1095 replies to this topic

[Super B]

I don't. USC emberassed highly touted Auburn last season 26-0, shutting them out. Auburn has basically the same team as last year, while USC has gained experience.

Furthermore, next season, should Leinart stay as he says he will, USC will have its best team of the last 3 years.
I think the best 2 teams are playing in the title game

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

1999 Texas 38 OU 28
2000 OU 63 Texas 14

Pretty much the same teams/players involved.

[yallerjacket]

1999 Texas 38 OU 28
2000 OU 63 Texas 14

Pretty much the same teams/players involved.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[Lancer1997]

1999 Texas 38 OU 28
2000 OU 63 Texas 14

Pretty much the same teams/players involved.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I dont remember their position Skill players and the QB's either. If they returned all of those guys then your analogy makes sense.

But lets look at something. 26-0 is an absolute butt whooping. Auburn didnt even score. texas beating OU 38-28 is a close game. So OU figured it out and whooped them the next year. Auburn wasnt even close to USC last season. All of a sudden they are this year with the same personel as last season??? I dont think so.

The two best teams are playing.

The most exciting player on the field will be USC RB and All Everything Reggie Bush.

The game will be decided on an exceptional USC D Line vs. and Experienced and awfully talented OU O-Line.

Should be a great game

[yallerjacket]

I dont remember their position Skill players and the QB's either. If they returned all of those guys then your analogy makes sense.

But lets look at something. 26-0 is an absolute butt whooping. Auburn didnt even score. texas beating OU 38-28 is a close game. So OU figured it out and whooped them the next year. Auburn wasnt even close to USC last season. All of a sudden they are this year with the same personel as last season??? I dont think so.

The two best teams are playing.

The most exciting player on the field will be USC RB and All Everything Reggie Bush.

The game will be decided on an exceptional USC D Line vs. and Experienced and awfully talented OU O-Line.

Should be a great game

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think OU will beat USC by at least 10 and probably more. Yeah, USC's D Line was exceptional against the girlie-men of the Pac-10 but how will it hold up to the punishment a real O-line will dish out? And although Bush may be the most exciting player on the field, Peterson will probably be the most productive.

[Lancer1997]

I think OU will beat USC by at least 10 and probably more.  Yeah, USC's D Line was exceptional against the girlie-men of the Pac-10 but how will it hold up to the punishment a real O-line will dish out?  And although Bush may be the most exciting player on the field, Peterson will probably be the most productive.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree on these point:

-USC D-Line was dominant against PAC-10 competiton ***but also against BCS team Va Tech

-Peterson will be the most productive RB on the field

However-

Bush will be the difference. He will be Returning Kicks and Punts...Hes bsically Michael Vick, only not quite as tall

Total yards Bush will eclipse Peterson (kick returning and all)

Leinart will out preform Jason White (How many Knee surgeries has he had?)


USC wont lose by 10. In fact I think they win by 7. Ill go ahead and predict 28-21. USC will be by far the best team OU has played this year, and probably the only team in the country who matches up really well with OU.

[rockinl]

The two best teams are playing.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It hasnt been that long ago you said OU didnt belong in this game...?

[MulletMan#5]

girlie-men

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Haha whats up Mr. Schwarrtenager(or whatever)

[Lancer1997]

It hasnt been that long ago you said OU didnt belong in this game...?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

nope last year i said that, not this year

[Super B]

I dont remember their position Skill players and the QB's either. If they returned all of those guys then your analogy makes sense.

But lets look at something. 26-0 is an absolute butt whooping. Auburn didnt even score. texas beating OU 38-28 is a close game. So OU figured it out and whooped them the next year. Auburn wasnt even close to USC last season. All of a sudden they are this year with the same personel as last season??? I dont think so.

The two best teams are playing.

The most exciting player on the field will be USC RB and All Everything Reggie Bush.

The game will be decided on an exceptional USC D Line vs. and Experienced and awfully talented OU O-Line.

Should be a great game

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

First of all, my point is, "that's why you play the game.".

Second of all, Auburn did not impress me much last night. They have a terrific defense, but lack a lot offensively.

