College Football Week 6 Thread

[TazFTW]

Tyler Graunke 6 for 6 152 yards 2 TDs. Welcome back Tyler!

[SackAttack]

I thought he had thrown passes in that game. My mistake.

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

...held ND to 140 yards total offense. It's amazing how little comprehension of the game you actually have. You make yourself look foolish every time you open your mouth.

To be fair, ND is only averaging 194.8 yds yards a game...so 140, while looking stellar for most teams, is only slightly below average for ND. Yes, your defense played well(im happy to admit that, i think you guys are very talented)...but everyone has been playing well against ND's offense

[MrBug708]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

You know, I'm not as mad tonight as I was after Utah. Maybe I'm just resigned to it. It seemed like the team played better tonight than in Utah, for sure, particularly the defense. But we got done in by an awful string of injuries to the most critical position in the game--and one where we weren't particularly deep to begin with. And if you can believe it, we're still on top of the Pac 10. We can still actually win out in conference and get to a BSC bowl. How stupid is that, huh? We certainly don't deserve to be there.

All that said, it's time for Guerrero to drag Dorrell into his office and tell him it's either a simpler offense college players can run or he's gone. A complicated West Coast offense is not the sort of offense you run with a bunch of kids who are only there at most five years.

Well, I was at the game and want to say Fuck Dorrell

[TazFTW]

Originally Posted by TazFTW

Tyler Graunke 6 for 6 152 yards 2 TDs. Welcome back Tyler!

8 for 8 235 yards 3 TDs.

[MrBug708]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

Rough game for UCLA. If I'm not mistaken, hadn't Olson's replacement only thrown, like, two college passes in his life?

The defense was great, but the offense died after Olson went out.

Hopefully he's okay, but I can't shed any tears over ND winning tonight - I had a bet with my dad that Notre Dame would win at least one game this year, and they won the very first game after we made that bet. Those dried strawberries are gonna be delicious.

Depends on how you look at it? He's more or less Ben Olson's replacements replacement.

Ben Olson has won more games then Pat Cowan actually, but Cowan has the win vs SC. Cowan seems to get the team going more and seems to have more then a 2 cent head like Old Man Ben has. Who knows really. Dorrell said that he's thinking of burning a freshmen's RS or moving a former WR back to QB (first year at WR) if both Ben and Pat are out.

Oh well, who cares at this point. Get this season over with or at least til Basketball starts. At least we'll be top 3 for that

[Karlifornia]

Ok...I think I am finally collected enough (and buzzed enough...bought some Goldschlager in celebration...go ahead and make fun of me...I like it) to gather a few thoughts to share with you guys about tonight, from a Stanford die-hards perspective.

The game started at 4, and I had to be at work at 5. I watched the entire first quarter, and the first play of the second. At this point, Stanford was down 3-0. I decided that I would, much to my own surprise, tape the rest of the game, and watch it when I got back home.

My dad and I have had season tickets to Stanford (both FB and BB) since the mid 90's, and we had spent this weeks phone calls alternating between serious discussion about Stanford chances, and wondering whether or not SC could put up 100 (You could say they were one and the same, I suppose). Our starting QB, Ostrander, had suffered a seizure and was ruled out of the SC game, our best running back had been out, and our suddenly not horrible O-Line was depleted. If there was one game I (an eternal Stanford optimist) had absolutely no hope for, it was this one. I wasn't even expecting any sort of competitiveness.

I went to work at the pizza place, and one of our usual weekend drivers was out sick. I stepped in to take the deliveries, which I wasn't expecting. I was Tavita Pritchard, so to speak! Everything was going rather smoothly, and I did my last delivery of the night to one of the many swank houses in the Los Gatos/Santa Cruz mountains.. It was a bunch of high-schoolers having a party. I hit the call button, and a group of girls answered the door. While one of them signed the receipt, I made small talk with the rest of the group.

Me: "Hey, what are y'all up to tonight?"
HS Girl #1: "Uhh you know just hangin' out and whatever HEHEHEHEHEHE!!"
HS Girl #2: "Yeah, Stanford won and the boys are ignoring us"
Me: "Haha oh that suc---STANFORD WON!?!"
HS Girl #3: Well, the game is still going on, but they just scored.

