Texas +7 v USC Natl Title Rose Bowl picks/discussion

[Lori]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm waiting to make sure there are no injuries before the game; it's a long ways away

[/ QUOTE ]

I know nothing about college football so I won't comment on the bet itself.

It does however strike me that if injuries are random, then having the bet earlier is slightly good for you if you are on the underdogs.

I'm assuming that if both sides lost their best four players, the game would be more level and extrapolating from there.

Lori

[ZeroGravitas]

[ QUOTE ]

I'm assuming that if both sides lost their best four players, the game would be more level and extrapolating from there.


[/ QUOTE ]

If both teams lost their four best players, USC would win by 30.

[MyTurn2Raise]

yeah...the injury thing I'm worried about is Vince Young. I think that Texas without Vince Young is a top 5 team, but not good enough to beat USC, and possibly not good enough to stay within 2 touchdowns. USC without Bush = more carries for White, passes to Jarrett and Smith, etc. USC without Lienart would hurt about 4 points I think, but still Bush, White, Jarrett, and Smith. so...my wait is over Vince Young.

[thatpfunk]

All,
I think the experience that USC has w/ the natl championship and the media hype machine may play a stronger role than many are predicting. Also the fact that this team has a month to scheme for Texas make me (a biased USC fan) believe that its an easy USC cover.

USC had more than a week to prepare for 3 teams this season: @UH 63-17, v.Arkansas 70-17, v UCLA 66-19. Coincendentally these also happen to be their best defensive performances of the year gving up 10, 7, and 6 in the first half while the games were still semi-competitive.

I'd be interested to see if someone could drag up the info of Pete's D w/ more than 1 week of preparation.

Anywho, I think many are largely ignoring or discounting how big of a factor these two trends will play on the game.