College Football Week 10 discussion

[HeavyReign]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

And that call was the right call on the TD. The ref was right there to make the play. Even if they review it, there was little chance they overturn it. And in the small chance that they did review it and overturned it, UCLA was sitting on 1st and goal on the 1 yard line. It didn't cost you the game like you intended.

The ball leaves his hands while its touching the ground. The pass likely would have been ruled incomplete if challenged....it was never going to be spotted at the 1. Sarc needs to learn that sometimes you have to roll the dice on a challenge on a controversial play.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by Lathum

I have no problem with the broadcast rules, money talks, but I totally agree on the other points. The BCS rules are basically written so a 9-2 Notre Dame team can go to a BCS game.

when the BCS wrote the rules they looked at Notre Dames schedule and said, OK, we will let them lose to Michigan and USC, beat the other 10 cupcakes and we can still get the monster ratings from their BCS game appearance.

It's a moot point this year (hello Brian Kelly... please), but I just have to argue against this. There are so many legitimate reasons to hate ND, but their schedule isn't one of them. Notre Dame doesn't schedule USC/Michigan and 10 cupcakes. Teams like BC, Michigan St, and even now Navy, our previous cupcake, are respectable teams year in year out - plus we're even playing at a team that should be #10 in the BCS this coming weekend, but somehow is a cupcake. U Mich is probably the 2nd or 3rd worst team ND played this year (after Washington State, maybe Nevada/Purdue. God Wazzu sucks for a BCS team. Happy Lathum?)

Also, you have no problem with money talking on the broadcast rules, but do with the BCS non-title games? If ND ever gets an undeserved shot at a national title (and they haven't in my lifetime - if anything they got screwed in 1993), I'll be first in line yelling about it, but the #8-10 BCS teams are done for TV ratings rather than "deserves". The BCS rules at this point actually prevent weak ND teams from being chosen - as JiMGA loves to point out, a 3-9 ND (or Ohio St etc) team would draw more viewers than an undefeated TCU/Boise, but they have to be top 12. The Holiday Bowl has consistently had better teams and matchups the past 5 years than at least 1 BCS game (often the Orange iirc) - just don't look at the BCS teams past 1-2 as the best other 8 and there's no travesty.


Heroic ending for Houston tonight. Partly the onside kick with 20 seconds left, but more the kicker with a previous career long of 34 yards hitting from 51 to win it. Case Keenum another 522 yards and 3 TD's in the air - if he doesn't make it to New York it's a shame, and he probably deserves to win the Heisman right now.

UConn also had a (couple) nice comebacks, but Cincinnati survives. #4 and in the drivers seat if Texas gets upset though? Yeesh - I'm moving TCU up there... we'll see if the Frogs can keep looking great when they move into the spotlight next weekend. (PS - nice job CBS picking up TCU-Utah for primetime.)

No one's really having the debate, but seriously at this point, if Texas gets upset (which I'm rooting for to see how it plays out), who's going in the title game? Would the voters actually put in Cincy/TCU/Boise? Would Texas stay in line or the voters immediately rematch the SECCG? Georgia Tech and Pitt are the only other BCS 1-loss teams left (and Houston the non-BCS one), and they're clearly not jumping in. It's good every team in contention is getting some primetime coverage so the voters who do care can actually do their job (and we can argue somewhat on merit ). And thank god Iowa lost so we can stop that charade.

[k0ruptr]

Hawaii rolls up 700 yards of offense and wins 49-36. wow.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

No one's really having the debate, but seriously at this point, if Texas gets upset (which I'm rooting for to see how it plays out), who's going in the title game? Would the voters actually put in Cincy/TCU/Boise? Would Texas stay in line or the voters immediately rematch the SECCG? Georgia Tech and Pitt are the only other BCS 1-loss teams left (and Houston the non-BCS one), and they're clearly not jumping in. It's good every team in contention is getting some primetime coverage so the voters who do care can actually do their job (and we can argue somewhat on merit ). And thank god Iowa lost so we can stop that charade.

The funny thing is that you can make a case that TCU will have a tougher schedule than Texas by the end of the year.

[Swaggs]

I didn't realize how bad Texas' non-conference has been this season. Am I mistaken, or do they not play any OOC BCS teams?

[RainMaker]

None. There is a chance that by the end of the year, there will be only one ranked team on their schedule (Oklahoma State).

TCU would potentially have wins against a ranked BYU, Utah, and Clemson team (which could win the ACC). Cincinnati's schedule doesn't look all that bad if Pittsburgh keeps winning. And lets say Alabama loses in the SEC Championship game to Florida, shouldn't they be above Texas since their OOC featured a game with Virginia Tech as well as a tough SEC schedule with the only loss being to the #1 team in the country.

I know it's not Texas fault, but the Big 12 is real bad this year. They may very well be the 2nd best team in the country, but if you're going to punish schools for poor schedules, it should be universally used to include big name programs.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

Bullshit. Watch that play at normal speed - there's no way you can assume Butler was intentionally trying to spear Prince. He saw the QB running towards him and not sliding, and he got low to deliver a shot. A fraction of a second either way in what Prince does and that's a shoulder hitting his helmet and not Butler's helmet.

It was a deserved penalty, but there's no way you can assume given the speed of the play and how quickly everything happened that it was a dirty play, with Butler intending to spear Prince.

Horribly frustrating game - I haven't been this angry in a long time. Once again, a game the Huskies should've won but for a bad call by the officials - that "TD" by Austin hit the ground first, and I'm stunned that a review wasn't called for. A big mistake by Sark not demanding a replay.

And just like the Notre Dame game, that call shouldn't have mattered in the long run. To get 5 takeaways in the game and be +3 in turnovers, you should win the game. Sark had the run game working beautifully with Polk in the first half, but only ran him 7 times despite over 100 yards of rushing.

