RE: College Football (Future Vikings!)

RE: College Football (Future Vikings!) (Full Version)

All Forums >> [The Minnesota Vikings] >> Vikes Talk

Message

Brad H -> RE: College Football (Future Vikings!) (1/4/2017 9:30:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Steve Lentz quote: ORIGINAL: Brad H quote: ORIGINAL: Steve Lentz quote: ORIGINAL: Brad H quote: ORIGINAL: Mark Anderson quote: ORIGINAL: Brad H quote: ORIGINAL: McMurfy quote: ORIGINAL: Steve Lentz quote: ORIGINAL: McMurfy quote: ORIGINAL: Steve Lentz USC is falling apart. They haven't seen a QB like this. Neither has Penn State He's been superb. Both teams have a bright future. Hell of a game, lots of players Clearly the best game of the year. Cancel the title game. We might see some defense in Title Game. Yep, those Big Ten defenses sure brought it in the bowl games. Michigan gives up 33. Ohio State 31. Penn State 52. Like I have been saying for a month, the Big Ten defenses looked great this season because they play in a conference with no quarterbacks. Penn State was the only club with a halfway decent quarterback and they used it to win the Big Ten title. Stop! You also said Penn State was a fraud and that USC would rout them. You really need to go back and read some of your posts. The refs kept the game close. It was a total debacle from a ref standpoint. Penn State had five scores aided by the refs. If the refs were even close to even it would have been a four-score game. USC overcame the worst refereed game I have seen in 30 years, and still won. They could have had 800 yards of offense if they wanted. As it was, their freshman quarterback threw for 450 and five scores. It was like taking candy from a baby. Undoubtedly the worst defense USC has seen all season. USC was as bad on defense for huge stretches of the game as I saw in any Bowl game. They couldn't stop Barkley at all. A late TD changes the final score of the game, but it was obvious to anyone who watched that Penn State was far from a fraud. This was a hard fought game to the end. You weren't close on your projection. We also saw what happened when the Gophers minus many starters beat Washington State. You missed that one by a mile too. Nothing wrong with being wrong though. I thought Ohio State was the best in the Big 10. USC had a tough time with the running back. The kid was very good. The long stretches were because the refs kept drives alive. The first scoring drive by Penn State, there was a massive hold right in front of the screen pass that no human with working eyes could miss. Without that, maybe they score, maybe they don't. On the second scoring drive, the guy didn't have possession of the ball until he was out of bounds (would have been 4th down if I recall right). Not sure how they couldn't see that on replay, but it was pretty obvious to me he didn't have possession. The third scoring drive, it was an obvious push-off by the tight end. Again, maybe they score, maybe they don't (we'll never know). The interception returned to the three was an obvious interference and should have never been a turnover. Go back and watch the replay, he hit him way early and no call. The acrobatic catch by 12 along the sideline for a long score was an obvious push-off, with again no call. The late scoring drive where they called a total horseshit late hit was garbage and it would have been 4th down. The very next play they threw the top tackler for USC out of the game on what was a very debatable call. Then, Penn State fans have the audacity to think that the USC receiver pushed off on what was a sensation catch at the 3-yard line. Only to be deemed out of bounds by the official for which they had to go to replay. Finally, Herbstreet called them out for the pushoff by the tight end. (the former Big Ten player finally did his job and called out his own, about 8-10 missed calls too late) The hack job by the refs in that game was as bad as I have ever seen. Outside of the obvious pass interference calls on Penn State late in the game, do you recall any significant penalties against the Nittany Lions the entire game? I seem to remember two false starts. Seriously, can you imagine the score had USC gotten all the calls and not Penn State? It could have been 70-14. It was, literally, the worst defense USC has sen all season. Not even close.

