Sunday Morning Quarterback: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:





An Absurdly Premature Assessment of: Southern Cal

A too-soon look at next fall, sans the inevitable injuries, suspensions and other pratfalls of the long offseason.
- - -

The least you should know about Southern Cal...

2007 Record • Past Five Years
2007: 11-2 (7-2 Pac Ten, Champion)
2003-07: 59-6 (37-5 Pac Ten)
Five-Year Recruiting Rankings*
2004-08: 1 • 1 • 1 • 2 • 8
Returning Starters, Roughly
14 (6 Offense, 8 Defense)
Best Player
Rey Maualuga appeared to draw his strength in equal parts from his flowing Polynesian mane and his many-vowelled surname, before his MVP performance in the Rose Bowl sans the kinky locks made clear the source of his hard-hitting dominance: it’s gotta be the name. It’s gotta be something, because the kid brings the pain:

The guy’s like the Tebow of defense: I don’t know of any better player in the country.
And Now, Song Girls In Bikinis


Thank you.

(If that’s not your thing, or, like, you expected something substantive, just be glad it wasn’t Will Ferrell in a bikini. You have been warned).

*According to Rivals
What's Changed. You won't read much about anything else through August, but as I pointed out last week, USC quarterbacks these days tend to be USC quarterbacks: be it Mark Sanchez, Mitch Mustain, even Aaron Corp, the new passer is assuredly in the same big-armed, pocket-bound mold of blue chip predecessors Palmer, Leinart and Booty and will generate comparable numbers in essentially the same play-action-based system. A commenter in the afore-linked post noted that most absurdly premature lists for the Trophy Which Shall Not Be Named include an entry for Sanchez/Mustain despite neither having finished a season as a starter here or anywhere else, or even clearly established he's the Most Outstanding Player at his own position on his own team. But, you know, yeah, both guys were the legends of their recruiting class and the winner of the spring competition is automatically in that mix. Only the name is really changing.

That isn't the case in front of him, though, and if the golden child du jour is so much as second team all-conference material (to who? Rudy Carpenter? Jake Locker?), expect the blame to go straight to the very young offensive line. Sam Baker started all but two games the last four years; Drew Radovich and Chilo Rachal started every game the last two. With center Matt Spanos, that's well over 100 career starts lumbering gingerly out the door. It's still a very talented line, of course, and the good thing about the spate of injuries that helped temporarily stall the offense last year is that the new guys are not completely green: Butch Lewis, Kris O'Dowd, Zack Heberer and Charles Brown combined for nine starts in the shuffle, and are presumably the better for it. Given the relative midseason lull with various combinations of young `uns in the lineup, they should hope so.

What's the Same. The last two years were the lowest scoring since Pete Carroll's first year, 2001, but were still top five, championship, Rose Bowl seasons because the defense got back to blowing the doors off. This was especially true last year, when the SC D finished in the top six nationally across the board and lived in opposing backfields. In Lawrence Jackson and Sedrick Ellis alone, the Trojans are losing 19 sacks and 30 tackles for loss; add to that Keith Rivers, leading tackler the last two years. Ellis and Rivers will go in the top ten of the draft, Jackson in the second round.

Like I wrote two years ago: cry me a fuckin' river, Fauntleroy. The leftovers include three more first-rounders in 2009, Rey Maualuga, Fili Moala and Brian Cushing (since we're only talking front seven here, that doesn't even include likely early entrant Taylor Mays, a 6-4, 225-pound Greek god of a safety), and end Everson Griffen, who managed to get overlooked by Joe McKnight in last year's recruiting hype but racked up six sacks off the bench, made every all-freshman team, spent the first part of the spring scarring new freshmen for life and will make any forward-looking all-America team this summer.

If you're waiting for the other shoe to drop, uh, stop - even the new starters up front (Griffen, Kaluka Maiava at outside linebacker and Averell Spicer at tackle) have played often and project to the NFL. You can probably say the same about the rest of the two deep in two years. The only offenses that have really given SC any kind of trouble the last few seasons are of the spread variety, run with athletic quarterbacks - Texas in the `06 Rose Bowl, Oregon and Illinois last year, if you want to stretch it (the Illini did have 445 yards; their problems in the end were mainly defensive). The only possibility of seeing a top-end talent like Vince Young or Dennis Dixon running from a shotgun on the upcoming schedule is against Ohio State, if Terrelle Pryor defies all reasonable expectations, wins the starting job by the second game of his career and is ready to break out in the Coliseum. Even if that could happen, Jim Tressel won't let it - premature exposure to a group like this is liable to cause deep, lasting psychological damage, if not actual physical trauma.