Not sure what happened with Folk on that FG attempt in the 4th quarter, but it was an ugly kick. Make that kick and we're likely talking about how the Huskies barely held on in a game they should've won by a decent margin.

They've put themselves in a really tough spot to get to a bowl game. Beating WSU should be a cakewalk, and the December home game against a Cal team that probably won't have a lot of motivation could be a win, but going into Corvallis and beating the Beavers is a real longshot.

This is another horrible missed opportunity, just like the Notre Dame and Arizona State games. While I like what Sark has done this year, there are some definite concerns as well.

I have watched the play. Prince was already practically down on his own, and Butler went in hard at him, head first. Throw out intentions--it was a freakin' stupid play. For stupidity alone, Butler should have been gone from the game. If it was intentional (which I don't actually believe), he should be gone for a career.

Fact is, Prince was absolutely torching your D. You had absolutely no answer for him and the passing game, other than one poorly thrown pass that Prince pretty much gifted you an INT. Ironic that he gets taken out with a head to head by a LB. Ironic in that the staff comes from USC, and I saw Maleuga make that same dirty play on more than one occasion, including one famous hit on Cowan in the 13-9 game.

Washington should have won this game going away? Who are you kidding? UCLA was all over you guys. If they didn't have five TOs--two INTs that were pretty much thrown to the heavens by their respective QBs, and fumbles entirely caused by careless offensive execution, you guys wouldn't have been within two TDs. The Austin play should have been reviewed, yes. But don't kid yourself into thinking Washington deserved to win this game. No, UCLA clearly outplayed them, and allowed Washington a good chance at walking away with a win because Washington cheap-shotted the Bruins' QB and UCLA gifted five balls to the Huskies.

You shouldn't be looking at the little ways they lost this game. You should be looking at the big flaws that cost you this game--a poor defense and bad playcalling (as you already intimated), and be happy that UCLA was so giving to you today and give you the impression you "should have" won.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

UCLA should have blown UW out in that game. We had 5 TO's and most of them were ticky tacky, not holding on to the ball. The hit on Prince was dirty, but it wasn't malicious. Prince needs to learn to slide, but if Butler does that in the NFL, he's probably tossed from the game.

And that call was the right call on the TD. The ref was right there to make the play. Even if they review it, there was little chance they overturn it. And in the small chance that they did review it and overturned it, UCLA was sitting on 1st and goal on the 1 yard line. It didn't cost you the game like you intended. Hell, Prince going out probably saved you from being blown out in that game. We had first and 10 from about the 22 yard line when he got hurt. First two plays with Brehaut were running plays and the third one, Paulsen his block, Brehaut held the ball too long and was creamed, losing the ball and at least 3 sure point.

Locker and Polk are good ones. You also have some nice receivers as well.

lol...I should have read further down. Didn't realize Bug already chipped in on this one.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by HeavyReign

The ball leaves his hands while its touching the ground. The pass likely would have been ruled incomplete if challenged....it was never going to be spotted at the 1. Sarc needs to learn that sometimes you have to roll the dice on a challenge on a controversial play.

I think both UCLA and UDub fans alike can agree Sark should have at least challenged that call. Not a guarantee UCLA wouldn't have scored on that drive anyway (the Austin play was off of a first down), nor am I certain even now if that play was called right or wrong. Regardless, Sark should have challenged it, and I was pretty surprised he didn't.

[Radii]

Originally Posted by Eaglesfan27

ASU just pulled off a very nice interception in which a defender got his foot on the ball before it hit the ground to kick it up into the air to his teammate.

So crazy.

[clemsonfan]

Originally Posted by Noop

Got to love Clemson fans rushing the field after beating a 4-5 team.

It's always great when we beat Bowden. No matter if they're 4-5.

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by Noop

Got to love Clemson fans rushing the field after beating a 4-5 team.

FSwho?

[Noop]

Laugh now because you know we won't be down forever. We will resume the regular ass whooping up ACC teams in due time.

[MizzouRah]

Wow Mizzou... really?

[MJ4H]

Had to miss my first game of the season yesterday due to All-district band audition judging, but I watched the full replay on espn360 this morning. Great win for Arkansas and this team is still moving in the right direction. I've heard grumbles from non-razorback fans about Petrino and how long it would take for us to become impatient with him. Well, informal polls show 95%+ confidence in him and I think anyone that doesn't think he is the right one for this job is nuts.

Anyway, Mallett continued to show improvement over his mid-season weird-out (rocketing everything right through receivers' hands and over-throwing half the time on wide open receivers). Yesterday he went 23 of 27 for 329 yards against a solid South Carolina defense. Last week he was something like 14 of 16 for around the same amount of yards. Major league improvement. His confidence is growing.

It feels like the team has turned a big corner and a momentum sustaining win at home next week against Troy (whose coach, oddly guaranteed a win at Arkansas back before the season) would be huge--and make Arkansas bowl-eligible. Continuing to build in Little Rock against Mississippi State could mean a lot of confidence and momentum for a season-ender at LSU.

Then, hopefully a decent bowl game.

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by Noop

Laugh now because you know we won't be down forever. We will resume the regular ass whooping up ACC teams in due time.

Actually Noop, I dont know that.
And I actually like FSU, my comment was more at your dismissal of our fans excitement than the program.

FSU was nothing before Bobby Bowden arrived and I am not too sure they will be anything after he leaves. The administration is doing untold harm to their future coaching search in how they are handling this year. You do not force out a legend, when you do future coaches look at your program and wonder how they will be treated knowing they will never amass the record and accolades attained by Bowden. Also since the reduction of scholarships and their joining of the ACC they have been on a steady downhill slide. Against our mediocre program they are 6-2 and have not won in Clemson since 2001.

