Rose Bowl Recap
We've all had a chance to sober up (some) from the big game, and besides basking in the glory of being national champions, there's the business of sorting out how Texas won the game.
*Let's just get Vince Young out of the way here. Every single story in every magazine, newspaper, blog, and television is about Young, so we're not going to re-hash it. He was the MVP, the best player on the field, and all the rest. Truly a one-of-a-kind performance.
--This vindicates our argument that Young should have been the Heisman Trophy winner, by the way. We argued, convincingly we thought, that Young was the best player on the field in every game, and he was most outstanding because of his ability to run AND pass like a Heisman player. After last night's game, most of the nation agrees, and were there a recall election, Young would win the award.
--Young's performance also apparently boosted his draft status among NFL teams. According to some reports, the Texans would consider taking Young 1st overall were he to decide to enter the draft. I still think he'll stay for his senior year, but it was that kind of performance.
*I thought that one of the biggest keys to the game was the Texas' defense ability to prevent USC from scoring the big play. You could literally see how badly USC wanted to put Texas away with the big play, but Texas refused to give in. To their credit, USC did an excellent job of taking what Texas gave them, but you could literally sense how badly USC wanted to put the game away with the big play, but couldn't.
The Horns ability to make USC work for their scores kept the game from getting in to one of those out of hand, Pac 10 showdowns, a type of game USC is better suited to win. Instead, Texas kept the pace at a reasonable clip and eventually wore down the Trojans. The game could have gone either way, but the Texas coaches did a great job doing what they had to to keep the game close.
*Gene Chizik has now won something like 26 straight games, and I was thrilled with his gameplan for USC on Wednesday night. He allowed USC to take the 4-8 yard plays underneath, refusing to give ground on the big plays. I can't emphasize how important I think it was that USC wasn't able to land one of their patented big plays. It's those plays that tend to break teams' backs. Texas refused to allow it. A great job by Chizik.
*Matt Leinart had a great game. I thought he was excessive about his refusal to take a hit, occassionally avoiding contact when yards could be had on a run, but other than that, he was masterful. He took what the Horns gave him and was a true technician, making accurate throws and perfect reads. In the end, it wasn't enough, but you can't fault Leinart for the loss. He had an outstanding game. I thought he might be the problem for USC. He wasn't. Instead, it was...
*...Reggie Bush. The Heisman winner didn't have a bad game statistically, with over 200 all purpose yards, but he didn't have a good game. His pitch-fumble was a huge mistake when he tried to make too much happen, and he was never able to break a big run. Even his 20 yard touchdown scamper would have only been good for 25 yards had he had more field in front of him. Texas had the team speed to stay with Bush, and he just didn't look immortal as he did against slower, weaker defenses. If anyone's draft stock went down last night, it was Bush. We've been saying for a while now that while Bush has great pro potential, he looks better than he is because of the poor team speed of the defenses he's facing. He's still got great pro potential, but at least we can all stop with the He's Immortal talk for a while.
Bush was trying so hard to make plays last night, but Chizik did a great job of having the speed ready on the outside for him. He was never able to shake free, and you could feel his frustration. I think that contributed to his first quarter mistake. He wanted to big play all game. Never got it.
*Lendale White, on the other hand, was very strong. I thought USC's coaches did a great job using him and recognizing that he was going to be effective against what Texas was giving the USC offense. The Trojans are too deep and talented to stop, and it's not surprising that they scored 38 points. Still, they can score 50+ on anyone if the opposing defense isn't having a good day. Kudos to Chizik and the Horns defenders for executing the game plan. It's weird to say, but only allowing 38 points was a success. The strategy worked. 38 is not enough to beat Vince Young.
*In one of my Rose Bowl previews, I said that Vince Young seemed to have an "MJ mode." He had it in last year's Rose Bowl, and he had it again this year. So next time you hear Vince talking about all the things he thinks he can do, just remember: he's not an arrogant asshole. He's just really confindent, really competitive, and really good. Like MJ.
*Lastly, while Matt Leinart played well, he was a total bitch in defeat. Maybe he learned it in Ballroom Dancing, but after the game, he got all stepsisterly bitchy and said, "I think we're still the better football team, but we didn't make plays." For all the bitching about Vince Young being "classless," I think we saw who the real poor sport was.
To be fair, Leinart's coach, Pete Carroll, was very gracious in defeat. Congratulations to him on the ridiculous 34 game winning streak and two national titles.
Now, the torch has been passed. Vince Young and the Texas Longhorns are the national champions. Just like we called it, by three points. Your 2005 National Champions: Texas Longhorns.
Baseball...
Football...
And did anyone notice we beat Memphis on the road in basketball on Monday? My, my... Things are good in Austin these days.