Then one of the girls gave me back the receipt, and and I said goodnight and went back to my car. Ok....these girls didn't seemed too well-versed in football, and at least one of them appeared to have confused scoring with actually winning the game. I drove back to the restaurant with a glow. A confused glow, but a glow that could best be read as "This guy will have a reason to watch the game he taped after all."

When I got back, I relayed the story to a co-worker. He said "Yeah, they won. They got an interception as time was running out."

WTF?

I didn't believe it until I watched the tape just a little bit ago. I canceled a night out on the town with the guys so I could come home and watch it. This marks the first time ever I didn't mind having the results of a taped game spoiled for me. I'm on cloud nine, and my first child will be named Harbaugh Bernal.

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

To be fair, ND is only averaging 194.8 yds yards a game...so 140, while looking stellar for most teams, is only slightly below average for ND. Yes, your defense played well(im happy to admit that, i think you guys are very talented)...but everyone has been playing well against ND's offense

That's not the point Blade. noop blasted the UCLA defense and said they were slow and pathetic. Chief said they weren't. Then noop made a snide comment about the UCLA defense based off of tonights game.

OK, I don't have a dog in the fight. I haven't watched a single UCLA game this year. I probably watched 2 last year. I wouldn't recognize a single UCLA defensive player without a gamebook or a UCLA fan to help me. And I KNOW ND sucks ass on offense. It's pretty easy to understand that.

But there is "nothing" to "be fair" about here. noop has ZERO business using this game as some conclusive proof that UCLA sucks on defense. There are only three reasons he posted what he did above:

1) He's an idiot. I don't buy it. He understands that 140 total yards allowed is damned good, no matter who you are going against.

2) He was baiting Chief into a tirade. Being a complete and total troll.

3) He didn't look at the box score of the game before he yapped off. This isn't as bad as #1 or #2, but it's still obnoxious and idiotic. Before you use a game as proof of how big your brain is, you should either watch the game or at least take a peak at a box score before you do it.

FWIW, the stats pretty much back what Chief is saying. Heading into the ND game, UCLA was 17th in the country in rushing defense. They were 13th in sacks. They were 4th in third down percentage against. They were 30th in tackles for loss. Yet they were 55th in total defense. That tells me they have plenty of talent, but are prone to giving up the big play. Probably a hole or two in the secondary.

The stats don't suggest a "soft" defense either. They suggest a fairly stout front seven with the weakness being in the back line.

Those problems are both likely to come to the forefront next week when they face a big play Cal team that is likely to make them pay for their assignment mistakes and exploit every flaw they have in the secondary.

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

1st down and I think that's game for KU, up 6 with 1 to go- KSU only 2 timeouts.

First win for KU in Manhattan since the 80s. A good chance to start 7-0 with Baylor and at Colorado next. But then the schedule gets brutal with @ Texas A&M, Nebraska, @ Okie State, Iowa State (breather), and then Mizzou @ Arrowhead.

SI

Just caught this. I wouldn't call any trip to Boulder this year as a "good" chance to do anything. In fact, I'd say CU will give you more trouble than the first 4 games on that "brutal" stretch. CU has a solid defense and an improving offense. Even if they were to get beat by KState next week (which I think is entirely possible), they'll be plenty tough for Kansas to handle in Boulder.

Not saying you won't win. (though if I had to predict now I'd say CU wins the game, only a major injury to Dizon or Hawkins would change my mind on that) But this isn't the same CU team you guys saw last year. I wouldn't be looking past them to A&M if I were you.

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by TazFTW

8 for 8 235 yards 3 TDs.

Nope, it's not the system at all...

[MizzouRah]

Hey SI, I think I'm also going to the Kansas - Missouri game at Arrowhead.. we should hook up.

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by timmynausea

So is Tommy Bowden done at Clemson after this season?

At this point I hope so.

And it pains me to say this.
I know and like the man.
I think he is a fine Christian human being and has done veery good things for our program. He is a great program coach. veery few know how bad things were when he got there, he turned it around has had some measure of success on the field, gradutaes his players and has almost no police blotter material.

