Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Thursday, November 01, 2012

OT: November College Football Thread.

Alabama Is still Ranked #1.  Will they hold steady to repeat? Make it to the title game?  Or does another team claim the Crystal ball in Miami in January.

odds are meatwad is drunk Posted: November 01, 2012 at 01:43 PM | 3408 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: college football

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 26 of 35 pages ‹ First  < 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 >  Last ›
   2501. zonk Posted: January 02, 2013 at 10:28 AM (#4336751)
zonk

michigan state beat tcu


Oops - yeah, forgot that one.

it's loony tunes to think ohio state would have been in the championship game given the nature of the big10 in 2012.


Setting aside probation and assuming they win the B1G title game?

Yes - I guarantee that the national title game would be OSU-ND.

I'm mystified that folks think any one loss team would play a title game over an undefeated...

Like it or not - the title game isn't always the two "Best" teams playing anymore than the '87 Twins were the 'best' team in baseball despite the fact that they won the WS.
   2502. Spivey Posted: January 02, 2013 at 10:56 AM (#4336763)
I don't see how you could guarantee that. Ohio State is 3rd in the AP Poll, behind Alabama. Even if you think they'd maybe be higher if they were eligible - which is arguable - it would probably be close. And Ohio State would really struggle in the computer polls. The ELO_CHESS for Sagarin has Ohio State 7th.
   2503. Pops Freshenmeyer Posted: January 02, 2013 at 10:57 AM (#4336764)
Like it or not - the title game isn't always the two "Best" teams playing anymore than the '87 Twins were the 'best' team in baseball despite the fact that they won the WS.

I agree with you, zonk. Record is paramount in CFB which is the driving force behind the decline in good OOC matchups.
   2504. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: January 02, 2013 at 10:58 AM (#4336765)
zonk

well, it's a moot point.

but given how the big10 is currently perceived i see the voters working to keep osu's bcs ranking out of the top 2. the big10 needs a string of wins in what are perceived as 'big games' to get back into the national title discussion

i do not believe a national title game appearance should be a goal. the goal of the big10 is to send a team to the rose bowl that wins.

i am personally disappointed that wisconsin has failed to meet that standard now multiple times
   2505. SoSH U at work Posted: January 02, 2013 at 11:00 AM (#4336770)
don't see how you could guarantee that. Ohio State is 3rd in the AP Poll, behind Alabama. Even if you think they'd maybe be higher if they were eligible - which is arguable - it would probably be close. And Ohio State would really struggle in the computer polls. The ELO_CHESS for Sagarin has Ohio State 7th.


I agree with this. It isn't just that the Big 10 was woeful, but Ohio State was so thoroughly unimpressive in getting to 12-0 that tells me they might have been shut out.

   2506. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: January 02, 2013 at 11:05 AM (#4336775)
i understand i am asking to be drowned in catcalls but i thought michigan, wisconsin and northwestern did pretty ok yesterday.

i understand that only one of those teams won but the other two games were in doubt until the final minute or so.

i guess my definition of 'woeful' is not the same as others.

completely agree that the lesser teams in the big10 fit that adjective
   2507. SoSH U at work Posted: January 02, 2013 at 11:10 AM (#4336776)
i guess my definition of 'woeful' is not the same as others.


They did play well yesterday, all of them. That doesn't erase the previous 16 weeks or so of football, when the conference was indeed woeful (Compared to how it usually performs. Compared to the Big East or MAC, it was OK).

   2508. stanmvp48 Posted: January 02, 2013 at 11:12 AM (#4336778)
Georgia had trouble putting away Nebraska and LSU was dramatically outplayed by Clemson. How does that affect your assessment of the championship game. On the other hand Southern Cal lost to Ga Tech worse than they lost to ND.
   2509. zonk Posted: January 02, 2013 at 11:17 AM (#4336781)
i understand i am asking to be drowned in catcalls but i thought michigan, wisconsin and northwestern did pretty ok yesterday.

i understand that only one of those teams won but the other two games were in doubt until the final minute or so.

i guess my definition of 'woeful' is not the same as others.

completely agree that the lesser teams in the big10 fit that adjective


Obviously, as a B1G guy -- you'll get no catcalls from me...

Michigan got pasted by Alabama, but they could have beaten ND, lost by just a TD to OSU, etc.

Wisconsin 5 regular seasons losses included what... 2? 3? OT losses and of their 6 losses -- 4 came by a field goal (and the other 2 by a TD).

The B1G had a bad year... but there are alternate universes where a bounce here, a flag there, or a dropped pass on the other side means you might have seen, say... an undefeated Wisconsin playing an undefeated Northwestern for the B1G title, with the winner going to the title game.

CFB is a season long tournament.... you lose, you go into the single elimination loser's bracket and need help to get back in the game...
   2510. zonk Posted: January 02, 2013 at 11:18 AM (#4336783)

I agree with this. It isn't just that the Big 10 was woeful, but Ohio State was so thoroughly unimpressive in getting to 12-0 that tells me they might have been shut out.


I just don't see any way that an undefeated OSU gets shut out of a title game in favor of a one loss team - not in the current schema.
   2511. A big pile of nonsense (gef the talking mongoose) Posted: January 02, 2013 at 11:25 AM (#4336786)
stay classy californians:

The Los Angeles' Times' Bill Dwyre: "The Wisconsin Badgers slinked out of Pasadena again Tuesday, defeated for the third straight year in the Rose Bowl. The good news was, by now, they certainly know the backroads out of town."


No kidding.

