T1B

weirdest thing I can remember
here it is a couple of hours before the MNC and in an office full of college football fans, not once has anybody mentioned the game.....

this game hasn't created controversy, it's created the monster known as apathy....I have no doubt this will probably be one of (if not the) least watched MNC games ever....

a system can live with controversy, it can't live with apathy....

He's only a sophomore, isn't he? I don't think he's draft-eligible yet.

I think his diminuitive size will likely be the major determining factor should he fall in the 2013 draft. In a league of 6'4" receivers his 5'8"-5'9" frame (depending on who you believe) will give a lot of GMs pause.

I don't even care about reading this entire thread.

What I saw this evening was at least 13 passing plays where a wide ass open wide receiver was overthrown by 12+ feet (4+ yards) at least 13 times (8 LSU, 4 Bama). 9 running plays with holes the size of mac trucks to run throw where someone in the back 7 made a shoe string tackle.

Without going into a rant what I saw tonight was two atrocious offenses, not two great defenses. Two dismal quarterbacks. Two WR corps who would get laughed off the field at most spring practices west of the Mississippi river. Period, end of story.

SunCoastSooner wrote:I don't even care about reading this entire thread.

What I saw this evening was at least 13 passing plays where a wide ass open wide receiver was overthrown by 12+ feet (4+ yards) at least 13 times (8 LSU, 4 Bama). 9 running plays with holes the size of mac trucks to run throw where someone in the back 7 made a shoe string tackle.

Without going into a rant what I saw tonight was two atrocious offenses, not two great defenses. Two dismal quarterbacks. Two WR corps who would get laughed off the field at most spring practices west of the Mississippi river. Period, end of story.

I thought Bama's offense looked pretty crisp.
not a lot of flash but executed a nice game plan.
Bama's D looked wicked good, what game did you watch?

LSU not able to leave New Orleans.




Someone painted a 50 yard line across I-10 at the Orleans-Jefferson Parish boundary.

Looks like 'bama will be defending its title next season with home games against western kentucky and florida atlantic.

what balls they have.

Papa Willie wrote:

And the Pac 12 will be playing - the Pac 12.

Dude whose conference no longer has the most money sayswhat?

Alabama does have a great defense, probably the best this year, HOWEVER, a truly great ALL TIME defense must have played great offenses. This years Alabama did NOT.
92 Alabama shut down the miami hurricanes, 86 penn st. shut down the miami hurricanes.
95 nebraska shut down the high powered gators, 2000 oklahoma shut down the high powered seminoles.
SO, what high powered offense did this years Alabama shut down???
It seems to me that when last years Alabama had to shut down a Cam Newton Auburn team, Bama got fucked in da mouth. Their defense wasnt so bad ass then?
This year? Lets see, bama did go out of conf. to face the high powered penn st squad? Who the fuck did bama play that actually had a great offense?
vandy? the gators?
ALL TIME defense? no way. The stats may seem impressive, BUT, its due to the fact that they played weak weak offfenses.
And thats a fact.

So who is trying to argue that this year's Bama's defense is one of the all-time greatest?

Certainly nobody here.

Van wrote:So who is trying to argue that this year's Bama's defense is one of the all-time greatest?

Certainly nobody here.

I keep hearing it all over the media, especially on the talk radio, They keep talking about bama being one of the best ever defenses, HOWEVER they dont talk about the offenses they had to shut down. AND lets face it, if you didnt face any high powered offenses, then how can you claim all time greatness?

I'm a little late jumping into this thread but I want to say congrats to Sam and his beloved Tide. The two best teams in the country met on the field for all of the marbles and the 'Bama proved who deserved the title of National Champs. Props to Saban and the Crimson Tide.

It sounds like we might be headed for some sort of playoff in the near future, so, if that happens, props to the NCAA.

Sudden Sam wrote:Some fool from out west wrote that he wished Oregon or USC or Okie State had been there. Why? He'd have seen a horrible game.

He'd have seen a different horrible game, though.

