(Editors note: I am not a USC hater. I actually go to USC. I’m a Trojan. I wasn’t rooting for them — or against them, for that matter — during the Rose Bowl. My “rooting” interest in college football ended when the Miami Hurricanes decided to stay in Miami for the Peach Bowl, even thought it was played in Atlanta. I’m just a college football fan who’s been around the game for almost 15 years and who pays attention. So with that said….)

People are fond of using the “transitivity” argument in college football. If team A beats team B, and team B beat team C, then they say that team A is better than team C, even though they’ve never met head to head. Sometimes that works. Unfortunately, people have been using a much more circular argument this year in college football….

So let me pose a little scenario for you…

…say I’m 28, and in pretty good shape. And I have this weird thing where, once a week, I beat up a 9 year old. I’m pretty good at it, and after awhile, the 9 year olds don’t stand a chance. They leave nary a scratch on me. Every once in awhile, I’ll beat up a 10 or 11 year old, but mostly I stick to the 9 year olds.

In the past I even beat up some people my own age. Even some of those fights were a little one-sided. So it’s obvious I’m a pretty good fighter. But I haven’t beaten up anyone close to my own age in over a year, and even when I do it’s at most once or twice a year. This year I haven’t really done much of anything but beat up 9 year olds.

I hang out with a couple of 15 year olds. These guys beat up on 9 year olds too. Actually, most of these guys beat up on 8 year olds, but no one really notices (because when you’re that young, 8, 9, what’s the difference?) The weird thing is, these 15 year olds are starting to get reputations for being good fighters. It doesn’t make much sense, since all they’ve ever done is beaten up 9 year olds, but that doesn’t seem to deter anyone.

So once or twice a year, I take on one of these 15 year olds. Strangely, people seem to actually want to give them a fighting chance! I mean, I outweigh them by like 60 pounds, and have way more experience than them, but people want to root for the underdog, so they’ll list a bunch of things that if they happen just right, maybe the 15 year old will win the fight.

Of course that never happens. But what does happen, interestingly enough, is that the 15 year old gives me a fight. All I can handle. On the one hand, that’s weird. I mean, I am bigger than the 15 year old, and have more experience. But on the other, it’s not that strange…some people mature physically at 15, so perhaps our bodies aren’t really all that different, and some strategy and a couple of lucky shots makes up for a lot of experience.

Regardless, I still win the fight. What happens next is the seriously strange thing. Even though it should never really have been close, the 15 year old gets all sorts of credit. All the sudden the 15 year old is a real big-shot, a real contender. So sometimes these 15 year olds go on to beat up more 8 and 9 year olds. Sometimes they get sad at having lost the chance to beat up a 28 year old, and they start losing to 8 and 9 year olds. But most of the time they just go back to normal, beating up 9 year olds and loving every second of it, with their newfound “contender” status. Even though they now have lost one more fight than they did before they got in the ring with me.

Weirder than the newfound status for the 15 year olds, however, is the status that beating them garners me. (Remember, I’m 28. I’ve been in lots of fights. I should have no trouble beating the crap out of a 15 year old.) So people give the 15 year olds credit for giving me a good fight, but then I end up getting even MORE credit for beating up someone who’s only claim to fame is that they “gave me a good fight”. Lost in the shuffle is that, hey, they’re only freakin’ fifteen.

Doesn’t that seem a bit circular? Someone that shouldn’t come close to beating me actually does come close to beating me, and then when you look at my record, you give me credit for beating someone who “almost” beat me? What?

But the reality is, that’s really all I have on my record this year. I’ve beaten up tons of 9 year olds, and the occasional 15 year old who’ll give me a game. Not the most impressive thing, if you ask me. But it looks good because people seem to think those 15 year olds are something special. What have they done to be special? Well, they’ve “almost” beaten up a 28 year old.

So what happens when I get in the ring with another 28 year old?

Yes, yes, I know you got the analogy like a bazzilionty years ago. But it’s a very good point, which most people (and seemingly all USC fans) are completely overlooking. And while I don’t want to get too deep into talking about fan perception, because I’d rather talk about college football itself, but there are some interesting points here.

At some point along the way, USC fans put themselves in that rarified air — along with Yankee and Laker fans – where they seemingly lost touch with reality and take serious offense whenever you make the outrageous claim that the team they’re rooting for might not be the best. If you remember back to the Shaq and Kobe days (back when there actually were Laker fans, as their record dictates that all Laker fans go into a cryogenic freeze until the next superstar comes to play for them), Laker fans would get all up in arms when you suggested something crazy like they weren’t the best team out there. The reality of the fact is that of their 4 finals appearances, they were only the better team once: the Blazers had the better squad in 2000 but missed something like 15 straight shots, the Kings were better in 2002, with the Rob Horry shot and horrible officiating killing them, and of course, the Pistons mopped the floor with the Lakers two years ago in the finals. Now, they managed three championships out of that little run, and hey, there’s a reason why they actually play the games. The Lakers won the rings, and that’s that. You have to tip your cap to them.

