Rose Bowl

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Sat Jan 01, 2011 10:08 pm

Would really liked to have seen Stanford play against Wisky but damn, at this point I don't care - water under the bridge and stuff.

I just love this game, no matter who's in it. It's marked the new year for me for about 45 years. The location, the atmosphere, the mountains in the background, everything. I know that the fighters buzzing the stadium is nothing new or unusual, but goddam that was cool.

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Sat Jan 01, 2011 10:10 pm

RACK Granddaddy.

Let's not forget which conference invented bowl games.

Mace · Post by **Mace** » Sat Jan 01, 2011 10:11 pm

The Big 10 has had a tough day, so let's see if Wisconsin can stop the bleeding with a total ass pounding of the Frogs.

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Sat Jan 01, 2011 10:13 pm

Oh fuck, please don't blow this one open early -- had enough of that shit the last couple of weeks.

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Sat Jan 01, 2011 10:15 pm

Haven't watched a lot of B10 ball this year.

Does Wisky have a decent running game?

(kidding)

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Sat Jan 01, 2011 10:16 pm

Dinsdale wrote:if TCU doesn't stack the box against Wisky

Damn -- I'm not sure the Rose Bowl is the appropriate place to experiment with your revolutionary new "spread defense."

If TCU doesn't rethink their 7-man spread out box, Wisky's gonna drop 80 on them.

WTF are they thinking?

Mace · Post by **Mace** » Sat Jan 01, 2011 10:20 pm

Mikey wrote:Haven't watched a lot of B10 ball this year.

Does Wisky have a decent running game?

(kidding)

When you mention "spread" to Wisconsin, those gigantic linemen immediately start looking for the food.

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Sat Jan 01, 2011 10:35 pm

Papa Willie wrote:This might actually be the good game we thought it should be.

As long as the score stays reasonable, smashmouth vs. wide-open is usually entertaining.

And I've never claimed to be anything other than a PACBSH.

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Sat Jan 01, 2011 10:38 pm

Papa Willie wrote:
Dinsdale wrote:RACK Granddaddy.

Let's not forget which conference invented bowl games.
PAC10BSH!

Facts is facts. No matter of opinion about where it all started.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial · Sat Jan 01, 2011 10:39 pm

Dinsdale wrote:Let's not forget which conference invented bowl games.

That figures they wouldn't have the good sense to invent a playoff. Morons.

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Sat Jan 01, 2011 10:40 pm

The Rose Bowl couldn't afford anything better than a 10" level to true up the uprights?

Pretty accurate measuring device they came up with -- screw those $25 lasers and shit.

Screw_Michigan · Post by **Screw_Michigan** » Sat Jan 01, 2011 10:41 pm

The Rose Bowl is still the best of them all with the Sugar Bowl a close second.

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Sat Jan 01, 2011 10:42 pm

Papa Willie wrote:Fuck. I thought we'd have an o/u of about 40 on this one. Doesn't look like it so far.

While I never "called my shot," I easily saw this one being a 9-6 affair...

which means a smart gambler would have taken the Over, assuming it was less than 119.5.

I'm like a redshirt freshman YAFJ.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial · Sat Jan 01, 2011 10:42 pm

Papa Willie wrote:Props to Tcu on that last drive. I had a feeling that UW might have intimidated them on their first drive. This might actually be the good game we thought it should be.

Wisconsin's D is not good. Their bread and butter is hanging a shit ton of points on people, and wearing them down. On the flip side, I can't see TCU doing much against Wisky's oversized OL. I'm guessing the scoreboard operator will get a workout in this one.

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Sat Jan 01, 2011 10:42 pm

Damn, Dalton is accurate on those long balls.

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Sat Jan 01, 2011 10:43 pm

BTW -- if you didn't watch much TCU... Dalton ain't fucking around. Real deal.

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Sat Jan 01, 2011 10:45 pm

Dinsdale wrote:BTW -- if you didn't watch much TCU... Dalton ain't fucking around. Real deal.

We gonna seem him throw a pass to himself before the game is over?

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Sat Jan 01, 2011 10:47 pm

An SEC replay crew?

Someone in a position of authority decided it was a good idea to put southern folks in charge of... electronics?

It's digital media, not a cotton gin.

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Sat Jan 01, 2011 10:50 pm

Nice defensive battle.

Someone must not have got the memo.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial · Sat Jan 01, 2011 10:53 pm

Dinsdale wrote:Someone in a position of authority decided it was a good idea to put southern folks in charge of... electronics?