Mark Anderson -> RE: College Football (Future Vikings!) (1/4/2017 9:32:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Brad H quote: ORIGINAL: Dave Odle Come on, man. Pac 12 defenses have been notoriously SAWT (to use your term) for decades now. It just is what it is... There's no more need to defend those defenses by saying they are good than someone should defend Big 10 offenses by saying they produce great QBs. It's okay. Nothing to be ashamed of. Well, okay, maybe that's going a little too far because everyone respects a kick ass defense. California teams just are what they are. They are a lot like their state. Flashy, pretty, and kind of wimpy. Again, you aren't really paying attention closely to the conversation. Perception is not always reality. We've heard for years that Pac 12 defenses are soft and Big Ten defenses are tough. Most of that conversation comes from the fans. In reality, the Big Ten defenses look good because there is not many good quarterbacks in the conferences and the offenses are geared around muck and grind on the ground. This year was a perfect example. They were supposed to have some of the top defenses in the country. All we heard all season was how Michigan was great. Ohio State was great. Penn State was great. What happened when they played competent offenses? They gave up 33, 31 and 52 respectively. In the Pac 12, you have (at the very least) good quarterbacks on every team. If they get hot, you better be prepared to play an up-tempo game on offense. That creates a style of play and the perception that they are soft on defense. It couldn't be farther from the truth. Just curious, how did that USC defense do in the 4th quarter? Penn State went into their shell (like Big Ten teams always do) and they stopped them easily. It's not hard to stop a team when you know they are going to go conservative and try to run out the clock. When they (Penn St.) had to go up-tempo in the final minute they were completely lost. USC gave up 49 points to a middle of the road offense. Soft I was watching the Gopher game and the announcers were talking about if Wash St. QB should go Pro or not. I'm not sure if that guy could be a backup in the CFL. How was this guy getting these big stats?

Brad H -> RE: College Football (Future Vikings!) (1/4/2017 9:34:11 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer quote: ORIGINAL: Brad H quote: ORIGINAL: Dave Odle Come on, man. Pac 12 defenses have been notoriously SAWT (to use your term) for decades now. It just is what it is... There's no more need to defend those defenses by saying they are good than someone should defend Big 10 offenses by saying they produce great QBs. It's okay. Nothing to be ashamed of. Well, okay, maybe that's going a little too far because everyone respects a kick ass defense. California teams just are what they are. They are a lot like their state. Flashy, pretty, and kind of wimpy. Again, you aren't really paying attention closely to the conversation. Perception is not always reality. We've heard for years that Pac 12 defenses are soft and Big Ten defenses are tough. Most of that conversation comes from the fans. In reality, the Big Ten defenses look good because there is not many good quarterbacks in the conferences and the offenses are geared around muck and grind on the ground. This year was a perfect example. They were supposed to have some of the top defenses in the country. All we heard all season was how Michigan was great. Ohio State was great. Penn State was great. What happened when they played competent offenses? They gave up 33, 31 and 52 respectively. In the Pac 12, you have (at the very least) good quarterbacks on every team. If they get hot, you better be prepared to play an up-tempo game on offense. That creates a style of play and the perception that they are soft on defense. It couldn't be farther from the truth. Just curious, how did that USC defense do in the 4th quarter? Penn State went into their shell (like Big Ten teams always do) and they stopped them easily. It's not hard to stop a team when you know they are going to go conservative and try to run out the clock. When they (Penn St.) had to go up-tempo in the final minute they were completely lost. Brad in the grand scheme of things why is this Big Ten vs Pac 12 for you? I am not a Penn State fan or USC fan so I didn't give one shichts about that game because it wasn't even relevant. I watched some of the Gophers/Wash St. but that had about as much relevance too.....the playoff games are what really counts now and Penn St, USC, etc aren't in it. Don't care about the playoff. It is a money grab. If they want to have a legit tournament (with at least 16 teams) I will tune in.

Brad H -> RE: College Football (Future Vikings!) (1/4/2017 9:35:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mark Anderson quote: ORIGINAL: Brad H quote: ORIGINAL: Dave Odle Come on, man. Pac 12 defenses have been notoriously SAWT (to use your term) for decades now. It just is what it is... There's no more need to defend those defenses by saying they are good than someone should defend Big 10 offenses by saying they produce great QBs. It's okay. Nothing to be ashamed of. Well, okay, maybe that's going a little too far because everyone respects a kick ass defense. California teams just are what they are. They are a lot like their state. Flashy, pretty, and kind of wimpy. Again, you aren't really paying attention closely to the conversation. Perception is not always reality. We've heard for years that Pac 12 defenses are soft and Big Ten defenses are tough. Most of that conversation comes from the fans. In reality, the Big Ten defenses look good because there is not many good quarterbacks in the conferences and the offenses are geared around muck and grind on the ground. This year was a perfect example. They were supposed to have some of the top defenses in the country. All we heard all season was how Michigan was great. Ohio State was great. Penn State was great. What happened when they played competent offenses? They gave up 33, 31 and 52 respectively. In the Pac 12, you have (at the very least) good quarterbacks on every team. If they get hot, you better be prepared to play an up-tempo game on offense. That creates a style of play and the perception that they are soft on defense. It couldn't be farther from the truth. Just curious, how did that USC defense do in the 4th quarter? Penn State went into their shell (like Big Ten teams always do) and they stopped them easily. It's not hard to stop a team when you know they are going to go conservative and try to run out the clock. When they (Penn St.) had to go up-tempo in the final minute they were completely lost. USC gave up 49 points to a middle of the road offense. Soft I was watching the Gopher game and the announcers were talking about if Wash St. QB should go Pro or not. I'm not sure if that guy could be a backup in the CFL. How was this guy getting these big stats? Penn State scored 14 legitimate points. The refs guided them to the other 35. The refs were in over their heads.