But the point is, during that stretch, Laker fans became so insanely out of touch with reality, they just couldn’t accept any objective criticism of their team. This seems a bit like how USC fans were during this season. I commented to a friend that she better hope Texas loses, because they’d be a tough matchup for the Trojans, and all I got was vitriol in response. I guess it’s college football, and you’re supposed to be passionate, but c’mon, folks.

The reality is, this ‘SC squad wasn’t the best in college football this year. They might not even have been second best. Top 5? Absolutely. Top 3? A lock. And hey, you could certainly make a case that they were second (or even first, depending on how you look at it). But the point is, none of that is set in stone. Tell that to a USC fan – give them the grave insult of telling them that they root for a top three football program – and they’ll go ape shit. It’d probably go something like this:

You: “The USC Trojans in 2005 were, by all guesses, a Top 3 program”
USC fan: “What?! Top THREE? REGGIE BUSH! MATT LEINART! LENDALE WHITE!”
You: “I know, but given their strength of schedule and their weakness on defe…”
USC fan: “REGGIE BUSH!!!!!”
You: “…yeah, you mentioned him already. I just don’t see how when other, sub-par offenses can put up the sort of numbers tha…”
USC fan: “REGGIE MOTHER-FUCKING BUSH RAARRRRAAWGKJHJFGHGF!”
You: ::stabs self in neck with pencil::

The reality of the situation is, this USC (2005) team beat nobody. Yes, you heard it right, nobody. Their non-conference schedule consisted of Hawaii, Arkansas, Notre Dame and Fresno State. Hawaii and Arkansas are 8 year olds. Notre Dame and Fresno State are, at best 15 year olds.

“Now wait one gosh-durned second there, Jeremy! Notre Dame has a great squad! They made the BCS! They almost beat USC!”

Exactly. That’s all they did. They almost beat USC. That’s their great claim to fame this year. The got crushed by Ohio State (the other candidate for second best team this year) in the Fiesta Bowl. They lost to Michigan State. They beat a Tenessee team that, despite the big “name”, wasn’t even freakin’ bowl elligble this year! (Navy was bowl elligble this year. NAVY! And they even managed to WIN their bowl game!) There only “real” win was against a Michigan team that went on to have 5 losses. Whoopdee-freakin’-do.

“But what about Fresno State? They almost beat USC! They must be good!”

Right. Except where they lost their next three games and even managed to lose to Tulsa in their bowl game. Um, who did Fresno St. beat again? Oh, wait, that’s right…nobody. The best thing you can say about Fresno St. is that they gave USC a game. Well, if USC is so good, why is a crap team like Fresno St. giving them such a hard time? Good point.

“Okay, okay, your logic cuts through my BS like a hot knife through butter. But USC beat OREGON! You can’t tell me OREGON isn’t a great team!”

Sure I can. Oregon’s biggest claim to fame this season? They beat Fresno State. Honestly. I wish that where the punchline to some elaborate joke I’d spent all day concocting, but it’s not. Oregon was easily the most over-rated team in the country. Easily. They got beat by a weak Oklahoma team in their bowl game. They were, at best, a top 15 team. At best.

So, yeah, there are similar arguments for Cal and Arizona State. The fact remains, the USC schedule was softer than, well, than the USC linebacking corp. And that’s saying something. This isn’t like years before when USC went to Alabama and beat a ranked (although WILDY overrated) Crimson Tide squad, or last year when they went to Washington and beat a very, very good Virginia Tech team.

It’s obviously not all about schedule though. What people seem to not grasp is that I’m not saying USC was a horrible team this year. (Didn’t I just say Top 3? How is that horrible?) I agree with them being ranked number 1. They’re the champs. Crappy teams or not, they beat everyone who came their way. They deserved to be in the championship game, obviously.

I’m just explaining to everyone that it is by no means a surprise that they lost. None whatsoever.

“But Jeremy…Texas got LUCKY! IF [this] hadn’t happened, or if the refs had seen [that], USC totally would have won and your argument would be completely bunk!”

College football is seemingly unique in that you have to be lucky as well as good. As in, have to be. With the possible exception of those Nebraska teams in the mid ‘90s, I can’t think of a team that didn’t get seriously lucky in their run to a title. (And even those Nebraska teams got lucky in that they never had to play any of the top teams!)

In college football, you have to just factor in “luck” (or the refs, or the weather, or even injuries) into the thing from the start. The USC fumble against Notre Dame was lucky. There were a couple of plays in the Fresno game that, had they gone the other way, would have amounted in a Trojan loss.