Surely it's "slunk"?
   2512. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: January 02, 2013 at 11:28 AM (#4336787)
gef

are you quoting the grinch now?
   2513. SoSH U at work Posted: January 02, 2013 at 11:33 AM (#4336792)


I just don't see any way that an undefeated OSU gets shut out of a title game in favor of a one loss team - not in the current schema.


So do you think the computers were underrating OSU because they were on probation? It's possible that the humans look more favorably upon this OSU team had they been street legal, enough to vault it past Bama, but I don't see how it's a guarantee. The Big Ten was way down, and Ohio State was an unimpressive as a team can be in getting to 12-0.

   2514. zonk Posted: January 02, 2013 at 11:35 AM (#4336794)
zonk

well, it's a moot point.

but given how the big10 is currently perceived i see the voters working to keep osu's bcs ranking out of the top 2. the big10 needs a string of wins in what are perceived as 'big games' to get back into the national title discussion

i do not believe a national title game appearance should be a goal. the goal of the big10 is to send a team to the rose bowl that wins.

i am personally disappointed that wisconsin has failed to meet that standard now multiple times


I really do think that the B1G is hurt by conference parity... I suppose a pessimist can look at the glass as half empty, but I tend to look at it as half full.

Indiana is really the only woeful program left in the conference -- yeah, yeah Illinois was awful but they've got at least some semblance of a history and if they could get a decent turnaround coach...

The Legends division is just murderous -- Nebraska and Michigan are (still, I think) perennial national powers, even if they're faded a bit of late... Northwestern, Michigan State, and Iowa have all become perennial regional powers - and quite dangerous in their 'up' years. Minnesota is a step behind, but let's face it -- they're not a woebegone program.

The Leaders division always has a couple perennial national powers in OSU and PSU, as well as a regional power that occasionally has up years where they run with the big dogs (Wisconsin)... and then a couple of programs that take their turns as spoilers (Purdue and sometimes Illinois).

Indiana is really the only hopeless program in the conference - and that's a simple matter of the school really caring more about hoops than anyone else.
   2515. zonk Posted: January 02, 2013 at 11:42 AM (#4336799)
So do you think the computers were underrating OSU because they were on probation? It's possible that the humans look more favorably upon this OSU team had they been street legal, enough to vault it past Bama, but I don't see how it's a guarantee. The Big Ten was way down, and Ohio State was an unimpressive as a team can be in getting to 12-0.


Well, it's hard to game out -- so much would be different without an OSU probation (for one thing, Tressel is probably still coaching... for another, I might imagine a few NFL bound from last year stay put)...

But if we can imagine a non-probation OSU -- yes, I think OSU starts the season somewhere in the top 20, ends up spending most of the second half of the year in the conversation with KSU, OU, Bama, and ND, and ultimately ends up in the same place every major conference undefeated ends up... playing the other (if it exists) major undefeated for the title.

Again - this is just how things work in CFB.... It's a season long tournament, for better or worse. Ever since the PAC/B1G/Rose got on board with the BCS/FCS -- the idea is that never again would we see "split titles" because some conference wasn't able to send an undefeated team to the title game.

I would readily concede that Alabama is a better team than OSU... OU and maybe KSU might even be "better teams" than OSU.

...but OSU is a major, historical power that went undefeated -- I find it completely impossible to think they'd have been shut out of a title game if they were one of only two undefeateds... it just wouldn't have happened.
   2516. SoSH U at work Posted: January 02, 2013 at 11:44 AM (#4336801)
...but OSU is a major, historical power that went undefeated -- I find it completely impossible to think they'd have been shut out of a title game if they were one of only two undefeateds... it just wouldn't have happened.


And I don't think the computers care about any of that. Like I said, it's possible, but by no means guaranteed. I see this OSU team as similar to the Boise States and Utahs and Cincinnati's that went unbeaten and didn't make the title game.
   2517. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: January 02, 2013 at 11:45 AM (#4336802)
zonk

to put penn state ahead of wisconsin, well that's just silly. what the h8ll has penn state done of significance over the last 5 years?

one rose bowl.

whoopdedoo
   2518. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: January 02, 2013 at 11:46 AM (#4336805)
Georgia had trouble putting away Nebraska and LSU was dramatically outplayed by Clemson.


I didn't watch LSU-Clemson, but UGA had Nebraska "put away" by the fourth quarter. It took 2.5 quarters for the UGA defense to show up, but once they got their heads in the game, UGA took control. And if we're giving credit for effort and trying hard, UGA was a dropped pass by T. King away from a three TD win. (It was perfectly delivered by Murray, who should have had six TD passes on the day.)

How does that affect your assessment of the championship game. On the other hand Southern Cal lost to Ga Tech worse than they lost to ND.


I expect about the same result from the NC as we saw in the Capital One bowl. ND will hold close in the first half. Bama's line will wear them down in the 2nd and win comfortably.
   2519. zonk Posted: January 02, 2013 at 11:50 AM (#4336809)
And I don't think the computers care about any of that. Like I said, it's possible, but by no means guaranteed. I see this OSU team as similar to the Boise States and Utahs and Cincinnati's that went unbeaten and didn't make the title game.


Boise State, Utah (prior to joining the PAC 10) and Cincy aren't from traditional major FB conferences.

The computers alone do not select the title game participants.

The idea that the BCS powers that be would put any one loss team ahead of an undefeated Big 10/Pac 10/ACC/SEC/Big12/maybeBig East/ND team is ludicrous.