This is not a new phenomenon.

And I for one (of many) do not think Jimbo Fisher is the answer...but we will see soon enough he has the University hostage.

[Noop]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

Actually Noop, I dont know that.
And I actually like FSU, my comment was more at your dismissal of our fans excitement than the program.

FSU was nothing before Bobby Bowden arrived and I am not too sure they will be anything after he leaves. The administration is doing untold harm to their future coaching search in how they are handling this year. You do not force out a legend, when you do future coaches look at your program and wonder how they will be treated knowing they will never amass the record and accolades attained by Bowden. Also since the reduction of scholarships and their joining of the ACC they have been on a steady downhill slide. Against our mediocre program they are 6-2 and have not won in Clemson since 2001.

This is not a new phenomenon.

And I for one (of many) do not think Jimbo Fisher is the answer...but we will see soon enough he has the University hostage.

I could careless about Bowden and his legacy, any good will he had has be eroded to the point of hatred. I believe Coach Fisher is one of the few bright spots on our coaching staff and he has done a hell of a job turning around the offense. He took an offense that was down right disgraceful and turned it into something respectable. Will he make a good head coach? At this point he is a better head coach then Bowden.

As for you guys rushing the field I do find that odd because you guys have won over us so much it should not be such a big deal. We will not be down forever because Florida State is going to have a lot of things it hasn't had in over a decade....accountability.

[Lathum]

I think the whole rushing the field thing is dumb.

You know who rushes the field? Underdogs and teams that didn't think they were going to win. The best example I can think of this season is when UW beat USC. UW was a down program that just pulled off a landmark win as huge underdogs.

If you think of yourself as a top team in a top league you shouldn't be rushing the field after winning a game you should win. It's just lame.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

I have watched the play. Prince was already practically down on his own, and Butler went in hard at him, head first. Throw out intentions--it was a freakin' stupid play. For stupidity alone, Butler should have been gone from the game. If it was intentional (which I don't actually believe), he should be gone for a career.

Without knowing intention (which none of us do) it's impossible to define ti being a "stupid" play. Given how fast the play developed, all you can know for sure is that Butler was attempting to deliver a hit on Prince. Given that Prince wasn't sliding, there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. For all you know, Butler was getting low to get his shoulder pads into Prince, but Prince arrived too soon for that and it was Butler's helmet that made first contact. There's no way in hell Butler should've been tossed from the game, and it was the correct call for it to be a personal foul penalty and nothing more.

Fact is, Prince was absolutely torching your D. You had absolutely no answer for him and the passing game, other than one poorly thrown pass that Prince pretty much gifted you an INT. Ironic that he gets taken out with a head to head by a LB. Ironic in that the staff comes from USC, and I saw Maleuga make that same dirty play on more than one occasion, including one famous hit on Cowan in the 13-9 game.

Yes, our pass defense sucks other than the interceptions. Yes, you're being a whiny little bitch about the hit on Prince.

Washington should have won this game going away? Who are you kidding? UCLA was all over you guys. If they didn't have five TOs--two INTs that were pretty much thrown to the heavens by their respective QBs, and fumbles entirely caused by careless offensive execution, you guys wouldn't have been within two TDs. The Austin play should have been reviewed, yes. But don't kid yourself into thinking Washington deserved to win this game. No, UCLA clearly outplayed them, and allowed Washington a good chance at walking away with a win because Washington cheap-shotted the Bruins' QB and UCLA gifted five balls to the Huskies.

I'm sorry, at what point did turnovers stop being considered part of the game? Yes, the Huskies did generate five turnovers, and that's a credit more to them than to UCLA - hard hits and strips of the ball and being heads-up to jump on them, and good plays by the secondary on the two picks.

With all of those turnovers in hand, the Huskies ought to have won comfortably - teams that are +4 in the turnover battle almost always win.

Add in the bullshit Austin TD "catch", and that's why I think the Huskies blew a game that they should've won comfortably.

And you can go to hell with your whiny bullshit about that being a "cheap-shot".

You shouldn't be looking at the little ways they lost this game. You should be looking at the big flaws that cost you this game--a poor defense and bad playcalling (as you already intimated), and be happy that UCLA was so giving to you today and give you the impression you "should have" won.

UCLA didn't give us shit - our defense created those turnovers.

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by Lathum

I think the whole rushing the field thing is dumb.

You know who rushes the field? Underdogs and teams that didn't think they were going to win. The best example I can think of this season is when UW beat USC. UW was a down program that just pulled off a landmark win as huge underdogs.

If you think of yourself as a top team in a top league you shouldn't be rushing the field after winning a game you should win. It's just lame.

Call it what you will.
Clemson fans come on to the field and have a meet and greet with the tam at the PAW where we sing the alma mater at EVERY GAME....

Now at smaller games you can kinda stroll out there and join the team...for an ESPN game you need to be quick if you want to be near the team....I didnt go on the field last night because I had a 3 hour ride in front of me....

But a decade after graduating it is a normal for me and my kids, even last week when we beat the powerhouse that is Coastal Carolina.

[Lathum]

I actually wasn't being specific about Clemson ( although I can see why you would think I was) I just mean in general. It has completely jumped the shark.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

Without knowing intention (which none of us do) it's impossible to define ti being a "stupid" play. Given how fast the play developed, all you can know for sure is that Butler was attempting to deliver a hit on Prince. Given that Prince wasn't sliding, there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. For all you know, Butler was getting low to get his shoulder pads into Prince, but Prince arrived too soon for that and it was Butler's helmet that made first contact. There's no way in hell Butler should've been tossed from the game, and it was the correct call for it to be a personal foul penalty and nothing more.