Doom Arrives With A Limp. Go back to the 2006 preview linked a couple paragraphs back and you'll come across the notion of "the next Inevitable USC Tailback(s) of Doom," which, two years later, hasn't materialized. Not that there haven't been enough candidates, and it's uncertain to what extent the cyclical ebbs and flows of tight competition and nagging injuries have prevented any single member of the rotation of Chauncey Washington, Stafon Johnson, Joe McKnight, C.J. Gable, Emmanuel Moody, Desmond Reed, Herschel Dennis, Allen Bradford, Broderick Green and Marc Tyler from breaking out. In some of those cases, it's clear enough - Dennis and Reed were basically never healthy enough to get on the field with any consistency in their star-crossed careers; Moody was hurt after a promising start as a freshman and decided he'd be better off trying to steal carries from Tim Tebow at Florida. Gable got a few early carries but missed the rest of last season with a suspiciously vague ab injury; Tyler came into the mix off a broken leg and redshirted along with Green. Bradford played in every game but virtually never saw the ball after the first two.


UCLA vs. Everson Griffen: At one point, this looked like a mismatch.
- - -
The rotation last year wound up an inconsistent mix of Washington, Johnson and McKnight, and though Washington led the team in carries and yards for the second straight season, his first team status always seemed somewhat de facto. In two years, he only broke 100 yards four times and was held to a pedestrian four yards per carry or less about half the time. The younger guys have been more exciting - Moody averaged a full yard more every time he touched the ball in 2006, a margin nearly matched last year by McKnight, and Johnson finished almost two yards better than Washington's `07 average - but not nearly as consistent. Washington had more carries than the top three youngsters combined.

With the Old Man in Dreds now out of the mix, the best guess based on the way last year played out is Johnson as pacesetter and McKnight and Gable, presumably healthy now, as versatile, situational daggers, the Reggie Bushes to Johnson's LenDale White, even if it's Bradford (6-0, 230) who best fits the punishing White role physically. To be clear, though, that's not a fair comparison. No single player in this galaxy of would-be stars has shined brightly enough to deserve that kind of expectation, much less two of them.

It's not an endorsement, but Johnson struck me last year as the most explosive and effective of the group; this is probably only because his best efforts (100-plus yards on sparse carries against Nebraska, Washington and Illinois) happened to be the SC games I watched most closely. In reality, the only really unique talent is probably McKnight's, but his particular skills, like Bush's, aren't suited to endure an every-down pounding between the tackles, especially behind an iffy line. He's probably going to play good bit of receiver. So it's a much smaller committee than last year, down from ten to six, but nevertheless, committee it is.

Overly Optimistic Spring Chatter. Read Scott Wolf's quick-hitting, wide-ranging, pull-no-punches Trojan blog for the L.A. Daily News, and you'll not only learn that Pete Carroll's favorite TV show is HBO's bizarre, kaput "John From Cincinnati." You'll also get a pretty clear sense of the daily turbulence of the quarterback derby. First, Mustain was locked in with the second team in last weekend's scrimmage. Tuesday, Wolf graded Mitch and Mark as equals, at three Euros apiece. But by Tuesday night, he was saying turn out the lights on this "competition":

For two weeks I resisted the constant temptation to say the quarterback competition was a charade although anyone who reads this blog probably figured out what direction the ``derby'' was taking. But it seems foolish to act like anything is up for grabs right now as Mark Sanchez clearly is the No. 1 quarterback.

Here's some facts for those following this race:

Sanchez got six series with the first team during Sunday's scrimmage. Mitch Mustain got two.

Sanchez practiced exclusively with the first team Tuesday. Mustain split time with Aaron Corp with the second team.

Offensive coordinator Steve Sarkisian said he did not anticipate giving Mustain more time with the first team during USC's next scrimmage on Saturday.

We will wait for the official word from Pete Carroll, of course. When (not who) he announces the starter is the only mystery left right now.
- - -

So that's that, it seems. If the outcome that clear cut, the critically acclaimed drama "Mustain: The College Years" is destined to end in anticlimax - Mitch has one season after Sanchez's eligibility runs out in 2010, but with Corp and current high school junior Matt Barkley and whichever other teenage quarterbacking idol comes aboard in the next two years breathing down his formerly blue chip neck, he's just playing out his run for the draft scouts.