But at this point, I am tired of having my heart ripped out by this team. This is at least the 3rd time in the past 5 years were we had the talent, schedule and opportunity to be a top 5 team and we just alid 2 eggs in a row.
I mean last night wasnt even competitive.

And this will be his undoing. Just 5 weeks ago before the FSU game which started at 8pm my lot was compleetely full at 8AM. For this 6PM game people were still filing in at 4:30.

Even the fans are starting to expect disappointment.

Im too mad to think about it.

[Eaglesfan27]

Originally Posted by wade moore

Nope, it's not the system at all...

Of course not, Colt would have been 8 of 8 for 300 yards and 3 TD's.

[larrymcg421]

I don't think anyone is arguing it's not the system, but just that Brennan runs it better than anyone else has and he would still be successful in other systems, just with lower numbers. Using one game as some kind of measure on Brennan's ability is as silly as saying the system has nothing to do with his success at all.

[Logan]

Well, I might've been wrong about Rutgers. The Teel from early last year came back, locking onto receivers as if it was going out of style. You can't win when your QB plays like that.

Speaking of QBs, I don't think I've ever been as impressed by an opposing QB like I was with Ben Mauk. He threw 6 or 7 passes to the sideline that had the perfect amount of touch and were placed in the perfect spot.

I have a general college football complaint. These games take way too long. Last night's regulation game ended just before midnight, making it run just under 4 hours. These long, frequent TV timeouts are complete killers to the momentum of the game. Speeding up the clock definitely wasn't the answer, and it's a shame that the actual answer will never be utilized.

[Klinglerware]

Originally Posted by wade moore

Nope, it's not the system at all...

No, it means that Graunke IS EVEN MORE AWESOMER than Brennan!!!!

Just a little joke there everyone. I still like Hawaii. I still love the run and shoot. But I do have to agree that it is indeed the system that is elevating the play of these quarterbacks. That doesn't mean Brennan is merely an average quarterback--he is a good quarterback that understands and plays within the confines of his offense, and that elevates his play to near greatness.

Success or failure in this system is not all on the quarterback alone. It is as much on the wide receivers on Hawaii's team--remember that the run and shoot was designed to have the "receivers be where the defenses ain't". To accomplish this, the receivers have to read the defense as well and adjust their routes accordingly. Furthermore, the quarterback and the receivers all have to read the same thing. So,

1. It is a system that can work well, but requires several years of implementation to truly reach its potential (ie, the recruiting pipeline needs to fill the program with players that fit the system, and most of these recruits have to be in the system for awhile to know what they are doing). I think Hawaii has hit that point in the last couple of years

2. Physical talent obviously makes the system better, but the success of the system puts a premium on the cogs being in sync with one another

[Logan]

Originally Posted by Noop

Wow your an idiot.

Sorry Noop, that's just funny.

[Noop]

Originally Posted by Logan

Sorry Noop, that's just funny.

Indeed. I edited that comment out.

[Noop]

The last two weeks have been great major upsets and great games.

The shockers for me were UCLA losing to Notre Dame and USC losing to Stanford. While I though LSU was better then USC I didn't see anyone on USC's schedule that would beat them, maybe make it close but not beat them. Booty didn't look good last night and while I was flipping back and forth I wondered why the hotshot young kid Sanchez didn't get a series to see if he provided a spark.

Florida lost. I am happy and the fact they have lost two in a row makes me smile.

Miami lost. I am not happy. I am glad they showed some effort but they should have not lost.

Ron Zook is the man.

I really need to watch Hawaii play.

Oklahoma what the hell happened? If you had beat Colorado you would be in the drivers seat for one of the top two spots in the BCS.

Ohio State might be going back to the championship.

Missouri has my attention.

Notre Dame won a game without an offense. I guess they are bowl eligible now.

[Poli]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

I don't think anyone is arguing it's not the system, but just that Brennan runs it better than anyone else has and he would still be successful in other systems, just with lower numbers.

I'm not sure Mel Kiper would agree with that comment after hearing him talk about Brennan yesterday morning on ESPN Radio.