Yes, our pass defense sucks other than the interceptions. Yes, you're being a whiny little bitch about the hit on Prince.


I'm sorry, at what point did turnovers stop being considered part of the game? Yes, the Huskies did generate five turnovers, and that's a credit more to them than to UCLA - hard hits and strips of the ball and being heads-up to jump on them, and good plays by the secondary on the two picks.

With all of those turnovers in hand, the Huskies ought to have won comfortably - teams that are +4 in the turnover battle almost always win.

Add in the bullshit Austin TD "catch", and that's why I think the Huskies blew a game that they should've won comfortably.

And you can go to hell with your whiny bullshit about that being a "cheap-shot".


UCLA didn't give us shit - our defense created those turnovers.

I expected better from you than the personal attacks. We'll have to agree to disagree.

Your team sucks. Deal with it. Good luck getting to a bowl game.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

I expected better from you than the personal attacks. We'll have to agree to disagree.

I got sick of seeing your highly slanted view on that play, so I called you on it.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

I got sick of seeing your highly slanted view on that play, so I called you on it.

Disagreement is fine. Namecalling is not. Instead of acting this way, why don't you man up and apologize? That sucks, dawgfan. I didn't say anything that deserved that shit.

I stand by everything I said. Your view is every bit as slanted as you think mine is, and if you don't think so, you're being truly oblivious.

I'm not in this anymore. The way you're acting doesn't deserve any further response from me.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

Disagreement is fine. Namecalling is not. Instead of acting this way, why don't you man up and apologize? That sucks, dawgfan. I didn't say anything that deserved that shit.

I stand by everything I said. Your view is every bit as slanted as you think mine is, and if you don't think so, you're being truly oblivious.

I'm not in this anymore. The way you're acting doesn't deserve any further response from me.

Point out a non-biased source that called that a dirty play. Hell, Neuheisel didn't think it was a dirty play.

Oblivious my ass - it was a fast, bang-bang play, and it's football.

You're right, I probably didn't need to add "bitch" to the description of you as a whiner. But you are a whiner, and you are notorious for being one of the most overly sensitive people on this board when it comes to your favorite teams. Say one thing that is even vaguely critical of the Angels or Bruins and you get hot under the collar.

So I do apologize for the "bitch", but I don't apologize for calling you a whiner - it's just the hard truth.

[cartman]

Texas was supposed to travel to play Arkansas this year, but Arkansas called the game off back in April to schedule games with Texas A&M at the new Cowboys stadium. That's how the Wyoming game got on the schedule this season. Texas was also supposed to start a series this season with Utah, but the Utes backed out as well.

[RainMaker]

They should be treated like the non-BCS schools in regards to schedule however.

[HeavyReign]

I'm not really sure Prince going down had all that much of an effect on the game. He wasn't exactly making a bunch of amazing throws. The WRs were able to get open because other than Trufant, Washington doesn't cover anyone. Crafts numbers for the game are pretty much in line with what Prince had done. Watching the play at full speed I originally didn't even notice Butler making a move toward Prince. It looked like he just lowered himself to Prince's level. In the slower replay you could see that he did move toward Prince though.

The Washington defense gives up tons of yards and rarely stops anyone other than through turnovers or forcing FGs. I believe forcing fumbles is a skill. That is something that Washington has gotten way better at this year. They constantly go for the ball.

I do think Sark messed up the play calling on offense. How do you pass the ball 40 times when you are averaging 6ypc on the ground? Polk made the UCLA defense look silly when he got the ball but they only gave him 15 carries. If they run the ball 40 times and pass 25 I think they win this game.

[BishopMVP]

Question about the ND game. Since everyone I know turned it off after Navy got the safety to go up 23-14 with a minute left, how did ND onsides the free kick? Did they put it on a tee like a regular one, or did they somehow punt it the 10 yards and recover? Is it even legal to punt it 10-12 yards, and go catch the ball in the air (provided the other team doesn't call for a fair catch?)

TCU jumps Cincy for 4th in the BCS standings, but Cincy has multiple good opponents (WV, @Pitt) left while TCU will disappear from the national spotlight after the Utah game this weekend. btw, absurd Cincy stat - 4 turnovers all season, and 0 fumbles lost. If Texas wins the Big 12 CG and Cincy beats Pitt, Boise St. might actually get that 4th at-large spot over teams like 2-loss Pitt/Iowa/Miami/GT.

[Matthean]

2009 NCAA College Football Polls and Rankings for Week 11 - ESPN

New rankings are out and there are few enough games left to where I can see four teams being undefeated by bowl selection time, Florida/'Bama, Texas, TCU, and BSU. Cincinnati has a tough enough road that I could see a loss coming. Gonna be fun seeing how the people against a playoff handle the pressure of doing at least a four team playoff.

[Dr. Sak]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

Is it even legal to punt it 10-12 yards, and go catch the ball in the air (provided the other team doesn't call for a fair catch?)
.

The ball must go 10 yards and hit the ground before K can recover a free kick. The only other way K can recover is if R touches it before it goes 10 yards, then it is a free ball.

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by Matthean

2009 NCAA College Football Polls and Rankings for Week 11 - ESPN

New rankings are out and there are few enough games left to where I can see four teams being undefeated by bowl selection time, Florida/'Bama, Texas, TCU, and BSU. Cincinnati has a tough enough road that I could see a loss coming. Gonna be fun seeing how the people against a playoff handle the pressure of doing at least a four team playoff.

Simple, two of those arent BCS teams...and even in Cincy goes undefeated, people will say the big east is weaker. Its actually really easy to not have the playoff talk this year is SEC champ and texas are both undefeated

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

Simple, two of those arent BCS teams...and even in Cincy goes undefeated, people will say the big east is weaker. Its actually really easy to not have the playoff talk this year is SEC champ and texas are both undefeated

Texas will have had an easier schedule than Cincinnati and TCU. That argument is based on historical prestige and not reality.