... on You Tube. Pete Carroll miked up for last year's Rose Bowl, on meth, as usual:

The closing (and surprisingly profanity-free) fracas is the best, though be sure not to miss the inappropriate personal contact by the potbelied equipment manager a little past the two-minute mark.

See Also: Combine "USC Greek Week" and "Playboy U," and the result is the most disappointing video of all time. ... A USC grad sings the Oregon fight song. ... And the end of last year's loss to Stanford. If you were wondering what happened there.

Best-Case. Obviously. Not to overstate the point, but USC has played 30 games against ranked teams since 2002 and it's record (26-4) is not the most impressive point of the portfolio. That would be the average margin of victory in those games, which is just shy of 19 points. Six straight BCS bowls is one thing; five blowouts is something else. The Trojans will be the unanimous Pac Ten favorite, again, and on paper only face one serious challenge, from Ohio State on Sept. 13. That's a home game SC will probably be favored to win, and the line may not creep below double digits again the rest of the year. This is easily one of the handful of elite mythical championship contenders.

Worst-Case. Three times in two years is a trend - every week is a major upset alert. With so much uncertainty on offense, this is not the kind of opening stretch that lends itself to any false starts, growing pains, etc.: at Virginia, Ohio State, at Oregon State, Oregon, Arizona State. Outside of OSU, that's not daunting on the "traditional power" scale, but all five were at least nine-game winners last year, which must set a new standard for the first month-and-a-half of any schedule. And that's not even the type of game SC has found itself losing; three of four shocking defeats the last two years have been at the hands of the aforementioned double-digit dogs. By hook or crook, Washington, Arizona and Cal all played the Trojans within a touchdown last year, and Notre Dame will be bouncing back with some as-yet-unknown level of vengeance. There's the whole Stanford thing last year, and Oregon State and UCLA before it. You can't take for granted any breathers here. A sputtering, one-dimensional or turnover-prone offense could find itself on the wrong end of another pair of upsets; if they're to the wrong teams, it could cost them the conference. It has to happen sometime - if Dennis Dixon doesn't take the Ducks' fortunes down with his bum knee later in the season, last year's loss to Oregon was the streak-breaker.

Non-Binding Forecast. The air of inevitability wafting around last preseason evaporated with the Stanford loss, but there's no reason other than hubris SC shouldn't start the season number one again, or that it should be expected to lose any particular game. If the reader is thinking, "Yeah, but you know they're gonna lose one..." which one? I'm the guy who wondered if we were seing the beginning of the end of the Troy dynasty last October, but it definitely did not look that way once the team was healthy again a few weeks later. In terms of personnel and consistent high end dominance, if not consistency, this is still the gold standard, so much so that talking about the schedule (other than Ohio State) is really beside the point. If they beat the Buckeyes, the only thing standing between the Trojans and the mythical championship game is themselves. You have heard this before. But I don't know what else to say.

0 recs | Comment 12 comments

Story-email Email | Print |

Comments

Display:

For What It's Worth
With John David Booty starting, USC scored 34.9 points per game against defenses that gave up on average 28.31 points per game for the season. With Mark Sanchez starting, they scored 25 points per game against teams that gave up on average 26.4 points per game on the season. Booty was worth an extra touchdown per game, and he lead the offense to scoring almost a touchdown more than what his opponents gave up on average. Sanchez lead the offense to scoring 1.4 fewer points that what his opponents gave up on average.

Now I know Booty was in his second year of starting and had more work with the first string offense. Still, it's not automatic that Sanchez will come in and light up defenses with the regularity that Booty did, much less Leinart or Palmer. He still may yet be Kyle Wright, with Mustain lurking in the shadows as Kirby Freeman.

As to which games they'd lose? Arizona State should still be good if not better in year 2 under Erickson. Losing at Oregon State is plausible given the Beavers' defense, but then it's always the minor games they lose. So, why not at Arizona, with 10 defensive starters back and its spread offense? Why not at Washington State, losing to another first year coach? Why not at UCLA, with Ricky Neuheisel working some comeback magic? If it doesn't make sense, that's the point: neither did the Stanford loss last year.

by Year2 on Apr 9, 2008 1:12 PM EDT   0 recs

On the other hand...
Your point about Sanchez is well taken - but the evidence is limited to this point. I was watching the footage that SMQ posted of the Oregon game last year, and he reminded me of Carson Palmer (though a bit more mobile) - arm like a cannon, but a knack for pushing too far once too often.

