 |
View Old Forum Thread
Old Forum Index » Other Stuff » Sports Talk » Texas vs. Ohio State
folifan19
Texas vs. Ohio State
September 11, 2005 at 01:53AM View BBCode
Anyone watching this. What a game so far. It looked like it was going to be a long night for OSU there in the first quarter! Glad the D figured out what to do with that QB, atleast for now.
FuriousGiorge
September 11, 2005 at 02:10AM View BBCode
The Buckeyes just ran one of my all-time pet peeve, jab a fork in my eye plays, the short side option. Brian Stinespring used to pull that crap all the time with Bryan Randall, a quarterback who didn't make very good option decisions anyway. I love the option, I think teams generally don't use it enough, but I will never understand why people run the option to the short side of the field.
folifan19
September 11, 2005 at 02:55AM View BBCode
OSU ran it a couple times last week agains't Miami.
folifan19
Since the idiot BCS, football is like a street fight. You gotta do ANYTHING you can to win. Pull out all the SEC trick plays you can too.
September 11, 2005 at 03:11AM View BBCode
Originally posted by FuriousGiorge
The Buckeyes just ran one of my all-time pet peeve, jab a fork in my eye plays, the short side option. Brian Stinespring used to pull that crap all the time with Bryan Randall, a quarterback who didn't make very good option decisions anyway. I love the option, I think teams generally don't use it enough, but I will never understand why people run the option to the short side of the field.
Since the idiot BCS, football is like a street fight. You gotta do ANYTHING you can to win. Pull out all the SEC trick plays you can too.
FuriousGiorge
OSU ultimately got buried by crappy quarterback play. Job sharing arrangements at that position never work.
September 11, 2005 at 03:39AM View BBCode
I have no idea what that has to do with the BCS.....OSU ultimately got buried by crappy quarterback play. Job sharing arrangements at that position never work.
Cubsfan13
The special teams played like complete shit. I realize that Holmes and Ginn are good return men, but you can't let them start from the 50 every time. The defense really saved their asses. They did a really good job of not letting Ginn do much. I'll never understand why Ohio State put Zwick out there on the drive after the last touchdown instead of Smith.
September 11, 2005 at 03:31PM View BBCode
I'm glad Texas won, but it seemed like Young was too hesitant to use his legs. I realize that the Buckeyes did a very good job of shutting him down on designed run plays after the first quarter, but it seemed like he hardly ever wanted to scramble on pass plays. He did throw pretty well other than the two interceptions, so it was probably good for his development or some crap like that, but there were times that instead of running for the 15 yard gain, he settled for the 5 yard pass play.The special teams played like complete shit. I realize that Holmes and Ginn are good return men, but you can't let them start from the 50 every time. The defense really saved their asses. They did a really good job of not letting Ginn do much. I'll never understand why Ohio State put Zwick out there on the drive after the last touchdown instead of Smith.
folifan19
I think Smith is beter overall than Zwick, and the team responds better to him.
That game was a real heart breaker. Mainly because I think OSU gave the game away, by not taking advantage of the great field position they had all game long, the turn overs, and two poorly executed defensive opportunities. The safety that never was on the kick return by Texas, and the sack that didn't happen. That play resulted in a 60+ yard pass play that led to a score.
Oh well. OSU still has a slim chance of making it to te Rose Bowl. if they can run the table, and get a BUNCH of help. Not worried about Texas going undefeatd. Oklahoma will beat them like they always do.
I think after yesterday, VA Tech and USC are the only likely choices for an undefeated season. I think the Hurricane hurt LSU's chances, since they will play some home games on the road, and practice who knows where. I haven't read anything about their situation.
September 11, 2005 at 05:33PM View BBCode
I'm not a fan of QB tandems either. Cooper tried it back when with Stan Jackson anf Joe Germaine. I thought Germaine was a better QB, but the team responded better to Jackson, who was a captain.I think Smith is beter overall than Zwick, and the team responds better to him.
That game was a real heart breaker. Mainly because I think OSU gave the game away, by not taking advantage of the great field position they had all game long, the turn overs, and two poorly executed defensive opportunities. The safety that never was on the kick return by Texas, and the sack that didn't happen. That play resulted in a 60+ yard pass play that led to a score.
Oh well. OSU still has a slim chance of making it to te Rose Bowl. if they can run the table, and get a BUNCH of help. Not worried about Texas going undefeatd. Oklahoma will beat them like they always do.
I think after yesterday, VA Tech and USC are the only likely choices for an undefeated season. I think the Hurricane hurt LSU's chances, since they will play some home games on the road, and practice who knows where. I haven't read anything about their situation.
FuriousGiorge
September 11, 2005 at 05:41PM View BBCode
WAY too early to talk about who can still go undefeated. There are 4 very good teams in the SEC, 3 if you discount LSU (which I don't) and any of those teams could run the table. Don't forget about FSU. Yes they have a lot of issues, especially at QB, but their defense is still top notch. They probably won't run the table, but they could make it interesting, and they could go into Gainesville with an undefeated season intact. And then there are the Cardinals. Everyone will discount them if they go undefeated for having an incredibly soft schedule, and they do, but it will be very hard for the BCS to keep an undefeated school from a BCS conference out of the title game.
