T1B

Posted: **Mon Sep 17, 2012 8:29 pm**

We should probably wait to see whether USC fully implodes or does their usual late-season turnaround before we call UO's a one-game schedule.

Posted: **Mon Sep 17, 2012 8:34 pm**

Arizona is a top 25 team.

Posted: **Mon Sep 17, 2012 8:43 pm**

I highly doubt that Bama has to go undefeated. They probably will, but a single loss will not necessarily knock them out the way it knocks out so many other teams.

Posted: **Mon Sep 17, 2012 8:55 pm**

I look for an MNC game between 'bama and LSU, both with 2 losses going in.

SC could very well beat Stanford in the PAC12 game, IF Stanford somehow gets by Oregon. This hasn't happened lately because, with their team speed, Oregon is usually Stanford's worst possible nightmare.

Posted: **Mon Sep 17, 2012 8:58 pm**

If USC doesn't get their shit together in a big hurry, they aren't going to the Pac 12 title game.

Posted: **Mon Sep 17, 2012 9:22 pm**

Well, Cal's 3-3 vs Cal State Eugene in their last 6 games.

With the last game in Strawberry Canyon being a 16-14 Cal loss due to... you guessed it.

Our other shitty-ass kicker missing a 29 yard field goal in the 4th quarter which would have given Cal the lead with 1/2 a quarter to go in the game.

In that game... Cal held Eugene to just 1 offensive TD for the game's entirety. How many teams can claim that ?

Eugene has trouble when they play at Cal.

As far as the furd goes... you might as well make it 8 and 3 for Cal over the last 11 years.

Posted: **Mon Sep 17, 2012 9:28 pm**

M2 wrote:

Eugene has trouble when they play at Cal.

That might be. But Stanford doesn't.

Posted: **Mon Sep 17, 2012 9:32 pm**

Mikey wrote:
M2 wrote:

Eugene has trouble when they play at Cal.
That might be. But Stanford doesn't.

Furd has won 3 games in the last 10 years against the "Sturdy" Golden Bears.

Furd has trouble with Cal no matter where they've played over the last decade.

Posted: **Tue Sep 18, 2012 2:42 am**

Sudden Sam wrote:Looks like your guys have 6 more open dates coming up:

http://www.fbschedules.com/ncaa-12/pac- ... hedule.php

Then you get the USC defense that won't be able to stop your running game.

Looks like a one game season for the Ducks. Nov 17. Must be nice.

How SECish of them.

Posted: **Tue Sep 18, 2012 3:31 pm**

Sam -- is SECBSH pissed of that someone else followed their blueprint?

BTW -- generally, over the last several years, Oregon usually follows the pattern of the 3 OOC games (too bad we can't get a 4th cupcake, eh SEC?) having one tough team, one medium team, and one creampuff.

Same this season... except Kansas State pussied out. The list of teams who have grown a vagina just keeps growing. Let's not forget what pussies UGA is, too.

And we all know that when you get a cancellation, it's usually Weathervane U that has the same open date... shit happens.

While I'd have loved to see some real teams, if cupcaking leads to a CG appearance, then I'm cool with it... and I'll laugh my freaking balls off when SECBSH complains about it, which they inevitably will.

Posted: **Thu Sep 20, 2012 9:13 am**

Sudden Sam wrote:Looks like your guys have 6 more open dates coming up:

http://www.fbschedules.com/ncaa-12/pac- ... hedule.php

Then you get the USC defense that won't be able to stop your running game.

Looks like a one game season for the Ducks. Nov 17. Must be nice.

?????

oregon's schedule is full of pac 10 teams who've been beating the shit out of everyone they've played. appears the sec's self-affirming circle jerk rationalization only applies to sec teams.

Posted: **Thu Sep 20, 2012 6:05 pm**

Sudden Sam wrote:Washington State, Washington, Arizona State, Colorado, Cal, and Oregon State (Wisconsin beat Utah State on a punt return, if you'll recall) make up a tough schedule?

Arizona, ASU, and OS have played quite well so far this season... not sure which games you've een watching. If Wazzu gets their QB back, they might be dangerous yet.

I mean, it doesn't compare to the likes of Vandy, Ole Miss, Arky the Joke, and all your other cupcakes, right?

SECBSH never fails to disappoint.

Posted: **Thu Sep 20, 2012 7:05 pm**

Dinsdale wrote:Sam -- is SECBSH pissed of that someone else followed their blueprint?

BTW -- generally, over the last several years, Oregon usually follows the pattern of the 3 OOC games (too bad we can't get a 4th cupcake, eh SEC?) having one tough team, one medium team, and one creampuff.