As for the opposition - ASU's offensive line is still pants, which is going to hamper them. Arizona has a history of being giant killers, but it's still not clear that they can put an entire game together on offense. Washington State is awfully thin. UCLA is potentially in the mix - their defense will be good and Chow's offense is simple enough in basis that they should have some luck with it next year... but as with ASU, their O-line is a bit thin.

All that said, I fully expect USC to lose two games next year... I just don't know how to predict that on paper.  

by DC Trojan on Apr 9, 2008 3:15 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I hate to bring this up but I'm afraid ...
...tOSU's prospects might be somewhat better than you seem to imply.  With 18 or 19 starters coming back (including at leat two - Lurenitis and Jenkins - who were mentioned by at least some as possible top 15 picks) and, as you so thoroughly describe, considerable inexperience and some uncertainty for the Trojans on offense, the Buckeys could give the Trojans all the trouble they need at that juncture in the season.

To be sure the defense, as you suggest, will keep them fully in the game but this could be a close run thing indeed.  

by marcillac on Apr 9, 2008 1:27 PM EDT   0 recs

The burden of my post...
...and the reason I "hated" to bring it up is that given the likelyhood that tOSU will go undefeated in the Big 10 and with a win at USC on the resume they may, AGAIN (!!!!), be well for the...inevitable thumping of the winner of the Georgia, Florida(??), LSU(??????) round robin.

by marcillac on Apr 9, 2008 1:31 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Isn't that a little presumptuous...
... considering that last year's SEC champ only got a shot at Ohio State because Southern Cal lost a fluke game to Stanford AND West Virginia lost a fluke game to Pitt AND Oklahoma lost a fluke game to Colorado AND Denis Dixon tore his ACL? And the year before only because Southern Cal lost a fluke game to UCLA, no one wanted a OSU/Michigan rematch, and no one took an 11-1 Louisville team seriously as a BCS title contender?

by drothgery on Apr 9, 2008 2:05 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Re: Isn't that a little presumptuous...
True, but all of those things happening last year also allowed Ohio State to get back up that high too. Without the USC loss to Stanford, Dixon tearing his ACL, the WVU loss to Pitt, Oklahoma's weird loss to Colorado and/or Missouri's loss to OU in the Big 12 CG, Ohio State could have finished the regular season 5th behind all one loss teams in USC, Oregon, West Virginia, and Oklahoma/Missouri. Here's another: what if Auburn didn't chop block Glen Dorsey and he was healthy all season?

The point is that the what if gate swings both ways, and there's too many what ifs in any given season to give them much credence.

by Year2 on Apr 9, 2008 2:31 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

The thing is...
... that it took a ton of improbable things falling into place to set up the SEC's spot in last two BCS title games, and figuring on it happening again seems silly. My usual SEC prediction -- the SEC champ will have two losses and sit out the BCS title game -- seems much more likely.

Ohio State, on the other hand, is good enough relative to the rest of the Big Ten that if they don't get blown out by Southern Cal, they've got a good shot of making a third consecutive BCS title game appearance (much to the dismay of fans everywhere outside of Columbus). But I think their opponent's much more likely to come from somewhere other than the jumbled-up SEC.

by drothgery on Apr 9, 2008 5:47 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I wouldn't say presumptuous...
... although I'll conceede somewhat flippant.  Flippant and yet perhaps not entirely careless and unfounded.  Florida and LSU made it through difficult, injury affected seasons and in the end proved themselves to be creditable MNCs (somewhat less but sufficiently so in the case of  LSU).  In doing so they have contirubted to the credibility of the SEC thus makeing it quite possible that the conference champion, likely the winner of the aforementioned round robin, will get a substantial benefit of the doubt.  

Moreover, one might question just how completely flukie the losses you mentioned were.  Without a doubt Stanford over USC in LA, 4 extremely inopportune TOs notwithstanding.  Colorado over Oklahoma might have appeared flukie at the time, an altitude-induced accident.  However, subsequent, problems at Iowa State (Iowa State?), a close game against a fairly pedestrian Texas team (with an all time horrendous offense) and the blow out against WVU raised some real questions.  Oklahoma is was just not that great away from Norman and Head Football Coach Robert Anthony Stoops (hereinafter "HFCRAS")reputation for prowess in big games has been somewhat tainted.  As for West Virginia/Pitt...well...Pitt actualy had a pretty good defense (as I think SMQ wrote about at the time), LeShawn McKoy and finally WVU choked, VERY BADLY.  The Dixon injury derailed an excellent and exciting Oregon team but a healthy Dorsey, Doucet and Flynn might well have kept LSU undefeated.  

