Answer Monday!
Time to answer questions. This week's answers are sponsored by the Pacific Life Pac-9 Men's Basketball Tournament.
Q: Trojan Conquest said:
Scott, what's up with Junior Day? Who was here, who looked good, and I know it's early but how does the 2011 class look for USC?
A: I hate to focus on a QB because they get so much publicity, but Michael Eubank of Corona Centennial was very impressive looking physically. He is going to be someone to watch, because he knows if he attends USC that Matt Barkley might only play one year once Eubank arrived and then the job is open. Anoter interesting prospect who is much lower profile is linebacker Lavonte Barnett of Paraclete High School in Antelope Valley. It was interesting to see Antwaun Woods, but everyone knows him now because he committed to USC already.
Q: USCfan said:
Every so often Colin Cowherd will say on his show that USC is in the middle of being a college team and a NFL team? He says that USC feels different compared to any other college team in the nation. He compares USC to kinda like how Miami feels but USC is much more different. For me, I can't really understand that feeling because the only stadiums I've been to are the Coliseum and the Rose Bowl. Can you relate to Colin and explain what he means; you've been to alot of diverse college venues.
How is the Coliseum different from Eugene, South Bend, Columbus, or Blacksburg?
Does UCLA have that same feeling too?
Is it because USC is in a different and bigger market compared to small town college teams?
Is it because LA does not have a NFL team and USC just happens to feel that void?
Is it because USC has had success like a pro team? Does the USC fan base really feel like a NFL crowd? How is a NFL crowd different to a college crowd?
That feeling he refers to, has it always felt like that even when LA had 2 pro teams, or did it just feel like that because of what Carroll did to USC in the last decade?
Thanks for the Open Forum Scott.
A: I don't listen to Cowherd, so I'm going to assume what he means is that L.A. does not have pro football and is in a major media market, so USC receives much more attention and has a larger fan base than it might if there were an NFL team.
The Coliseum atmosphere is not bad but it's not as crazy as Eugene or Columbus. I'd say South Bend is not really known for being too loud. I have not been to Blacksburg but one of the loudest games I attended was USC-Virginia Tech at FedEx Field.
Or maybe Cowherd meant that USC's talent is almost like being a pro football team. Of course, he probably would not have said that this past year.
Q: NOBS said:
SW, here's a negative question for Kiff and Eddie O: How come both of them, after leaving SC for the SEC, refer to us as Southern Cal when both of them know we hate it?
A: I noticed that also. I guess when you're in the South and your conference rival is South Carolina, you get in the habit of saying Southern Cal to avoid confusion. I'll give them until spring practice to cure themselves of this disorder.
"Southern Cal"? I don't get it? I went to SC and I have no problem calling it Southern Cal. Why the issue?
Question for Wolf.............
Why didn't you report on Junior Day and give us information about these recruits instead of "baby quarterback" and "song of the day"?
Yes, I also don't get it. I'm an alum and grew up in Southern California and remember people around me always calling USC "SC" and "Southern Cal." Everyone calls us Southern Cal on TV and the radio. Seems like someone at USC SID office has a pet peeve, and the bRuin trolls seem to think it gets under our skin and insist on using that name for us, but if that's the best they can do then all that "education" is gone to waste.
The only thing that would give me pause is that UC Berkeley people like to call their school Cal and it sorta kinda sounds like we're the Southern Cal, although no one would mistake us for Cal on the academic side or on the athletic field, for opposite reasons, at least at this moment in time.
how can using "Southern Cal" be wrong, when it feels so right? you go, Kiff!
The issue (from the University standpoint) has to do with trademark enforcability. Not sure why we fans should care.
This "Southern Cal" thing is way overblown. It's in the media guide because it's a pet peeve with Mike Garrett. That's all.
Most of the country refers to us as "Southern Cal" and there's nothing wrong with it.
USC Aneater........"no one would mistake us for Cal on the academic side"
I don't know when you went to USC, but it's now one of the top academic schools on the West Coast. Check out this article:
www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-12-13/the-decades-hottest-schools
I'm sorry to see alum not being informed about the high standards USC now meets.
THE TROJANS OF SOUTHERN CAL! FIGHT ON!
erupted, a civil war has, hmmm?
united within The Force, a school must be.
infighting, to the dark side leads.
Southern Cal, it shall be.
correct, Jedi Bucket was all along.
meditate on this, i will.
No one at the University of Southern California likes it.
Did Lane really say “Southern Cal”?
January 13th, 2010, 8:42 am · 17 Comments · posted by Mark Whicker, ocregister.com
Those who report on USC football are cheerfully warned by the sports info staff that they should refer to the Trojans indeed as USC. Not Southern Cal.
Brand marketing, and all that. Plus, no one out here refers to USC as Southern Cal anyway.
The word doesn’t always get up to the broadcast booth – Bill Rozinski, for ESPN Radio, consistently referred to Southern Cal during the Emerald Bowl – but most writers seem to comply with this innocent request.
Which makes Lane Kiffin’s choice of words so interesting, Tuesday night in Knoxville.
“I really believe this is the only place I would have left here to go,” Kiffin said, “to Southern Cal.”
This would be like the new 49ers coach referring to “Frisco.”
Hopefully school officials will have a sit-down with Kiffin and explain some of these finer points.
But who will conduct the NCAA rules seminar?
Sounds like it's all about money, brand marketing. Seems pretty silly what a coach or anyone else calls the school. It's not like they're trying to sell a shirt with "Southern Cal" on it. I guess it's OK to say "Southern California".
S...O...U...T...HERN C...A...L...I...FORNIA. Southern Califoooooornia!
It wouldn't be the same if it was just Southern Cal!
Fight On!!
Huh? I love to count, it's what I do, and I count 10 teams in the Pac10, not 9!
oh yes...sorry.
I don't recall anyone having problems with being called "Southern Cal" when I was in school.
As far as being Southern Cal (Berkley), doesn't ucla have that honor?
They stole Cal's song and a bruin is basically a Golden Bear cub.
Basically, they're second best in every way.
Tons of people on campus, alums and in the community use Southern Cal and they even have it on t-shirts, albeit bootleg ones like those that fraternities and sororities make up for fundraisers. It isn't insulting or anything.
What the big deal is for the USC media office is that Southern Cal is not an official, trademarked name like University of Southern California, or USC and Southern California (as applied to school of higher ed). Word is that we tried for Southern Cal but it was far too late, the phrase was in too common usage for too many things by then. And again, yes we did register USC and yes we do give permission to the other "USC" to use it, though we retain our legal ownership to the copyright.
I still have the sweatshirt I bought in the bookstore my freshman year (1988) that says "Southern Cal" across the front. I frequently use the term "Southern Cal" around the Athletic Department and have never been corrected by the staff. The only people that seem to care about this pointless issue are in the Sports Information Department.
Here's another question about trademark or patient logo. The interlocking SC used almost exclusively except for baseball is fairly new. I heard that this was developed for SC by Nike. It makes sense since this seems to have appeared around the same time USC started using Nike uniforms. I originally noticed it only on Nike clothes, but now it' on everything. Anybody know the origins of this logo and how it came about?
Interesting article in 2008 by Adam Rose when he blogged for the LA Times on USC....
"The University of Southern California loathes the moniker "Southern Cal" even though it makes a limited run of "Southern Cal" branded apparel every year. The production is necessary for the school to retain it's trademark and prevent anybody else from using it." The blog was on SC winning a case against South Carolina and the use of SC and USC. South Carolina also changed their red color so it wouldn't be the same as Southern California.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/allthingstrojan/2008/08/take-that-usc.html