We'll see after tonight. If I'm right USC will get their butts kicked, then whther USC is better than Auburn won't matter much.

[MrHawk2U]

Auburn did not impress me...

They only scored 1 TD.... those two backs were billed as the best running back tandem in the country....

A GREAT team wins games.... Auburn did not win that game... VT lost it... they should have kicked the FG when they were only down 6.... then they missed another....

I like the fact that Auburn won and we will now have 3 undefeated teams.... putting pressure on the BCS .... BS!!

[Super B]

Auburn did not impress me...

They only scored 1 TD.... those two backs were billed as the best running back tandem in the country....

A GREAT team wins games.... Auburn did not win that game... VT lost it... they should have kicked the FG when they were only down 6.... then they missed another....

I like the fact that  Auburn won and we will now have 3 undefeated teams.... putting pressure on the BCS .... BS!!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'd say Gerald Riggs Jr. and Cedric Houston of Tennessee has that distinction.

[concha]

Well to anwser the question, Yes.  Winning by one point against tougher opponents is better than blowing out lesser one.  Thats how I see it, you see it differently and that why we disagree on who would be #1.

Everyone love to jump on the not dominating a 3 - 7 team.  I haven't see anyone saying over and over that the mighty Colerain offense was held to only 21 points on their first game and gave up 14 in another.  Because that does not indicate if a game was dominated.  The Haltom/SLC was just as much a blow out as any Corelain game. 

It is obvious that SLC does not care how many points or yards it give up, as long as they are scoring more than the opponent.  Lancer, Concha, and a few other see this as a major weakness and making SLC undeserving of #1.  To me it is just a coaching style difference.  SLC only wants to stop you enough times to score more than the opponent.  Corelain is a running offense that would relies more on the defense to stop the opponent.  Both styles win games and have proven themselves to be dominate in their leagues.  It also means that no matter how many stats are thrown out, it doesn't matter because you are not comparing apples to apples.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

MMG,

I was referring to the concept. If two teams play the same schedules, both go undefeated, but one wins by big margins and the other just barely wins their games - which would you call the better team? I realize that Colerain and SLC don't play the same schedules, but the concept of margin of victory IS valid.

As far as Colerain's first game (emphasis on "first" BTW), they played it with their star RB injured and with a new QB running a sophisticated option offense and held their opponenet less than 100 yards of offense. They played the same team (Elder) later in the tournament and won 38-3. Also, they actually gave up 20 in one game, more than the 14 you cite. Of course, that was after being up 49-0 at the half and having the their starters sipping cocktails for virtually the entire 2nd half. I would note that this was the MOST points given up by Colerain during the year. SLC gave up more points than that ON AVERAGE.

As far as this point "It is obvious that SLC does not care how many points or yards it give up, as long as they are scoring more than the opponent.", to a certain degree that is true as far as getting the win. But somehow I think SLC's coach was less than thrilled with his team's performance against Haltom (see below) and would have liked to have had more solid wins against certain teams than the one score or less margins that in fact happened.

BTW:
"The Haltom/SLC was just as much a blow out as any Colerain game."

Don't be ridiculous. SLC dropped 35 points and 500-600 yards to Haltom. Colerain had a 70-3 win and at least one game (I believe more) where their opponent never even entered the red zone. Several shutouts, opponenets held to less than 100 yards of offense, negative rushing yardage.... You get the idea.

[Lancer1997]

I am still unclear how Texas SLC fans can make some of the statements they make...

"Every writer or pollster says SLC is #1 so they must be"

"They just know how to win. Doesnt matter if its pretty as long as they score more than the other team"

"SLC does enough to win"



OK...

Whats funny is when De La Salle was champ, and we all said "every pollster says DLS is #1 you guys didnt buy it. If De La Salle squeaked by week to week you'd have been all over them, because a national champ would roll everyone. (Which the Spartans did for 12 years)

But now, its "the polls all say so" and "They do just enough to win" is acceptable enough for a title...????

[MMGambit]

I am still unclear how Texas SLC fans can make some of the statements they make...