Right or wrong - you win one of the big conferences with a spotless record and you play for the title... things only get messy when you've only got one undefeated team that meets that criteria and you have to select a one-loss team from that pool.
   2520. zonk Posted: January 02, 2013 at 11:55 AM (#4336812)
zonk

to put penn state ahead of wisconsin, well that's just silly. what the h8ll has penn state done of significance over the last 5 years?

one rose bowl.

whoopdedoo


Sorry - I was just using national championships as shorthand... OSU, Michigan, Nebraska, and Penn State have them and within the modern age... Wisconsin doesn't.

National hardware matters and it alone means you get a permanent membership to the "national powers" club.
   2521. SoSH U at work Posted: January 02, 2013 at 11:56 AM (#4336813)

The computers alone do not select the title game participants.


No, but they play a role, and they correctly viewed OSU similar, or worse, to how they viewed Boise and Utah.

The idea that the BCS powers that be would put any one loss team ahead of an undefeated Big 10/Pac 10/ACC/SEC/Big12/maybeBig East/ND team is ludicrous.


If it were as simple as that, then sure, I'd agree. But it isn't. This amorphous "they" don't just pick the teams they want in there. It don't work that way.
   2522. SouthSideRyan Posted: January 02, 2013 at 12:06 PM (#4336822)
but UGA had Nebraska "put away" by the fourth quarter.


Well that's disingenuous considering it was a tie game heading into the 4th. (Though Georgia was on the Nebraksa 24 and would score on the first play of the 4th.
   2523. A big pile of nonsense (gef the talking mongoose) Posted: January 02, 2013 at 12:06 PM (#4336823)
HW --

are you quoting the grinch now?


Yessir.
   2524. zonk Posted: January 02, 2013 at 12:11 PM (#4336830)


If it were as simple as that, then sure, I'd agree. But it isn't. This amorphous "they" don't just pick the teams they want in there. It don't work that way.


Of course - if they did, they'd probably just toss USC, ND, Alabama, Texas, Nebraska, FSU, OSU, etc into a hat and pick two of them annually to play for the title because the 10-12 'premier' programs travel well, fill stadiums, and draw good TV.

All the complex BCS 'system' does is ensure that the teams on the outside looking in -- where 'outside looking in' means teams that don't play in the traditional power conferences, but having objectively power seasons - don't get shut out of the BCS bowls. In effect - the computers don't pick the title game -- the computers ensure that, say... NIU gets to play in one of the big bowls.

When it comes to the title game - the BCS is very traditionalist and very based on the idea that the entire season is a tournament... So long as the BCS is around, I can guarantee that the title game will always match up two undefeated teams rather than leave one of those undefeateds to play a consolation game.

Again... you're mixing up the "best" teams with the system as it stands now. If you go undefeated and play in one of the 5 (or 6... or 6 + ND) major FB conferences, the only way you don't play in the title game is if there are three undefeateds and people/computers try to determine who the best two of those three teams are.
   2525. Tulo's Fishy Mullet (mrams) Posted: January 02, 2013 at 12:13 PM (#4336831)
and as part of my annual activities let me state in 2013 how much i dislike the journal sentinel writer who follows the badgers, jeff potrykus

he treats readers like garbage, his writing isn't anything special, he never breaks any news you cannot find elsewhere just as quickly and he covers for the coaches while dumping on the kids repeatedly. he's the epitome of 8sskissing twerp


you're not alone in this. He's always been a coaches water carrier, and oddly spends a fair amount of time on Badger message boards, which is funny since he's such a defensive snarky prick.
   2526. Pops Freshenmeyer Posted: January 02, 2013 at 12:17 PM (#4336836)
No, but they play a role, and they correctly viewed OSU similar, or worse, to how they viewed Boise and Utah.

I think the computer ranking is accurate but I also believe that OSU was third in the AP because there is a kind of artificial ceiling there. The writers do not want to give them the benefit of the doubt and deal with split title talk.

Anyway, this is all moot and purely theoretical. I think Alabama is quite a reasonable choice from among the one loss teams and there are a hand full of one loss teams I think are better than OSU.

EDIT: and the computers are only 1/3 of the formula so it only really matters if the two human polls are undecided or very very close between 2 & 3. If OSU wins the Big Ten championship game they get another little bump in their computer ranking.
   2527. Foghorn Leghorn Posted: January 02, 2013 at 12:22 PM (#4336841)
I expect about the same result from the NC as we saw in the Capital One bowl. ND will hold close in the first half. Bama's line will wear them down in the 2nd and win comfortably.
This.
   2528. SoSH U at work Posted: January 02, 2013 at 12:23 PM (#4336842)
When it comes to the title game - the BCS is very traditionalist and very based on the idea that the entire season is a tournament... So long as the BCS is around, I can guarantee that the title game will always match up two undefeated teams rather than leave one of those undefeateds to play a consolation game.

Again... you're mixing up the "best" teams with the system as it stands now. If you go undefeated and play in one of the 5 (or 6... or 6 + ND) major FB conferences, the only way you don't play in the title game is if there are three undefeateds and people/computers try to determine who the best two of those three teams are.


I'm not mixing up anything. There's a formula. It's possible that OSU is able to overcome its computer disadvantage (not sure how a second beating of Nebraska helps, but it's obviously going to benefit the Buckeyes) with its human poll performance, but it is by no means certain, no matter how many empty "ludicrouses" or "guarantees" you want to toss around.

EDIT: and the computers are only 1/3 of the formula so it only really matters if the two human polls are undecided or very very close between 2 & 3. If OSU wins the Big Ten championship game they get another little bump in their computer ranking.