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by Noop

I made that comment tongue in cheek as a way to rub it in his team lost. Next time don't assume things because as anyone who knows me when it comes to college football I know my shit. Also that doesn't change the fact that when I have seen UCLA play they looked slow. Also I never said they were pathetic or soft, that would be another poster who said that. I called them slow based on the two times I have seen them play.

So you were being a troll and I was right with #2 on my list. FWIW, I have no problems kicking a PROGRAM when it's down. Bash UCLA for losing to ND all you want. To bash a fan? To troll him into a response? That's simply being an asshat. It's what I've learned to expect from you.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by MizzouRah

Hey SI, I think I'm also going to the Kansas - Missouri game at Arrowhead.. we should hook up.

I can't- I'm going to be out of town over Thanksgiving

SI

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by TroyF

Just caught this. I wouldn't call any trip to Boulder this year as a "good" chance to do anything. In fact, I'd say CU will give you more trouble than the first 4 games on that "brutal" stretch. CU has a solid defense and an improving offense. Even if they were to get beat by KState next week (which I think is entirely possible), they'll be plenty tough for Kansas to handle in Boulder.

Not saying you won't win. (though if I had to predict now I'd say CU wins the game, only a major injury to Dizon or Hawkins would change my mind on that) But this isn't the same CU team you guys saw last year. I wouldn't be looking past them to A&M if I were you.

Unless KU loses to Baylor next week or major injuries to either team, the line on that game is going to be 3 points either direction, likely towards Colorado. Not a slam dunk, certainly, but I'll take that, particularly on the road, where Jowls is something like 5-22 in his coaching career with his only real victory not in Columbia coming yesterday.

SI

[sooner333]

Wait, so why didn't Dorrell pull the redshirt? Obviously the walk-on isn't any better. Dorrell's gotta save his job...he can't lose to teams he has no business losing to. Even if he didn't have to save his job, you need to win the game and you have no idea how long Olsen is out.

[SnDvls]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

LSU remaining schedule
October 13 at No. 8 Kentucky
October 20 Auburn
November 3 at Alabama
November 10 Louisiana Tech
November 17 at Mississippi
November 23 Arkansas

the thing is just like USC and Oklahoma found out you are getting everyone's "A" game week end and week out as they want to knock you off. South Florida found that out this past weekend with Fla. Atl. and will need to work that much harder now that they are the top dog in the Big East.

[MizzouRah]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

I can't- I'm going to be out of town over Thanksgiving

SI

Awwwww man!!!

[Young Drachma]

What a crazy, crazy week again.

After the past few weeks, I'm starting to think that we don't need a playoff. Each week has turned into one.

[General Mike]

Originally Posted by Logan

Well, I might've been wrong about Rutgers. The Teel from early last year came back, locking onto receivers as if it was going out of style. You can't win when your QB plays like that.

Speaking of QBs, I don't think I've ever been as impressed by an opposing QB like I was with Ben Mauk. He threw 6 or 7 passes to the sideline that had the perfect amount of touch and were placed in the perfect spot.

I have a general college football complaint. These games take way too long. Last night's regulation game ended just before midnight, making it run just under 4 hours. These long, frequent TV timeouts are complete killers to the momentum of the game. Speeding up the clock definitely wasn't the answer, and it's a shame that the actual answer will never be utilized.

Yeah. Teel has been awful the last 2 weeks. We haven;t gotten the breaks that we got last year as well, and both lines are playing worse than last year.

[Young Drachma]

I agree that college football games take entirely too long. Anytime I'd go to crappy home games that Wyoming was playing some no-account opponent and there were STILL TV timeouts, despite the games not being shown locally -- and this was before the Mtn. West Conference had its own network -- used to drive me batty.

Even years later, I'll catch a game on TV and it still moves super slow. Part of that is because of their plodding offenses, but still..

There isn't enough movement and the game just takes too long to complete for all sorts of extraneous reasons. When it's great, it's great. But when the teams aren't shining examples of super talent, it can be painful.

[MrBug708]

Originally Posted by sooner333

Wait, so why didn't Dorrell pull the redshirt? Obviously the walk-on isn't any better. Dorrell's gotta save his job...he can't lose to teams he has no business losing to. Even if he didn't have to save his job, you need to win the game and you have no idea how long Olsen is out.

