[pokergrader]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Give us Dixon, Paysinger, Colvin, Johnson and Bacon back and we will beat a fully healthy USC 7 times out of 10 on a neutral site.

[/ QUOTE ]
doubt that very much. i'd say they're maybe even, but usc probably has the edge. remember oregon only won by 7 at home against usc who was missing most of their front line and was starting sanchez. oregon has too many defensive liablities.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think you're underestimating how badly Oregon was hurt in that game. Sure we still had Dixon, but the offense with Paysinger, Colvin, and Johnson healthy is WAY better than what we had on the field against USC. I think Oregon was playing at least as far below their peak capabilities as USC was in that game, due to injuries, and I think Oregon was more dominant than the 7 point final margin indicated.

*Maybe* I'm being overconfident, and Oregon only wins 6 of 10, but there is no question in my mind that the Ducks are better than USC if both are 100% healthy.

[/ QUOTE ]

6 out of 10? Are you kidding me? Do you have any idea how injured our offense was for that game?

Our defense was injured too and missing some key starters, but we didn't lose the game on defense, so I wont complain about it.

USC would be a 3 point favorite at least on a neutral field against a healthy Oregon.