And you don't think it would be very close between 2 and 3? I think it's obvious that, after the SEC title game, no one's finishing ahead of Bama for the No. 3 spot, so it's safe to say that's their floor. Are you so sure that every voter out there would ignore what every one of us have agreed upon, that Bama is in fact better than Ohio State? That doesn't pass my smell test (especially since we already have one poll where Ohio State was considered, and they didn't even finish ahead of Bama in that one).
   2529. Foghorn Leghorn Posted: January 02, 2013 at 12:23 PM (#4336844)
LSU was dramatically outplayed by Clemson
?? They needed Miles to throw three passes with under 2 to play, and a miracle 4th and 16 to squeak out a last second FG to win by one.
   2530. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: January 02, 2013 at 12:30 PM (#4336853)
Well that's disingenuous considering it was a tie game heading into the 4th.


Midway through the third the UGA defense figured out Nebraska's offense and started shutting them down. At that point, with Nebraska having no answer to stop the UGA offense, the game was done. Admittedly, UGA should have one by 3+ touchdowns, not merely two. They didn't come to play defensively in the first half.
   2531. Pops Freshenmeyer Posted: January 02, 2013 at 12:37 PM (#4336866)
And you don't think it would be very close between 2 and 3? I think it's obvious that, after the SEC title game, no one's finishing ahead of Bama for the No. 3 spot, so it's safe to say that's their floor. Are you so sure that every voter out there would ignore what every one of us have agreed upon, that Bama is in fact better than Ohio State? That doesn't pass my smell test (especially since we already have one poll where Ohio State was considered, and they didn't even finish ahead of Bama in that one).

Well, I don't claim to be sure of anything but the past conventions of the human polls strongly suggest to me that OSU would be #2 in both of them and the computer gap wouldn't have been enough. It might have been sufficient to keep Florida State down (IIRC, they were in the teens).

EDIT: and all the pundits are saying Alabama is going to win on Monday but that didn't stop ND from being the heavy winner in the polls.
   2532. Chicago Joe Posted: January 02, 2013 at 12:44 PM (#4336872)
Well, I'm a bit of a lurker in this thread, but a couple of responses/questions:

A few pages upthread, Harveys:
stanford has not exploited the special teams mismatch

And I was curious as to how one would go about doing this. Seems to me like special teams are almost entirely reactive with the possible exception of gimmick plays. Please correct me. (I know one possible corrective might be a reference to the Bears return game prior to the moving of the kickoff).

yeah, yeah Illinois was awful but they've got at least some semblance of a history and if they could get a decent turnaround coach...


The Illini have not been consistently relevant since the 80's and even that was a brief flowering under a coach/AD regime that was apparently rather loose with the rules. Sure, Illinois has been in a couple of BCS bowls, but then, so has Kansas.

   2533. odds are meatwad is drunk Posted: January 02, 2013 at 12:53 PM (#4336885)
Nebraska's run game was toast once they lost serle to injury(midway in the third) they just couldnt run at all with him out thats what hurt them.
   2534. Barry`s_Lazy_Boy Posted: January 02, 2013 at 12:54 PM (#4336889)
Agreed that if OSU were eligible and beat Nebraska in the BTT game, they are #2 in both human polls, with Alabama as #3 in both polls. Alabama was 3, 4, 2, 4, 3, 3, and 3 in the BCS computer rankings. Ohio State is 11th in the Massey computer rankings, and don't see them getting a lot higher in the bcs computer rankings after a BTT win, maybe a rough average of 8th or 9th. I think Alabama would have made it over them, and the screaming would have been over the top.

   2535. SoSH U at work Posted: January 02, 2013 at 12:57 PM (#4336895)
Well, I don't claim to be sure of anything but the past conventions of the human polls strongly suggest to me that OSU would be #2 in both of them and the computer gap wouldn't have been enough. It might have been sufficient to keep Florida State down (IIRC, they were in the teens).


Sure, but here we have a group of voters, not unlike those that make up the Harris and Coaches polls, who were free to rank Ohio State ahead of Alabama, and they didn't just put Alabama ahead of the Buckeyes, but OSU was closer to No. 6 Georgia than it was to No. 2 Bama. I just don't see how one can be certain (which, to be fair, you aren't being certain the way zonk is) that simply making Ohio State eligible is enough to overcome the existing evaluations of their worth.

   2536. Barry`s_Lazy_Boy Posted: January 02, 2013 at 01:05 PM (#4336901)
?? They needed Miles to throw three passes with under 2 to play, and a miracle 4th and 16 to squeak out a last second FG to win by one.

Clemson out gained them 445 to 219 and won first down battle 32 to 9. LSU was +1 in the turnover battle.
   2537. stanmvp48 Posted: January 02, 2013 at 01:07 PM (#4336903)
-LSU was dramatically outplayed by Clemson-

>?? They needed Miles to throw three passes with under 2 to play, and a miracle 4th and 16 to squeak out a last second FG to win by one.<

32 first downs to 9. 445 yards to 219. Perhaps I should have said dramatically outplayed statistically.
   2538. Foghorn Leghorn Posted: January 02, 2013 at 01:09 PM (#4336906)
Clemson out gained them 445 to 219 and won first down battle 32 to 9. LSU was +1 in the turnover battle.
LSU won the return game by 100 yards. LSU had 7 penalties - 6 of them gave Clemson a first down.

Also, there is no "first down battle". Yards, yes, but "first downs"? Those are Not Needed. Nor is Time of Possession. If the score is tied it just means the construct of your scoring is different - it doesn't mean you are being "outplayed". I guess "running more plays" could be a definition of "outplayed".

Clemson won on gifts - they did need to capitalize on them, and did so in an exciting fashion.
   2539. SoSH U at work Posted: January 02, 2013 at 01:10 PM (#4336909)
Clemson out gained them 445 to 219 and won first down battle 32 to 9. LSU was +1 in the turnover battle.