[Poli]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Incidentally, with his 4 TD passes against Memphis tonight, Jonathan Crompton now leads the SEC with 20 TD passes.

{shakes head}
{rubs eyes}
{worries about impending Armageddon}

I'm sorry, did I read that correctly?

[Radii]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

TCU jumps Cincy for 4th in the BCS standings, but Cincy has multiple good opponents (WV, @Pitt) left while TCU will disappear from the national spotlight after the Utah game this weekend. btw, absurd Cincy stat - 4 turnovers all season, and 0 fumbles lost. If Texas wins the Big 12 CG and Cincy beats Pitt, Boise St. might actually get that 4th at-large spot over teams like 2-loss Pitt/Iowa/Miami/GT.

I absolutely have no delusions that Georgia Tech will get a BCS bid should they not win the ACC. The only way they get in is by winning the ACC title game. Iowa fell a lot getting their 1 loss, if they lose another they're done too IMO.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Poli

I'm sorry, did I read that correctly?

Yes you did.

I couldn't believe it when I heard it last night either, but sure enough I looked at the conference stats & there it was. Crompton has thrown 21 TD's, Mallett is next with 18, followed by Cox/Snead/Todd with 17 each.

Of course he's still Crompton, he's 2nd in the SEC in INT's thrown with 10, only QB worse is Cox with 12.

[Swaggs]

Thinking about the Notre Dame situation a little bit...

They are currently sitting at 6-3 w/ games @ Pitt, UConn, and @Stanford remaining. So, they will probably be slight dogs vs Pitt, slight favorites vs UConn, and, I would guess, slight dogs or tossup vs Stanford. Essentially, three very winnable, but very loseable games.

If you are a Notre Dame fan, do you hope for them to win out and probably go to the Gator or Cotton Bowl this season, keep Weis, and probably lose out. Or, do you hope for them to lose 1 or 2 (or maybe all 3), just so you can end the marriage to Weis. And, if the team plays poorly, it is possible that Clausen returns and you get a John Gruden or Brian Kelly to take over the program.

What do you hope for if you are a ND alum or fan?

[MrBug708]

UCLA beat Washington handily, 30-10. Well, that was what it should have been had UCLA not attempted to give the game to Washington. There were 13 points handed to Washington on a silver turnover, and at least 6 points UCLA took off its own scoreboard because of turnovers. UCLA committed five turnovers and still won the game. The odds of that happening this year are probably in the single digits. Except, of course, when you’re playing against a pretty poor team like Washington. It’s great UCLA got its first win after suffering through a five-game losing streak. Winning, of course, cures everything. UCLA is now 4-5 and looking like it could draw to .500 after next week’s trip to take on the woeful Washington State Cougars in the Palouse.

UCLA still has yet to play a good game this season. Heck, probably in the last two seasons, for that matter. Five turnovers usually will make you lose. And in this case it projected an impression of the game completely different than what it should have been.

That impression being that Washington’s a decent team and that the game was close. They’re not and it shouldn’t have been. UCLA’s defense wasn’t fantastic, but it wasn’t bad either. It really only allowed Washington 10 points.

Originally Posted by dawgfan

Without knowing intention (which none of us do) it's impossible to define ti being a "stupid" play. Given how fast the play developed, all you can know for sure is that Butler was attempting to deliver a hit on Prince. Given that Prince wasn't sliding, there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. For all you know, Butler was getting low to get his shoulder pads into Prince, but Prince arrived too soon for that and it was Butler's helmet that made first contact. There's no way in hell Butler should've been tossed from the game, and it was the correct call for it to be a personal foul penalty and nothing more.

Butler needs to shut up. He also supposedly gave the crowd the bird after the hit when they were booing him

"I was just trying to make a play on the ball," Butler said. "Nothing was intentional from my standpoint. It looked like he didn't slide and I thought he was trying to run me over. As a defensive player, you are taught to make the tackle, so that's what I did."

Seriously? You, as the best LB on the field, thought the QB was going to run you over, so you went low? He's a good football player, but he's lacking on common sense.

"Hopefully, he is OK," Butler said. "But definitely, whenever you can take a shot at the quarterback, you are going to take it, and that's what I did."

So you were taking a shot at the QB and not trying to prevent from being ran over? I think the PAC-10 should suspend him for stupidity.

[Poli]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Yes you did.

I couldn't believe it when I heard it last night either, but sure enough I looked at the conference stats & there it was. Crompton has thrown 21 TD's, Mallett is next with 18, followed by Cox/Snead/Todd with 17 each.

Of course he's still Crompton, he's 2nd in the SEC in INT's thrown with 10, only QB worse is Cox with 12.

Considering JC was leading the nation in interceptions at one point, I'll take 2nd in the SEC, thank you.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

UCLA beat Washington handily, 30-10. Well, that was what it should have been had UCLA not attempted to give the game to Washington. There were 13 points handed to Washington on a silver turnover, and at least 6 points UCLA took off its own scoreboard because of turnovers. UCLA committed five turnovers and still won the game. The odds of that happening this year are probably in the single digits. Except, of course, when you’re playing against a pretty poor team like Washington. It’s great UCLA got its first win after suffering through a five-game losing streak. Winning, of course, cures everything. UCLA is now 4-5 and looking like it could draw to .500 after next week’s trip to take on the woeful Washington State Cougars in the Palouse.

Give me a fucking break. Those turnovers were all Washington - UCLA didn't hand us shit, the Huskies took those balls away with hard hits, strips and good plays in the secondary (granted, the only good plays in the secondary).