--PB--
0 recs |
24 comments
Comments
Things Are Beyond Good!
2002 Mens Swimming National Championship
2002 Baseball National Championship
2003 MBB Final Four
2003 WBB Final Four
2004 Baseball Runners-Up
2005 Rose Bowl Championship
2005 Women's Track & Field National Championship
2005 Baseball National Championship
2005 Women's Tennis Runners-Up
2005 VBall beats Unbeaten and #1 Nebraska in 5 games at Gregory - hopefully a preview of things to come
2006 Rose Bowl Championship
2006 Football National Championship
by patienthornsfan on
Jan 5, 2006 7:28 PM CST
reply
actions
0 recs
UT Championships
Next step: March Madness
Congrats again on your football NC.
by blackdog81 on
Jan 6, 2006 8:38 AM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Don't Forget
2004 Olympic gold medalist swimmers Ian Crocker, Brendan Hansen, Aaron Piersol, coach Eddie Reese and softball pitcher Cat Osterman
and
2000 Olympians Tommy Hannan, Nate Dusing, Jamie Rauch, Ian Crocker, Erin Phenix, Troy Dumais, Laura Wilkinson.
by FreedomDip on
Jan 5, 2006 10:45 PM CST
reply
actions
0 recs
Congrats from a Sooner
by MattH on
Jan 5, 2006 11:03 PM CST
reply
actions
0 recs
Trojan Response
- Vince Young was the best player on the field? Try the planet. The guy was astounding. His combination of size and speed is just freakish. While I agree that VY had a very strong case for the Heisman, comparing him to Bush is pretty tough since they play different positions. VY gets to touch the ball on every play while Bush does not. Still, like I said all along, I had no problem with Vince winning it. He proved last night that he was more than worthy, but didn't we know that all along??
- While it's true that Texas succeeded in preventing the big play, USC really didn't try to make too many big plays. They took a few shots, but were perfectly content with running White up the middle, mixing in a Reggie run and playing a ball control offense, taking time off the clock. For most of the night, USC moved the ball at will, so they didn't need to make the big play. To Texas' credit, Vince stayed patient and didn't try for the big play often, either.
- Texas did not wear down the Trojans - it was simply Vince being unstoppable. He impacted the way all 11 of the Trojan defenders played. The defensive backs had to cover receivers while simultaneously keeping an eye on VY. So the Trojans had to give everything underneath in terms of coverage. The USC defense was just fine conditioning-wise - they just couldn't tackle Vince, even though they were in position to do so most of the time.
- Reggie Bush is where Chizik did a great job. However, the USC coaches and all of Trojan nation expected this. The game plan was centered entirely around Reggie, so we knew that Reggie would be relatively silent. Same thing in last year's Orange Bowl. When Reggie gets game-planned like that, the other Trojans step up. White, Jarrett and Leinart all had great games, the team scored 38 points (and should have been a lot more if it weren't for their boneheaded plays), all with Reggie essentially as a decoy. USC is generally fine with this. Reggie's lateral to me was the major turning point in the game. USC was in complete control at the time, and the MO completely swung to Texas.
- I agree that Leinart came off looking bad in that post-game interview. He should have been 100% gracious. However, I will do my best to explain - not excuse - what he (and all Trojan fans) were feeling: he just lost for the first time in 3 years. He was quite distraught and pissed off that this loss came after his team essentially outplayed Texas on a TEAM level (more on this in a moment), only to get beaten by one guy. I can't tell you how frustrating that is. Still, this is no excuse for mouthing off in that post-game interview. Vince and the boys won the game, fair and square, and he just came off looking like sour grapes.
- I really felt that USC was the better overall team on the field. Consider the following:
- USC's offensive line controlled the line of scrimmage all night, running for 213 yards and 4 TD's. Although, to be fair, that was a great 4th down stop by Texas against Lendale White.
- USC's torched Texas' secondary to the tune of 365 yards, as Leinart had a whale of a game. And he wasn't just throwing screens. He threw deep curls, outs and slants. He basically picked apart a Texas secondary thought to be the best in the nation.
- USC won the battle of special teams, not missing any PAT's or FG's (while Texas missed one of each), causing a fumble on punt return early on a hit by Scott Ware (which they converted into a TD), and not getting beat on any big plays in this phase.
- USC's secondary, much maligned all season, held Texas to 267 yards passing, only 30 yards above their season average, and allowing no big plays at all - almost all under routes to a tight end.
- USC held all Texas running backs to under 100 yards combined.
- The USC defense caused 4 Texas fumbles, 3 of which bounced back into the hands of the Longhorns.
