OldVol
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2005
- Messages
- 1,926
- Likes
- 595
They've officially destroyed any hope of USC repeating.
When they start all of this talk of Dynasty, it just blows any team out of the water.
I wasn't around, but I've read about the talk of a Dynasty to start the 1946 season. Army had just won back to back NCs. A late season Tie against ND cost them the championship, but even more telling; they only beat Navy by 3 and Navy was 1/8 that year.
Then Notre Dame reeled off back to back titles in 46 and 47. Guess what, yep; more talk of a Dynasty. What happens? They tied Southern Cal in the last game of the season and lost the title to Michigan. Now, is that poetic justice or what?
Then in 55 and 56 it was Oklahoma. Oh yeah, "They'll repeat," the experts said. You guessed it; they lost a heart breaker to ND, 0 to 7 and lost the title to a 10/0 Auburn team.
I remember the days of the 64 and 65 Bama Championships. "Oh baby, they'll threepeat in 66 as sure as you're born," squealed the pundits. So they lose the AP title to a ND team that had a tie, while the Tide were 11/0 that year. Do you see what's happening here? It's the Dynasty, threepeat jinx.
The same thing happened to Nebraska in 70 and 71, they're on their way to a threepeat, a dynasty if you will, and they lose the season opener and go 9/2/1.
Oklahoma again in 74 and 75, then Bama again in 78 and 79, then Nebraska in 94 and 95 and none of them yet have had the true dynasty.
It ain't gonna happen sports fans.
USC will not win a threepeat. Besides, it wouldn't be a real threepeat, it would only be a repeat and a half.
For once, Im agreeing with ESPN. Yep, talk up that threepeat. Call it a dynasty.
The Jinx of the D word is at work.
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/preview05/co...ivan&id=2129472
When they start all of this talk of Dynasty, it just blows any team out of the water.
I wasn't around, but I've read about the talk of a Dynasty to start the 1946 season. Army had just won back to back NCs. A late season Tie against ND cost them the championship, but even more telling; they only beat Navy by 3 and Navy was 1/8 that year.
Then Notre Dame reeled off back to back titles in 46 and 47. Guess what, yep; more talk of a Dynasty. What happens? They tied Southern Cal in the last game of the season and lost the title to Michigan. Now, is that poetic justice or what?
Then in 55 and 56 it was Oklahoma. Oh yeah, "They'll repeat," the experts said. You guessed it; they lost a heart breaker to ND, 0 to 7 and lost the title to a 10/0 Auburn team.
I remember the days of the 64 and 65 Bama Championships. "Oh baby, they'll threepeat in 66 as sure as you're born," squealed the pundits. So they lose the AP title to a ND team that had a tie, while the Tide were 11/0 that year. Do you see what's happening here? It's the Dynasty, threepeat jinx.
The same thing happened to Nebraska in 70 and 71, they're on their way to a threepeat, a dynasty if you will, and they lose the season opener and go 9/2/1.
Oklahoma again in 74 and 75, then Bama again in 78 and 79, then Nebraska in 94 and 95 and none of them yet have had the true dynasty.
It ain't gonna happen sports fans.
USC will not win a threepeat. Besides, it wouldn't be a real threepeat, it would only be a repeat and a half.
For once, Im agreeing with ESPN. Yep, talk up that threepeat. Call it a dynasty.
The Jinx of the D word is at work.
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/preview05/co...ivan&id=2129472