OT The NCAA Football Season Discussion

kevinpars · Post by **kevinpars** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 3:50 pm

I can't believe someone didn't start this one earlier. Have all the college football fans left the board?

The Vols are back - or Cal was way overrated. Notre Dame looked overrated, but they got the W. Georgia Tech played way too conservative in the first half. If you are happy to play for a field goal, chances are it is going to come back to haunt you. It was surprising to see an early season game with no turnovers.

Anyone else bothered by the hype surrounding the ND - G Tech game? Especially Bob Davie's comment about how 'courageous' Brady Quinn was? Nothing against Quinn, who took a lot of hits, but courageous?

As for the FSU - Miami game, it is four hours before gametime and I am already questioning Jeff Bowden's gamecalling.

SoMisss2000 · Post by **SoMisss2000** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 9:51 pm

Notre Dame looked overrated, but they got the W.

Not a fan of the Irish but they did go on the road, the first game of the year, to a hostile environment, against on of the best defenses in college football a year ago. The defense looks pretty damn good again this year. It wasn't pretty but they got it done. I had to admire the coconuts that Weis had to go for it on 4th down late in the game. If only he would come back to the league and coach my Boys once Parcells leaves. Anyways, I'm of the belief that College Football is so much better when the traditional powers are good.

Buckeyes come to Austin next Saturday night!

XXXIV · Post by **XXXIV** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 9:59 pm

SoMisss2000 wrote:
Notre Dame looked overrated, but they got the W.
Not a fan of the Irish but they did go on the road, the first game of the year, to a hostile environment, against on of the best defenses in college football a year ago. !

GT was UNRANKED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!....Sorry but a #2 ranked team with the greatest coach and qb of all time do better than luck out a win.....

How the hell is that guy the leading Heismann candidate?...other than he plays for ND?...

Sully · Post by **Sully** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 10:42 pm

XXXIV wrote:
SoMisss2000 wrote:
Notre Dame looked overrated, but they got the W.
Not a fan of the Irish but they did go on the road, the first game of the year, to a hostile environment, against on of the best defenses in college football a year ago. !
GT was UNRANKED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!....Sorry but a #2 ranked team with the greatest coach and qb of all time do better than luck out a win.....

How the hell is that guy the leading Heismann candidate?...other than he plays for ND?...

Well, GT also went into Jordan Hare last year and whooped Auburn to open the season. They are no pushover.

As for Quinn being a leading candidate, he had a great season last year, and the Notre Dame offense returns most of his supporting cast (Samardzija, Walker, McKnight).

With that said, I was also unimpressed with their first game. If they play the same way next week against Penn St., they'll lose. The Nittany Lions are a better team than GT on both sides of the ball.

SoMisss2000 · Post by **SoMisss2000** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 10:43 pm

XXXIV wrote:
SoMisss2000 wrote:
Notre Dame looked overrated, but they got the W.
Not a fan of the Irish but they did go on the road, the first game of the year, to a hostile environment, against on of the best defenses in college football a year ago. !
GT was UNRANKED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!....Sorry but a #2 ranked team with the greatest coach and qb of all time do better than luck out a win.....

How the hell is that guy the leading Heismann candidate?...other than he plays for ND?...

you and I know both know that ND is ranked #2 because they're Notre Dame, however, you can't ignore that GT has a good defense. They were #10 in the nation last year. So because GT was unranked before that game mean they suck or they can't cause problems for a top rated team? C'mon dude. They'll have to earn their #2 ranking over the next few weeks. You sound like Mark May. It's too early to call anyone overrated after one week. Even too early for the #9 Golden Bears of Cal.

SoMisss2000 · Post by **SoMisss2000** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 10:45 pm

Sully wrote:
XXXIV wrote:
SoMisss2000 wrote:Not a fan of the Irish but they did go on the road, the first game of the year, to a hostile environment, against on of the best defenses in college football a year ago. !
GT was UNRANKED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!....Sorry but a #2 ranked team with the greatest coach and qb of all time do better than luck out a win.....

How the hell is that guy the leading Heismann candidate?...other than he plays for ND?...
Well, GT also went into Jordan Hare last year and whooped Auburn to open the season. They are no pushover.

As for Quinn being a leading candidate, he had a great season last year, and the Notre Dame offense returns most of his supporting cast (Samardzija, Walker, McKnight).

