaches back on his staff so that they can win another title. If Pete does it just to shut you up, that is fine by me.

This past NFL draft proves that Pete has had the best talent in the country the past 3 years and wasnt able to get it done.

So again I ask, if this staff cannot win with the best players in the country, what the hell else do they want or need?

Cant you see the irony? Pete ensured after 2004 that he would get all the credit for winning by getting rid of all his best coaches and replacing them the inexperienced hacks. Then by doing so set himself up to never win again. Classic!!

The whining here is almost unbearable...

Yes, Pete Carroll has the best talent in the country. That was borne out by USC's performance at the NFL draft this year.

The best talent doesn't equal National Championships...(it gives you a better shot is all it does)

Miami clearly had the best talent in the late 90's. How many National Championships did they have to show for it? How many National Championships did Nebraska win in the early 90's? ND was a recruiting juggernaut in the 80's how many championships did they pick up in that time span?

This assumption that best talent = National Championships every year is ludicrous and frankly insulting to anyone that has watched football the past couple decades. The only think having the best talent does is ensure that you are gonna be in the discussion every year. There are a lot of other factors that crop up during a season that actually determine what your true fortunes are. Coaching, team chemistry, injuries, experience, position depth, suspensions, schedule, upsets, when you lose in a season, strength of schedule. These all affect where you actually wind up at the end of the season and most are completely out of the control of the coaches/teams.

Pete's recruiting has allowed USC to be in the discussion at the end of every season but not everything else has always lined up. Last year there was a rash of O-line injuries - the one position USC was woefully thin at. The year before it was the FB and skill position losses (anyone who thought losing 95% of the offense - Matt, Reggie and Lendale - would be no problem is seriously delusional). The year before that the secondary was crippled and USC couldn't hang with Texas as a result.

Recruiting and talent is a huge part of college success but there's so much more to attaining the actual trophy.

LSU won the trophy last year and they were ranked #7 going into the final weekend. To get into the big game they required multiple teams to lose and the voters to pity them for their 2-OT losses so that they could vault teams that were ranked ahead of them at the end of the season.

If that's not luck I don't know what is. Les Miles coaching staff had absolutely nothing to do with LSU getting into the big game last year.

Good points raised by Tyler. To expand slightly, a football team is made up of many parts, 11 on offense and 11 on defense are obvious, but special teams and backups are also required. That's a lot of men, or boys. Yes, SC had 10 men picked for the NFL last weekend, but they had many more players who were eligible and who were not picked. So not every player at SC is NFL-caliber.

Also, there is not a huge difference between a 5-star and a 4-star athlete. If you have ever watched practices, it is hard to tell the difference between who is very good and who is great.

It is very difficult to go undefeated in college football; how many teams have done it the last 20-years? And some years there are no undefeated teams. And if a team has even one loss they may not play for the National Championship.

Every school has some star players. Parity exists. And those kids are highly motivated to knock off the likes of SC or Ohio State. SC's opponent each week is playing its "Super Bowl" for the year. For example, despite Virginia undoubtedly being an underdog this coming August, do you not believe there will be a fanatic atmosphere in its stadium when the Trojans come marching in? It's hard to win on the road.

If a school wins a National Championship once every 10-years, they are great (only SC, Ohio State, Florida, LSU, Georgia, and a few others need apply). So get used to the 9 years your school does not win it all.

But is it necessary to win the title in order to justify the season? College football is so unique in that each game is a "universe" unto itself. Can you walk away from the upcoming SC-Ohio State game feeling really excited and good if Troy pulls it out? I would hope so.

National titles are great, but it's all about watching the games. I'd watch the trojans take on a special-ed pop warner team and love every minute of it. Can you imagine what Rey would do in that game!

Enjoy the success that sc IS having, and quit complaining about the lack of new crystal footballs in heritage hall for the last couple years.