Cubsfan13
September 11, 2005 at 05:53PM View BBCode
Louisville should run the table. I don't think anyone in the SEC will because there are so many good teams. Florida, Tenn., and Georgia are three of the four best in the conference and they are all in the same divison. LSU would probably have the best chance of going undefeated because they play in the easier division, but I don't know who they play out of the other one. USC probably should run the table because the Pac 10 isn't that great and they are amazing. I guess Purdue may actually have a chance because they don't play two of the top Big 10 teams. Florida State's quarterbacks will cost them in at least one game.
youngallstar
September 11, 2005 at 07:15PM View BBCode
OU choked against TCU. Im not so sure OU has a lock on this years shootout.
FuriousGiorge
September 11, 2005 at 07:30PM View BBCode
Agreed. Especially at home, Texas should be favored to win that game. If FSU can beat Miami, Texas can beat OU.
lvnwrth
They will be discounted, and rightfully so. They play in a very weak conference that should not have a BCS bid. Were they forming the BCS alliance today, you can just about bet that the Big East would not be included.
Louisville, Syracuse, Pitt, West Virginia aren't bad. But the rest of the conference is barely NCAA D-1 caliber. Rutgers, UConn, South Florida and Cincinnati? This is a BCS conference?
I know it's an inexact science, and people can and do disagree about which measure is most accurate. But for the sake of this post, I'm looking at Jeff Sagarin's ratings. Louisville leads the Big Least at #14. West Virginia is next, a respectable 20th. Pitt is 64th, Syracuse 68th, UConn is 82nd, South Florida is 84th, Cincinnati is 97th, Rutgers is 111th.
By comparison, the top 8 Mountain West teams rank 12, 22, 38, 52, 55, 62, 70, and 78. In other words, the MW has 6 teams better than the third best team in the Big Least. Take away Louisville, and the Big Least compares far more favorably with the WAC, Mid-American, or Conference USA than it does with the legitimate BCS conferences.
The Big Ten has four teams better than the #2 team in the Big Least. Their 8th best team is better than everyone except Louisville and West Virginia.
The top NINE teams in the Big 12 are better than #3 in the BL.
The ACC has FIVE teams rated higher than Louisville, and NINE teams better than Pitt (#3 in the BL).
The Mountain West has six teams better than Pitt.
The top NINE teams in the Pac-10 are better than #3 in the BL.
Same with the SEC...NINE teams better than Pitt.
Auburn was 12-0 last year, in a much, much tougher conference than the Big Least. They got left out of the title game.
If Louisville runs the table and gets left out of the BCS title game, it will be because they play in a lame conference whose tie-in to the BCS ought to end the next time the contract is negotiated.
September 11, 2005 at 07:56PM View BBCode
"And then there are the Cardinals. Everyone will discount them if they go undefeated for having an incredibly soft schedule, and they do, but it will be very hard for the BCS to keep an undefeated school from a BCS conference out of the title game."They will be discounted, and rightfully so. They play in a very weak conference that should not have a BCS bid. Were they forming the BCS alliance today, you can just about bet that the Big East would not be included.
Louisville, Syracuse, Pitt, West Virginia aren't bad. But the rest of the conference is barely NCAA D-1 caliber. Rutgers, UConn, South Florida and Cincinnati? This is a BCS conference?
I know it's an inexact science, and people can and do disagree about which measure is most accurate. But for the sake of this post, I'm looking at Jeff Sagarin's ratings. Louisville leads the Big Least at #14. West Virginia is next, a respectable 20th. Pitt is 64th, Syracuse 68th, UConn is 82nd, South Florida is 84th, Cincinnati is 97th, Rutgers is 111th.
By comparison, the top 8 Mountain West teams rank 12, 22, 38, 52, 55, 62, 70, and 78. In other words, the MW has 6 teams better than the third best team in the Big Least. Take away Louisville, and the Big Least compares far more favorably with the WAC, Mid-American, or Conference USA than it does with the legitimate BCS conferences.
The Big Ten has four teams better than the #2 team in the Big Least. Their 8th best team is better than everyone except Louisville and West Virginia.
The top NINE teams in the Big 12 are better than #3 in the BL.
The ACC has FIVE teams rated higher than Louisville, and NINE teams better than Pitt (#3 in the BL).
The Mountain West has six teams better than Pitt.
The top NINE teams in the Pac-10 are better than #3 in the BL.
Same with the SEC...NINE teams better than Pitt.
Auburn was 12-0 last year, in a much, much tougher conference than the Big Least. They got left out of the title game.
If Louisville runs the table and gets left out of the BCS title game, it will be because they play in a lame conference whose tie-in to the BCS ought to end the next time the contract is negotiated.
FuriousGiorge
They'll get their revenge on the NCAA when basketball season comes around.