A "remote" = yelling at your stepdaughter to get up and change this:

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Sat Jan 01, 2011 11:00 pm

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:Wisky's oversized OL.

BWA!!! RACK!

Sin,
Mike Leach

But TCU has a "speed defense" -- covers sideline to sideline, rather than north-south (sup Oregon). That style of D wprks better with small fast guys.

And it was very æffective all season... but they haven't seen beastly blockers like Wisky's this season, either.

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Sat Jan 01, 2011 11:01 pm

Can't afford to leave points on the field in this one.

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Sat Jan 01, 2011 11:02 pm

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:A "remote" = yelling at your stepdaughter to get up and change this:

Which means she has to put down one of her kids, put out her smoke, or finish her Budweiser first.

Does a "SEC replay review" involve chicken bones and goat's blood?

MgoBlue-LightSpecial · Sat Jan 01, 2011 11:07 pm

Dinsdale wrote:
MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:Wisky's oversized OL.
BWA!!! RACK!

Sin,
Mike Leach

But TCU has a "speed defense" -- covers sideline to sideline, rather than north-south (sup Oregon). That style of D wprks better with small fast guys.

And it was very æffective all season... but they haven't seen beastly blockers like Wisky's this season, either.

You could've saved a lot of time by just saying "you're right."

MgoBlue-LightSpecial · Sat Jan 01, 2011 11:10 pm

I've seen Nick Toon drop a lot of balls like that. I don't think he likes getting hit.

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Sat Jan 01, 2011 11:11 pm

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote: You could've saved a lot of time by just saying "you're right."

I wasn't trying to be condescending, I just got the impression that most of the east-of-the-Rockies crowd didn't get many MWC games, was all, and I was merely trying to lend some typically-retarded-Dinsdale-insight into things.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial · Sat Jan 01, 2011 11:11 pm

bwaaaa. They did that against Iowa. Slow as fuck and still converted.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial · Sat Jan 01, 2011 11:12 pm

How TCU didn't see it coming when Wisky was clearly running it before the flag, I don't know.

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Sat Jan 01, 2011 11:12 pm

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:Slow as fuck and still converted.

Size has its advantages (there's some sort of "Wisky's OL" joke in there).

War Wagon · Post by **War Wagon** » Sat Jan 01, 2011 11:12 pm

you could see that fake punt coming a mile away, hell they tipped it off when they got called for the false start.

Mace · Post by **Mace** » Sat Jan 01, 2011 11:15 pm

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:bwaaaa. They did that against Iowa. Slow as fuck and still converted.

That was one of the 5 plays that cost Iowa the national championship.

You could see he was running a fake on the punt that was blown dead with the penalty and they STILL pulled it off.

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Sat Jan 01, 2011 11:15 pm

"I think he got his right hand under it."

Ahhh, that explains your "commentary," Herbstreit -- you're fucking blind.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial · Sat Jan 01, 2011 11:17 pm

I thought it was a catch, but might be tough to overturn.

Mace · Post by **Mace** » Sat Jan 01, 2011 11:17 pm

Good call. It was definitely a catch.
Toon makes a tough catch and drops all of the passes that hit him in the hands/chest.

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Sat Jan 01, 2011 11:21 pm

Sure looked like part of the ball touched turf -- not enough evidence to overturn, IMO.

The PAC replay officials thought that was whack.

Mace · Post by **Mace** » Sat Jan 01, 2011 11:23 pm

Dinsdale wrote:Sure looked like part of the ball touched turf -- not enough evidence to overturn, IMO.

The PAC replay officials thought that was whack.

I couldn't believe that the official on the field even called it incomplete.

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Sat Jan 01, 2011 11:30 pm

No matter how perfectly the receiver has his hand under the ball, if his hand is on the ground part of the ball will be touching turf because turf is not a hard flat surface.

Where exactly do you draw the line?

War Wagon · Post by **War Wagon** » Sat Jan 01, 2011 11:36 pm

Mikey wrote:No matter how perfectly the receiver has his hand under the ball, if his hand is on the ground part of the ball will be touching turf because turf is not a hard flat surface.

What?

The ball isn't a flat surface either and that was a clean catch.

Mace · Post by **Mace** » Sat Jan 01, 2011 11:37 pm

I didn't see any part of the ball touch the ground.

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Sat Jan 01, 2011 11:41 pm

Splitting hairs -- it was a nice freaking play, regardless.