Oklahoma/Texas Tech...

Doomsday101

Well-Known Member
Messages
107,762
Reaction score
39,034
trickblue;4195274 said:
No... read closer... I'm blaming him for not kicking the FG... you went in to way too much detail...

You take the (attempted) points there... no question... he cost his team way too much time...

Texas Tech did some stupid things as well. Not taking the 3 points instead going for it, getting no points and then the fake punt on their side of the field. I thought Texas Tech was trying to give the game away with some of these calls
 

CATCH17

1st Round Pick
Messages
67,797
Reaction score
86,442
Doomsday101;4195284 said:
Texas Tech did some stupid things as well. Not taking the 3 points instead going for it, getting no points and then the fake punt on their side of the field. I thought Texas Tech was trying to give the game away with some of these calls

Agreed. It was like Garrett was managing that lead.
 

jimmy40

Well-Known Member
Messages
16,866
Reaction score
1,888
the dumbest decision was watching the Rangers' game instead.
 

CATCH17

1st Round Pick
Messages
67,797
Reaction score
86,442
Risen Star;4195404 said:
Stoops squanders another NC type roster.

He's overrated.

Doesn't Stoops coach their defense and Special teams?
 

revospeed

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,994
Reaction score
3,826
Biggems;4195185 said:
.

BTW, I would say the lightning delay had a lot to do with the struggles of OU. They were the home team. They had all the energy. They had the home field advantage, the crowd, the adrenaline. But when the delay happened, it sucked all that away for a bit. It seems that both teams came out as if to be the road team. On many occasions, weather has been the great equalizer.

Yeah, huge disadvantage when you're running plays in your indoor practice facility when you opponent is cooped up in a locker room.
 

Biggems

White and Nerdy
Messages
14,327
Reaction score
2,254
trickblue;4195274 said:
No... read closer... I'm blaming him for not kicking the FG... you went in to way too much detail...

You take the (attempted) points there... no question... he cost his team way too much time...

oh ok....btw, I agree. I feel that Tuberville should have taken the FG as well, just as we should have against the Pats....
 

ChopBlock

Benched
Messages
808
Reaction score
0
Hostile;4194902 said:
All I heard in 1985 was we did not deserve that title, the Washington Huskies did at 11-1.

3rd game of the season we played them at our house.

We took them to the woodshed.

A lot can change in a year, just ask this year's Auburn Tigers.
 

The30YardSlant

Benched
Messages
24,287
Reaction score
0
Hostile;4195129 said:
I graduated at Arizona. I coached there. Yes, I am an Arizona guy. I played at BYU and am still loyal. Like I said, everyone said Washington was the real #1 but we throttled them in 1985. That team would have beat anyone they put on the schedule that year and they did.

A team that plays a small conference schedule should never be awarded a national title, simply because they didnt earn it week in and week out like the big boys do.

Washington played four top 15 teams in 1984 and beat three of them, including #3 Michigan and #2 OU. They played seven of 11 games against teams who were ranked at one point or another in the season and nine games against teams from top level conferences. Excluding their wins against teams from crap conferences, they won their games by an average of 17 PPG.

In contrast, BYU played only ONE team in the top 25, played two games against teams that were ranked at some point in the season and three games against teams from top level conferences. Their three wins against teams from legitimate conferences was by an average of 15 PPG, and that is skewed by a 34 point win against a seven loss Baylor team

Maybe BYU was better, but they didnt deserve the title more than Washington did. BYU got to kick back and play scrimmage after scrimmage while Washington was laboring through a Pac-10 schedule filled with quality teams. Washington worked harder for their 11-1 record than BYU did for their 13-0 record. Also worth noting is that the 1984 Huskies put twice as many players in the NFL as the 1984 Cougars did, they clearly had more talent. What happened in 1985 is meaningless, the turnover from year to year in CF is huge. The 1985 Huskies lost five games and finished fifth in the Pac-10.
 

The30YardSlant

Benched
Messages
24,287
Reaction score
0
Hostile;4200493 said:
I know. BYU was far better in 1984.

Not that it is relevant at all, but they really werent. The 1985 Cougars won 11 games and actually had a larger average margin of victory of conference opponents. They also had a better offense and defense from a pure statistical standpoint. The only difference was that they lost close games to better big conference teams than they played the year before, and got upset by UTEP (as opposed to barely beating a similar Wyoming team in 1984).
 

trickblue

Not Old School...Old Testament...
Messages
31,439
Reaction score
3,961
The30YardSlant;4201089 said:
A team that plays a small conference schedule should never be awarded a national title, simply because they didnt earn it week in and week out like the big boys do.

Washington played four top 15 teams in 1984 and beat three of them, including #3 Michigan and #2 OU. They played seven of 11 games against teams who were ranked at one point or another in the season and nine games against teams from top level conferences. Excluding their wins against teams from crap conferences, they won their games by an average of 17 PPG.

In contrast, BYU played only ONE team in the top 25, played two games against teams that were ranked at some point in the season and three games against teams from top level conferences. Their three wins against teams from legitimate conferences was by an average of 15 PPG, and that is skewed by a 34 point win against a seven loss Baylor team

Maybe BYU was better, but they didnt deserve the title more than Washington did. BYU got to kick back and play scrimmage after scrimmage while Washington was laboring through a Pac-10 schedule filled with quality teams. Washington worked harder for their 11-1 record than BYU did for their 13-0 record. Also worth noting is that the 1984 Huskies put twice as many players in the NFL as the 1984 Cougars did, they clearly had more talent. What happened in 1985 is meaningless, the turnover from year to year in CF is huge. The 1985 Huskies lost five games and finished fifth in the Pac-10.