You want to talk about luck? Colorado won a national championship, back in ’90 based completely on luck. They needed five downs to score on the final drive of the game to beat a [I’m guessing] unranked Missouri team. FIVE DOWNS! The refs just blew it. Completley. And yet, they won the national championship. Even more stunning, is that it was a split championship (like the USC/LSU deal a couple of years back). So in the face of another team with [presumably] solid championship credentials, the voters STILL voted for a Colorado team that totally had a BS win.

A couple of years ago, Miami lost a national championship because of what is universally considered the worst call – a pass interference call that didn’t happen — in college football history. The title was gone, just like that. Oh, and that’s after they forced the game to overtime after losing all-world running back Willis McGahee to a career-threatening injury.

Heck, the year before that, when Miami actually DID win the championship, they were lucky. They barely beat Boston College, on an interception return that bounced off the knee of a Miami corner back, was intercepted by a Miami lineman, and then stripped by Ed Reed and run back for a touchdown. 80 yards. Which if you do the math, means Boston College was deep in Miami territory and about to score, putting the game away.

So the point is, to win a national championship in college football, you simply have to be lucky. There’s no margin for error. So I don’t see how the “woulda shoulda coulda” argument bears much weight here. Colorado shouldn’t have gotten 5 downs. That push by Reggie Bush in the Notre Dame game was illegal. Vince Young’s knee was down. That call in the Fiesta Bowl was in no way, shape or form pass interference. But none of that means anything.

The point is, this USC team was a shell of their previous squads. I might even say that the Carson Palmer team of 2002 could beat this year’s edition. This year’s defense is just so weak, even if the offense is better (which I would argue is more due to Matt Leinart finally being healthy than anything else). Another aspect is coaching. I don’t want to say USC was “outcoached”, since I hate that phrase and it’s insanely overused — and besides, you can’t really coach the things Vince Young did — but Pete Carroll did a horrible job in the Rose Bowl. That timeout on the 2 point conversion is ALL on Pete Carroll. You just don’t make that mistake at that point. As for the Fourth-and-2s? That’s more of a second-guessing game; It’s a great call if they make it, a horrible one if they don’t. But more than that, it’s a very obvious indictment on how freakin’ horrible the USC defense was. Mr. Carroll, who supposedly is a defensive genius, wouldn’t have made that call if he had any faith that his defense could stop Texas. But why would he? They couldn’t stop Fresno or Notre Dame either, could they?

At any rate, I predicted long ago that a team with real speed on defense would prove to be troublesome for the Trojans. Texas just happened to be that team. (Full disclosure: I also thought Oklahoma would be trouble for USC last year, although I never thought they would win. Further full disclosure: I think USC would have soundly beaten Auburn last year, and LSU the year before. Perhaps not blowout style, but they were clearly the best team in the country those two years).

One last note as far as the Trojans are concerned, since they’re all leaving for the NFL. Matt Leinart is the next Chad Pennington. Which certainly isn’t a bad thing, since he, when healthy, led the Jets to some playoff appearances, and even led the league in passing efficiency one year. But he’s not a franchise-savior quarterback, like Tom Brady, Donovan McNabb, or Carson Palmer. But put him in a good system, with a good running game, and he’s going to win plenty of games.

LenDale White is probably the next Corey Dillon, if not a little better. I see him as having the most immediate impact in the NFL, and will probably have the most noteworthy career.

That leaves us with Mr. Universe, Reggie Bush. I actually think he’s probably the next Rocket Ismael, or perhaps the next Eric Metcalf. Not to rain on everybody’s parade here (again), but I’m so freakin’ sick of hearing how Bush can do things on the football field that “no one’s ever done before”. Ismael did the same thing. So did Desmond Howard. And Mike Vick. And Barry Sanders. The problem is, he’s not a wide reciever, like Howard and Ismael, and isn’t half the running back that Sanders was. I honestly don’t know how big of an impact he’s going to have in a league littered with guys who are as fast as he is. He’ll probably have a respectable career as a versatile player, but so did Dave Meggett — another “mighty-mite” who played wideout, kick returner and running back – and no one is going apeshit about him. Bush is bigger and stronger than Meggett, so he’ll do much better between the tackles, but I don’t know if he’s really got the running instincts and the patience to be an every-down back.

Which brings us to Vince Young. Of the four “stars” in the Rose Bowl, I think he’s the hardest to project. Another McNair? Another McNabb? Another Kordell Stewart? I honestly haven’t seen him play enough to make an accurate assessment, but I’d say the Stewart analogy is about right. I don’t know if Young has the decision making skills to be a big-time QB in the league. And he’s nowhere near the class of runner that Mike Vick is, but then again, no one is in Vick’s league. I think he can be a decent QB in the league…but people said the same thing about Akili Smith, and Cade McNown, and David Klingler and….

Welp, I think that’s enough from me. See you at the Fiesta Bowl next year!