Funny USC Pictures
USC fans celebrate their trip to the National Championship Game being held in the 2003 Sugar Bowl. *Correction* Because USC lost to an unranked, six loss team and played only one top 25 opponent during the entire season, they failed to earn a spot in the National Championship Game. 
More Trojan tomfoolery.
Class act Matt Lienert wears on public interviews a shirt that reads "F*CK The BCS" after USC failed to earn a berth in the National Championship Game. Oddly enough, Matt would later praise the BCS when USC got a spot in the 2004 National Championship Game and undefeated SEC power Auburn was left out. The next year after losing to Texas, Matt would insist, "We're still the better team."
posted by LSUoverUSC @ 5:59 PM
50 comments
50 Comments:
A picture says a thousand words.
USC fans weren't thinking Rose Bowl. Everyone wanted Sugar.
What's wrong with you people? Really, do you need mental help? You truly have obsessive-compulsive disorder.
I hope announcers see the pictures of Matt No Class Leinert. What a jerk.
Little Stevie: We know you want to be a lawyer. Will you lie to the judge and distort the facts? Did you know intentionally ignoring facts and case law against your position is unethical and grounds for discipline? I guess ethics is not important to you. Have a great, short career.
LMFAO thanks for the gig
It's appropriate that the guys' shirts read "GIVE ME some sugar." Obviously, USC is used to being given everything -- titles, awards, Heismans, etc. When finally there was a more fair system in place than the good ole beauty peagant of old, USC could not rely on being given anything. The AP tried, but the AP was already obsolete.
Here is a list of all college football national champs 1901-2005:
1958 LSU
2003 LSU
There are no other national champs as no others are recognized by LSU. They simply don't count. They don't exist.
Don't you think a national athletic power should have more than two shared championships?
LSU didn't share either of its two national championships. And if LSU counted championships as USC does, LSU would have six.
You guys are not only stupid but you are blind. Most LSU fans think you are jerks and are giving the school a bad name. Ohhhhh---I get it. You idiots are really Ole Miss or Arkansas fans. Yeah, that's it. And yes, USC has 11 but you are too ignorant and uneducated re the history of college football to even have an inkling as to how it works. Just admit it---the truth will set you free. Dummies.
Pretty funny, Anon. Actually, I was tongue-in-cheek about LSU's championships but I guess these guys don't get it. But we know they really do have an agenda as their clear goal is to denegrate what USC has done to make themselves look better. They're not realy dummies but their feeling is that they will be bigger and better by belittling others. Not a wise way to go.
I actually cheered for LSU in the Sugar Bowl in 2003. I thought it was a great story and two classy teams would split. This was with no offense to Oklahoma. Boy, was I wrong. Oklahoma would never have acted this way. They have split in the past and the response was always "congratulations" to the other team. I'm very sorry to have cheered for LSU in that one. Never again.
Don't sign a contract if you're not going to abide by the stipulations of that contract.
LOL @ USC fans attempting to take the high moral ground in this debate.
You are so damn stupid. The contract never excluded the AP, dummy. Now stop this crap. You keep giving the same false argument, "Stevie." Do you know that most LSU fans think you are an absolute classless jerk? Do you know why they think that? It's because you ARE. High moral ground? Buddy, you are a bottom-feeder.
read the contract before acting like you know anything about the BCS.
BCS = legitimate & authoritative
AP = outdated & obsolete
It's been read ad nauseum.
It says nothing about rejecting the AP. Don't parce. The AP was never rejected nor relegated which has been the crux of your squirrely little argument. The contract provides for the BCS champion but not the AP champion and you damn well know it. That's what this one-sided "dialogue" has been about--you ignore facts and reality and are trying to re-write history by picking a stupid fight over a non-issue. You've been blown out of the water numerous times (see the Michigan Zone and Heismanpundit for example). If you don't like the AP that's your problem which you can't seem to deal with, theiving little "Stevie." Don't give me any more of this "moral" crap as you are the worst of the lot.
As an LSU alum ('79)living in LA with a lot of USC folks, I never had a problem with them until this billboard stuff came up. Most of the USC people I know cheered for LSU (like the anon. above) but that sure changed with this garbage. Please stop making us look like a bunch of classless hicks, Steve. You are truely ungracious in your attitude and, frankly, you are off-base in your argument. Please stop it as you've done enough damage.
I'm a USC alum (75) and I find this site hilarious. I even thought the billboard was in good taste. I'm going to level with you...I think LSU has the stronger claim because we did agree to the BCS. That doesn't mean I won't accept the AP. It's just that I think the BCS is what counts in these times.
