Ohio State vs. USC: The Key to the Game

Of all the commentary written and spoken this season about the Ohio State/USC matchup, most are completely missing the real key to the game.  The key to winning Saturday isn’t the talent level, the venue, USC's freshman quarterback or Terrelle Pryor.   

Past year's scores have no bearing at all on what will happen this week. Last year's game was between two teams that no longer exist and players now gone.  It’s a new year with new teams, and the team that wants it more and imposes its will during the game will win, period.

There is plenty of historical precedent for this idea.

The 2006 National Championship game took place between a team that thought it was unbeatable (the Buckeyes), and a team that felt disrespected. A hungry-for-victory Florida had the emotion, intensity and drive to win. 

That is exactly what we saw in the 2002 conflict between Miami and OSU.  Miami, on paper, was superior, but the Buckeyes were intense, brutal and emotional. The Bucks hit Miami every single chance they had and took home the trophy.  Ken Dorsey STILL has blurred vision from the Wilhelm hit.  The single play that epitomized the struggle was Miami defender Sean Taylor's interception of a Craig Krenzel pass; a play which ended with Maurice Clarrett stripping the ball back from Taylor.  Clarett simply wanted it more.

Ohio State’s oft-discussed problem since 2006 is simple - they had (past tense) suffered from the same virus which plagued the Atlanta Braves of the 1990s.  How many times did the Braves run into a team in the playoffs that simply wanted it more? The all-business Braves lacked passion.   

That business-like focus is what led them through the regular season to multiple 100-win campaigns, but it did not serve them well in the playoffs.  The Braves had the talent to win multiple world championships, yet they are remembered for winning fourteen division titles and only one World Series.

When discussing this matchup, our USC friends rely a great deal on "talent level and past results."  On paper, sure, USC might be untouchable, but on paper, better teams lose to hungrier teams all the time.  While Ohio State has been trashed for losing to top-five teams, USC has busily ruined multiple seasons losing to low or unranked teams.

We can list hundreds of games this decade alone where a "lesser" team adopted a "go to the mattresses" attitude and took home the win.  A team that believes it cannot lose is certain to do just that.   

Ask Oklahoma about BYU.  Yes, BYU has talent, but the way the team played with intensity, Donny Osmond could have played QB with a similar result. 

I live in Oklahoma and listen to a local sports radio station.  The entire week leading up to the BYU game, I heard not a single caller or announcer give BYU a prayer of winning that game.   

Oklahoma was too strong, too fast, too talented and losing was an impossibility. Well, you get the point.  This week, I have somewhat the same sensation listening or reading anything about the USC/Ohio State game. 

Ask Oregon State, UCLA or Stanford about playing the "invincible USC Trojans" this decade. What would they tell you?  They would not say, "USC was superior on paper so we just went through the motions and got lucky."  I don't think so.  They wanted it more, and they were playing an arrogant team that thought it could not lose.  

Ditto Texas in 2005.  Playing in essentially yet another home Bowl game for USC (that sounds familiar to every Big Ten fan reading this, doesn’t it?), Texas never gave up and simply took the game away. 

That is exactly the combination we have Saturday as the "invincible" Trojans swagger into Ohio Stadium with a cocky freshman quarterback who asks Ohio State to “bring it on."

Regardless of what you hear, the game has not been played yet. The 2009 Buckeyes and 2009 Trojans are new teams.  Saturday we will find out who wants it more.  

Buckeyes, leave and gun, take the cannoli.