Mark Anderson -> RE: College Football (Future Vikings!) (1/4/2017 9:37:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Brad H quote: ORIGINAL: Mark Anderson quote: ORIGINAL: Brad H quote: ORIGINAL: Dave Odle Come on, man. Pac 12 defenses have been notoriously SAWT (to use your term) for decades now. It just is what it is... There's no more need to defend those defenses by saying they are good than someone should defend Big 10 offenses by saying they produce great QBs. It's okay. Nothing to be ashamed of. Well, okay, maybe that's going a little too far because everyone respects a kick ass defense. California teams just are what they are. They are a lot like their state. Flashy, pretty, and kind of wimpy. Again, you aren't really paying attention closely to the conversation. Perception is not always reality. We've heard for years that Pac 12 defenses are soft and Big Ten defenses are tough. Most of that conversation comes from the fans. In reality, the Big Ten defenses look good because there is not many good quarterbacks in the conferences and the offenses are geared around muck and grind on the ground. This year was a perfect example. They were supposed to have some of the top defenses in the country. All we heard all season was how Michigan was great. Ohio State was great. Penn State was great. What happened when they played competent offenses? They gave up 33, 31 and 52 respectively. In the Pac 12, you have (at the very least) good quarterbacks on every team. If they get hot, you better be prepared to play an up-tempo game on offense. That creates a style of play and the perception that they are soft on defense. It couldn't be farther from the truth. Just curious, how did that USC defense do in the 4th quarter? Penn State went into their shell (like Big Ten teams always do) and they stopped them easily. It's not hard to stop a team when you know they are going to go conservative and try to run out the clock. When they (Penn St.) had to go up-tempo in the final minute they were completely lost. USC gave up 49 points to a middle of the road offense. Soft I was watching the Gopher game and the announcers were talking about if Wash St. QB should go Pro or not. I'm not sure if that guy could be a backup in the CFL. How was this guy getting these big stats? Penn State scored 14 legitimate points. The refs guided them to the other 35. The refs were in over their heads. Stop. It's OK to admit that USC's defense is not very good.

Brad H -> RE: College Football (Future Vikings!) (1/4/2017 9:38:26 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mark Anderson quote: ORIGINAL: Brad H quote: ORIGINAL: Mark Anderson quote: ORIGINAL: Brad H quote: ORIGINAL: Dave Odle Come on, man. Pac 12 defenses have been notoriously SAWT (to use your term) for decades now. It just is what it is... There's no more need to defend those defenses by saying they are good than someone should defend Big 10 offenses by saying they produce great QBs. It's okay. Nothing to be ashamed of. Well, okay, maybe that's going a little too far because everyone respects a kick ass defense. California teams just are what they are. They are a lot like their state. Flashy, pretty, and kind of wimpy. Again, you aren't really paying attention closely to the conversation. Perception is not always reality. We've heard for years that Pac 12 defenses are soft and Big Ten defenses are tough. Most of that conversation comes from the fans. In reality, the Big Ten defenses look good because there is not many good quarterbacks in the conferences and the offenses are geared around muck and grind on the ground. This year was a perfect example. They were supposed to have some of the top defenses in the country. All we heard all season was how Michigan was great. Ohio State was great. Penn State was great. What happened when they played competent offenses? They gave up 33, 31 and 52 respectively. In the Pac 12, you have (at the very least) good quarterbacks on every team. If they get hot, you better be prepared to play an up-tempo game on offense. That creates a style of play and the perception that they are soft on defense. It couldn't be farther from the truth. Just curious, how did that USC defense do in the 4th quarter? Penn State went into their shell (like Big Ten teams always do) and they stopped them easily. It's not hard to stop a team when you know they are going to go conservative and try to run out the clock. When they (Penn St.) had to go up-tempo in the final minute they were completely lost. USC gave up 49 points to a middle of the road offense. Soft I was watching the Gopher game and the announcers were talking about if Wash St. QB should go Pro or not. I'm not sure if that guy could be a backup in the CFL. How was this guy getting these big stats? Penn State scored 14 legitimate points. The refs guided them to the other 35. The refs were in over their heads. Stop. It's OK to admit that USC's defense is not very good. Nope. Watch the game over again. It was a total hack job. If you didn't see that, you have ZERO football competence.