Those numbers only matter when its the SEC team on the left side of the ledger. (-:

   2540. Foghorn Leghorn Posted: January 02, 2013 at 01:14 PM (#4336912)
Those numbers only matter when its the SEC team on the left side of the ledger. (-:
As a Peyton Manning fan, I never care about first downs nor TOP. A good team doesn't need a bunch of first downs, nor the ball very long.

Those things aren't complete garbage - they are just the batting average of offense - they things that construct how the yards were gained and points were scored.
   2541. SoSH U at work Posted: January 02, 2013 at 01:18 PM (#4336918)
As a Peyton Manning fan, I never care about first downs nor TOP. A good team doesn't need a bunch of first downs, nor the ball very long.


Time of possession? Sure. First downs? To a lesser extent? Yards? Absolutely not. Yards gained is the building block. You can luck your way into an edge in points much easier than you can luck your way into a 2-1 advantage in yards gained. You know, the one Clemson had.
   2542. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: January 02, 2013 at 01:19 PM (#4336919)
chicago

teams with good special teams exploit coverage and blocking gaps all the time. you set up a special return. you call a block. you try an onside. you set up a specific coverage to pin your opponent even closer to its goal line

michigan state blocks a kick in every game against wisky because of its ability to exploit issues with wisky's blocking approach on punts
   2543. Yardape Posted: January 02, 2013 at 01:23 PM (#4336924)
I think Alabama would have made it over them, and the screaming would have been over the top.


I think Ohio St. would have made it, but I think the second part is the important part: if an undefeated Ohio St. was left out of the title game for a one-loss team, we'd have a new system next year. Which I guess is happening anyways.
   2544. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: January 02, 2013 at 01:24 PM (#4336926)
interestingly the broncos finished 8th in the league in time of possession and third in first downs

//cue being told this is a byproduct of the yards gained and not a goal which i will grant but posted these facts to tweak the poster
   2545. Tulo's Fishy Mullet (mrams) Posted: January 02, 2013 at 01:25 PM (#4336927)
My calling card when debunking TOP or significance of 1st downs. Two absolute woodsheddings,

TOP doesn't mean squat, neither do total 1st downs.

This game was a month or two later than the first one.
   2546. Foghorn Leghorn Posted: January 02, 2013 at 01:27 PM (#4336932)
Yards? Absolutely not. Yards gained is the building block. You can luck your way into an edge in points much easier than you can luck your way into a 2-1 advantage in yards gained. You know, the one Clemson had.
I acknowledged yards, and also showed where Clemson gave up half of that advantage in returns.

From the Hidden Game, I think 12 yards is a point. So Clemson had 100 yard advantage, which is about 8 points, but they gave 4 back with the turnover margin, so the game says Clemson by about 4, and they won by 1. And they *really* needed that last 60 yards that Miles can prevent if he runs the ball on second and two or third and two - at a minimum burning Clemson's timeouts.
   2547. Foghorn Leghorn Posted: January 02, 2013 at 01:28 PM (#4336935)
interestingly the broncos finished 8th in the league in time of possession and third in first downs

//cue being told this is a byproduct of the yards gained and not a goal which i will grant but posted these facts to tweak the poster
I don't know how that is supposed to tweak me. It supports my position.
   2548. SoSH U at work Posted: January 02, 2013 at 01:31 PM (#4336936)
I acknowledged yards, and also showed where Clemson gave up half of that advantage in returns.

From the Hidden Game, I think 12 yards is a point. So Clemson had 100 yard advantage, which is about 8 points, but they gave 4 back with the turnover margin, so the game says Clemson by about 4, and they won by 1. And they *really* needed that last 60 yards that Miles can prevent if he runs the ball on second and two or third and two - at a minimum burning Clemson's timeouts.


If....

And like I said, had the numbers been reversed, the SEC worshippers wouldn't be doing any digging to explain the overwhelming disparity. For evidence, read any of the nonsense Sam has posted in this thread (beating Missouri is the same as beating Stanford, doncha know).


   2549. Foghorn Leghorn Posted: January 02, 2013 at 01:36 PM (#4336941)
And like I said, if the numbers were reversed, the SEC worshippers wouldn't be doing any digging to explain the overwhelming disparity. For evidence, read any of the nonsense Sam has posted in this thread (beating Missouri is the same as beating Stanford, doncha know).
1. HW has painted *me* as THE SEC WORSHIPPER, and yes, I would do the same analysis, but I do appreciate the accusation of intellectual dishonesty. ;-)

2. Sam is a crackpot.

3. I was pulling for Michigan and Clemson. I *expect* SoCar and LSU to pull those games out - because even in close games, talent can win - and if Miles doesn't shoot himself in the foot with less than 2 min, they will beat Clemson despite is yardage difference - well, partly because the yardage gap would be closer to 40 yards, and LSU had the extra TO. Even just Hopkins dropping the sliding 4th and 16 and Clemson loses.
   2550. SoSH U at work Posted: January 02, 2013 at 01:43 PM (#4336952)
1. HW has painted *me* as THE SEC WORSHIPPER, and yes, I would do the same analysis, but I do appreciate the accusation of intellectual dishonesty. ;-)


Hey, I had the little smiley thing in there first.