Because the RS probably isn't much better then the walk on at this point

[Easy Mac]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

At this point I hope so.

And it pains me to say this.
I know and like the man.
I think he is a fine Christian human being and has done veery good things for our program. He is a great program coach. veery few know how bad things were when he got there, he turned it around has had some measure of success on the field, gradutaes his players and has almost no police blotter material.

But at this point, I am tired of having my heart ripped out by this team. This is at least the 3rd time in the past 5 years were we had the talent, schedule and opportunity to be a top 5 team and we just alid 2 eggs in a row.
I mean last night wasnt even competitive.

And this will be his undoing. Just 5 weeks ago before the FSU game which started at 8pm my lot was compleetely full at 8AM. For this 6PM game people were still filing in at 4:30.

Even the fans are starting to expect disappointment.

Im too mad to think about it.

plus his daughter is hot... googling it is well worth it...

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by Easy Mac

plus his daughter is hot... googling it is well worth it...

QFT

[Poli]

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

I agree that college football games take entirely too long. Anytime I'd go to crappy home games that Wyoming was playing some no-account opponent and there were STILL TV timeouts, despite the games not being shown locally -- and this was before the Mtn. West Conference had its own network -- used to drive me batty.

Even years later, I'll catch a game on TV and it still moves super slow. Part of that is because of their plodding offenses, but still..

There isn't enough movement and the game just takes too long to complete for all sorts of extraneous reasons. When it's great, it's great. But when the teams aren't shining examples of super talent, it can be painful.

Take/buy peanuts. Eat em while they're on the breaks. Peanuts are a great time waster.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Noop

No you are wrong. It was meant as humor. However there is an ignore button you should go ahead and use it.

Got it. It was humor to bait me. Well, we all had a good laugh, didn't we? You're a pretty shitty human being.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by sooner333

Wait, so why didn't Dorrell pull the redshirt? Obviously the walk-on isn't any better. Dorrell's gotta save his job...he can't lose to teams he has no business losing to. Even if he didn't have to save his job, you need to win the game and you have no idea how long Olsen is out.

Dorrell is the king of making bad decisions on the fly. Now he'll be really stupid and "correct" his decision by burning the redshirt this week if Olson can't play. Meaning perhaps he could have gone with his four star true freshman QB to save his ass against ND (or at least try), but chose not to, and then ends up burning the redshirt anyway.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Noop

I made that comment tongue in cheek as a way to rub it in his team lost. Next time don't assume things because as anyone who knows me when it comes to college football I know my shit. Also that doesn't change the fact that when I have seen UCLA play they looked slow. Also I never said they were pathetic or soft, that would be another poster who said that. I called them slow based on the two times I have seen them play.

I love, BTW, how you throw it back in Troy's face like he did something wrong for "assuming things". Especially since you did a whole lot of that about UCLA's defense. That means you're a hypocrite on top of having no moral standards. Not that any of that has surprised me, given I have read your posts for years now, so maybe it's my fault for not realizing you're an asshat.

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

At this point I hope so.

And it pains me to say this.
I know and like the man.
I think he is a fine Christian human being and has done veery good things for our program. He is a great program coach. veery few know how bad things were when he got there, he turned it around has had some measure of success on the field, gradutaes his players and has almost no police blotter material.

But at this point, I am tired of having my heart ripped out by this team. This is at least the 3rd time in the past 5 years were we had the talent, schedule and opportunity to be a top 5 team and we just alid 2 eggs in a row.
I mean last night wasnt even competitive.

And this will be his undoing. Just 5 weeks ago before the FSU game which started at 8pm my lot was compleetely full at 8AM. For this 6PM game people were still filing in at 4:30.

Even the fans are starting to expect disappointment.

Im too mad to think about it.

I can understand the sentiment about the program kind of being stagnant, but what are the realistic expectations for Clemson?

The way I perceive the ACC is that there are two programs that are national powers (even though they aren't at their peak right now) in Miami and Florida State. There is Duke and (I still think) Wake Forest, that are more academic schools with small enrollments that can occasionally be solid if they have a little luck and a great coach, but they are overall a little lower in their potential ceilings.