Year2 is right in his his view that you can't anticipate all the possible twists and turns of a season but the real problem, as I say in my original post would not be that those twists might lead to a MNC matchup featuring the SEC winner but that they may, yet again, spit out Ohio State.  Clearly USC is the biggest obstacle to that outcome.  Right now I'd make them about a 4 point favorite (18-14 or so [20-16) - maybe a safety or two, perhaps some heroics on a return or in change-of-pace situation by Joe McKnight.)  This is certainly not a margin that cannot be easily erased by a turnover or two.  

by marcillac on Apr 9, 2008 4:14 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

This taking it one step further...
...than SMQ and Fiutak even predicted: http://www.sundaymorningqb.com/story/2008/3/26/11129/4187 .  I knew it was bad, but complaints against OSU getting in the title game undefeated with a win at Southern Cal?  Wow.

by osuvandy on Apr 9, 2008 5:04 PM EDT   0 recs

Very sorry for the threadjack...
...particularly obnoxious given that SMQ's assessment of USC is a topic quite sufficiently compelling on its own merits not to require a diversion to the vagaries of tOSU's prospects and the conniptions that such may induce in some.  

Will try to be better behaved in future.

by marcillac on Apr 9, 2008 6:04 PM EDT   0 recs

They only lose the minor games anyway....?
One of the themes that is getting particularly tiresome and old from SEC fans is the fact that the fans from this conference think that USC - CAL, USC - Stanford, USC - Oregon, USC - Washington or USC - Arizona are minor games.  It is getting very tiresome and old.

THERE ARE NO MINOR GAMES IN THE PAC-10, just like there are no minor games in the SEC, Big-East or Big-12.  The Trojans are 70-8 since 2002 and are 19-2 against the BCS Conference opponents from outside the PAC-10. No other team in the country comes close to matching this statistic from the 21 total BCS games standpoint, or the 19 victories as well.  

Of the 8 losses, six have been to PAC-10 teams and only Vince Young and the national champion Longhorns or a very good Kansas State team has beaten USC during that time period. Given the fact that the so called "traditional power" schools (Name Brand Teams), like Virginia Tech, Nebraska, Notre Dame, Michigan, Oklahoma, Auburn, Arkansas and Iowa have performed so poorly, as compared to Oregon, Oregon State, Fresno State, Washington and California, maybe it's time we stop addressing these teams as minor programs.

A regular season bracketed playoff - truly making every game a playoff in college football.

by bcsbusters on Apr 15, 2008 10:45 PM EDT   0 recs

Implying that they win the big games
So we're arguing over who is going to play in the national championship already?

The PAC-10 is a solid conference, no doubt about it. I think what my boy Les was trying to say (along with other SEC folks) was that the SEC is real difficult - out of conference schedule notwithstanding, the SEC has the most upper echelon teams and a conference championship game.

I think USC absolutely demolishes Ohio State next year. As does Wisconsin. Not sure who is in the title game. Don't really give a crap right now. Is it September yet?

by purpleheart on Apr 16, 2008 6:58 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

SMQ is not journalism, but it does need your tips! Loyal readers who see anything of timely interest, incredible brilliance or earth-shattering sublimity, drop me a line -- sundaymorningqb-at-yah00, etc. You won't be sorry.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Rockmnation_small
Beyond the Box Score: Win Correlations (Part Two)
Rockmnation_small
Beyond the Box Score: Win Correlations (Part One)
Southern_miss_eagle_small
Facemask Decals: New Form of Collegiate Marketing
Small
College Football Question: Sleeper Teams
Rockmnation_small
Beyond the Box Score: Special Teams
Rockmnation_small
Beyond the Box Score: Turnovers
Small
!!!!
Rockmnation_small
Beyond the Box Score: The '+' Concept
Comics_archiecomics-jughead_small
Cal's successes and failures in the Tedford era
Snapshot_2008-05-09_03-11-55_small
Question for Firefox Users

Post_icon New FanPost All FanPosts Carrot-mini


Site Meter