Cal

#51
#51
milohimself said:
The difference is with USC, it's true. Their talent level is astronomically better than the rest of the Pac-10. They're so much better than the rest of the conference at football, it's almost impossible to comprehend.
Click to expand...

Then they should be winning most their games by 4 tds no matter how little they prepared. It doesn't happen. Cal has LOTS of guys SC wanted. Obviously the opposite is true, but they can only get so many guys on the field. They also get the benefit of the doubt when looking at players. OSU was recruiting a player and rivals had him as a 3 star. SC started recruiting him, the analyst immediately moved him to a 4 star. That sort of crap happens all the time.
 
#52
#52
I just disagree. Players have tons of reasons to play hard each and every week, regardless of opponents. Implying that they dog it against lesser opponents is silly. There is always a backup waiting for PT and coaches will bench someone in a hurry who isn't putting forth the effort to win. Heck, competitive people play hard in pickup games. That's a lot of the reason they're plying their wares on Saturdays.
 
#53
#53
droski said:
I see so every time SC wins it because they got up for the game and anytime they lose it's because they didn't. You sound like a delusional trojan fan. If you actually listen to PC and his players they REPEATABLY mention how the pac-10 season is the most important part of the schedule and the hardest.

The reason why SC's offense stunk last season was because their running game was nonexitant due to a) no fb, b) inexperience oline, and c) inexperienced rbs. Their only two playmakers on offense were jarrett and smith. This is why they threw it like 30 straight times at the end of the michigan game.
Click to expand...
What do USC fans have to be dilusional about? They've gone like what, 40-4 in the Pac-10 since '02?
 
#55
#55
milohimself said:
Because they can. While the talent disparity is obviously not that great, USC is of the same mindset for most the Pac-10 schedule. I don't agree with it. But they've gotten acustomed to being able to playing one half of football and winning the whole game. It's got to be tough to get players to do that, game in and game out for years on end when they KNOW they don't have to.
Click to expand...


BS. They've lost enough pac-10 games and had many many close wins that those players realize they need to get up for those games. They had a bunch of close games last year because their offense was mediocre. All those 5 star runningbacks were mediocre. Are you really trying to tell me that the RB and olineman ran a little slower or decided they didn't want to make that extra cut? Are they throwing these games? seriously. this argument is really stupid.
 
#56
#56
milohimself said:
What do USC fans have to be dilusional about? They've gone like what, 40-4 in the Pac-10 since '02?
Click to expand...

They've had 2 close nonconference games in 5 years. And at least two dozen close conference games. If you were them, which teams would you get up for?
 
#57
#57
BigPapaVol said:
I just disagree. Players have tons of reasons to play hard each and every week, regardless of opponents. Implying that they dog it against lesser opponents is silly. There is always a backup waiting for PT and coaches will bench someone in a hurry who isn't putting forth the effort to win. Heck, competitive people play hard in pickup games. That's a lot of the reason they're plying their wares on Saturdays.
Click to expand...

particurally when you are talking about USC when they have 5 star players as backups.
 
#58
#58
this notion of getting players up for games is just a modern commentator invention. players play hard. rub of the green says even great teams will lose to inferior opponents at times.
 
#59
#59
droski said:
They've had 2 close nonconference games in 5 years. And at least two dozen close conference games. If you were them, which teams would you get up for?
Click to expand...

I think two of those games were to Stanford.
 
#61
#61
BigPapaVol said:
this notion of getting players up for games is just a modern commentator invention. players play hard. rub of the green says even great teams will lose to inferior opponents at times.
Click to expand...

I doubt Justin Harrell would have come back and played a game after tearing his pectoralis had the opponent not been Florida.
 
#62
#62
I guess that's why florida blew out ohio state. must not have been getting up for their SEC games.
 
#63
#63
kptvol said:
I doubt Justin Harrell would have come back and played a game after tearing his pectoralis had the opponent not been Florida.
Click to expand...
what does that have to do with the price of tea in China? Did the coach have something to do with motivating him? Did he need a speech? Did he dog some plays and need a boot?
 
#65
#65
BigPapaVol said:
what does that have to do with the price of tea in China? Did the coach have something to do with motivating him? Did he need a speech? Did he dog some plays and need a boot?
Click to expand...

You said players getting up for games was a commentator invention. I think the UF-UT rivalry was enough to make Harrell put forth the extra effort to play through a lot of pain.
 
#66
#66
kptvol said:
You said players getting up for games was a commentator invention. I think the UF-UT rivalry was enough to make Harrell put forth the extra effort to play through a lot of pain.
Click to expand...
that was exactly my point. Players don't need coaches motivating them. It is intrinsic in people who are driven to win. This focus on speeches and psychology is just commentator hype. Coaching happens in preparation for the game, calling schemes / plays and adjustments. Players do their own motivating, especially at the college level with so few games played.
 
#67
#67
BigPapaVol said:
that was exactly my point. Players don't need coaches motivating them. It is intrinsic in people who are driven to win. This focus on speeches and psychology is just commentator hype. Coaching happens in preparation for the game, calling schemes / plays and adjustments. Players do their own motivating, especially at the college level with so few games played.
Click to expand...

I assumed you meant that players have the same amount of drive for every game.
 
#68
#68
kptvol said:
I assumed you meant that players have the same amount of drive for every game.
Click to expand...
I am saying that winners have the same drive for every game, because losing is not an option. Players that need a lot of external motivation need not apply for my team.

I just don't buy this coaches as master motivators stuff. Players want to play, play well and kick the other guys teeth in, regardless of team.
 
#69
#69
BigPapaVol said:
I am saying that winners have the same drive for every game, because losing is not an option. Players that need a lot of external motivation need not apply for my team.

I just don't buy this coaches as master motivators stuff. Players want to play, play well and kick the other guys teeth in, regardless of team.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but different coaches get their players ready to do that in different ways. I remember the National Championship from 2004. USC was ready to take the field and all the players were jumping up and down and hollering. The Oklahoma players were standing there, much more calm. I'm sure the Sooners weren't overlooking USC (obviously), but it definitely seemed like USC was ready to roll over OU. I thought the composure of the Sooners would help them play sound football, but instead they made several stupid mistakes on which the Trojans capitalized.
 
#72
#72
BigPapaVol said:
I am saying that winners have the same drive for every game, because losing is not an option. Players that need a lot of external motivation need not apply for my team.

I just don't buy this coaches as master motivators stuff. Players want to play, play well and kick the other guys teeth in, regardless of team.
Click to expand...

SEC Championship game, 2001. Peach Bowl, 2002. Peach Bowl, 2003.

I don't disagree with you that the pregame speech has very little to do with what happens on the field. I can't imagine Fulmer just sat there in a La-Z-Boy before those games and said, "go get 'em." But I think there's plenty of evidence that sometimes teams discount an opponent and come out flat. A lot of times it costs them.
 
#73
#73
Vercingetorix said:
SEC Championship game, 2001. Peach Bowl, 2002. Peach Bowl, 2003.

I don't disagree with you that the pregame speech has very little to do with what happens on the field. I can't imagine Fulmer just sat there in a La-Z-Boy before those games and said, "go get 'em." But I think there's plenty of evidence that sometimes teams discount an opponent and come out flat. A lot of times it costs them.
Click to expand...
I think that reflects the staff's lack of focus and discipline. That said, I want the players who don't need Clintonian speeches to get ready to play - Every Game.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top