You make good points, but how do you justify Boise's coach calling out anyone/everyone? Why won't they schedule them? It is maddening...

We've had ONE major bowl with BSU and, well, they won that one... I get tired of hearing they aren't worthy...

I love Hos, but I agree that that BYU team was a farce... being undefeated is by no means justification for a NC... a playoff is the only way...

Unfortunately, as states, we support these Cretans and their ilk and they laugh in our collective faces...
 

The30YardSlant

Benched
Messages
24,287
Reaction score
0
Hostile;4195207 said:
Stanford is the team I said was going to be the one to beat. Looking true.

Stanford doesnt have the interior line play to matchup against the defensive fronts of LSU and Bama, if they got that far they wouldnt be playing a small Frank Beamer defense again. They'll get blown off the ball on a regular basis, Taylor will get shut down and Luck will be forced to throw under pressure. We saw what happened last year when an average SEC defense went up against a great Pac-12 offense, and it took an off night from the Auburn offense to keep Oregon in the game. We saw earlier this year what happens when a GREAT SEC defense plays a GREAT Pac-12 offense, Oregon was shut down. The Pac-12 plays small speed football. The SEC plays big speed football, and the teams from out west (and the Big XII and Big 10, for that matter) are rarely able to match up.

The smart money says they slip up once between USC and Oregon, though.
 

The30YardSlant

Benched
Messages
24,287
Reaction score
0
trickblue;4201100 said:
You make good points, but how do you justify Boise's coach calling out anyone/everyone? Why won't they schedule them? It is maddening...

Pretty simple really, it's a no win proposition. If you beat them, all you did was beat a WAC (now MWC) school with a goofy blue field. If they beat you, you lost to a mid-major and your loss is seen as worse than it otherwise would be. That's how it goes in the eyes of the national media. Why schedule Boise when you can schedule an average BCS school, beat them and get more credit for it in the media than you would beating Boise?

Also, Boise has a big head now and demand a home and home with everyone they play. The OUs, Floridas and Bamas of the world don't want to go play a game in Idaho against a mid-major school.

We've had ONE major bowl with BSU and, well, they won that one... I get tired of hearing they aren't worthy...

And TCU beat Wisconsin last year. So what? BCS conference teams suffer injuries, they have to go 100% every week and they are mentally drained by their schedules. Boise State and TCU rest their starters for a quarter of the season and gear up for one or two big games every year all the while staying completely healthy. Wisconsin was down six starters in the Rose Bowl last year. OU was down five in the Fiesta Bowl and Adrian Peterson wasnt healthy.

Look at it this way, Boise and TCU always have at least one almost-loss every year against the SMUs or Hawaii's of the world. Anybody think LSU would do anything other than beat every team on their schedule by 40+ if they played in one of those conferences this year?

I love Hos, but I agree that that BYU team was a farce... being undefeated is by no means justification for a NC... a playoff is the only way...

Unfortunately, as states, we support these Cretans and their ilk and they laugh in our collective faces...

College football is my true love and the game I pay the most attention to, and it kills me when I hear people saying teams like Boise, TCU and BYU deserve anything because they beat creampuffs all year. It takes away from the meaning of competition and doesnt promote quality college football. The integrity of college football depends on keeping schools like that out of the national title picture until they win against better competition. Nobody can argue that Boise deserves the MNC more than an SEC school does, and yet people try and make cute little arguments that appeal to the "littel guy" emotion because they think it isnt fair.

I also agree a playoff is best, because it would not only determine a true champion but expose the mid-major schools. They won't be able to compete playing multiple top-10 caliber teams in consecutive weeks. They'll use all their tricks and gimmicks to win one game (maybe) and that'll be it.
 

CATCH17

1st Round Pick
Messages
67,797
Reaction score
86,442
trickblue;4201100 said:
You make good points, but how do you justify Boise's coach calling out anyone/everyone? Why won't they schedule them? It is maddening...

We've had ONE major bowl with BSU and, well, they won that one... I get tired of hearing they aren't worthy...

I love Hos, but I agree that that BYU team was a farce... being undefeated is by no means justification for a NC... a playoff is the only way...

Unfortunately, as states, we support these Cretans and their ilk and they laugh in our collective faces...


You give Boise with Chris Peterson / Kellen Moore a month to prepare I like their odds better than anyone elses and that includes OU to beat LSU/Bama.

I still think last years Boise team was their best squad though. I would've loved to had seen them play Auburn.
 

The30YardSlant

Benched
Messages
24,287
Reaction score
0
CATCH17;4201312 said:
You give Boise with Chris Peterson / Kellen Moore a month to prepare I like their odds better than anyone elses and that includes OU to beat LSU/Bama.

I still think last years Boise team was their best squad though. I would've loved to had seen them play Auburn.

If they couldnt beat Nevada, they werent going to beat Auburn. They werent good enough to beat Auburn anyway, but that just drove the point home.
 
Top