With that said, I was also unimpressed with their first game. If they play the same way next week against Penn St., they'll lose. The Nittany Lions are a better team than GT on both sides of the ball.

exactly, like I said, they'll be showing where they are over the next couple weeks.

XXXIV · Post by **XXXIV** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 10:46 pm

Nah...he plays for ND...

XXXIV · Post by **XXXIV** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 10:49 pm

Polls should not be taken til after a few games are played...We have already seen the undeserved(ND) and the over looked (Tenn)....

Sully · Post by **Sully** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 10:54 pm

XXXIV wrote:Polls should not be taken til after a few games are played...We have already seen the undeserved(ND) and the over looked (Tenn)....

I agree.

dbdynsty25 · Post by **dbdynsty25** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 11:12 pm

Sucks that the Hurricanes don't have any playmakers on offense. It's gonna be a long year...even if they do find a way to beat FSU in this game. Neither team looks very impressive on offense. A couple broken plays have given FSU the advatage so far...it looks like another year of "down" Florida football...hopefully it just sticks in the college game.

dbdynsty25 · Post by **dbdynsty25** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 11:37 pm

Yeah...my team sucks. A pretty nice D, but the O is an atrocity. I'll be surprised if they win 8 games this year.

Nozzleman_216 · Post by **Nozzleman_216** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 11:53 pm

I would HARDLY say your team sucks! Both teams have probably the best D's in the country and IT SHOWED! Both offenses really looked poor, although the Noles FINALLY took some advantage of their recievers being a foot taller then both of your DB's. What do you expect of the offenses. Something has to give when defenses of this calibar are in the same game. Look at last year, you got beat then put together a hell of a string of wins, only to blow it but still.

I will admit, I hate Miami, but to lose to them in a close game is NEVER anything to be too ashamed of, its just always heart breaking. So to say you guys suck is a farse. I mean dont you think its OUR turn to win a string of games against you.....PLEASE

Don't forget you had how many players suspended???5 or 6?

Programmed2Kill · Post by **Programmed2Kill** » Tue Sep 05, 2006 12:29 am

Oh boy. Another season of no offense whatsoever

Was Greg Olsen even put in position to help out tonight???

The receivers were doing nice and actually being used in the first half. And then the second half happened. It was all messy runs, Wright being obliterated and ball-fumbling.

I need a drink. It's going to be a lonnnnnnnggggggggggggg season.

Atxj · Post by **Atxj** » Tue Sep 05, 2006 1:13 am

Buckeyes come to Austin next Saturday night!

Can't wait, you going?

I'll be there.

SoMisss2000 · Post by **SoMisss2000** » Tue Sep 05, 2006 1:23 am

AtXj wrote:
Buckeyes come to Austin next Saturday night!
Can't wait, you going?

I'll be there.

I wish. Doubt. I hope to catch the Red River Shootout in person this year.

bkrich83 · Post by **bkrich83** » Tue Sep 05, 2006 2:39 am

The stories of the demise of USC appears to have been premature.

dbdynsty25 · Post by **dbdynsty25** » Tue Sep 05, 2006 2:42 am

bkrich83 wrote:The stories of the demise of USC appears to have been premature.

Because they beat Arkansas? At least let them beat someone that won more than 4 games last year.

kevinpars · Post by **kevinpars** » Tue Sep 05, 2006 7:44 am

One thing that I take away from week 1 is that the addition of the 12th game is a joke on us. Far too many games between 1A and 1AA teams.

Another thing that jumps out at me is the length of the games. Funny how broadcasters will go on and on about the new rules but not once mention the real reason that games are too damn long: TV. Anyone who has ever gone to a game that is broadcast on national TV can tell you that most of the time you sit around waiting, the reason is because the network official is holding his arm up letting the 'real' officials know that the network is still in commercial break. Happens all the time. But that is one rule fix you will never see and you will never hear the broadcasters talk about.

And who thought it was a good idea to give conference officials the ability to review plays? The ACC officials are a worst case scenario because they have to huddle up to make an obvious holding call. How many times did the officials stop play to review an obvious call?

And what ever happened to a good "no call." No wonder the defenses controlled the game. How can an offense wear a defense down when the officials keep stopping play and giving the D a chance to rest? And how can any offense get into a flow with the disjointed game flow?

