More On Minnesota

North Carolina is getting better, but so is Minnesota.

All those SEC teams are bottom dwellers and USC would for sure stomp them, but they will schedule Citadel twice in the same year before they would play any Pac 10 school no less a sure loss to USC.

Sorry scott, but you have little concept of the sec and their goals if you think they will play USC.

Remember Arkansas?

Minnesota is a long ways from L.A. and it will be a fun game. A great place to showcase USC. They have some good high school talent (football players, not high school cheerleaders) up there in the cold. I don't know why Wolf would object to playing Minnesota. It might not be a super competitive game, but still. And they are from the Big Ten (Ohio State, Iowa, Michigan, Michigan State, Penn State...) not too shabby a conference.

Nothing will ever please Wolf unless USC Football is dropped for good. I just don't get it. USC Football players could bleed gold and silver and Wolf would still find something wrong with them.

I'm excited about Minnesota! It is a hell of a lot better than San Jose State of Hawaii.

"Here ARE a few others..." you mean. C'mon. You went to college.

I like it.
Virginia and Akansas looked like a tough series when originally scheduled. You never know. Still the Gophers should be relatively easy win over a BCS conference team. Low risk of a loss and you don't take a huge hit in the computer rankings by playing Citadel or a DII school

This can only benefit USC in the BCS if the Gophers somehow rise to greatness in 2009, and maintain it the following two years. Yeah, not likely. USC will roll Minnesota early in the year, and the Gophers will never recover. The Big 10 again? Yawn. But, it is better than S.J. St or Idaho.

Were there any other teams USC seriously considered?

T&T - Although I agree that scheduling such cupcakes should weigh heavily against a BCS title shot, Florida did not "take a huge hit in the computer rankings by playing Citadel....?" Florida won the BCS!

Oh please Scott!

Yet, I'm sure you'll be so impressed by the SEC and Big 12 conferences scheduling home games against Div 1-AA powerhouses Citadel, North Texas and Louisiana-Lafayette. Then again, who really cares what impresses you. You've proven to be completely biased (not a good reputation for a journalist) and have the least amount of football knowledge on your own blog.

And, you'll never be impressed with anything USC achieves. Did it ever occur to you that wins against seemingly unimpressive teams like Ohio State, Penn State, Notre Dame, Auburn, Arkansas, Michigan, Oklahoma, Iowa, Virginia is because SC is so impressive? Of course not, because to you only five loss or better SEC and Big 12 teams can be good.

And did it occur to you that SC would happily schedule SEC and Big-12 teams, but those conferences won't play USC? Because once they do and lose to SC by 50, the gigs up and everyone east of the Rocky Mountains will realize that those conference aint that good.

Swing over to the other side - UCLA blog and take a look at the "home and home" UNLV series being broadcast over there before you complain about Minnesota. All the talk over there is BB not FB. Furthermore, How bad can it be to be competing with the top 2 or 3 schools in the country for the BEST of the best recruits, on a yearly basis. Trojan_SF is right those SEC, Big 12 schools are scared to death to schedule USC in the season - look at the Carroll era to see why. Who has beat the Trojans except Texas in 2006 BCS championship? I think...NO One. The Pac-10 has to improve to help our chances. Out of conference games don't mean so much.

MAB- Out of conference games are very important, especially when the Pac 10 goes 1-6 against the MWC in the regular season. But, I agree that no one wants to schedule USC.

uscmike-

UF plays in the SEC which is way tougher than the PAC 10. Only Tom Hansen would argue against that. Plus UF beat #1 ranked Bama en route to the BCS title game.

USC beat the baby bears from across town to pad their late season resume. Maybe if USC would have played Utah in the Pac 12 CG they could have gained some BCS points.

Minnesota is not a cupcake. They are a bowl team from a BCS conference. Ask tOSU if playing Minnesota annually hurts their BCS NCG chances any...

Everybody is missing the significance of the series. Yes, its against a rising, but never expected to do much Big11 team. Regardless, its a game that will command a very large TV market both days it is played.

Think about the coverage map: that game, if its not a national telecast will be on in all big-ten and western markets. It probably means an earlier kickoff time, so the game isn't lost to the east. That all translates to good pr and recruiting exposure.

Minnesota doesn't present a great football opponent, what it presents is a good football opportunity.

It pains me to say it, but Wolfie is correct. Dump these Big 10 weak sisters. OK, the SEC and Big12 schedule peewee non-conference opponents on the fiction that their conference schedules are brutal. But, fellow Trojans, we are NOT a cousin-marrying, tobacco-chewing, moonshine-swilling SEC team. SC plays a top schedule because -- say it with me -- WE ARE SC!. Come on, Garrett, let's play Bama or Oklahoma pre-conference. Or, how exciting would an SC-Florida home-and-home be? FIGHT ON!!

Hey Mike, OU or Bama don't want to play us!

No SEC team will play USC OOC ever again. Not after Auburn and Arkansas got exposed and their NC chances killed after week 2. The SEC's running scared of USC and who can blame them. They don't play us they're guaranteed a spot in the MNC game.

T&T- "UF plays in the SEC which is way tougher than the PAC 10. Only Tom Hansen would argue against that."

The SEC was vastly overrated this year. They always feast on a cupcake OOC schedule, and did not fare well in several "tougher" OOC games:

fUCLA 27, Tenn 24
La Tech 22, Miss St. 14
Wake Forest 30, Ole Miss 28
Wyoming 13, Tenn 7
Duke 10, Vandy 7
Texas 52, Arkansas 10
Geo Tech 38, Miss St. 7
Clemson 31, So. Car 14
W. Va 34, Auburn 17
Wake Forest 23, Vandy 10
Geo Tech 45, Geo 42

Iowa 31, So. Car 10
Utah 31, Ala 17

Plus, look at the cupcake wins:
Hawaii, Citadel, Geo. Southern, C. Mich, Norfolk St., Mid. Tenn. (2), W. Ky (2), Wofford, UAB (2), N. Ill., Miami-Ohio, Rice, Tulane (2), Ark. St., W. Ill., La.-Monroe (3), Tenn-Martin, Appalachain St., Troy, N. Texas, Samford, Memphis, S.E. La.

In the end, the SEC was Florida, rising Ole Miss, exposed Ala, and not much else. The SEC was over-hyped, as usual.

Mike - How do you reconcile your statement that USC should not play Big 10 schools and instead play SEC/Big 12, yet also acknowledge that "the SEC and Big12 schedule peewee non-conference opponents?"

I'm sure Pete Carroll and Mike Garrett will have SC play anyone, anytime and anywhere, so I don't think they are the ones keeping USC from a home and home series with any school from one of those two conferences.

Fight On!

Come, Trojan_SF, don't confuse me with facts. I was on a roll. But actually my statements are not inconsistent. Yes, the SEC plays a weak non-conference schedule but is still light years tougher than the Big 10. At least that perception persists, so why play a Big 10 team in non-conference? What is to be gained? Playing and beating any SEC or Big 12 team would appear more impressive. Whipping a bad Nebraska team two years in a row looked better than it really was, no?

Mike - I agree with you and would prefer that USC didn't have to play the Big 10 so often, and instead played Big12 and SEC schools as frequently. I just don't think SC will be given the opportunity given those two conference preference for a weak OOC schedule.

So much for my request to the AD that USC play Alabama in 2010 and 2011, to commemorate the 40th anniversary of the 1970 Birmingham game...