Sudden Sam wrote:

Goober McTuber wrote:

Sudden Sam wrote:Some fool from out west wrote that he wished Oregon or USC or Okie State had been there. Why? He'd have seen a horrible game.

He'd have seen a different horrible game, though.

I understand. So where was all the anger when Florida and Florida State met for the title in a rematch?

What year was this?

Look, whether you were in favor or opposed to the rematch, it was still a horrible game to watch. Much more one-sided than the score would indicate.

1996 preceeds the BCS.

Of course you enjoyed the game. Your team won. But I can't believe you were at the edge of your seat much in the second half.

It was a horrible game to watch.

It was extremely one-sided.

Sudden Sam wrote: I hate to use the transitive "theory" shit, but you gotta look at a little of this: Arkansas' halfass defense held K-State to 16. K-State scored 45 on Oklahoma State. So what do you think Bama or LSU would have done to OSU? Arkansas was rolled by both LSU and Bama.

....and that juggernaut Georgia Southern dropped 21 points on 'bama, imagine what they would have done to LSU.

Sudden Sam wrote:

Goober McTuber wrote:1996 preceeds the BCS.

Of course you enjoyed the game. Your team won. But I can't believe you were at the edge of your seat much in the second half.

It was a horrible game to watch.

It was extremely one-sided.

Yet one punt return, one fumble or INT and LSU woulda been right back in it. I was nervous as fuck even up 15-0.

Right. Because they had been moving the ball all night long. Face it, Sam, everyone outside of the deep south thought that game sucked.

Sorry Sam, im not impressed with your LSU and bama HYPE. Did you look at the sec this year?
The gators? vandy, kentucky, ole miss, miss st. etc etc etc.... IT SUCKED.

SO, dont give me this crap about oregon not being able to put up poiints on alabama, if the jauggernaut known as georgia southern could hang 21 pts on that great bama defense, WHAT THE FUCK do you think oregon would have done?

I'll tell you what oregon would have done with their speed and talent, they would have put up 50 on bama, you tard.

sec? JOKE.

Goober McTuber wrote:Right. Because they had been moving the ball all night long. Face it, Sam, everyone outside of the deep south thought that game sucked.

This.

Looks like Mizzou is in for a 27-0 ass-whoopin' at the hands of the Bammers in Columbia next season under the unrelentless onslaught of a stifling defense and nine freaking field goals.

With no less than 37 MNCs to its name, is there a reason why you people can't recruit an arm north of Stabler to 'Bama? Or is playing NFL-caliber defense so culturally engrained that you folks are content with signing "game managers"?

Jesus-in-the-Wing-T, is this what we signed up for?!

Hangin' 40 on Kent State and North Texas doesn't impress anybody, Sammie. And everybody beats Ole Mess by fiddy.

The rest of 'em we call half-time scores in the XII. This SEC stuff is gonna take some gittin' use-to...

Sam, one thing to keep in mind when you talk about LSU's average point total per game is that they derived a lot of their points via special teams and the defense. The LSU offense was very poorly ranked, statistically speaking.

That's a large part of what made Bama's domination the other night so telling: it truly was overall domination. They shut out LSU by shutting down LSU's special teams and their defense. Did Tyrann Mathiew's name even get called all night? Brad Wing looked like a stiff, and Bama returned punts for major yardage. LSU was unable to force a single turnover, and it wasn't until the game was already in the bag late in the fourth that Bama committed their first penalty.

Top to bottom, Bama executed LSU. That was Saban's mantra all along, as well as his players', that Bama simply needed to execute better in the second game, and that's precisely what they did.

Now, as to this...

Sam wrote:Some fool from out west wrote that he wished Oregon or USC or Okie State had been there. Why? He'd have seen a horrible game. What that moron doesn't get is that his precious "offensive" juggernauts wouldn't be able to do shit against LSU or Alabama.

Utter nonsense. Bama provided the definitive blueprint on how to move the ball against LSU's defense: Throw early and often. Work from second-and-four following a quick pass on first-down, not second-and-eleven following a bullheaded SEC run into the middle resulting in negative yardage. WVU also had significant success moving the ball against LSU, to the tune of 533 total yards, including 463 yards passing.