But if you don't want to lumped in with crackpots, you should include your disclaimer at the beginning of joining the thread. (-:

For the record, you're overstating the return yardage edge. Clemson kicked off four times. One went for a touchback, which is an extra 25 yards to add to UT's total. UT kicked off five times, three went for touchbacks, which is an extra 75 yards. The Tigers also had one fewer touchback on punts, so the return gap was really only 30 yards, not 100.
   2551. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: January 02, 2013 at 01:49 PM (#4336963)
christopher

you have been pretty consistent on the point that the sec is the only conference worth watching and all other conferences are filled with pond scum and rat droppings

and i am paraphrasing to spare the youngsters your smut talk
   2552. Tom Nawrocki Posted: January 02, 2013 at 02:17 PM (#4336995)
Miles is probably relatively bad at it, but are there any college teams who do well at clock management? It comes up so rarely and it's such a small part of the overall skillset for a college coach. Plus, you're relying on a bunch of 19-year-olds to know when to get quickly to the line, when to go out of bounds or stay in bounds, when to spike the ball...

It seems like most college teams don't manage the clock well. I think you ought to be surprised when a team does a good job of it.
   2553. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: January 02, 2013 at 02:19 PM (#4336997)
2. Sam is a crackpot.


Sam is also always right.
   2554. SoSH U at work Posted: January 02, 2013 at 02:24 PM (#4337004)
Miles is probably relatively bad at it, but are there any college teams who do well at clock management?


I saw a NW game where Randy Walker managed the clock brilliantly (he started calling his timeouts with the lead and the opponent in field goal range but before they got inside the 15), and the Cats ended up winning with their own FG at the gun. It stood out because of how rare it was.

Then he died, while Les Miles just kept on chugging along. So maybe it's not a very good idea.
   2555. Tulo's Fishy Mullet (mrams) Posted: January 02, 2013 at 02:26 PM (#4337006)
Miles is probably relatively bad at it, but are there any college teams who do well at clock management? It comes up so rarely and it's such a small part of the overall skillset for a college coach. Plus, you're relying on a bunch of 19-year-olds to know when to get quickly to the line, when to go out of bounds or stay in bounds, when to spike the ball...


as with long snappers, you don't notice the good ones, same with proper clock mgmt.
   2556. Foghorn Leghorn Posted: January 02, 2013 at 02:27 PM (#4337009)
No, doubt, Tom. But Miles' mismanagement was playcalling. He gets the ball with 2 min, and surprises Clemson's stacked line with a pass for 8 yards. HAHA! So 2nd and two. Well, Jeremy Hill has been cruising this game, so get a first down, causing Clemson to burn a TO, right? Not even clock management, but "keep the clock running" management. Nope, he tries to surprise Clemson with ANOTHER PASS! Incomplete - clock stops. Well, okay, lets get the first down and start the clock again, right? Nope ! Surprise! Another pass! Incomplete, clock stops again, and then a punt.

Just some real WTF stuff.
   2557. Foghorn Leghorn Posted: January 02, 2013 at 02:28 PM (#4337010)
HW, did you see the replay on the Michigan "first down" spot, yet?
   2558. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: January 02, 2013 at 02:31 PM (#4337016)
christopher

i did not. still devastated over wisconsin gacking away another rose bowl

   2559. odds are meatwad is drunk Posted: January 02, 2013 at 02:42 PM (#4337036)
it was pretty bad, but it ended up better for south car. because when clowney ate that running back they had better field position.
   2560. Barry`s_Lazy_Boy Posted: January 02, 2013 at 03:33 PM (#4337082)
Has there been an explanation for the first down call? That was bizarre.

   2561. I am going to be Frank Posted: January 02, 2013 at 03:58 PM (#4337097)
The official was from the Big East - he was trying to gain favor with the Big 10 so he could get a new job. That's all I could think of.
   2562. Tulo's Fishy Mullet (mrams) Posted: January 02, 2013 at 04:11 PM (#4337116)
Has there been an explanation for the first down call? That was bizarre.


The official was from the Big East


Which makes sense. The conference made it a double dip in the UCONN at Marquette game last night too, when they totally ###### up the beginning of overtime. They had the teams going to the wrong baskets for a possession, then when MU goaltended a UConn shot attempt they said, 'ah nevermind,' and switched the teams sides and took away UConn's basket and resumed play. The explanation from the league was particularly timid.

I haven't seen or heard anything in response to the measurement. Spurrier said he was later happy it happened, otherwise we don't get to see Clowney knock the guy's helmet off the TV screen and just snatch the ball like a handful of mixed nuts.

Both egregious officiating errors, and while human, I have never seen either in my life.
   2563. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: January 02, 2013 at 04:16 PM (#4337125)
the head official for the rose bowl was from the big east. he was the one who called running into the kicker when the wisconsin kid got plowed over and even the anti big10 folks here thought it should have been a roughing call

whatchagonnado?
   2564. ASmitty Posted: January 02, 2013 at 04:26 PM (#4337140)
Clemson won on gifts - they did need to capitalize on them, and did so in an exciting fashion.


This is a joke, right? Humor? Did you watch the game at all?

LSU had two plays all game, the forced fumble that led to their first TD, and the long TD run. Two. They were utterly dominated the entire remainder of the game.

Much ado is made of the fourth down pass made by Clemson, but really LSU was far more relient on big plays in the game than Clemson was. Take away either the fumble or the long TD run by Hill and LSU would have been sunk. What "gifts" did Clemson get in the game? I can't think of many/any, unless you conclude that it was cheritable of LSU to repeatedly let Clemson drive the length of the field or to let Clemson force repeated three and outs.

I generally concede SEC supremecy, but I just don't see how someone could watch that game and think LSU was the better team. They emphatically were not.
   2565. Pops Freshenmeyer Posted: January 02, 2013 at 04:31 PM (#4337145)
Has there been an explanation for the first down call? That was bizarre.

No kidding. I was watching with my wife and I said, "maybe I don't understand which part of the chain actually means it's a first down." She replied, "well I'm pretty sure the 50 football players standing there yelling at the official know the rule."

