Seeing the game yesterday made me very happy, but at the same time I started thinking, is Notre Dame really as good as it was made out to be? If yes, then it makes USC even better than what it has been made out to be.
But what if Notre Dame was really overrated and its boosters had just unjustifiably made them ranked so high at the beginning? What if Notre Dame was not that good?
I don’t care at the end, of course. USC beat one of its biggest rivals and that too handily. If not for Booty’s 2 INT’s, the blocked punt and that one freakish run by Brady Quinn, this would have been a flawless night.
The offense did seem like it was working like a well-oiled machine, the defense has really come up in the last few games and the special teams showed up too (way to go, Cushing!).
Ok, so now it is down to the last regular season game with another big rival who is doing not that well. ucla in Pasadena. I am not as tense as I was for the Notre Dame game, but I just hope there is no over confidence and complacency in the USC team and the “looking ahead” mentality. They do need to win this one and then start the chatter.
4 thoughts on “Is Notre Dame overrated or USC was too good?”
i think that notre dame benifited all year from a schedule that was full of underachieving teams. they struggled against average teams like georgia tech,ucla, and michigan state. USC has looked better since they lost to oregon state but i don’t think that they really have played a challenging game since then. personally i think this year is a perfect example of why we need a playoff because there is really no way to know who really is the best between michigan, florida, and USC
@katie: I am one of those who question the playoff system as an answer to the question ‘which is the best team among Florida, USC, Michigan’. Why? Because in a playoff, most likely USC will not play Michigan AND Florida and so if Florida lost and USC won, would it make USC any better than Florida? I don’t think so. What we then need is a round robin league of the best teams in the country and then have a semi final and a final. But I don’t think that is ever going to happen. For now, we have to play with what we have, and that is the BCS. I don’t like it much but my beef is more about the pre season poll system and how it affects the teams.
i always thought they should have the winner of the rose bowl play the winner of the fiesta bowl and have the winners of the sugar and orange bowl play and make it an eight team playoff.
@katie: I understand that a traditional playoff and the kind of system you are proposing, is better than #1 playing #2 for the National Title, but it still does not mean that the eventual winner is true #1. Because in the example you provided, the loser of Rose Bowl could actually be better than the winner of Fiesta Bowl (or such an argument can be made). I may end up writing a separate post on this, but I think there should be a Final Four which plays each other and the top 2 then play for the National Title.