"Every writer or pollster says SLC is #1 so they must be"

"They just know how to win. Doesnt matter if its pretty as long as they score more than the other team"

"SLC does enough to win"
OK...

Whats funny is when De La Salle was champ, and we all said "every pollster says DLS is #1 you guys didnt buy it. If De La Salle squeaked by week to week you'd have been all over them, because a national champ would roll everyone. (Which the Spartans did for 12 years)

But now, its "the polls all say so" and "They do just enough to win" is acceptable enough for a title...????

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So you ridicule Texas people for using these statements, but when you used them to defend De La Salle it was justified? I have not read every thread, but you imply that you or other Cali posters used these reasons and some Texas posters call you out on them. Now you are doing the same to the Texas posters.

On the blow out comment I meant more that the game was never close and neither SLC or Colerain felt threatened or it possible to lose. Colerain had a bigger blow-out of some team, but as I stated before thats their style. Control the opponents offense with a good defense and score when possible on offense. If Colerain opponent has little to no defense and offense is shut down, then yes you get 70 - 3 scores. SLC will jump out quickly on a team and then they are content to trade points until the game is over. The final score is not as impressive, but SLC never feels threatend. Of course the coaches would have liked a better effort to shut down a weaker team, but they still easily rolled to the win. Many football fans, espically fans of older style, don't like SLC style and think it not as good, but it wins football games and more than any other team in Texas 5A the last 3 years.

Edited by MMGambit, 04 January 2005 - 01:44 PM.

[Lancer1997]

So you ridicule Texas people for using these statements, but when you used them to defend De La Salle it was justified?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Wow, you totally missed that.

No is the answer to your question. It is the opposite way around. DLS faithful tried to justify the ranking from the onslaught of Texas' and other posters by using argument #1, (every poll has them ranked #1 so it must be true), at which time the Texas faithful said that doesnt mean anything. So that argument was not correct to a lot of Texans. However now that SLC is #1 in many polls all of a sudden that argument holds water???

[concha]

"Every writer or pollster says SLC is #1 so they must be"

"They just know how to win. Doesnt matter if its pretty as long as they score more than the other team"

"SLC does enough to win"



Only point 1 really applies to both SLC and DLS.


DLS was pretty in that they destroyed virtually every opponent. They therefore did far more than enough to win. SLC did not.

[concha]

On the blow out comment I meant more that the game was never close and neither SLC or Colerain felt threatened or it possible to lose.  Colerain had a bigger blow-out of some team, but as I stated before thats their style.  Control the opponents offense with a good defense and score when possible on offense.  If Colerain opponent has little to no defense and offense is shut down, then yes you get 70 - 3 scores.  SLC will jump out quickly on a team and then they are content to trade points until the game is over. The final score is not as impressive, but SLC never feels threatend.  Of course the coaches would have liked a better effort to shut down a weaker team, but they still easily rolled to the win.  Many football fans, espically fans of older style, don't like SLC style and think it not as good, but it wins football games and more than any other team in Texas 5A the last 3 years.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

1) Colerain's offense scored as much as SLC's. And they did it almost undoubtedly with their starters out of the game earlier.

2) Colerain jumped out early and had every game over by the half if not before. That's every game.

3) It would appear that SLC should have felt threatened on at least three occasions.

[Texas Fan]

[i]"Every writer or pollster says SLC is #1 so they must be"

[B]"DLS was pretty in that they destroyed virtually every opponent.  They therefore did far more than enough to win. SLC did not.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Southlake Carroll

2002 16-0 State Champions
2003 15-1 State Runner Up
2004 16-0 State Champions

Looks to me like they did enough

[concha]

Ex.

27-24 come from behind win over a 2-loss team.


Hardly a dominating display.

Barely enough to win.

[Lancer1997]

Southlake Carroll

2002 16-0 State Champions
2003 15-1 State Runner Up
2004 16-0 State Champions

Looks to me like they did enough

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I havent compared their stats in 2003 and 2002 but in 2004 it wasnt enough for me in comparison to at least 2 other teams out there