Another negative about officials that I saw about 10 times this weekend is the penalty (such as a false start) infraction before the start of the play, yet the play does start and only then do the whistles blow. If the infraction happens before the play, blow the whistle before the play starts! FSU ran 2 goal line QB sneaks that did not count as plays due to official ineptitude. That's 2 plays where the players risk injury and go all out for nothing. Stupid. I wonder how Miami's defense felt? Stop 2 QB sneaks and instead of third down it is still first down. That has to be demoralizing. On another play, FSU sacked the QB for a 15 yard loss that was taken away by a penalty on the offense that FSU could not refuse because it came before the snap. The obvious question is that if the penalty came before the snap, why was play not stopped? What if the QB broke his leg on a non-play? It boggles the mind that officials would let this happen.

bdunn13 · Post by **bdunn13** » Tue Sep 05, 2006 9:37 am

Instant replay is a joke in college football. I bet the game last night was delayed 20+ minutes do to all the replays. Not only that, I see just as many good plays over turned to bad calls as I do bad calls over turned to good calls.

Georgia looked as bad as you can look in a 48-12 win(against Western Kentucky).

Matt Stafford played some in the second half. He was 3/5 for around 40 yards and a TD. He seemed to like throwing to another true freshman.... 6'5 Durham. Durham reminds me of Chris Doering( I hope Durham has as good of a collegiate career as Doering). Joe T, 5th year senior and 3rd generation bulldog showed why he has not been the starter until now. He bleeds red and black as much as anyone, but he is just not very good. On the otherhand, Stafford did well enough to move up to #2 on the QB chart(Georgia played 3qbs). I have little doubt in my mind that by the middle of the year Matt will be the starter.

bkrich83 · Post by **bkrich83** » Tue Sep 05, 2006 1:35 pm

dbdynsty25 wrote:
bkrich83 wrote:The stories of the demise of USC appears to have been premature.
Because they beat Arkansas? At least let them beat someone that won more than 4 games last year.

Which is funny, because so many people had picked them to lose.

On the road, vs. an SEC team, an entire new backfield, vs. a team that's been working all off-season for "revenge"

Go in to a hostile crowd and drop 50 on them. Will they contend for the title? No.

But are they a rebuilding club that will struggle this year? If you watched the game at all, as I said, the rumors of their demise were premature.

Sully · Post by **Sully** » Tue Sep 05, 2006 1:53 pm

I thought I also heard Arkansas was returning 19 of the 22 starters on last year's team. It looked like USC was playing conservative in the first half, which is understandable with them being the road team. I thought they looked pretty good, especially on defense.

bkrich83 · Post by **bkrich83** » Tue Sep 05, 2006 1:58 pm

Sully wrote:I thought I also heard Arkansas was returning 19 of the 22 starters on last year's team. It looked like USC was playing conservative in the first half, which is understandable with them being the road team. I thought they looked pretty good, especially on defense.

Yeah 19 returners is what I heard. Also led the SEC in rushing.

First half they played a lot like at Auburn in 03, very conservative. Pete Carroll told them to open it up in the second half, and they did.

Offense, is still a little shaky, but according to PC, this could be his best defense in his tenure there...

If they win 9 gamest his year, I will be content.

bdunn13 · Post by **bdunn13** » Tue Sep 05, 2006 2:12 pm

"but according to PC, this could be his best defense in his tenure there... "

LMAO - thats not saying a whole lot.

dbdynsty25 · Post by **dbdynsty25** » Tue Sep 05, 2006 2:15 pm

bkrich83 wrote:But are they a rebuilding club that will struggle this year? If you watched the game at all, as I said, the rumors of their demise were premature.

Oh, I did watch it...almost the entire game. You can return all the guys you want when you go 4-7 during a season...obviously you don't have a lot of NFL talent when you suck that bad. Just wait until SC plays a decent team...it's not going to be as one sided. I was impressed with the way Booty threw the ball and the way Parker catches it...plus you still got Jarret and Smith on the outside. They are going to be good for a long time...I just don't think I'd be getting too excited about a win over Arkansas...that's all.

bkrich83 · Post by **bkrich83** » Tue Sep 05, 2006 2:21 pm

bdunn13 wrote:"but according to PC, this could be his best defense in his tenure there... "

LMAO - thats not saying a whole lot.

2002 and 2004, they were ranked #6 in the nation in defense. That's not too bad. 2003, the were #30 I think.

Not to mention in his tenure, they are +99 in turnover ratio. I don't think anyone else is close in that time frame.