If USC somehow maintains a "elite status" with 75 scholarships, I'm not even saying a national championship, lets say top 10, over the next few years, will this result be used to further lower the scholarship level for teams in CFB?
|
-
The Pac-12 Thread....June 18, 2012 5:27 pm
That's exactly my thoughts on it as well. Also, not so much this upcoming season as we've basically culled the best 75 out of last years 85 anyway. it the next/full three season's results and if the totals drop below 75 and still perform?? Wow..
|
|
-
The Pac-12 Thread....June 18, 2012 5:56 pm
Sorry Trojans, I can't buy into the premise that USC having only 75 schollies is going to hurt much. Any other school, then we have a different analysis. But, USC?
The Trojans get the premier talent in CFB. You have the best weather in America. LA has hot chicks everywhere. (So many they actually send the overflow to flood Vegas). And, an alumni base of deep pockets and deep connections. USC is almost an exclusive five star club......those four stars you have are immediately upgraded to five if offered. You are rich in every respect, hence the University of Spoiled Children moniker. As Oregon continues their reign of terror on the conference, I don't want to hear the 75 schollie excuse when we continue to pummel you into submission the next decade or so. Alternatively, if we don't continue to unmercifully beat you down, it is because we don't get 75 five star recruits like you do. QUERY: How come USC is only committed to dominating football and not any other sport? |
|
-
The Pac-12 Thread....June 18, 2012 6:12 pm
ED,
It's not so much the 75 schollies as you are correct, USC will still pull in top level talent. We have done so for 2 years with bowl bans hanging over our heads and now Kiffin can sell these top level recruits on not only bowl games, but also on having more playing time than if we were at at full complement of 85. Where it will hurt the most is depth. An injury to the wrong position and it could be trouble. For example, this coming season, we are thin at running back. The 2 that we have that will carry the biggest load are as talented as any in the country. However, if one or both are injured, then our running game will be in trouble. QUERY: How come USC is only committed to dominating football and not any other sport? It's not that USC is not committed to that, it's that it can be difficult to do when you are considered a "football school". I'm sure that UCLA would love to field a dominant football team, but they lose some recruits because they are considered a "basketball school". So, UCLA loses some football players who want to go to a "football school" and USC loses players who want to go to a "basketball school". USC has had dominant baseball teams in the past and has made some occasional noise in basketball as well. We are also usually pretty good in volleyball, water polo and track and field. Football pays the majority of the bills, it what we are known for. So, even when we are very good in other sports, they still get overshadowed by football. |
|
-
The Pac-12 Thread....June 19, 2012 12:46 am
QUERY: How come USC is only committed to dominating football and not any other sport? USC has won 4 straight NCAA men's championships in both tennis and water polo. No other school has won 4 straight NCAA championships in any sport, male or female. USC men's teams have two such streaks. |