Fight On!
Was there any reason on this planet an unbiased person would have thought USC was better than LSU in 2003?
USC was playing so much better at the end of the year. That's abundantly clear but you want to re-write history. Yeah, USC was probably better but that's not relevant. Once again, you know damn well that's not relevant to the discussion. Also, nice post from the "USC '75" person. Yeah, right.
This crap is funny. Go Western Ilinois!!!
If you had read the argument, you wouldn't need me to post this:
LSU ended the season playing teams that finished #13, #27, #5, and #3 (of course had they not played or had the other team won, their rankings would be much higher). LSU won by an average of over 15 against each.
USC, on the other hand, finished the season playing three unranked mid-level teams before beating 3 loss Michigan (one of those losses was to an unranked team) in its non-championship game bowl.
Two-loss Michigan. The third was to USC. But this is not relevant. The votes were cast. Period. But that's too difficult a concept for you. If you don't like it, great. But don't re-write history. Your argument is useless when it comes to what actually transpired.
Brief truce. I'm not one of those engaged in name-calling. I am also a USC alum ('77). I certainly don't like this particular attitude but I can appreciate the fact that you feel slighted. I don't think it's justified but your feelings are yours.
I have written a few college football historical pieces in the past and hosings by the voters are not new. Beauty contests are also certainly not without fault. You are clearly also utilizing the "beauty contest" route. However, in the history of college football, there are several years that stand out as hosings or near-hosings (for lack of a better word). The following are just three:
In 1953, which is the worst of all, Notre Dame faced a backlash and failed to win either AP or UPI but won every other selector. Many, many sources rightfully consider this to be one of ND's championship teams while ND is seemingly on the fence about this one. This was a clear anti-ND vote but the other two teams still claim theirs. In 1939, Texas A&M was perfect while USC had two ties. However, USC had the toughest schedule in the nation and the math overcame the ties to give them the Dickenson championship, recognized at the time at representative of the NC. A&M won the AP which was ALSO representative of the NC. If either selector would have been absent a reasonable outcry would have ensued. Beauty contest vrs. record vrs. mathematical formula. Finally, in 1990, Colorado, with an inferior record and a "fifth-down" win beat Georgia Tech in one poll but lost to them by one vote in the other. Colorado was the stronger team but was more blemished (and Colorado is still screaming about the split). Both count theirs (of course).
My point is that even with the BCS which is no more than a combination beauty contest and math formula it is never perfect. A fine LSU team was selected for and won the BCS which is flawed. USC won the AP which is flawed but venerable and yes, still counts. If you don't like the AP, that's your choice. By the way, every team wants to play in the BCS game for one simple reason: It's a guarantee that you will play for at least a portion of the championship which cannot be guaranteed by the AP. Simple. Thanks.
BCS was started and agreed upon by the major conferences. AP has no such legitimacy and authority.
Had LSU not beaten Georgia twice, Georgia would have been a one loss team. Same goes for OU. Ole Miss, an equivalent to Michigan, would have been two loss as well.
LSU wishing for a bcs of sorts in basketball. Then they would possibly have been able to receive half of a national championship and been able to bitch for years in attempting to convince everyone outside the state of Louisiana how much better they were than that other team from Los Angeles. p.s. Thank you for not throwing Pabst Blue Ribbon or Milwaukee's best beer bottles at the opposing team's busses after your final four embarrasment. You good ole boys are a real class act.
Earn a spot in the national championship before claiming the national championship USC fans.
Simple as that.
I would love to see USC fans give one, just one rational explanation why they even deserved to be in the national championship game.
Didn't you only play one ranked team during the entire season?
Any top 10 team could go 11-1 with your schedule.
lol
what's your excuse for barely beating oregon St. and Arizona St?
You whiney, hick LSU douche bags have no tradition. You think your conference is so damn great, yet they get beat consistently year in and out in their bowl games. Saban should have called Pete Carrol for advice on how to beat Iowa. I laughed my ass off at that last second touchdown pass. Bring on the excuses. May you long live in the shadow of Alabama and Tennessee. Kick the light off in the trailer when you're done.
Sorry you could only beat OU by 7 points (and needed a little help from the refs). Enjoy Les Miles after he has one more winning season and jumps ship to the NFL.
LSU dominated OU. 7 point win doesn't indicate the type of domination (150 yards of OU offense).
LSU is 7-2 in bowl games the past 12 years. How is that getting destroyed in the bowls?