- USC left 3 TD's off the board in the first half: one on the Reggie lateral, one on the poor throw & decision by Leinart (it was picked off on a MARVELOUS play by Griffin, but shouldn't have been thrown), and one on the pass by Jarrett to a wide open Steve Smith. That's 21 points that USC blew all by themselves. This is what Leinart means by Texas "making the plays." (not excusing what Leinart did, just explaining).
The irony is that the Trojans, a program that had become the ultimate TEAM in college football - through camaraderie, teamwork, mental toughness, communication - were taken down pretty much by a single player. I know that's going to sound like sour grapes, or a dig at Texas, but it's not intended that way. It's simply fact. Texas is mentally tough and has great teamwork, but USC handled the rest of the Longhorns just fine - they just had no answer for Vince, and if the two teams played again, they still wouldn't. The guy is unstoppable. There was no luck, cheating or trickery involved. USC scored 38 points, and that is more than enough to win a title game. But PB was spot on when he said, "it's not enough to beat Vince Young." It sure isn't. I'm a believer.
by TrojanMal on
Jan 6, 2006 1:47 AM CST
reply
actions
0 recs
Texas response
Texas offensive line was more impressive than USC's. Texas rushed for 289 yards four touchdowns and gave up 0 sacks. USC gave up three.
Lienart had a great game but Vince had a higher completion percentage nad 0 interceptions.
USC did win the special teams, Texas did win the turnover battle.
You do not hold a team to 30 yards above thier passing average. This indicates that Texas did better against USC than the norm. this is not a good thing.
USC held all Texas running backs to under 100 yards combined and yet Texas still out rushed USC. Our running backs had O turnovers, yours 1.
The texas defense cause two fumbles, one lost and had their hands on three interceptions two dropped.
You can't say USC left three TDs on the board. The smith pass is the only one that would have resulted in a TD. Reggie does not lateral, maybe USC kicks a FG, maybe a TD. The interception, just a great play by Texas. If Ross does not fumble the Punt, Texas goes down to score a TD, texas also missed a FG and extra point. That is 4 guaranteed points left out and one possible TD. That comes out 11 to 10 Texas (if we are going to have revisionist history then I can revision it anyway I want).
USC was not the better team. sorry the bes team one, and saying anything less IS sour grapes.
by billb on
Jan 6, 2006 8:24 AM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I think you better look again...
- Texas' offensive line was very good, but it was Vince who rushed for 200 of those 289 yards, and he made a lot of those out of broken pass plays (and I acknowledged that Texas did a great job in pass protection). On designed rushes, USC was in position to make tackles, but VY was too good to tackle. This does not make Texas' offensive line "more impressive than USC's."
- I never said Leinart was better than Young. He wasn't. How could he be? LOL. I said that Leinart picked apart the Texas secondary, which is indisputable.
- Holding a team to 30 yards above their average is essentially holding them to their average, especially when you consider that the USC secondary essentially left men open on many plays to try to contain VY's running. Again, Vince beat us there, too. If VY is unable to run like can, those receivers are shut down.
- Texas DID outrush USC and that's because of Vince. See first point.
- The three TD's on the board is arguable, of course. The reason I say the Reggie lateral is a TD is because we were marching at will. Texas couldn't stop us. The same goes for Vince's knee down before the pitch for the TD. That non-call wasn't a big deal, because you have to assume they would have scored anyway because they were marching on USC during that drive.
- The interception was a great individual play, but the pass shouldn't have been thrown. That's not Texas' fault, of course. But once again, we were marching on that drive.
You've really done nothing to refute the fact that USC simply got beat by the most unstoppable player in college football, not by his team as a whole. I heard an Austin columnist on the radio this morning say that if VY comes back, the Longhorns will be huge favorites to win the NC next year. If he doesn't, they will have trouble cracking the top 20. Even a columnist in your own town supports my argument.
I'm not trying to downplay Texas' national title. After all, the other players certainly stepped up during the course of the season, right? I'm just looking at this game for what it was - one guy becoming a legend before our own eyes.
Texas won the ring and USC didn't. It wasn't unfair or unearned. Congratulations and enjoy your national championship!
by TrojanMal on
Jan 6, 2006 11:56 AM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
A win is a win is a win
by GoHorns on
Jan 6, 2006 12:00 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Here, here
And thanks to everyone for having me on this site.
by TrojanMal on
Jan 6, 2006 12:02 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
You are...
If you are using rushing stats to prove USC offensive line dominance then why don't Vince's rushing stats count? What about there three sacks. Both O lines dominated. This is a push.
MY point was that Vince picked apart the USC secondary. Picking aprt the secondary is a push.