That play by Jadeveon Clowney was as good a defensive effort as I've ever seen. I particularly enjoyed this interpretation of events.

It reminded me a little bit of
this.
   2566. Foghorn Leghorn Posted: January 02, 2013 at 05:12 PM (#4337192)
ASmitty,
LSU had two plays? Then how did they score four times?

Much ado is made of the fourth down pass made by Clemson, but really LSU was far more relient on big plays in the game than Clemson was. Take away either the fumble or the long TD run by Hill and LSU would have been sunk.
That makes no sense.
What "gifts" did Clemson get in the game? I can't think of many/any,
Did you see any of this: LSU gets the ball with 2 min, and surprises Clemson's stacked line with a pass for 8 yards. HAHA! So 2nd and two. Well, Jeremy Hill has been cruising this game, so get a first down, causing Clemson to burn a TO, right? Not even clock management, but "keep the clock running" management. Nope, Miles tries to surprise Clemson with ANOTHER PASS! Incomplete - clock stops. Well, okay, lets get the first down and start the clock again, right? Nope ! Surprise! Another pass! Incomplete, clock stops again, and then a punt.

If you don't think that was charitable, perhaps you are unfamiliar with football strategies. Oh, no, that was Clemson "forcing" a three and out.

unless you conclude that it was cheritable of LSU to repeatedly let Clemson drive the length of the field or to let Clemson force repeated three and outs.
Let Clemson repeatedly drive the length of the field and not score? Did you miss the fact that it took the last tick for Clemson to lead?
   2567. Foghorn Leghorn Posted: January 02, 2013 at 05:14 PM (#4337195)
I generally concede SEC supremecy, but I just don't see how someone could watch that game and think LSU was the better team. They emphatically were not.
Oh, emphatically? Well, that's different. LSU has a much better defense and a much worse offense. I think LSU, by changing *ONE* play call, wins that game.
   2568. spike Posted: January 02, 2013 at 05:52 PM (#4337251)
Besides, Clemson is an honorary SEC team.
   2569. Foghorn Leghorn Posted: January 02, 2013 at 05:53 PM (#4337252)
Besides, Clemson is an honorary SEC team.
HA!
   2570. Foghorn Leghorn Posted: January 02, 2013 at 05:54 PM (#4337255)
Clemson four lowest point totals: 17, 25, 26, 37

The three SEC teams and FSU.
   2571. Eddo Posted: January 02, 2013 at 06:00 PM (#4337264)
Let Clemson repeatedly drive the length of the field and not score?

I didn't watch the game, but I'm not sure I'd include that as a point in LSU's favor.
   2572. Cowboy Popup Posted: January 02, 2013 at 08:51 PM (#4337374)
So, is tonight going to be better than last night? I hope so. At least tonight, I think we can count on the underdog's QB to not suck ass all game.
   2573. CFBF Is A Golden Spider Duck Posted: January 02, 2013 at 09:25 PM (#4337387)
Florida going with the blue shirts, orange pants combo for the first time in almost 14 years. It's an...interesting look.
   2574. OCF Posted: January 02, 2013 at 09:30 PM (#4337389)
Has Sam M. been around here much lately? This would seem to be his game to care about.
   2575. Spivey Posted: January 02, 2013 at 09:32 PM (#4337392)
SEC! SEC! SEC!
   2576. Cowboy Popup Posted: January 02, 2013 at 09:32 PM (#4337393)
Well that's an amazing start for Louisville!
   2577. Spivey Posted: January 02, 2013 at 09:34 PM (#4337394)
That was one of the shittiest kickoffs I've ever seen.
   2578. Spivey Posted: January 02, 2013 at 09:40 PM (#4337397)
That was a bounty hit on Bridgewater right there.
   2579. Cowboy Popup Posted: January 02, 2013 at 09:42 PM (#4337398)
Whoa, big pass play against the UF secondary.
   2580. Brian White Posted: January 02, 2013 at 09:43 PM (#4337399)
So, can you have possession of the football with your knees?
   2581. Darkness and the howling fantods Posted: January 02, 2013 at 09:44 PM (#4337400)
How was that not a personal foul? His knee was down well before the hit and it was helmet to helmet.
   2582. Spivey Posted: January 02, 2013 at 09:45 PM (#4337402)
I remember from the FSU/Florida game how much Florida hits helmet to helmet. It's insane to the point where you assume it's almost being coached, but I guess you gotta keep your job eh Muschamp?
   2583. Brian White Posted: January 02, 2013 at 09:46 PM (#4337404)
How was that not a personal foul? His knee was down well before the hit and it was helmet to helmet.


Refs should have whistled it dead, but they didn't. I can't comment on the helmet to helmet thing, I missed that one replay angle.
   2584. Cowboy Popup Posted: January 02, 2013 at 09:47 PM (#4337409)
Nice scramble there.
   2585. Spivey Posted: January 02, 2013 at 09:49 PM (#4337411)
It shouldn't have been whistled dead because even though he had his knee down he was juggling the ball.

   2586. CFBF Is A Golden Spider Duck Posted: January 02, 2013 at 09:51 PM (#4337415)
Man, Louisville is making third down look really damn easy. Soft SEC schedule clearly didn't prepare UF.
   2587. Spivey Posted: January 02, 2013 at 09:51 PM (#4337416)
Bulldozer!
   2588. Brian White Posted: January 02, 2013 at 09:51 PM (#4337418)
It shouldn't have been whistled dead because even though he had his knee down he was juggling the ball.


Well, the ball was on the ground, so at that point it's either incomplete or down. But whatever, it's moot.