September 11, 2005 at 08:11PM View BBCode
That's a lot of numbers to show what I think we all pretty much already know, that the Big East blows. The fact remains that no BCS school with an undefeated record has been left out of the BCS title game if there is no more than 1 other undefeated school. If the BCS leaves an undefeated Louisville out in favor of a 1-loss team, they are basically admitting that the Big East is not a major conference, which runs directly contrary to allowing the conference an automatic BCS bowl berth.They'll get their revenge on the NCAA when basketball season comes around.
swerve
September 11, 2005 at 08:19PM View BBCode
All Young has to do is throw the ball like he did last night and UT will rip OU. Playing Jamaal Charles full time will help too.
lvnwrth
Which would be worse? Inviting a team ranked 8th or 9th in the BCS rankings to the title game? Or leaving that team out, even though they're undefeated?
If Ohio State finishes the season with only the loss to Texas (unlikely, but possible), are they not more deserving than Louisville? If any of those top SEC teams finishes with only one loss, aren't they more deserving? If Texas loses to Oklahoma and they both finish with only one loss, are they not both more deserving? If FSU, Miami, or Va Tech finish with one loss, are they not more deserving? The way they played yesterday, if Iowa State only loses to OU or Texas in the Big 12 title game, wouldn't they be more deserving?
Bypassing Louisville WOULD, as you suggest, confirm that no one believes the Big Least is a BCS conference anymore. But what's wrong with that? It's true.
September 11, 2005 at 08:26PM View BBCode
But the BCS doesn't get to simply hand out invitations to the title game. They have their system of polls and computer rankings and they're bound by that, aren't they?Which would be worse? Inviting a team ranked 8th or 9th in the BCS rankings to the title game? Or leaving that team out, even though they're undefeated?
If Ohio State finishes the season with only the loss to Texas (unlikely, but possible), are they not more deserving than Louisville? If any of those top SEC teams finishes with only one loss, aren't they more deserving? If Texas loses to Oklahoma and they both finish with only one loss, are they not both more deserving? If FSU, Miami, or Va Tech finish with one loss, are they not more deserving? The way they played yesterday, if Iowa State only loses to OU or Texas in the Big 12 title game, wouldn't they be more deserving?
Bypassing Louisville WOULD, as you suggest, confirm that no one believes the Big Least is a BCS conference anymore. But what's wrong with that? It's true.
FuriousGiorge
I just wonder where this all leads. The trend of the BCS has been to cut more and more teams out of the chance to win the title, to the point now where less than half of the Division 1-A schools can actually win the thing. College football has gotten more elitist under the BCS, and I think that's the biggest problem with it. I don't think you're wrong - Louisville's schedule is terrible. But they do have a good football team, and it's not their fault that they have to play that conference schedule. This year was supposed to be their move into big-time college football and yet it seems very likely that they're going to get the shaft.
September 11, 2005 at 08:36PM View BBCode
Maybe it's just residual guilt for us having used and then abandoned the conference.I just wonder where this all leads. The trend of the BCS has been to cut more and more teams out of the chance to win the title, to the point now where less than half of the Division 1-A schools can actually win the thing. College football has gotten more elitist under the BCS, and I think that's the biggest problem with it. I don't think you're wrong - Louisville's schedule is terrible. But they do have a good football team, and it's not their fault that they have to play that conference schedule. This year was supposed to be their move into big-time college football and yet it seems very likely that they're going to get the shaft.
lvnwrth
Even if they were playing at home, if they played Miami, Oklahoma, Texas, Ohio State, Auburn, USC, LSU, Florida State, Virginia Tech (you could probably add at least 5 more teams to that list) they would be decided underdogs.
I'm not saying they aren't a good football team. They're certainly a Top 20 team, and probably a Top 10 team. I'm just not sure they're a BCS title caliber team.
I agree with you completely about the BCS. What we're seeing in college sports (think NIT...think BCS) is the power of television dollars at work. If the BCS conferences got together and decided they were forming their own association, where would all the TV money go? The NCAA is basically powerless. Schools only stay as long as its to their advantage to do so. Until the schools decide to de-emphasize sports dollars, it's not going to change. Which means it's not going to change.
September 11, 2005 at 09:16PM View BBCode
Winning the Big East guarantees them a BCS bowl, even if it's not the title game. That will still be the biggest game in Louisville's football history. So I wouldn't say they're getting the shaft, anymore than Auburn did last year. Only two teams can go to the title game, and as much as possible, it ought to be the two best teams in the country. Louisville's probably not a Top 5 team, even if they do run the schedule.Even if they were playing at home, if they played Miami, Oklahoma, Texas, Ohio State, Auburn, USC, LSU, Florida State, Virginia Tech (you could probably add at least 5 more teams to that list) they would be decided underdogs.
I'm not saying they aren't a good football team. They're certainly a Top 20 team, and probably a Top 10 team. I'm just not sure they're a BCS title caliber team.
I agree with you completely about the BCS. What we're seeing in college sports (think NIT...think BCS) is the power of television dollars at work. If the BCS conferences got together and decided they were forming their own association, where would all the TV money go? The NCAA is basically powerless. Schools only stay as long as its to their advantage to do so. Until the schools decide to de-emphasize sports dollars, it's not going to change. Which means it's not going to change.
Pages: 1