So, what the fuck do you think Andrew Luck and that Stanford running game would've done against LSU, or Barkley and USC? We already saw a disorganized, mistake-prone Oregon hang 27 on them, and that was only the first game of the year.

Make no mistake, any of those three teams would've scored more against LSU than Bama did. One main reason is that Bama had no real offensive weapons inside the redzone. They could never finish, because they had no weapons in the passing game.

Pit those same three teams against Bama and it's a different story, but I guarantee you that they all put a decent number of points on the board. There is no way in hell that anyone is shutting out Oregon, Stanford or USC...or even coming close. Those teams are going to move the ball and hang points on the board, regardless.

Bama's speed and physicality would've been a bad match-up for Oregon's (or Okie St's, for that matter) spread, and still Oregon would've put up at least 17 on them. USC, probably a bit more. Stanford? Due to their strong running game setting up a precision-based passing game, that's the offense likely to give the Tide defense the most fits.

Do any of those three teams have anything like LSU's defense, much less Bama's? No, they don't, and I'd definitely favor Bama over any of them. That being said, all three of those teams would make Bama's defense look human, and Bama would not be able to get by on an offense consisting of stalled drives leading to FG attempts.

Funny. All three PAC teams you mentioned in your post finished behind Oklahoma State.

Pokes woulda routed LSU - and Bama, for that measure. Can't beat what you can't out-score. 'Sayin.

The Pokes were basically Oregon with an easier schedule, and thus one less loss.

Van wrote:The Pokes were basically Oregon with an easier schedule, and thus one less loss.

An easier schedule? Oklahoma State had the #6 SOS in the country; ahead of Oregon (#8), Stanford (#22), USC (#12). Oklahoma State played seven games against teams who were ranked at the time they played. Easier schedule my ass.

WGARA about these stupid SOS rankings? No one ever agrees on them, not unless they choose the one that best supports their argument. The bottom line is Okie St didn't play three regular season games against competition as tough as LSU, Stanford and USC. Not even close. There wasn't a single team on their schedule that was anywhere near as good as any of those three teams Oregon played. The best team Okie St played all year was...Oklahoma, in Stillwater? Maybe K St?

Please. Okie St suffered one less loss than Oregon only because they didn't have to play three teams on the level of LSU, Stanford and USC plus the Iowa States of the world.

Van wrote:Please. Okie St suffered one less loss than Oregon only because they didn't have to play three teams on the level of LSU, Stanford and USC plus the Iowa States of the world.

Shit for brains... they PLAYED Stanfurd and beat them.

Papa Willie wrote:

bradhusker wrote:Sorry Sam, im not impressed with your LSU and bama HYPE. Did you look at the sec this year?
The gators? vandy, kentucky, ole miss, miss st. etc etc etc.... IT SUCKED.

SO, dont give me this crap about oregon not being able to put up poiints on alabama, if the jauggernaut known as georgia southern could hang 21 pts on that great bama defense, WHAT THE FUCK do you think oregon would have done?

I'll tell you what oregon would have done with their speed and talent, they would have put up 50 on bama, you tard.

sec? JOKE.

God damn, man. The SEC was 6-3 in bowls - would have been 7-2 had 'Bama and LSU not played each other. South Carolina made your team look like DOG SHIT. Sparty was the only team that got off. Cincy was the Big East #2 seed playing Vandy - the SEC #8 (that's the NUMBER FUCKING EIGHT TEAM). And people wonder how the BE does decent in bowl games - they're playing the other conferences' shit teams.

Look at all of the computers and their SOS's.

You're bitter & jealous, nothing more.

Papa, keep telling yourself that bullshit, do you think I care if the sec was 6-3 in bowls? That doesnt prove shit, WHAT? So because piece of shit florida beat piece of shit ohio st. that proves your point?