Florida's defense is looking pretty good when it isn't third down.
   2589. Darkness and the howling fantods Posted: January 02, 2013 at 09:51 PM (#4337419)
It shouldn't have been whistled dead because even though he had his knee down he was juggling the ball.

Ah, good call.
   2590. Cowboy Popup Posted: January 02, 2013 at 09:52 PM (#4337421)
Look at Louisville. Getting smacked, refs not helping, and they put the ball on the half yard line on their first drive. This is exactly what I was hoping for.
   2591. Spivey Posted: January 02, 2013 at 09:52 PM (#4337422)
His knee does not look down to me. I normally like Spielman but I don't understand why they're so adamant his knee was down.
   2592. ASmitty Posted: January 02, 2013 at 09:54 PM (#4337425)
"Let Clemson repeatedly drive the length of the field and not score? Did you miss the fact that it took the last tick for Clemson to lead?"

Clemson allowed about one yard in the fourth quarter and scored twelve consecutive points. They're tempo utterly cooked LSU's defense. LSU essentially scored half of their points on two plays. Clemson repeatedly drove the field. LSU was the worse team and lost. They trailed in total yardage and score. WHAT MORE DO PEOPLE WANT.

I watched Clemson lose to South Carolina. Clemson was worse than Carolina. Clemson was better than LSU.
   2593. Spivey Posted: January 02, 2013 at 09:54 PM (#4337426)
Well, the ball was on the ground, so at that point it's either incomplete or down. But whatever, it's moot.


It wasn't clear it was on the ground though. I think it was appropriate to let the play go on.
   2594. Spivey Posted: January 02, 2013 at 10:02 PM (#4337432)
That was a split second from a pick 6.
   2595. Brian White Posted: January 02, 2013 at 10:03 PM (#4337435)
Ah, a Jeff Driskel special. Stare at a guy for like three minutes and finally squeeze it in there.
   2596. ASmitty Posted: January 02, 2013 at 10:10 PM (#4337442)
Oh, and also:

Clemson four lowest point totals: 17, 25, 26, 37

The three SEC teams and FSU.


You do realize only one of those numbers is small?
   2597. Cowboy Popup Posted: January 02, 2013 at 10:11 PM (#4337443)
Florida just killed itself there. Now they need Driskel to make a play with his arm (probably) in the red zone.
   2598. Brian White Posted: January 02, 2013 at 10:13 PM (#4337446)
Now they need Driskel to make a play with his arm (probably) in the red zone.


Let's not hold our breath here.

At least UF's offense is moving. That's a pretty good sign, even if they're only getting three out of this.
   2599. CFBF Is A Golden Spider Duck Posted: January 02, 2013 at 10:17 PM (#4337448)
I struggle to evaluate Driskel. He really does have all the physical tools. As Spielman just mentioned (and will rant about for the rest of the game), he's not much of a defense reader. On the other hand, his completion percentage is solid. On the other other hand, they aren't asking him to make difficult throws. On the other other other hand, he doesn't throw many interceptions. On the other other other other hand, he's under explicit instructions to avoid turnovers, so he takes a lot of sacks. On the other other other other other hand, his offensive line is mediocre at best and his receivers blow.

So...yeah, I don't know.
   2600. ASmitty Posted: January 02, 2013 at 10:20 PM (#4337450)
CFBF

So minus the O Line, recent vintage Alex Smith?
Page 26 of 35 pages ‹ First  < 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 >  Last ›

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Adam S
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogOT: September 2014 College Football thread
(289 - 4:12pm, Sep 20)
Last: spike

NewsblogKeri: How Washington Built a World Series Favorite
(56 - 4:01pm, Sep 20)
Last: Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip

NewsblogHBT: Talking head says Jeter is “a fraud” and “you are all suckers”
(52 - 3:44pm, Sep 20)
Last: PreservedFish

NewsblogOMNICHATTER 9-20-2014
(13 - 3:43pm, Sep 20)
Last: crict

NewsblogRoyals encounter problem with online sale of playoff tickets
(4 - 3:38pm, Sep 20)
Last: Knock on any Iorg

NewsblogOT: Politics, September, 2014: ESPN honors Daily Worker sports editor Lester Rodney
(3394 - 3:09pm, Sep 20)
Last: BDC

NewsblogPedro pens a letter to Clayton Kershaw
(68 - 3:09pm, Sep 20)
Last: Avoid running at all times.-S. Paige

NewsblogOT: Monthly NBA Thread - September 2014
(292 - 2:37pm, Sep 20)
Last: Steve Parris, Je t'aime

NewsblogLindbergh: Dellin Betances’s Season & Bullpen Strategy
(2 - 2:32pm, Sep 20)
Last: Steve Parris, Je t'aime

NewsblogRon Washington Acknowledges Infidelity, Doesn’t Explain Why He Resigned
(60 - 1:18pm, Sep 20)
Last: Lassus

NewsblogOT: The Soccer Thread, September 2014
(309 - 1:10pm, Sep 20)
Last: Shooty Survived the Shutdown of '14!

NewsblogEn Banc Court May Call Foul on Bonds Conviction
(34 - 1:08pm, Sep 20)
Last: Brian

NewsblogNew approach on offense has Pirates in playoff contention this season
(26 - 11:42am, Sep 20)
Last: BDC

NewsblogAraton: The Other Side of a Derek Jeter Hustle Play
(35 - 9:43am, Sep 20)
Last: Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip

NewsblogA’s lose Triple-A Sacramento affiliate
(91 - 8:49am, Sep 20)
Last: JE (Jason)

Page rendered in 1.0308 seconds
53 querie(s) executed