Mark Anderson -> RE: College Football (Future Vikings!) (1/4/2017 9:39:51 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Brad H quote: ORIGINAL: Mark Anderson quote: ORIGINAL: Brad H quote: ORIGINAL: Mark Anderson quote: ORIGINAL: Brad H quote: ORIGINAL: Dave Odle Come on, man. Pac 12 defenses have been notoriously SAWT (to use your term) for decades now. It just is what it is... There's no more need to defend those defenses by saying they are good than someone should defend Big 10 offenses by saying they produce great QBs. It's okay. Nothing to be ashamed of. Well, okay, maybe that's going a little too far because everyone respects a kick ass defense. California teams just are what they are. They are a lot like their state. Flashy, pretty, and kind of wimpy. Again, you aren't really paying attention closely to the conversation. Perception is not always reality. We've heard for years that Pac 12 defenses are soft and Big Ten defenses are tough. Most of that conversation comes from the fans. In reality, the Big Ten defenses look good because there is not many good quarterbacks in the conferences and the offenses are geared around muck and grind on the ground. This year was a perfect example. They were supposed to have some of the top defenses in the country. All we heard all season was how Michigan was great. Ohio State was great. Penn State was great. What happened when they played competent offenses? They gave up 33, 31 and 52 respectively. In the Pac 12, you have (at the very least) good quarterbacks on every team. If they get hot, you better be prepared to play an up-tempo game on offense. That creates a style of play and the perception that they are soft on defense. It couldn't be farther from the truth. Just curious, how did that USC defense do in the 4th quarter? Penn State went into their shell (like Big Ten teams always do) and they stopped them easily. It's not hard to stop a team when you know they are going to go conservative and try to run out the clock. When they (Penn St.) had to go up-tempo in the final minute they were completely lost. USC gave up 49 points to a middle of the road offense. Soft I was watching the Gopher game and the announcers were talking about if Wash St. QB should go Pro or not. I'm not sure if that guy could be a backup in the CFL. How was this guy getting these big stats? Penn State scored 14 legitimate points. The refs guided them to the other 35. The refs were in over their heads. Stop. It's OK to admit that USC's defense is not very good. Nope. Watch the game over again. It was a total hack job. If you didn't see that, you have ZERO football competence. And you have no objectivity when it comes to the Pac12. USC has a great offense with great skill players. Defense, not so much.

bohumm -> RE: College Football (Future Vikings!) (1/4/2017 9:39:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer quote: ORIGINAL: Brad H Here's the reality. The perceived best conference in America this season went 3-6 in bowl games, with wins over Western Michigan, Washington State and Pittsburgh. The so-called three great teams they had went 0-3. Who is the perceived best conference? I always figure there will be a few surprises. To have 9 teams in the bowl games is the main thing---same for Pac 12, ACC, BIG 12, and SEC. You keep having over half your teams in bowl games the money and recruits will keep coming. Teams with losing records get into bowls; how can that possibly gauge quality?