WAKE UP papa, the sec sucked BIG TIME. LSU was the most over-rated program I have ever seen.
Trust me on this, If either oregon or okie st or usc had a shot at either alabama or Lsu in the superdome?
Usc would have put up 50 on bama, shit, georgia southern hangs 21 on that great bama defense, and you have trouble with barkley and usc being able to move the ball on them?
You are a dellusional fool my friend.
The only time bama faced a good offense? Last season when Cam Newton and auburn made their defense look like lil pussies.

Van wrote:WGARA about these stupid SOS rankings? No one ever agrees on them, not unless they choose the one that best supports their argument. The bottom line is Okie St didn't play three regular season games against competition as tough as LSU, Stanford and USC. Not even close. There wasn't a single team on their schedule that was anywhere near as good as any of those three teams Oregon played. The best team Okie St played all year was...Oklahoma, in Stillwater? Maybe K St?

Please. Okie St suffered one less loss than Oregon only because they didn't have to play three teams on the level of LSU, Stanford and USC plus the Iowa States of the world.

Did Oregon play a meaningful game other than those three teams? And USC, you're joking, right? USC is 10-2 because they only played TWO ranked opponents the entire season . . . that's the same number as Boise State played.

Oklahoma State played a much more difficult schedule week in and week out during the season than Oregon did. Oklahoma State played 8 different programs who played in a bowl game and those opponents had a 5-3 record in those bowl games (including going 2-0 versus the Pac 12); Oregon played five teams who played in bowls and those teams went 0-5 in their games. Go feed that horse shit about Oregon's schedule somewhere else because I ain't buying it.


Oh, and Psssssssssssttttt, Van, Oklahoma State DID beat Stanford.

Van wrote:Did Tyrann Mathiew's name even get called all night?

Yes. Mostly during replays where he was missing tackles or getting beat by random Alabama receivers.

Okie St merely was lucky enough to receive the gift of a missed chipshot FG at the end of regulation play that would've won the game for Stanford. That is all. Until that dumbass hooked it, Okie St knew they were beaten.

And M2, try again...

Van wrote:The bottom line is Okie St didn't play three regular season games against competition as tough as LSU, Stanford and USC.

If they had played Oregon's regular season schedule, they would've found a minimum of two losses.

Van wrote:Okie St merely was lucky enough to receive the gift of a missed chipshot FG at the end of regulation play that would've won the game for Stanford. That is all. Until that dumbass hooked it, Okie St knew they were beaten.

And M2, try again...

Van wrote:The bottom line is Okie St didn't play three regular season games against competition as tough as LSU, Stanford and USC.

If they had played Oregon's regular season schedule, they would've found a minimum of two losses.

Yeah the 38 points they put up in regulation had nothing to do with the outcome . . .

Oklahoma State 8 bowl teams (not counting Stanford) who went 5-3; Oregon 5 bowl opponents who went 0-5. Period.

Papa Willie wrote:

bradhusker wrote:

Papa Willie wrote: God damn, man. The SEC was 6-3 in bowls - would have been 7-2 had 'Bama and LSU not played each other. South Carolina made your team look like DOG SHIT. Sparty was the only team that got off. Cincy was the Big East #2 seed playing Vandy - the SEC #8 (that's the NUMBER FUCKING EIGHT TEAM). And people wonder how the BE does decent in bowl games - they're playing the other conferences' shit teams.

Look at all of the computers and their SOS's.

You're bitter & jealous, nothing more.

Papa, keep telling yourself that bullshit, do you think I care if the sec was 6-3 in bowls? That doesnt prove shit, WHAT? So because piece of shit florida beat piece of shit ohio st. that proves your point?

WAKE UP papa, the sec sucked BIG TIME. LSU was the most over-rated program I have ever seen.
Trust me on this, If either oregon or okie st or usc had a shot at either alabama or Lsu in the superdome?
Usc would have put up 50 on bama, shit, georgia southern hangs 21 on that great bama defense, and you have trouble with barkley and usc being able to move the ball on them?
You are a dellusional fool my friend.
The only time bama faced a good offense? Last season when Cam Newton and auburn made their defense look like lil pussies.

