Answer Friday, Take 5
Rank all of Pete Carroll's teams. I just did.
Q: I remember reading how the advisor to the Song Girls was a Flag Girl in the early to mid-1980s and so has been trying to get back at the Song Girls from back then by preventing pretty girls from being on the squad now that she's, inexplicably, on the selection committee. So is it a coincidence that you posted a picture from one of the great Song Girls of 1985 whom the former Flag Girl was most likely jealous of and filled with resentment towards?
A: Good detective work. I just remember the 1983-85 era to be a golden period and I hope to soon find the 1985 calendar, which the readers would really enjoy.
Q: The best USC team in the Carroll tenure, to many is the 2005 National Champion USC Trojans with Lofa, Patterson, and others that beat Oklahoma. Can you please rank all the teams that Pete Carroll has coached at USC. Who are the best and worst 1 through 7?
A: It's tough to rank teams if you judge them merely on national titles, etc. For example, the 2005 was supposed to be one of the greatest teams of all-time, but fell short in the title game, so does that mean it's worse than the 2004 team, which played a lesser opponent in the title game (Oklahoma)?
I personally rank the 2002 team higher than most because by the end of the season, I felt they were probably the best team in the nation and they featured Carson Palmer at the peak of his game.
But enough talk. Let's rank them.
2004
2005
2002
2003
2006
2007
2001
USC has had two commitments in the last couple weeks and you haven't mentioned either of them. Why is that? I guess you were too busy sniffing Perez Hiltons jock to give a shet about something that's not a bs rumor
Come on wstripes, don't you know how much material there is on the TMZ website to look through for any mention of Leinart??....that's time consuming...recruits committing? that isn't what this blog is all about...shhhh don't mention anything that has a positive image of the SC team here.. no no no, this is no lap dog for the 'hated' athletic dept... you want something noteworthy, then go to scripsit for the real info....this blog is for negativity...this is for taking shots at wearesc, knocking Pete Carroll down a peg or two, anti Arbo, anti athletic dept, anti basketball team, anti song girls, anti anything USC.... want something positive, visit your internet geek buddies, they are the losers... wait, who has a blog???? oops..
* and that '04 team wasn't that good, just that OK was bad, ya that's it...see how it works???
I've said it before; I will say it again-- Scott Wolf does not censor bloggers. For that I praise him. And ol' Scott absorbs a lot of heat from the bloggers and does not retaliate. Of course I do secretly believe that Mr. Wolf loves to be picked on, but I will leave that for the psychiatrists to unravel.
But back to Wolfie's order of SC teams under Carroll. Let's analyze it a little more deeply:
Too bad about that 2002 team-- they had to play a very tough and complex (offensively) Kansas State team early in the year, and SC had an immature Mike Williams basically lose the game for them. Otherwise, despite a misstep at Washington State, that could have been a national championship team.
I still remember and love the 2003 team that broke the 25-year dry spell by winning the national title. The 2004 team was good, but I still believe the 2005 team was the best because of the maturity of Leinart, Bush and White. It was the defense that year that was the achilles heal (oh, yeah, and a guy named {mighty Joe] Young.
That leaves a comparison of the Booty teams of 2006 and 2007. 2006 SC loses to Oregon State and UGLA. 2007 Troy loses to Stanford (Who?) and Oregon. Gotta go with the 2006 team with Smith and Jarrett.
P.S.-- On to more important matters, such as the state of the team for 2008.
Well, for starters, Vegas has annointed SC as the likely national champion. The odds are 3 to 1. Which means, unfortunately, that the betters believe SC has 1 chance in 4 of winning the title. Not exactly a slam dunk, but better than UGLA at 1 chance in 75.
But what does SC have?-- a great defense, although the line is new. And an offense with some new lineman, an untested quarterback, a stable of runners, and split ends that underperformed last year.
What do you make of it? Who knows. If a national championship is all you will settle for, 2008 is a bit iffy. Pac-10 championship?-- probably will win it for the 7the straight year. That ain't too shabby. Right? Maybe not.
It's odd that a team is favored to win the NC without a proven QB and go-to RB.
I think the consensus by the msm is that the RBs and WRs will be much improved this year, and that Sanchez will not be much of a drop off from Booty at the worst. The Def should be simply fantastic. The biggest concern IMO is the unproven, inexperienced O-line. They could take several weeks to gel, and Ohio St returns most of their linemen. That is going to be a very tough early game for us. But, even if we drop that one, I think this team has the talent to deserve being the natl championship favorite.