Phil Riewer -> RE: College Football (Future Vikings!) (1/4/2017 9:41:29 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Brad H quote: ORIGINAL: Mark Anderson quote: ORIGINAL: Brad H quote: ORIGINAL: Dave Odle Come on, man. Pac 12 defenses have been notoriously SAWT (to use your term) for decades now. It just is what it is... There's no more need to defend those defenses by saying they are good than someone should defend Big 10 offenses by saying they produce great QBs. It's okay. Nothing to be ashamed of. Well, okay, maybe that's going a little too far because everyone respects a kick ass defense. California teams just are what they are. They are a lot like their state. Flashy, pretty, and kind of wimpy. Again, you aren't really paying attention closely to the conversation. Perception is not always reality. We've heard for years that Pac 12 defenses are soft and Big Ten defenses are tough. Most of that conversation comes from the fans. In reality, the Big Ten defenses look good because there is not many good quarterbacks in the conferences and the offenses are geared around muck and grind on the ground. This year was a perfect example. They were supposed to have some of the top defenses in the country. All we heard all season was how Michigan was great. Ohio State was great. Penn State was great. What happened when they played competent offenses? They gave up 33, 31 and 52 respectively. In the Pac 12, you have (at the very least) good quarterbacks on every team. If they get hot, you better be prepared to play an up-tempo game on offense. That creates a style of play and the perception that they are soft on defense. It couldn't be farther from the truth. Just curious, how did that USC defense do in the 4th quarter? Penn State went into their shell (like Big Ten teams always do) and they stopped them easily. It's not hard to stop a team when you know they are going to go conservative and try to run out the clock. When they (Penn St.) had to go up-tempo in the final minute they were completely lost. USC gave up 49 points to a middle of the road offense. Soft I was watching the Gopher game and the announcers were talking about if Wash St. QB should go Pro or not. I'm not sure if that guy could be a backup in the CFL. How was this guy getting these big stats? Penn State scored 14 legitimate points. The refs guided them to the other 35. The refs were in over their heads. MN lost 1st and 2nd string defenders before their Penn State game (at Penn St.) and held Penn State to fewer points than USC.

Mark Anderson -> RE: College Football (Future Vikings!) (1/4/2017 9:44:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Brad H quote: ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer quote: ORIGINAL: Brad H quote: ORIGINAL: Dave Odle Come on, man. Pac 12 defenses have been notoriously SAWT (to use your term) for decades now. It just is what it is... There's no more need to defend those defenses by saying they are good than someone should defend Big 10 offenses by saying they produce great QBs. It's okay. Nothing to be ashamed of. Well, okay, maybe that's going a little too far because everyone respects a kick ass defense. California teams just are what they are. They are a lot like their state. Flashy, pretty, and kind of wimpy. Again, you aren't really paying attention closely to the conversation. Perception is not always reality. We've heard for years that Pac 12 defenses are soft and Big Ten defenses are tough. Most of that conversation comes from the fans. In reality, the Big Ten defenses look good because there is not many good quarterbacks in the conferences and the offenses are geared around muck and grind on the ground. This year was a perfect example. They were supposed to have some of the top defenses in the country. All we heard all season was how Michigan was great. Ohio State was great. Penn State was great. What happened when they played competent offenses? They gave up 33, 31 and 52 respectively. In the Pac 12, you have (at the very least) good quarterbacks on every team. If they get hot, you better be prepared to play an up-tempo game on offense. That creates a style of play and the perception that they are soft on defense. It couldn't be farther from the truth. Just curious, how did that USC defense do in the 4th quarter? Penn State went into their shell (like Big Ten teams always do) and they stopped them easily. It's not hard to stop a team when you know they are going to go conservative and try to run out the clock. When they (Penn St.) had to go up-tempo in the final minute they were completely lost. Brad in the grand scheme of things why is this Big Ten vs Pac 12 for you? I am not a Penn State fan or USC fan so I didn't give one shichts about that game because it wasn't even relevant. I watched some of the Gophers/Wash St. but that had about as much relevance too.....the playoff games are what really counts now and Penn St, USC, etc aren't in it. Don't care about the playoff. It is a money grab. If they want to have a legit tournament (with at least 16 teams) I will tune in. 8 teams sounds about right. Although this year, the 2 best teams are playing for the crown. There is Alabama and Clemson. And then everybody else.

Phil Riewer -> RE: College Football (Future Vikings!) (1/4/2017 9:46:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bohumm quote: ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer quote: ORIGINAL: Brad H Here's the reality. The perceived best conference in America this season went 3-6 in bowl games, with wins over Western Michigan, Washington State and Pittsburgh. The so-called three great teams they had went 0-3. Who is the perceived best conference? I always figure there will be a few surprises. To have 9 teams in the bowl games is the main thing---same for Pac 12, ACC, BIG 12, and SEC. You keep having over half your teams in bowl games the money and recruits will keep coming. Teams with losing records get into bowls; how can that possibly gauge quality? As long as there is too many bowls....it will keep happening.