Turnovers are part of the game. Yes, the Bruins were passing at will most of the game. By the same token, Washington was running at will, but for some reason Sark didn't ride the hot hand of Polk.

Interesting the description of "pretty poor" team of Washington, given your lame-ass Bruins are still looking up at us in the Pac-10 standings. Chances are you'll still be looking up at us in the standings when the season ends.

That impression being that Washington’s a decent team and that the game was close. They’re not and it shouldn’t have been. UCLA’s defense wasn’t fantastic, but it wasn’t bad either. It really only allowed Washington 10 points.

Look, neither team is that great. Trying to pretend that the Bruins are really any better is homerism at it's worst.

I have no idea how you justify the laughable assertion that the Bruins really only allowed the UW 10 points.

Seriously? You, as the best LB on the field, thought the QB was going to run you over, so you went low? He's a good football player, but he's lacking on common sense.

So you were taking a shot at the QB and not trying to prevent from being ran over? I think the PAC-10 should suspend him for stupidity.

Either you've never played competitive football or you're being purposely obtuse.

You're also delusional if you think that 99% of defensive players out there wouldn't have done the exact same thing as Butler. You really think if Jake Locker is running right at Kory Bosworth and isn't sliding feet first that Bosworth doesn't get low to take a shot at him?

By the way, neither Prince nor Neuheisel think Butler's hit was a cheap shot or dirty: LA Times story

You and CR should really just be counting your blessings that the Bruins got out of that game with a win and cease with the shit-talking. Your team ain't all that...

[bhlloy]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

Thinking about the Notre Dame situation a little bit...

They are currently sitting at 6-3 w/ games @ Pitt, UConn, and @Stanford remaining. So, they will probably be slight dogs vs Pitt, slight favorites vs UConn, and, I would guess, slight dogs or tossup vs Stanford. Essentially, three very winnable, but very loseable games.

If you are a Notre Dame fan, do you hope for them to win out and probably go to the Gator or Cotton Bowl this season, keep Weis, and probably lose out. Or, do you hope for them to lose 1 or 2 (or maybe all 3), just so you can end the marriage to Weis. And, if the team plays poorly, it is possible that Clausen returns and you get a John Gruden or Brian Kelly to take over the program.

What do you hope for if you are a ND alum or fan?

As a USC fan I know which one I want them to do. Let's keep giving Charlie a couple more years to develop all those studs he's recruiting, while his team continues into mediocrity (and yes I'm very aware that is a pretty decent description of where USC could be heading right now). Go look at the other teams that are consistently in the top 5/10 recruiting for the past 5 years and tell me if they are losing to Navy and Michigan and finishing with 5+ losses year after year. If Clausen goes pro next year ND will be a worse team, so I figure if Charlie manages to ride out this year he's gone the year after for sure.

Anyone see the human polls? USC 4 spots ahead of Oregon... just wow. As a USC fan it's funny but just shows what a joke this system is.

[MrBug708]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

Give me a fucking break. Those turnovers were all Washington - UCLA didn't hand us shit, the Huskies took those balls away with hard hits, strips and good plays in the secondary (granted, the only good plays in the secondary).

I'm not discounting the fact that Washington made the play to get the turnover. But turnovers are not necessarily caused by the defense. One of the INT's was airmailed 10 feet over the WR's head and into the arms of the safety. The last INT by UCLA was not a great play by Rahim Moore, yet he gets credit for the INT

Turnovers are part of the game. Yes, the Bruins were passing at will most of the game. By the same token, Washington was running at will, but for some reason Sark didn't ride the hot hand of Polk.

No idea why

Interesting the description of "pretty poor" team of Washington, given your lame-ass Bruins are still looking up at us in the Pac-10 standings. Chances are you'll still be looking up at us in the standings when the season ends.

For sure. UCLA also had a pretty front loaded schedule in the PAC-10 It was no coincidence that 3 of their final 4 games are against 3 of the 4 worst teams in the PAC-10.

[qupte]Look, neither team is that great. Trying to pretend that the Bruins are really any better is homerism at it's worst.[/quote]

Vegas thought so, but I'm sure the bookie was a UCLA grad.

I have no idea how you justify the laughable assertion that the Bruins really only allowed the UW 10 points.

Either you've never played competitive football or you're being purposely obtuse.

I'll take neither for $1000 Alex.

You're also delusional if you think that 99% of defensive players out there wouldn't have done the exact same thing as Butler. You really think if Jake Locker is running right at Kory Bosworth and isn't sliding feet first that Bosworth doesn't get low to take a shot at him?

99% of football players? Did you know that 82% of all internet statistics are made up?

By the way, neither Prince nor Neuheisel think Butler's hit was a cheap shot or dirty: LA Times story

I'm aware that both were being diplomatic about the situation. Neither one of them have a poor IQ score that apparently Butler has.

You and CR should really just be counting your blessings that the Bruins got out of that game with a win and cease with the shit-talking. Your team ain't all that...

We are considering how poorly we played with our third string QB in the game. It's not really trash talking, just pointing out some obvious issues. You'd have to be acting intentionally obtuse or have never had played competitive football, to think otherwise. (See what I did there?)

Our team is incredibly young. We start a JC transfer, and a bunch of 19 year-olds on our offensive line with a lot of decent upperclassman. This season has been disappointing and while losing Verner will hurt, we'll be having a lot of addition by subtraction after this year.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

I'm not discounting the fact that Washington made the play to get the turnover. But turnovers are not necessarily caused by the defense. One of the INT's was airmailed 10 feet over the WR's head and into the arms of the safety. The last INT by UCLA was not a great play by Rahim Moore, yet he gets credit for the INT

Each and every fumble that UCLA lost was due to a good play by the UW defense. And the first INT was a great play by Trufant in reading what Prince was doing.