Then, what I think is kind of the tough part of the new ACC lineup is that the rest of the schools are all fairly similar in that they could reach a national championship if things are run optimally (like VT has been for the past 10-12 years, under Beamer). But, some of those teams, as a product of the ACc having them altogether, are going to have to suffer while the others are thriving.

So, realistically, Clemson has been a team that has been between 7-9 wins since Bowden arrived. I can understand being frustrated that you all haven't seen the 10- or 11-win seasons yet, but the ACC is a deep, competitive conference now and it is going to be nearly impossible for any team to dominate it, now that it has gone to twelve teams. If he is graduating players and keeping it clean, off the field, while continually putting winning teams on the field, what are the expectations for the next coach and who is available that will be significantly better?

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Noop

Let me list the things I have been called.

Racist-- i never called you that. I have read others call you that.
Troll-- you posted only to bait me and kick me when my team lost. That is a troll.
Idiot-- you ignore stats blatantly showing you're wrong.
Asshat-- being a troll is pretty much being an asshat
No Moral Standards-- baiting someone to kick him when he's done is the providence of one who has rather iffy moral standards.
Hypocrite-- i presented the evidence right there. you called out troy for assuming things when you yourself did it. Definition hypocrite. look it up.
Pretty Shitty Human Being-- troll, asshat, hypocrite, no moral standards. i have sorta lotta evidence, huh? No remorse either. We'll add that on.

I love how I am all these things but I have not said a single thing about you or Troy personally. I suggest the ignore button so you won't be subject to my nonsense. In fact you should create a petition to have me banned.

And there is nothing about what you did that isn't personal. Try to hide it in college football banter, but you took a personal shot at me with your baiting. It doesn't get worse than that.

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by Noop

Let me list the things I have been called.

Racist
Troll
Idiot
Asshat
No Moral Standards
Hypocrite
Pretty Shitty Human Being
Did I forget anything?

I love how I am all these things but I have not said a single thing about you or Troy personally. I suggest the ignore button so you won't be subject to my nonsense. In fact you should create a petition to have me banned.

1) You have to do specific things to get banned. You haven't hit that level. You have hit the level of being called an asshat and have been called it.

2) I WAS right in what I said. You WERE being a troll, posting something not as a humerous shot at the UCLA program, but as a shot to Chief designed to get him to fire back. I just beat him to the punch because I found what you did pathetic. BTW: That WAS a personal shot at CR. Stop crying that you were called out on it.

3) I suggest you read my post. I didn't call you an idiot. I gave three reasons for why you posted what you did. I was dead on with #2. The one where I called you an idiot, I said (and I quote) "I don't buy it"

4) I'll put who I want to put on ignore. I understand it's there and I thank you for the tip. You can stop saying it now. This is one of the things where you probably have the idea I'm frothing at the mouth screaming four letter words in anger. I'm not. Calling you an asshat is simple fact for me. It's like me saying 2+2=4. I found what you did above to be pathetic, ridiculous and inflamitory. That's asshattery in my book.

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Unless KU loses to Baylor next week or major injuries to either team, the line on that game is going to be 3 points either direction, likely towards Colorado. Not a slam dunk, certainly, but I'll take that, particularly on the road, where Jowls is something like 5-22 in his coaching career with his only real victory not in Columbia coming yesterday.

SI

I don't disagree Sterling. I just found it odd that you said you had a great shot to go to 7-0 by beating Baylor and Colorado and then talked about a "brutal" stretch that included teams I think CU is either on even par with or better than. Your opinion may differ, but I'd MUCH rather face Nebraska at home, A&M or OSU on the road and Iowa State than I would this Colorado team right now.

I look at it the other way: I think if you get by the CU game, the North is yours for the taking. I think if Kansas played the way they played yesterday that they go 3-1 or 4-0 in that "brutal" stretch and then face Mizzou with everything on the line.

The problem is I don't think you are going to get by that CU game. I think CU is putting it together and that CU/Mizzou will end up being the key game for the North title. We'll see. . .

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Noop

Like I said ignore button. That way you won't ever have to read anything I write on this board. Or you can have Skydog or Ryan S ban me. Because you name calling me is baiting in my opinion just like me making a comment about your team is baiting you in the opinion of you and TroyF, yet I noticed other UCLA fans haven't said anything.