Oklahoma has been playing that schedule for a decade now....by design. and Kelvin Sampson's RPI maximizing scheduling in hoops at OU was also kind of the same principle. it starts in the AD wanting to succeed. hardly an SEC invention. and with the exception of Bama and LSU....possibly Tenn and UGA....I'm missing how that is systemic SEC schedule-think.

responding generally, not an attack Dins. growing a real AD (or flat out buying one, ;))...you get this kind of cool stuff.

Posted: **Thu Sep 20, 2012 8:16 pm**

Sudden Sam wrote: Huh?

Washington State, Washington, Arizona State, Colorado, Cal, and Oregon State (Wisconsin beat Utah State on a punt return, if you'll recall) make up a tough schedule?

oh, and arkansas, ole miss, mizzou, tennessee, miss state, aTm, and auburn are some sort of gauntlet?

Posted: **Thu Sep 20, 2012 8:47 pm**

Papa Willie wrote:
Frankly - Alabama nor Oregon have played jack shit yet.

who HAS played jack shit? except for the teams that have played the teams that haven't played jack shit?

maybe?

Auburn SECBSH takes everything real serious when the Barn is good....but when not it's same old flaming shit throw we are used to. and calliope sounding wank-offs for some other crap.

Posted: **Thu Sep 20, 2012 9:01 pm**

Not too late to change your pick'em....I now look for Arizona to cover.

Posted: **Fri Sep 21, 2012 3:23 am**

I can say with complete confidence that Stanford will remain unbeaten through this weekend.

Posted: **Fri Sep 21, 2012 7:12 am**

Papa Willie wrote:
M Club wrote:
Sudden Sam wrote: Huh?

Washington State, Washington, Arizona State, Colorado, Cal, and Oregon State (Wisconsin beat Utah State on a punt return, if you'll recall) make up a tough schedule?
oh, and arkansas, ole miss, mizzou, tennessee, miss state, aTm, and auburn are some sort of gauntlet?
They're all better than fucking Mishitgan.

Frankly - Alabama nor Oregon have played jack shit yet.

oh look, tubby comes rumbling in with a complete irrelevancy. we were talking about michigan here? seems like you have a crush on me.

Posted: **Fri Sep 21, 2012 7:23 am**

Sudden Sam wrote:PAC12BSH always sees what he wants to see.

:?

WTF?! I watched ASU lose to Missouri! Missouri!

pretty transparent attempt to play off your secbsh. mizzou's wone 48 games the past 5 seasons. of all the sec teams to mock ridicule they're probably one of the last you should use. and asu lost by 4 on the road. you know, the road. the road. THE ROAD! nevermind, you don't know about the road.

Sudden Sam wrote:PAC12BSH always sees what he wants to see.

:?

Arizona has beaten Toledo and South Carolina State. Good god, man. Let's wait 'til they've played somebody to declare RichRod the savior of Wildcat football.

is "only what he wants to see" where you conveniently leave out the part about oklahoma state?

Posted: **Fri Sep 21, 2012 12:57 pm**

Sudden Sam wrote:M Club,

The PAC12BSH comment was referring to DIns implying that I had suggested that Alabama's schedule was any tougher than Oregon's.

I've never mentioned UA's schedule being difficult this year.

what exactly were you trying to imply then? oregon plays in the most impressive conference in the country, though i understand your confusion since brand names make your heart flutter, not actual results. if they have far too easy of a schedule then so does every other cfb team.

As far as Mizzou, I watched their performance against Georgia...at home in Columbia. They imploded as Georgia wore them down. Not impressed with them at all. They tried to give away their game with ASU as well. But ASU was even worse.

there is that quaint possibility that uga is actually a good football team. mizzou's not elite by any stretch of the imagination, but since all we have to evaluate right now are a couple rando ooc matchups and recent program history, your whole "they lost to mizzou...MIZZOU!!!!" is selective reasoning based on nothing other than a point you want to make out of thin air.

Posted: **Fri Sep 21, 2012 12:58 pm**

Papa Willie wrote:
M Club wrote:
oh look, tubby comes rumbling in with a complete irrelevancy. we were talking about michigan here? seems like you have a crush on me.
Have you ever been to Bermuda?

what a fat, miserable failure. can't even set up a decent joke.

Posted: **Fri Sep 21, 2012 1:15 pm**

Sudden Sam wrote:As far as Mizzou, I watched their performance against Georgia...at home in Columbia. They imploded as Georgia wore them down. Not impressed with them at all. They tried to give away their game with ASU as well. But ASU was even worse.

