Huskies / UCLA

[hawknation2014]

A drop of 37 spots with essentially the same group of players, playing an easier schedule.

That statement I take issue with considering the fact that we are starting three true freshmen in the secondary and one true sophomore, who is seeing his first real playing time. Except for Peters, who has been kicked off the team, the cupboard was left bare. This is a totally rebuilt secondary made up of young players without any experience.

On offense, we're ranked 94th in 3rd down conversions and 104th in time of possession because we lack a reliable QB on the roster. And our best defensive player is forced to expend energy at running back because we lack a reliable full-time RB on the roster. All that puts additional pressure on the defense.

The good news is we are better against the run than we were last year. We are also better at rushing the passer. I believe this is a more physical defense than we ever had under WIlcox. The sole weakness has been in coverage . . . where we have dropped to 113th in the nation in passing yards allowed.

 

[Hasselbeck]

USC's defense has indeed declined so far this year, but only by 1.2 points per game. The hurry-up element Sark brings on offense probably accounts for at least that many points being added defensively, if not more, and it's close enough that by season's end Wilcox could still end up improving a pretty good defense despite Sark's offense.

Wilcox has a lot less depth to work with at USC because of those ridiculous sanctions the NCAA put on them. I think that's more to blame than Sark's offense.. which really hasn't been up tempo of late, in large part because of said depth.

If he doesn't get an HC offer somewhere, I think USC's defense will soar in the rankings in the coming years.. in large part because we will finally have the personnel to substitute fresh players in and out.