Brad H -> RE: College Football (Future Vikings!) (1/4/2017 10:10:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer quote: ORIGINAL: Brad H quote: ORIGINAL: Mark Anderson quote: ORIGINAL: Brad H quote: ORIGINAL: Dave Odle Come on, man. Pac 12 defenses have been notoriously SAWT (to use your term) for decades now. It just is what it is... There's no more need to defend those defenses by saying they are good than someone should defend Big 10 offenses by saying they produce great QBs. It's okay. Nothing to be ashamed of. Well, okay, maybe that's going a little too far because everyone respects a kick ass defense. California teams just are what they are. They are a lot like their state. Flashy, pretty, and kind of wimpy. Again, you aren't really paying attention closely to the conversation. Perception is not always reality. We've heard for years that Pac 12 defenses are soft and Big Ten defenses are tough. Most of that conversation comes from the fans. In reality, the Big Ten defenses look good because there is not many good quarterbacks in the conferences and the offenses are geared around muck and grind on the ground. This year was a perfect example. They were supposed to have some of the top defenses in the country. All we heard all season was how Michigan was great. Ohio State was great. Penn State was great. What happened when they played competent offenses? They gave up 33, 31 and 52 respectively. In the Pac 12, you have (at the very least) good quarterbacks on every team. If they get hot, you better be prepared to play an up-tempo game on offense. That creates a style of play and the perception that they are soft on defense. It couldn't be farther from the truth. Just curious, how did that USC defense do in the 4th quarter? Penn State went into their shell (like Big Ten teams always do) and they stopped them easily. It's not hard to stop a team when you know they are going to go conservative and try to run out the clock. When they (Penn St.) had to go up-tempo in the final minute they were completely lost. USC gave up 49 points to a middle of the road offense. Soft I was watching the Gopher game and the announcers were talking about if Wash St. QB should go Pro or not. I'm not sure if that guy could be a backup in the CFL. How was this guy getting these big stats? Penn State scored 14 legitimate points. The refs guided them to the other 35. The refs were in over their heads. MN lost 1st and 2nd string defenders before their Penn State game (at Penn St.) and held Penn State to fewer points than USC. Good for them. The Gophers had a very solid defense. If they had a quarterback they may have been playing for something special.

Brad H -> RE: College Football (Future Vikings!) (1/4/2017 10:12:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mark Anderson quote: ORIGINAL: Brad H quote: ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer quote: ORIGINAL: Brad H quote: ORIGINAL: Dave Odle Come on, man. Pac 12 defenses have been notoriously SAWT (to use your term) for decades now. It just is what it is... There's no more need to defend those defenses by saying they are good than someone should defend Big 10 offenses by saying they produce great QBs. It's okay. Nothing to be ashamed of. Well, okay, maybe that's going a little too far because everyone respects a kick ass defense. California teams just are what they are. They are a lot like their state. Flashy, pretty, and kind of wimpy. Again, you aren't really paying attention closely to the conversation. Perception is not always reality. We've heard for years that Pac 12 defenses are soft and Big Ten defenses are tough. Most of that conversation comes from the fans. In reality, the Big Ten defenses look good because there is not many good quarterbacks in the conferences and the offenses are geared around muck and grind on the ground. This year was a perfect example. They were supposed to have some of the top defenses in the country. All we heard all season was how Michigan was great. Ohio State was great. Penn State was great. What happened when they played competent offenses? They gave up 33, 31 and 52 respectively. In the Pac 12, you have (at the very least) good quarterbacks on every team. If they get hot, you better be prepared to play an up-tempo game on offense. That creates a style of play and the perception that they are soft on defense. It couldn't be farther from the truth. Just curious, how did that USC defense do in the 4th quarter? Penn State went into their shell (like Big Ten teams always do) and they stopped them easily. It's not hard to stop a team when you know they are going to go conservative and try to run out the clock. When they (Penn St.) had to go up-tempo in the final minute they were completely lost. Brad in the grand scheme of things why is this Big Ten vs Pac 12 for you? I am not a Penn State fan or USC fan so I didn't give one shichts about that game because it wasn't even relevant. I watched some of the Gophers/Wash St. but that had about as much relevance too.....the playoff games are what really counts now and Penn St, USC, etc aren't in it. Don't care about the playoff. It is a money grab. If they want to have a legit tournament (with at least 16 teams) I will tune in. 8 teams sounds about right. Although this year, the 2 best teams are playing for the crown. There is Alabama and Clemson. And then everybody else. Hard to say. The games this last week were not indicative of real games. Outside of the first game of the year, never does a team have 3-4 weeks to prepare for a game during the regular season. USC beat Washington 26-13 in week 10 and outgained them by 125 yards. Bama beat em 24-7 and outgained them by 130 (70 of which came on one play). Conversely, Clemson rolled up 576 yards against what was supposed to be a great Ohio State defense. Florida State had 371 against Michigan and USC had 575 against Penn State. Great defenses?