Hope USC enjoys probation for Reggie Push's family getting a 800,000 dollar house.
LOL.
I just find it funny that the homerism is only a one way road in trojan land. You trojans act like LSU fans are soo much worse, when in reality your own homerism is borderline retarded. Newflash, you might lose your ap title from 03. ahhahaha
Stevie is such an idiot. I guess yardage is more important than score. The next World Series will be decided by men left on base rather than runs. The bottom line is that OU lost by four touchdowns to K State (Cal only lost by two touchdowns) and LSU lost by 12 to a Florida team that was only half a game better than Cal. Cal's extra game was the Kick-off game with K State. And LSU's loss was at home while SC's was on the road in triple overtime. Guess none of that matters, right Little Stevie? But it's OK as all you care about is yardage and running up the score. Except when you are on the receiving end which renders it meaningless.
BTW, Socali's post on past champs was rather interesting. I would point out another "hose job": 1964 Arkansas where the polls voted before the bowls but Arkansas beat the No. 1 team and thus could not receive the No. 1 ranking. Some publications give them a NC anyway. Agree that no system is scientific enough.
No way USC would have beat LSU in New Orleans. NO CHANCE AT ALL.
LSU would have won by no less than 14. No way USC's illegal O could have done anything on that D.
Oh, and Florida was infinitely better than Cal.
SC wins that game by 14. They would've cracked LSU's D like an egg. But it's still irrelevant.
Look, If LSU wants to follow the BCS rules then implicitly it must accept the AP. The BCS recognizes the AP on its website (please, no bogus argument about the authenticity of this site as it is promoted and has been established by the BCS and is completely official. Just ask them. I have.). LSU cannot pick and choose which provisions it wishes to accept. If it accepts its BCS championship then it must recognize the AP as well for to do otherwise would be a rejection of the BCS. USC accepts the BCS which has accepted the AP. It's clear that per Stevie's arguments that LSU's BCS championship must be rejected which means 2003 is vacant as far as they are concerned. Brilliant.
Go read the BCS contract, moron.
Expressly states that there is one national champion.
That's authoratative because all major conferences agreed to it.
AP is obsolete and unimportant.
It does not say that, dumbass. It says there is a BCS champion. Don't lie. Show us the passage. It doesn't exist. And don't call me a moron you lying little son of a bitch. You are nothing but a fraud and you damn well know it. Anyone with a brain knows it but you still try to get away with your lying crap. Douchebag!
Also, craphead, you don't address the fact that the BCE recognizes the AP. And don't try that garbage that it's merely "a sidebar." It's their own goddamned site. You are a lying and you distort with the same crap over and over. That's why you won't come out little thieving Stevie. You coward. You gutless little coward.
Hey jackass! You're obsolete and unimportant. You clearly have the logical ability of a possum turd. But thanks for showing your true LSU education.
I'd suggest you ask your athletic director for a copy of the said BCS contract before you continue to act the fool.
Probation is lovely this time of year.
LOL!
I've read it. It DOES NOT say there is "only one national champ" but it talks about THE national champion which is a reference to the BCS system. There is NO exclusionary language and the BCS itself recognizes splits. Good God, I know you're not that dense but you really are playing a stupid game. You know better and your little ruse won't work. Nice try.
Don't even try, guys. Stevie and Chris will throw the same garbage back in your face over and over hoping it will stick while ignoring any facts against them. Unfortunately, you responded which is just what they want for credence. Most sane people understand the system and know there was a split (as do they) but they have succeeded in making a big stink out of a non-issue. It's like Karl Rove: Say it over and over and no matter how audacious it is, some will believe it and even more will respond. Your best bet is to just let it go and allow them to run off at the mouth while the real world laughs at them.
ya louisiana is a messed up state but atleast our schools don't help girls get abortions
HAHA LOOKS LIKE THIS TROJAN BROKE AND PETE CARROLL'S SUPER SEAMEN GOT ON BUSH'S CHIN. HAHAHA
What's wrong with an abortion for a 14-year-old? Especially in your case when Dad is the dad.
State of Louisiana only pays for abortions in case of incest. lol
usc didnt win they werent in the national cham p game dude ur blog rules usc get it thru ur f&&&&kin heads!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! gawd!!!!!!!!!! MYSPACE.COM/SKATEBORED1 geaux tigers O0 and the creator of this blog email me BRENDEN.OLEARY@CEBRIDGE.NET TO TEL ME IF U LIKE LSU THANX goodbye!
Post a Comment
<< Home