Like Troy said, what do you think, I am not familiar with the Ignore button? I'll use it if I want to, thank you. If instead I want to keep you on so I can call you an asshat when you deserve it, don't whine because you can't take the heat when I choose to do so. And be a man for once and own up when you make a mistake or at least take it when you're rightly called on it.

As for the name calling, everything I have called you, I have presented evidence for. I speak nothing but the truth. If you think I'll be banned for speaking the truth, you have a long wait ahead of you.

To my knowledge, there are only two UCLA fans on the board, me and Bug. Bug has been responding, as he did late last night. I'm sure he'll comment when he comes around and sees your latest. But I'm not sure what your point is, anyway. It was clearly an attack on me personally, not on UCLA fans in general.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Noop

Crying and whining. Thanks a million.

Truth. And you're welcome.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

I can understand the sentiment about the program kind of being stagnant, but what are the realistic expectations for Clemson?
... I can understand being frustrated that you all haven't seen the 10- or 11-win seasons yet, but the ACC is a deep, competitive conference now and it is going to be nearly impossible for any team to dominate it, now that it has gone to twelve teams.

I dunno, given the right set of circumstances, I think there's an opportunity for a team to have a pretty good roll at the moment. You mentioned the opening yourself - the fact that FSU & Miami are down at the moment. If any of those teams bunched in the middle could get everything clicking, I think there's an opportunity for someone to run off several conference championships in a row.

Problem is (as I know too well with GT as an example), none of the teams who seem like they could do that are actually doing it. Instead, they're mired in the same "we're not awful, we're not great, we're just okay" loop. And of those teams, I'd say Clemson is far & away the most football centric school (well, fanbase really) of the bunch -- other than VT perhaps, and I really don't count them as mired in the middle just yet -- so their frustration level has got to be getting pretty high at this point.

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

I don't think anyone is arguing it's not the system, but just that Brennan runs it better than anyone else has and he would still be successful in other systems, just with lower numbers. Using one game as some kind of measure on Brennan's ability is as silly as saying the system has nothing to do with his success at all.

Well, I think to an extent that korupt0r is arguing that it's not the system..

But outside of that, it's not one example.. Brennan has missed a fair amount of time in multiple games this season and every time the backups have put up big numbers. Brennan may be a pretty good QB, but he should not be in Heisman talks... this is what all of this revolves around for me - Brennan should not be in Heisman talks and Hawaii should not be in NC talks, that's my drum beat.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by TroyF

I don't disagree Sterling. I just found it odd that you said you had a great shot to go to 7-0 by beating Baylor and Colorado and then talked about a "brutal" stretch that included teams I think CU is either on even par with or better than. Your opinion may differ, but I'd MUCH rather face Nebraska at home, A&M or OSU on the road and Iowa State than I would this Colorado team right now.

I look at it the other way: I think if you get by the CU game, the North is yours for the taking. I think if Kansas played the way they played yesterday that they go 3-1 or 4-0 in that "brutal" stretch and then face Mizzou with everything on the line.

The problem is I don't think you are going to get by that CU game. I think CU is putting it together and that CU/Mizzou will end up being the key game for the North title. We'll see. . .

I just don't see it at all. I'd rather play Colorado on the road than OSU or A&M. OSU is questionable, tho- they seem to have the capacity of high highs and low lows so maybe we get lucky and catch them on a bad day. I think A&M is a much better team than Colorado but, again, maybe I'm just badly underestimating Colorado or overestimating A&M. Then again, we have a perfectly legit chance of losing all three.

Guess we'll see in 2 weeks and on

SI

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I dunno, given the right set of circumstances, I think there's an opportunity for a team to have a pretty good roll at the moment. You mentioned the opening yourself - the fact that FSU & Miami are down at the moment. If any of those teams bunched in the middle could get everything clicking, I think there's an opportunity for someone to run off several conference championships in a row.