Only the last pick off of Craft could be attributed more to a bad play by UCLA than a good play by the UW.

For sure. UCLA also had a pretty front loaded schedule in the PAC-10 It was no coincidence that 3 of their final 4 games are against 3 of the 4 worst teams in the PAC-10.

UW has already played USC, Oregon, Arizona and Stanford, and we haven't played WSU yet either. Our Pac-10 schedule hasn't been much easier up to this point. In fact, if you go by Sagarin's ratings our Pac-10 schedule so far has been slightly harder than UCLA's.

Vegas thought so, but I'm sure the bookie was a UCLA grad.

Vegas had it at ~3.5, which is roughly home field advantage. In essence, Vegas thought the teams were basically equal on a neutral field.

99% of football players? Did you know that 82% of all internet statistics are made up?

OK, fine - it was an opinion. I suspect if you poll a bunch of football players after showing them that play at game speed, they'd say "it's football".

I'm aware that both were being diplomatic about the situation. Neither one of them have a poor IQ score that apparently Butler has.

Maybe they're being diplomatic, though it's worth noting that plenty of coaches and players in college football have no problems speaking their mind publicly on such situations.

And again, you're delusional if you don't think UCLA defenders wouldn't do the exact same thing to Locker if the situations are reversed. I guess that would make them all stupid too, right?

We are considering how poorly we played with our third string QB in the game. It's not really trash talking, just pointing out some obvious issues. You'd have to be acting intentionally obtuse or have never had played competitive football, to think otherwise. (See what I did there?)

I see a lame attempt to throw my quote back at me. The UW isn't a very good team this year. Neither is UCLA, and yet you've implied otherwise.

And you still didn't explain how you think UCLA only really gave up 10 points on defense.

Try this - UCLA only 'really' scored 17 points, because that TD call for Austin was bogus.

Our team is incredibly young. We start a JC transfer, and a bunch of 19 year-olds on our offensive line with a lot of decent upperclassman. This season has been disappointing and while losing Verner will hurt, we'll be having a lot of addition by subtraction after this year.

I'm sure UCLA is looking better for the future. So is the UW. We started a walk-on on the OL this year until he got injured, and then we moved a guy over from deep in the depth charts at DT and in 2 weeks he's starting (in place of the injured walk-on). We started 5 true freshmen on defense against the Bruins.

[Poli]

Originally Posted by Poli

Considering JC was leading the nation in interceptions at one point, I'll take 2nd in the SEC, thank you.

After five touchdown passes against Memphis, Crompton has 21 on the season. Only three quarterbacks nationally have more.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by Poli

After five touchdown passes against Memphis, Crompton has 21 on the season. Only three quarterbacks nationally have more.

Between Crompton's development and Tennessee's improvement people might start thinking Lane Kiffin actually knows what he's doing as a coach pretty soon. (Then again, it's the SEC, so one loss in the next three and you'll have fans calling for his head again.)

Originally Posted by Swaggs

Thinking about the Notre Dame situation a little bit...

They are currently sitting at 6-3 w/ games @ Pitt, UConn, and @Stanford remaining. So, they will probably be slight dogs vs Pitt, slight favorites vs UConn, and, I would guess, slight dogs or tossup vs Stanford. Essentially, three very winnable, but very loseable games.

If you are a Notre Dame fan, do you hope for them to win out and probably go to the Gator or Cotton Bowl this season, keep Weis, and probably lose out. Or, do you hope for them to lose 1 or 2 (or maybe all 3), just so you can end the marriage to Weis. And, if the team plays poorly, it is possible that Clausen returns and you get a Jon Gruden or Brian Kelly to take over the program.

What do you hope for if you are a ND alum or fan?

If they win the last three - which would include a win at (deserved or not) top 10 Pittsburgh I think the year is a success and they're on track. Weis came in with (and developed his first 2 seasons) the reputation of being an offensive guru, and after the embarrassment of 2007 and the occasional bursts of potential last season, it's hard to rationally argue against what the offense has done this year. The one game you could superficially look at and blame the offense was yesterday against Navy, but you really can't put the blame on Weis for that comedy of errors. They put up >500 yards, Clausen fumbles at the 1, Floyd and/or Clausen make the wrong read and the ball hits Floyd in the back for a pick at the 1, a FG kicker who made 15 straight misses 2, including a 30-yarder - that not poor coaching, it's poor (and unlucky) execution by the players.

The defense is the more worrisome side of the ball, but we've hired Jon Tenuta there and the other co-DC, Corwin Brown has been considered by multiple teams for head coaching vacancies. That's not to say our defense is good by any means, but it's not as simple as hiring a name, since we did that with Tenuta and it hasn't seemed to help.

Bottom line, if you could promise me Brian Kelly, I would fire Charlie 9-3 or 6-6. But given how the last two coaching searches went, with multiple frontrunner candidates turning it down or dropping out, I don't want to go through the circus when the team is much better than last year, which was respectively much better than 2007. Go 1-2 though, and I think Weis will be fired. I thought 4 losses (i.e. 2-1) would have done it before the season, but between teams on our schedule outperforming expectations and the drama surrounding Rodriguez at Michigan I think Weis can survive 4.

Originally Posted by bhlloy

As a USC fan I know which one I want them to do. Let's keep giving Charlie a couple more years to develop all those studs he's recruiting, while his team continues into mediocrity (and yes I'm very aware that is a pretty decent description of where USC could be heading right now).

I'm not sure how the team can "continue into mediocrity". They were horrendous in 2007, mediocre in 2008 and above-average so far in 2009. I'm not saying Weis is the right coach to get us back to 10+ wins, but there's a trend there, and it's not down.