The secondary did not hold Texas to anything. To believe anything else is short sighted. No 30 yards more is not the same as average. It is 15 percent more. Again allowing a team to do better against you than they generally do is NOT a good thing. This is common sense. Edge Texas
The interception should not have been thrown, Ross should not have fumbled. That's a push, Texas giveth and taketh away.
I am not disputing that you got beat by Vince Young but that you said "that USC was the better overall team on the field". Vince Young may be 99% of the Texas team, but the best team on the field was Texas. If you are arguing that Vince was almost wholly responsible for the win, I'll give you that. If you are arguing that USC is more balanced, I'll give you that. BUT the score was Texas (not Vince Young) 41 USC 38. This is why games are played, to determine the best team. If you cannot admit that Texas was the best team then I cannot call your post anything more than sour grapes. poor sportsmanship at its best. I really expected better.
by billb on
Jan 6, 2006 1:10 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I AM aruing that...
- Vince's rushing does count. Absolutely. My point is, when Texas had a designed running play, USC tacklers were in position to make the play. They just couldn't. Where Texas' O-line really stood out was flawless pass protection. Of course, with Vince, pass protection also means a running opportunity. I never said Texas' O-line wasn't good. I just said that USC held the other Texas RBs in check. I don't really know what your point is here.
- The USC secondary couldn't really cover anyone consistently because they had to spy Vince so he wouldn't run. So I thought they did a pretty good job of holding Vince to 267 yards passing given that condition.
What is not perception is that this is a national championship that belongs to University of Texas. USC had their opportunities and didn't get it done. Texas did. End of story.
by TrojanMal on
Jan 6, 2006 1:32 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Then you need to retract this statement:
by billb on
Jan 6, 2006 2:29 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
LOL
by TrojanMal on
Jan 6, 2006 7:52 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Team effort
Vince Young plays on a team. The BCS/AP didn't have Vince ranked #2 all season, it was Texas. Vince Young playing for Temple is not going to beat USC.
For some USC fans to say that nobody else could do anything against the Trojan defense, just look at the numbers:
Rushing
Selvin Young 7-45 (6.4 ypc)
Jamaal Charles 5-34 (6.8 ypc)
(Bush 6.3, White 6.2...of course Vince 10.5 ypc)
Receiving
David Thomas 10-88 (8.8)
Limas Sweed 8-65 (8.1)
Billy Pittman 4-53 (13.3)
Brian Carter 3-52 (17.3)
(and Yes USC had equally great numbers receiving including the fullback catching 3 for 61 yds)
Both TEAMS played well. Last year I would pick USC over any other of the undefeated teams. But this year, there is no TEAM I'd rather have than Texas (and yes that includes Vince Young).
by Lincoln on
Jan 6, 2006 9:13 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Poor Sport.
by billb on
Jan 7, 2006 10:53 AM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
true, vince was good, but..
by bendj on
Jan 6, 2006 8:31 AM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Invalid Argument
But these two plays do not allow you to say that "defense wins championships" when your defense got marched on all night. Your defense didn't win the championship, Vince Young did.
by TrojanMal on
Jan 6, 2006 12:00 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
DEFENSE
by bendj on
Jan 6, 2006 1:05 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Defense didn't win this championship...
Great game by both teams and their players.
by Lincoln on
Jan 6, 2006 9:22 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
true
I agree completely.
Along with that, when ESPN was doing the sportsnation poll, one of the questions asked was: "If Texas and USC swapped QB's, who would win?" I'll tell you what, a Reggie Bush - Vince Young backfield would give NFL teams nightmares. I get chills just thinking about that.
by bendj on
Jan 6, 2006 11:16 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
No need to argue
Great players stepped up on both sides.
Both defenses, although overall got marched on, made big plays.
We just witnessed the greatest game in college history.
Two evenly matched teams, a team is the sum of their parts, played their hearts out.
Just sit back and enjoy the glory of something we may never get to witness again.
by Wells on
Jan 6, 2006 1:06 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
A game
The game DID have to end eventually and it was UT that had more points when the horn sounded. I imagine that if you said before the game that USC would have 30 first downs and 574 yards on about 75 percent passing, you'd have thought USC must have blown them out. However, horns won it.
Excellent game til the end.
by FreedomDip on
Jan 6, 2006 2:46 PM CST
reply
actions
0 recs
More to the Point
With 4 minutes and some change left to play Texas was Behind 12 points for whatever reason, Texas was losing the game. They scored twice and Stopped one of the best, most talented offensive teams that college football has ever seen. USC lost the game because in those last minutes they could not use their talent to determine the outcome of the game.
In those last four minutes Texas used all their talent, they whole team to exert their will and control the outcome of the game.
by Xerxes on
Jan 7, 2006 12:28 PM CST
reply
actions
0 recs