Problem is (as I know too well with GT as an example), none of the teams who seem like they could do that are actually doing it. Instead, they're mired in the same "we're not awful, we're not great, we're just okay" loop. And of those teams, I'd say Clemson is far & away the most football centric school (well, fanbase really) of the bunch -- other than VT perhaps, and I really don't count them as mired in the middle just yet -- so their frustration level has got to be getting pretty high at this point.

Interesting thoughts. Looking forward to seeing some more discussion on this.

I guess Clemson is really more of a Southern, football school--particularly when comparing it to (for lack of better terms) more "Northern, Southern schools" like the North Carolina teams, the Virginia teams, and Maryland (and even GT is sort of an academic, inner-city private school, so it is different).

There is an interesting occurrence going on in the ACC right now. I was looking at the coaching records on this site (a pretty awesome college football site to bookmark, btw): http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data.../acc/index.php

When you look at those middle tier ACC teams like Maryland, UVA, GT, Clemson, NC State (before they completely fell off the last couple of years), Boston College, and even VT (although they have been able to get to that 10-win mark pretty regularly), there are a lot of teams that have been between good and very good for a number of years.

It is kind of a chicken and egg thing, to me, as to whether or not they have kind of "topped out" due to coaching or other prohibitive factors or if they are just beating up on each either and preventing one another from reaching that next "level" because they are all at fairly similar levels of prestige/talent/program potential.

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by wade moore

Well, I think to an extent that korupt0r is arguing that it's not the system..

But outside of that, it's not one example.. Brennan has missed a fair amount of time in multiple games this season and every time the backups have put up big numbers. Brennan may be a pretty good QB, but he should not be in Heisman talks... this is what all of this revolves around for me - Brennan should not be in Heisman talks and Hawaii should not be in NC talks, that's my drum beat.

I think you are pretty much spot on here.

Brennan is a pretty good QB running a very QB-friendly offense and making the most of it. There are a lot of BCS teams that would enjoy having such an exciting offense to watch, but I suspect that Hawaii would lose its share of games if they were in a little bit more of a competitive conference.

I think the Heisman talk is pretty well over for Brennan at this point. His margin for winning was pretty small to begin (playing at a non-BCS school, playing at odd hours when people aren't watching, overcoming the questions about how much is due to offense vs his performance) with and missing time with injuries and having the one five interception game pretty well eliminated him, in my opinion. UofL's Brian Brohm and Texas Tech's Graham Harrell have much more gawdy numbers and play in more competitive conferences and aren't really on the radar either, at this point.

One interesting thing to watch is how Hawaii has stagnated in the coaches' poll the past three weeks. The have been between 15-17 for the past several weeks and, right or wrong, I'm sure there are a number of BCS coaches that are hesitant to put them much higher and give them an opportunity to take away one of the at-large BCS spots from their conference. It is probably somewhat unethical, I cannot see how coaches are able to not have it influence their votes. I will be surprised if we don't keep seeing teams like Missouri, Cincy, whichever ACC/Pac10/B10/SEC team is low in the polls and upsets a higher ranked in conference team, etc. leapfrogging Hawaii into the top 15 or so.

[gstelmack]

Rankings out. AP Top 10:

1. LSU (65) 6-0 1,625

2. California 5-0 1,538

3. Ohio State 6-0 1,511

4. Boston College 6-0 1,346

5. South Florida 5-0 1,339

6. Oklahoma 5-1 1,221

7. South Carolina 5-1 1,183

8. West Virginia 5-1 1,059

9. Oregon 4-1 1,047

10. USC 4-1 1,024

USA Today Top 10:

1. LSU (58) 6-0 1,498

2. California 5-0 1,416

3. Ohio State (2) 6-0 1,399

4. Boston College 6-0 1,283

5. Oklahoma 5-1 1,145

5. South Florida 5-0 1,145

7. USC 4-1 1,000

8. Oregon 4-1 936

9. West Virginia 5-1 931

10. Virginia Tech 5-1 913

[sterlingice]

WOO! KU is #20 in both polls. I can't remember the last time we were ranked. Maybe got close back in Whittimore's senior season but I don't think so.

SI

[sterlingice]

Mizzou with a really nice #11 but they look really strong. They have to avoid that loss to a random crap team this year, tho. Going to be a big game next week for them at Oklahoma.

SI