Orange County Register

 15 Comments

• franklymydearI says:

  November 5, 2009 at 2:08 pm

  Very doubtful.
• Marie says:

  November 5, 2009 at 2:09 pm

  These polls are always good for a laugh. As if there is any doubt who the results will favor on a USC blog? LOL But to answer the question, I’m no so sure you can call Pete Carroll’s run a dynasty. Yes he has done great things, but winning THE championship year after year is part a real dynasty. That has not happened. That would be like calling Mike Scoscia’s time with the Angels a dynasty, even though they only won a single World Series. The Angels have played well under Scoscia, but winning the tiny, Weak AL West and choking in the playoffs does not a dynasty make. The same goes with Pete Carroll and the weak PAC-10.
• TrojanAlum78 says:

  November 5, 2009 at 3:10 pm

  Premature comment. One defeat does not crumble a dynasty, even if its by 27-points. LBs need to work on lateral pursuit speed. Oregon State & Oregon exposed this. Too late to work on it now. Off season Carlise Conditioning will change that.

  PC always finds a way to come back. Those negative MEDIA WRITERS who follow the Trojans KNOW THIS.

  FIGHT ON!
• Nordeezy says:

  November 5, 2009 at 3:47 pm

  I wouldn’t call it dynsaty either. That’s some sports writers say to fill articles. I would actually call the past 7 years an era of domination, but not complete perfection (dynansty).

  Will USC continue to be a national title contender for the next 7 years?

  Absoulutely,

  FIGHT ON!

  hi Marie! did you get your milk and cookies yet? That hug offer is still on the table.
• pkcourt says:

  November 5, 2009 at 6:46 pm

  wow according to someone the usc players were pointing fingers at each other and crying on the bus, this is not true. There was no such article written in the times about this.
• Greg says:

  November 5, 2009 at 6:52 pm

  A football dynasty, indeed, any dynasty is a prominent and powerful team or program whose members retain their power and influence through time. With that in mind, USC can be considered a modern dynasty, as can others (FLA, LSU, etc.).

  Among the dynasties, USC can be plausibly considered the most prominent, that is - in addition to 2 NC’s, they have the most wins and best winning percentage in bowl games, vs. top ranked opponents, etc.

  Perhaps the greatest display of SC’s power and prowess came from the perception that they, although infrequently beaten, could not be dominated, conquered so to speak. In the last 8 years, SC was never beaten by more than 11pts (once) and on the rare occasion they lost, was by 7pts or less, typically within the last seconds or minute of the game.

  The reason why “this” SC dynasty has indeed come to an end, is the domination they were subjected to at Autzen. It is hard to imagine a scenario by which they will be able to erase the memory of that dismantling and recapture the perception of invincibility they have enjoyed over the last 8 years, within the near future.

  SC, like any other storied program can once again establish a dynasty, but in terms of “this” SC dynasty, I’m afraid it’s over.

  Thanks,
  Greg
• Quintiam says:

  November 5, 2009 at 7:24 pm

  Very nice post Greg, although I disagree with you that the dynasty has ended.

  Most consider John McKay’s tenure at USC a dynasty, at least from 1962 when he won his first national title to when he left in 1975. He and USC suffered a 51-0 loss to Notre Dame in 1966 yet went on to win the national title again in 1967.

  Will that happen with next year’s squad? I don’t know, but I do know it’s premature to say Pete’s dynasty is over.
• Marie says:

  November 5, 2009 at 7:38 pm

  I disagree that the dynasty is over because it was not a dynasty in the first place. In my opinion, a true dynasty would include multiple wins in the BCS championship game. Simply winning the weak PAC 10 does not a dynasty make. Calling Pete Carroll’s run a dynasty would be like saying Mike Scoscia has had a dynasty with the Angels. The Angels have done well under Scoscia, as have the Trojans with Carroll, but winning the tiny, weak AL West and failing to turn it into World Series wins disqualifies it as a true dynasty.
• b-house says:

  November 5, 2009 at 10:47 pm

  only if top athletes don’t want to go to usc anymore and given their success in the NFL the thought seems improbable. at the same time, i wouldn’t expect another seven year pac-10 title streak to begin next year (three or four maybe).
• pkcourt says:

  November 6, 2009 at 11:31 am

  Well lets get it straight players, coaches, administrations never identify their sports as dynasties. They simply talk about how good they have been over period of time, USC has been upper echelon in football since 1920. In present times the media is the one to claim dynasties on programs to sell ink, TV, and now the internet, it is how they make their living and stirring up the public to get attention. So is USC, or any other college team a dynasty no they are all just great football programs and give an education to boot.
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=575MqFK4tfQ
• TrojanAlum78 says:

  November 6, 2009 at 6:21 pm

  PAC-10 PARITY ……. We all know, & knew, it was coming. This is the year it caught up with USC - at least in Oregon. As we ALL know, USC can not have ALL of the elite players based on scholarship restrictions, thus those they passed up are wanting revenge for being passed-over (take ur pick of any PAC-10 team with SoCal HS players).

  UW was a different because Sark, Holt, & the rest of the USC staff know many of the Trojan players (just like when John Gruden went to Tampa Bay & had the Raider’s number in the Super Bowl), so they knew the strengths & weaknesses of the players and attacked it ….. successfully.

  Mario has a point & so does pk. but THE championship game is determined MAINLY by the yEast Coasters. Do you know WHICH conference has the MOST appearances in BCS Bowl Games? The BIG-12.

  The Pre-BCS polls where NOTHING like this. Thee Championship Team was selected by writers & coaches ONLY who actually could see how talented a team was. BCS does not (computer-animated).

  FIGHT ON!
• Marie says:

  November 7, 2009 at 1:12 pm

  Trojanwrapper78 is right, the Big 12 conference has the most appearances in BCS Bowl games. And with good reason.
• darkdiggler says:

  November 7, 2009 at 3:05 pm

  because the bcs selection needs a patsy for the title game?
• Marie says:

  November 8, 2009 at 1:31 pm

  We shouldn’t really discuss the BCS title game here because this is a USC blog and everyone knows the Trojans won’t anywhere near that event this year. Let’s talk about San Diego instead.
• Quintiam says:

  November 14, 2009 at 3:03 am

  Marie, er Mario:

  In the last 3 months, you have:

  1. Wished death upon all Trojan players and alumni
  2. Made jokes about injured Trojan players (twice)
  3. Made jokes about special education children
  4. Made jokes about “forced prison romances”
  5. Made jokes about bestiality

  The Mods and other maggots may tolerate your disgusting humor here but I will not.

  Please take your childish banality elsewhere.