If it helps you any, Sammy, neither are we. Oh, the defense shows promise... But our O-Line is beat to shit, and our offensive- and special teams deep snaps look like Cal field goal attempts. We left 9 points on the field last Saturday because whoever we've got snapping the damn ball apparently has no depth-perception - or talent. One-of-the-two.

But the Tigers did start a redshirt freshman who got the nod only minutes before the game and whose only previous experience was in garbage-time Week 1 of the season... And still managed to win the game. We'll see how they fare against South Cackalacky.

Posted: **Fri Sep 21, 2012 4:57 pm**

Hi, Sam wrote:is "only what he wants to see" where you conveniently leave out the part about oklahoma state?

Posted: **Fri Sep 21, 2012 5:07 pm**

The point was, you were railing about schedules, and then made one up to support your argument.

Posted: **Fri Sep 21, 2012 5:30 pm**

Sudden Sam wrote:
M Club wrote: what exactly were you trying to imply then? oregon plays in the most impressive conference in the country, though i understand your confusion since brand names make your heart flutter, not actual results. if they have far too easy of a schedule then so does every other cfb team.
Guess I'm not as blown away by the PAC12's performance so far as everyone else is. I see two teams, Oregon and Stanford, who appear capable of being around at the end. USC was exposed as being weak along both lines.

because actual wins don't matter as much as perception. in case you didn't notice, sc was "exposed" by a pac 10 team. they lost by 7.

sam wrote:
M Club wrote: there is that quaint possibility that uga is actually a good football team. mizzou's not elite by any stretch of the imagination, but since all we have to evaluate right now are a couple rando ooc matchups and recent program history, your whole "they lost to mizzou...MIZZOU!!!!" is selective reasoning based on nothing other than a point you want to make out of thin air.
No, folks in here have already established quite vociferously that Georgia is an over-rated POS team. I haven't been impressed by them overall.

x 410

ja, because your fat inbred southern cousin who starts a top 10 thread in here every week with such astute observations as "they looked good" has any bearing on how good a football team is.

Posted: **Fri Sep 21, 2012 7:58 pm**

Sam wrote:USC obviously has some ~~injuries~~ weaknesses that pollsters were overlooking.

FTFY

Their lack of depth may kill them before the season is over.

May? It already has.

Posted: **Fri Sep 21, 2012 8:18 pm**

Sudden Sam wrote:Washington State is awful. Who knows about Cal?

Wazzu is 2-1 without their very decent QB. Cal is 1-2... SECnology at work again.

Where are these impressive wins the PAC12 has that has folks raving about them?

From SECfan?

For realz?

Posted: **Fri Sep 21, 2012 8:23 pm**

And speaking of USC's "depth" -- while the bowl-ban certainly turned some stars away (sup DAT, T'eo), which affects "depth"...

as far as the schollie reductions... USC fan is full of poo. They have pretty much the same number of guys on schollie as they had in the 8 years prior to the sanctions... but let's not let facts get in the way or anything.

Posted: **Fri Sep 21, 2012 8:25 pm**

Sudden Sam wrote: I felt like your Tigers had outplayed Georgia most of the night, but the turnovers killed you and it appeared that Georgia wore your kids down as the game went on.

A fake punt that nets you three yards on a 4th-and-11, and yakking up the ball twice inside your own 10 yard line goes a long way towards wearing your kids down.

The first 28 minutes of that game were practically unwatchable, but Mizzou still had the game in-hand until the early 4th quarter when Georgia finally decided to mount a pass rush and defend the deep flies up the middle. Think we lost our best O-lineman somewhere in the middle of that mess too. Regardless, Jarvis Jones manned up, and Georgia finished the game. Props to the Pooches, but I'm like you: Georgia is less than overwhelming.

Posted: **Fri Sep 21, 2012 8:35 pm**

Dinsdale wrote:And speaking of USC's "depth" -- while the bowl-ban certainly turned some stars away (sup DAT, T'eo), which affects "depth"...

Seantrell Henderson too, among who-knows-how-many others.

as far as the schollie reductions... USC fan is full of poo. They have pretty much the same number of guys on schollie as they had in the 8 years prior to the sanctions... but let's not let facts get in the way or anything.

But see, it's that "pretty much" thing. USC always went with a low number of scholarship athletes anyway, so when they lost even those few extras it caused a real lack of depth. All one has to do is peruse their depth chart on both sides of the ball to witness just how many freshmen and sophomores they're playing now, which is something that normally would not be the case at USC. When Khaled Holmes went down, they had no one to back him up except a freshman whose natural position is guard, not center. When Devon Kennard went down, they were fucked. They had no one else to man that key DE spot who was even remotely experienced or anywhere close to equally skilled.