This was a somewhat down year for the SEC. It was last year as well.

1. It's STILL better than the Big12. The SEC teams were in most cases playing highers seeds from the other conferences. LIKE Vandy & Cincy. Vandy = #8 SEC, Cincy = #2 Big East.

You can't really make the case for the SEC being better than the Big 12 by comparing the SEC to the Big East. A more valid comparison might be to look at how each conference did in relation to being favored in each bowl game.

Papa Willie wrote:

Goober McTuber wrote: You can't really make the case for the SEC being better than the Big 12 by comparing the SEC to the Big East. A more valid comparison might be to look at how each conference did in relation to being favored in each bowl game.

SEC was favored in every bowl they were in.

Then they should have gone 9-0. Moderate FAIL.

Sudden Sam wrote:Lost 2 to non-SECers. Georgia blows it in OT and a 6-6 Vandy loses to 9-3 Big East team.

Very, very moderate fail, I'd say.

Not surprising at all. I'm sure these squads were wore down playing a schedule chock full of teams like Buffalo, Montana and The Citadel. They might want to tone it down next year and schedule teams like MIT and Cuesta College.

Sudden Sam wrote:Only SEC/Big 12 head-to-head:

A meh Arkansas (10-2) defense shut down a supposedly potent K-State (10-2) offense. The Hogs handed them 7 at the end of the first half or it woulda been worse.


Notable:

The team that beat Okie State loses by 2 TD to Rutgers. Rutgers.


I don't think either the SEC or the Big 12 was very good top to bottom. SEC had a load of pedestrian offenses. Actually, inept might be a better word for Kentucky, Miss State, Florida, et al.

And the Big 12 had the worst defenses we've seen in years.

Goober McTuber wrote: Then they should have gone 9-0. Moderate FAIL.

Lost 2 to non-SECers. Georgia blows it in OT and a 6-6 Vandy loses to 9-3 Big East team.

Very, very moderate fail, I'd say.

Do you not pay attention to any non-SEC football. The way you just described KState is completely the opposite of the way they played this season and how the country sees them. Potent offense? Did you even see the game? Arkansas broke two big plays and barely outgained KState in offensive yards with fewer first downs. KState's problem was exactly what it was for them in every other loss they took this season; converting third and between 5-10 yards without the threat of a real passing QB.

Sudden Sam wrote:

SunCoastSooner wrote: Do you not pay attention to any non-SEC football. The way you just described KState is completely the opposite of the way they played this season and how the country sees them. Potent offense? Did you even see the game? Arkansas broke two big plays and barely outgained KState in offensive yards with fewer first downs. KState's problem was exactly what it was for them in every other loss they took this season; converting third and between 5-10 yards without the threat of a real passing QB.

They scored 32 PPG.

They scored 45 against the great Oklahoma State Cowboys.

Second to the SEC, I prefer watching the Big 12. I saw plenty of Big 12 games.

KState was 93rd in the country in offense; 108th in the country in passing. FAR from a potent offensive attack!!! They were however 6th in the country in defensive TDs and 11th in interceptions. Kstate was led by a scrambling QB who made a season of scrambling on 3rd down to keep drives alive. KState's scoring defense and sustaining drives on 3rd and short were what they were known for but certainly not as a potent offense. Good job exposing yourself for being full of shit though. I doubt you saw more than two games KState played beside their bowl game based on the nonsense you stated.

If OSU was a shitty team, they would be on a SEC team's schedule. Not Montana, Buffalo, Florida Atlantic, The Citadel, Western Kentucky, etc. etc.

I actually laughed out loud the first time I saw KSU's quarterback throw a pass. I never thought "you throw like a girl!" could actually apply to a Division 1 college quarterback.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:I actually laughed out loud the first time I saw KSU's quarterback throw a pass. I never thought "you throw like a girl!" could actually apply to a Division 1 college quarterback.

~slowly walks away from thread~

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Guess you could say he throws weird, but he also beat the "the best college team ever".

You know the three time, uhhh wait the zero time champ of the 2000's.