Steve Lentz -> RE: College Football (Future Vikings!) (1/4/2017 10:27:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mark Anderson quote: ORIGINAL: Brad H quote: ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer quote: ORIGINAL: Brad H quote: ORIGINAL: Dave Odle Come on, man. Pac 12 defenses have been notoriously SAWT (to use your term) for decades now. It just is what it is... There's no more need to defend those defenses by saying they are good than someone should defend Big 10 offenses by saying they produce great QBs. It's okay. Nothing to be ashamed of. Well, okay, maybe that's going a little too far because everyone respects a kick ass defense. California teams just are what they are. They are a lot like their state. Flashy, pretty, and kind of wimpy. Again, you aren't really paying attention closely to the conversation. Perception is not always reality. We've heard for years that Pac 12 defenses are soft and Big Ten defenses are tough. Most of that conversation comes from the fans. In reality, the Big Ten defenses look good because there is not many good quarterbacks in the conferences and the offenses are geared around muck and grind on the ground. This year was a perfect example. They were supposed to have some of the top defenses in the country. All we heard all season was how Michigan was great. Ohio State was great. Penn State was great. What happened when they played competent offenses? They gave up 33, 31 and 52 respectively. In the Pac 12, you have (at the very least) good quarterbacks on every team. If they get hot, you better be prepared to play an up-tempo game on offense. That creates a style of play and the perception that they are soft on defense. It couldn't be farther from the truth. Just curious, how did that USC defense do in the 4th quarter? Penn State went into their shell (like Big Ten teams always do) and they stopped them easily. It's not hard to stop a team when you know they are going to go conservative and try to run out the clock. When they (Penn St.) had to go up-tempo in the final minute they were completely lost. Brad in the grand scheme of things why is this Big Ten vs Pac 12 for you? I am not a Penn State fan or USC fan so I didn't give one shichts about that game because it wasn't even relevant. I watched some of the Gophers/Wash St. but that had about as much relevance too.....the playoff games are what really counts now and Penn St, USC, etc aren't in it. Don't care about the playoff. It is a money grab. If they want to have a legit tournament (with at least 16 teams) I will tune in. 8 teams sounds about right. Although this year, the 2 best teams are playing for the crown. There is Alabama and Clemson. And then everybody else. It appears you are correct. Neither Penn State or USC has a good enough defense to compete for the National Title.

