SB Nation User Blog: The Hombre

USC Overrated? SEC Overrated? We actually don't know.

The Hombre — Wed, 12 Nov 2008 01:32:28 -0000

Just a thought on USC, which I might have brought up in the open game thread on Saturday. The conventional wisdom is that USC has consistently been one of the best teams in the country over the past 5 years. I heard on TV last week (I think on the ABC half time show from Flutie) that USC would probably have won several more national titles during the Carroll era had a playoff system been in place. Let's look at USC's bowl wins:

2007 49-17 over a mediocre Illinois team. (Big 10)
2006 32-18 over a declining Michigan program. (Big 10)
2005 38-41 loss to Vince Young. (He just wins football games . . . except not anymore?) (Big 12)
2004 55-19 over an Oklahoma team (Big 12) that would go on to barely scrape by Oregon in its bowl game the following year, and then lose to Boise St. in 2006 and a West Virginia team last year that is also in decline.
2003 28-14 over a Michigan program that was beginning its decline. (Big 10)
2002 38-17 over an Iowa program at its peak. (Big 10)

You can't blame USC because of the way the bowl system is set up, but notice how SC has never had to take on a top SEC opponent. USC has clearly been the best team in the Pac-10, they own the Big 10, and have split against the Big 12. And really, sans Vince Young, Texas loses that game by 20. It was the greatest individual performance by a college football player that I've ever seen.

Meanwhile, the SEC champ has destroyed the Big 10 for a couple of years and beat the Big 12 champ, LSU over Oklahoma, by a touchdown in 2003.

I know it sounds crazy, but I'm actually rooting for USC to make the title game against Florida or Alabama to see how the elites from the two conferences actually matchup.

I'd love to hear what others think about this and I'm sure that I've overlooked some key non-conferences games that might further illuminate things in this brief analysis.

DBD Labor Day Weekend 1st Game Reaction Post

The Hombre — Sun, 31 Aug 2008 04:08:13 -0000

The Hombre wrote a great post here, which I think can be a good place for dumping of links. There will be probably many, many many post-game wrap links and other items of interest from around these here intertubes. So, to help keep the FanPost section clean for items of longer analysis, like Danzig's post, we can use this for a weekend DBD. I'll even start off:

Okanes article on Sean Young.

"I told him during pregame at stretch that this is what he's been waiting for for six years," Cal coach Jeff Tedford said. "He had a great camp. It's nice to see him contribute to the team."

A series of injuries led to Young amassing just three career catches coming into the season. Young was the Bears' most consistent receiver during training camp and simply continued that production Saturday night.

Enjoy the post-game analysis done by The Hombre and others. I, for one, am surprised at how well The Hombre did with 10 beers in him. But if you have some other links, we can put them in here, too. Dump away! GO BEARS!

1. Riley was amazing. He does things that you can't teach. He's special and there really is no way to quantify that.

2. Vereen and Best are both special. We've been blessed.

3. Normally the offense comes along slower than the defense so that might be initially discouraging. Still, I like the 3-4, Syd reminds me of Delta O'Neill. I think the defense will come along and will be great. Our linebackers are a wrecking crew.

4. Our receivers are green but receivers can develop faster than any other position on the field. I think we'll be fine.

5. I feel bad for Nate. When he got in the game he showed that he has the better arm. The problem was that it seemed like he felt he had to prove too much and made mistakes. Nate got his chance and it didn't work out. For a moment he showed prominence, and for that I give credit to everyone who defended Longshore. When he's at the top his game from a raw talent standpoint he's better than just about anyone in the country.

6. Cal is under the radar. We play our best from that position. We need to take one week at a time and I think it might be a good thing if we aren't ranked next week.

7. I've had ten beers. Please excuse any errors. Wish I could be in Berkeley tonight! Go Bears!

Riley vs. Longshore - My Take

The Hombre — Sun, 03 Aug 2008 00:33:56 -0000

After reading Danzig's excellent statistical analysis posted here and commentary on Glenn Dickey's surprisingly informative article posted by Hydro, I can't help but feel compelled to give my opinion on the subject. We're less than a month away from Cal football and I'm getting excited just thinking about it. For the first time in seven months my dad and I reignited the Longshore/ Riley debate.

I think the main difference between the Longshore camp and the Riley camp on this site is how one approaches football. Those who support Longshore point primarily to statistics which reflect his talent. I have to admit, after reading Danzig's post I was shocked at how well Longshore played in certain games. I thought Dickey's piece was particularly illuminating in the sense that it illustrates how Longshore obviously takes a technical approach to the game. His instinct is to check all five options as he searches for the hole that must exist in the defensive scheme. When he succeeds it's perfection (ie. offensive stats that are off the charts; see early 2007). When he fails it results in sacks and injuries. Besides being a classy guy (from everything I've heard), this must be why Tedford loves coaching him. He's the perfect student.

However, although Longshore is obviously very intelligent and has a strong understanding of the game, this is in fact his biggest weakness. He plays football like it's a video game when in fact football is something else. I played football in high school on the offensive line. I suffered from slow white man's syndrome and while I wasn't the biggest kid or the strongest kid, I was a decent player because I knew the play book inside and out. I understood how to operate with technical and tactical precession. Look at any intelligence survey from the NFL and you'll find that o-linemen are at the top. With that said, I was an absolute mess on defense. I spent my freshman year of high school as a third string middle linebacker and when I got in the game I was confused. My brain needs a strategy and I lacked the ability to read and react to what was happening. I was incapable of forgetting everything from practice and just hitting someone. To me, that has always been Nate's biggest problem. When a play goes wrong he's constantly thinking about what could have been improved. Perhaps the receiver should have run the route differently, or maybe he should have stepped out of the pocket sooner. It's all technical analysis. That's not playing football but rather it is thinking about football. Had Nate just reacted to the situation he might have made a first down. Watch any Longshore game and when a play goes wrong you can see the focus on technical mistakes in his eyes as he politely tries to communicate to his teammates or Tedford what went afoul. The kid thinks too much.

So why Riley? Well, look at the Dickey article. Riley will look to option 1, and option 2, and then he looks to make his own play. That's what my coaches used to call "reading and reacting." The best football players learn the plays but understand that the game is technical only in a limited sense. This isn't Madden football and no play is going to work every time. Although I respect it, that's why statistical analysis is so silly in football. You can complete every pass on first and second down but miss every pass on third down and yet you'll still have a 66% completion rate. We all know that the game is determined by four or five big plays. Consistency is a factor, but is basically irrelevant in a close college football game. You only have to deliver on those important plays.

Nate's a nice kid but he doesn't have "it." There's a difference between being able to throw a sixty yard pass from your knees and leading men. Let's watch Aaron Rodgers this year. The ESPN pundits think he's going to be a disaster. I think they'll be in for a shock. As for Kevin, he blew one of the biggest games in Cal history and yet came back and won the bowl game against Air Force. The kid is a winner. Nate is a prodigy who would make a great offensive coordinator and maybe a decent backup in the NFL. My hunch is that Tedford sees Nate as what he could have been had he had the pure athletic talent. That's why he's so loyal to Nate.

-The Guy Who Used to Post as "Ted" on the Old Site