As for developing prospects, we've got 3 sure-fire 1st round picks (Clausen, Floyd, Rudolph) and a possible 4th (Tate) on offense. The only real stud defenders I recall us getting were Ethan Johnson and Manti Te'o, both of whom look fine so far.

Go look at the other teams that are consistently in the top 5/10 recruiting for the past 5 years and tell me if they are losing to Navy and Michigan and finishing with 5+ losses year after year.

Comparing this team to 2007 is retarded, but let's look at this year alone and teams in Scout's top 10 from 2005-2007.

USC lost to Washington, whom we beat.
Ohio St lost to Purdue, whom we beat.
Auburn lost to Kentucky at home.
Pitt's lost to NC State.
Iowa (yes, 8th in 2005) lost to Northwestern at home.
Nebraska lost at home to Iowa St.
Michigan's lost 5 straight to FBS teams.
Florida St is 4-5.
Tennessee is 5-4.
Georgia is 5-4.
Oklahoma is 5-4.

Nick Saban, Urban Meyer, Pete Carroll, Bob Stoops and Mack Brown aren't walking through that door. So if we put all our eggs in the Brian Kelly basket and he goes a different direction (and while I don't think he'd have a problem, considering the academic profiles of ND and Cincy, it's not a guarantee he would want to or could recruit the different group of athletes) where do we go? Go NFL big-name with Gruden, which didn't work for Nebraska, possibly Pitt (they may be #8 now, but I seem to recall many people calling for Wannstache's head the past couple years) or according to the reasoning, us? Gary Patterson and Chris Peterson are sure to be hot candidates, but are you sold on either of them working? (And why is Patterson still at TCU? Wasn't he just as hot a commodity in like 2003?) Try to steal Paul Johnson and get back to the option? (How's that transition from pro-style going Michigan?)

[Karlifornia]

Stanford could run the table. USC is a tossup, kal is now in the "should win" category, but you never know with rivalry games, and I fully expect them to manhandle the Domers.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by Karlifornia

Stanford could run the table. USC is a tossup, kal is now in the "should win" category, but you never know with rivalry games, and I fully expect them to manhandle the Domers.

When you're on offense, probably (although it's been mobile quarterbacks more than power running teams that have given us trouble), but considering Stanford's allowed 38+ 3 of the last 4 games I highly doubt there will be any manhandling going on.

[Balldog]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

Ohio St lost to Purdue, whom we beat.

I'm having a hard time understanding your point. From 2005-now that is the first game that Ohio State has lost to a non-BCS Bowl team.

2005 @ Penn State (Rose Bowl)
2006 vs Florida in NC
2007 vs Illinois (Rose Bowl) and vs LSU in NC
2008 @ USC (Rose Bowl), vs Penn State (Rose Bowl) and vs Texas in Fiesta Bowl
2009 vs USC (tbd) and Purdue.

Once in 64 games, while Notre Dame has lost at least 10 during that span.

[RainMaker]

Weis has to go. It's not the fact that he's not winning, it's the fact he's not winning with some of the best recruiting classes in the nation. Here is where his classes have ranked.

2006 - 8th
2007 - 8th
2008 - 2nd

Now I know the rankings aren't everything, but if you look at the other teams that are consistently in the top 10, they are all much more succesful schools. He has the talent at Notre Dame where they should be a top 10 team year in and year out. For whatever reason, he has not been able to develop that talent properly.

The Navy losses are unacceptable. I've said that Navy isn't a bad team, but still, Notre Dame has a massive talent advantage. They outweighed that team by 50 pounds and about 4 inches on the line. They have a slew of NFL prospects. Navy has no business being in a game with that team on the road. To put up 21 points when you have one of the most talented QBs in the nation along with a great set of Wide Receivers and an offensive line that has a dramatic advantage in size, it's an issue with the coaching staff.

I know Bishop is saying their 6-3 record isn't bad, their schedule has actually been rather easy. They have only played one ranked opponent all year and their only quality win is against an unranked Boston College squad at home. 7 of their 9 games have been at home this season. With that kind of schedule, there is no reason this team should not be 8-1 with the talent they have.

If I'm a Notre Dame fan, I root for whatever scenario gets Weis out of there. I also don't know if you need to go with a huge name in the coaching world. Why not poach a guy from a non-BCS or lower tiered conference who has been dominating? Gary Patterson at TCU, Mike London at Richmond, or Kyle Whittingham at Utah.

I'm against the picking up of an NFL coach right now for Notre Dame. It has worked out in some occasions, but I think Notre Dame really needs a college coach who knows the game and can step right in and turn a team into a winner. Gruden would be interesting as I think his style would translate well to the college game, but I think it would take a couple years for him to get accustomed. He's better suited at a University where there will be less pressure from the start. The talk of Louisville seems like an interesting fit for him.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

They were horrendous in 2007, mediocre in 2008 and above-average so far in 2009. I'm not saying Weis is the right coach to get us back to 10+ wins, but there's a trend there, and it's not down.

Above average is a stretch. They are 6-3 against an easy schedule that has had them play 7 of their 9 games at home. They've lost to a Navy team that has much less talent and a Michigan squad that started a Freshman QB and is 1-5 in the below average Big 10. If they don't beat Pittsburgh, they'll finish the season without a win against a top 25 school. That is a team that would be in the bottom half of just about every BCS conference in the country.

If you can't pull off 10 wins with this easy schedule and talent, you'll never pull it off. Maybe the standards at ND has been lowered over the years, but it's sad to see the school considering being a middle of the pack FBS school a positive trend. With the recruits they've brought in, there is no reason this school shouldn't be finishing the year with 10 wins factoring in this easy schedule.