Brad H -> RE: College Football (Future Vikings!) (1/5/2017 11:23:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Steve Lentz quote: ORIGINAL: Mark Anderson quote: ORIGINAL: Brad H quote: ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer quote: ORIGINAL: Brad H quote: ORIGINAL: Dave Odle Come on, man. Pac 12 defenses have been notoriously SAWT (to use your term) for decades now. It just is what it is... There's no more need to defend those defenses by saying they are good than someone should defend Big 10 offenses by saying they produce great QBs. It's okay. Nothing to be ashamed of. Well, okay, maybe that's going a little too far because everyone respects a kick ass defense. California teams just are what they are. They are a lot like their state. Flashy, pretty, and kind of wimpy. Again, you aren't really paying attention closely to the conversation. Perception is not always reality. We've heard for years that Pac 12 defenses are soft and Big Ten defenses are tough. Most of that conversation comes from the fans. In reality, the Big Ten defenses look good because there is not many good quarterbacks in the conferences and the offenses are geared around muck and grind on the ground. This year was a perfect example. They were supposed to have some of the top defenses in the country. All we heard all season was how Michigan was great. Ohio State was great. Penn State was great. What happened when they played competent offenses? They gave up 33, 31 and 52 respectively. In the Pac 12, you have (at the very least) good quarterbacks on every team. If they get hot, you better be prepared to play an up-tempo game on offense. That creates a style of play and the perception that they are soft on defense. It couldn't be farther from the truth. Just curious, how did that USC defense do in the 4th quarter? Penn State went into their shell (like Big Ten teams always do) and they stopped them easily. It's not hard to stop a team when you know they are going to go conservative and try to run out the clock. When they (Penn St.) had to go up-tempo in the final minute they were completely lost. Brad in the grand scheme of things why is this Big Ten vs Pac 12 for you? I am not a Penn State fan or USC fan so I didn't give one shichts about that game because it wasn't even relevant. I watched some of the Gophers/Wash St. but that had about as much relevance too.....the playoff games are what really counts now and Penn St, USC, etc aren't in it. Don't care about the playoff. It is a money grab. If they want to have a legit tournament (with at least 16 teams) I will tune in. 8 teams sounds about right. Although this year, the 2 best teams are playing for the crown. There is Alabama and Clemson. And then everybody else. It appears you are correct. Neither Penn State or USC has a good enough defense to compete for the National Title. Pretty tough for a defense to look good when the officials don't call obvious penalties on the opposing offense and allow guys to catch balls out of bounds while overturning obvious fumble calls. The Nittany Lions scored 14 points on their own. In the 4th quarter, when it counted, Penn State had ZERO points. That's all I need to know about the Trojan defense.

Bill Jandro -> RE: College Football (Future Vikings!) (1/5/2017 11:39:20 AM)
Homerism at its finest Blame the refs. Very cliche

Brad H -> RE: College Football (Future Vikings!) (1/5/2017 11:40:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Bill Jandro Homerism at its finest Blame the refs. Very cliche Nothing to do with homerism. Just bad refs who were in over their heads.

Phil Riewer -> RE: College Football (Future Vikings!) (1/5/2017 11:44:29 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Brad H quote: ORIGINAL: Bill Jandro Homerism at its finest Blame the refs. Very cliche Nothing to do with homerism. Just bad refs who were in over their heads. it does sound pretty bad when your favorite team wins and you still complain about the refs.

Brad H -> RE: College Football (Future Vikings!) (1/5/2017 11:55:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer quote: ORIGINAL: Brad H quote: ORIGINAL: Bill Jandro Homerism at its finest Blame the refs. Very cliche Nothing to do with homerism. Just bad refs who were in over their heads. it does sound pretty bad when your favorite team wins and you still complain about the refs. Yep, it was a terrible tragedy. Just because a team wins doesn't make it any better. Those guys should never work again in the industry. They make all refs look bad and cause fans to think about the potential for crooked behavior in the profession. It's bad for business.

Steve Lentz -> RE: College Football (Future Vikings!) (1/7/2017 3:18:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Brad H quote: ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer quote: ORIGINAL: Brad H quote: ORIGINAL: Bill Jandro Homerism at its finest Blame the refs. Very cliche Nothing to do with homerism. Just bad refs who were in over their heads. it does sound pretty bad when your favorite team wins and you still complain about the refs. Yep, it was a terrible tragedy. Just because a team wins doesn't make it any better. Those guys should never work again in the industry. They make all refs look bad and cause fans to think about the potential for crooked behavior in the profession. It's bad for business. Tragedy??? Get real.

twinsfan -> RE: College Football (Future Vikings!) (1/7/2017 3:42:32 PM)
In the scope of the sports world maybe?

Brad H -> RE: College Football (Future Vikings!) (1/9/2017 4:44:14 PM)
All right, who wins it tonight? If Watson plays well, Clemson wins. That's a tall order, but I say it happens. And by playing well, I don't mean throwing for 450 yards and four scores. I mean moving the chains, getting first downs with his legs and winning a field position battle. No huge mistakes. Clemson 23 Bama 17

Guest -> RE: College Football (Future Vikings!) (1/9/2017 9:21:27 PM)
Bama runs away this half. Saban is clearly superior to Swinney.

Guest -> RE: College Football (Future Vikings!) (1/9/2017 10:05:07 PM)
This Bama QB isn't very good, is he?

JT2 -> RE: College Football (Future Vikings!) (1/9/2017 11:06:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Art Bama runs away this half. Saban is clearly superior to Swinney. Not so fast my friend.

Page: << < prev 132 133 [134] 135 136 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5.5 Unicode