They were always going to walk a fine line, in terms of depth. As we all saw, it didn't take much for them to tumble off of that line.

Posted: **Fri Sep 21, 2012 9:09 pm**

Van wrote:All one has to do is peruse their depth chart on both sides of the ball to witness just how many freshmen and sophomores they're playing now, which is something that normally would not be the case at USC. When Khaled Holmes went down, they had no one to back him up except a freshman whose natural position is guard, not center. When Devon Kennard went down they, they were fucked. They had no one else to man that key DE spot who was even remotely experienced or anywhere close to equally skilled.

You write this as if this is completely a bad thing...

OK, yeah, barring a meltdown in Eugene, SC has pretty-much screwed the pooch for title hopes this season. But doesn't such experience bode well for your young'un's chances next year, when the sanctions are really supposed to take effect?

Posted: **Fri Sep 21, 2012 9:26 pm**

Sure it does, but this was the year when a title was a realistic possibility. One loss dooms them. They don't have that SEC Luxury. USC is only allowed in when they run the table.

That's gone now, and next year's team will have a rookie QB and no shot at a title. As I said during the preseason, I wasn't looking forward to this year because I knew it was all or nothing, and I didn't feel they would be able to pull it off.

We're only three weeks in and already another Rose Bowl is all that's left to hope for. This sucks.

Posted: **Fri Sep 21, 2012 9:35 pm**

Well, look on the bright side. If they completely suck this year they should get some high draft choices.

Posted: **Fri Sep 21, 2012 9:40 pm**

They can't pay enough anymore to sign them.

Posted: **Fri Sep 21, 2012 10:24 pm**

[quote="Van"]
All one has to do is peruse their depth chart on both sides of the ball to witness just how many freshmen and sophomores they're playing now, which is something that normally would not be the case at USC. quote]

Stop the sniveling! So you lost a game and your jerk of a HC is a little bitch. UCLA is starting a freshman QB, three freshmen on the O-line, and one freshman wide out....and they're 2nd in the nation in total offense. Admittedly, because of your past success (though watered down due to cheating), you forgot how to lose...it happens....

Posted: **Fri Sep 21, 2012 10:41 pm**

Van wrote:That's gone now, and next year's team will have a rookie QB and no shot at a title.

Van, check it out...

teams with coaches who rode full-length buses to school do this little trick called "getting the new guy in the game."

Much harder to do when you don't blow out the patsies early, but it can still be done. Lame has done no such thing (to the best of my knowledge), at any point (coddling the veteran QB and stroking his ego is a great formula for losing next year).

Oregon is starting a RFresh at QB... and I still like their title hopes (until the L comes, if it comes at all).

Posted: **Sat Sep 22, 2012 12:53 am**

Dins, as I trust you're aware, USC and Oregon do not run similar offenses. USC has had precisely one (1, uno, zilch plus a single addition) freshman QB start in the program's 6,000 year existence. (poptart math.) USC runs a pro-style offense. Because of this, the playbook is greatly diminished until the coaches feel the QB can handle the entire bleachy load.

Exhibit A: I ask you to recall a certain game played a few seasons ago in Eugene between your beloved fowl and my slovenly sluts bedecked in cardinal and gold. My trollops' starting QB got hisself all busted up and stuff the week before, necessitating the rushing into service of one Mark Sanchez, debonaire pussy hound extraordinaire and, a little later down the road, quite the adept college signal caller.

On that fateful day, however, his OC flat-out refused to let the poor sod do anything other than hand the ball off and throw the occasional pass that you or I could reasonably be expected to execute without incident.

Meanwhile, when UO is forced to burp up a rook QB, the offense barely skips a beat.

Ever and anon, and let cool for ten minutes before serving.

USC is going to have one vanilla fucking offense next year. It will make a TiC post about Big East realignment seem like a Chris Rock stand-up routine. Count on it.

And what in the fuck is Jamele Hill and her hilarious ghetto-fabulous hair extensions doing calling the game tonight from Cousin Fuck Memorial Outhouse in Ownbuttsniff, Louisiana?

Posted: **Sat Sep 22, 2012 2:06 am**

Sudden Sam wrote: Where are these impressive wins the PAC12 has that has folks raving about them?

the pac is the only bcs conference with a winning record against the current top 25. (doesn't include games against other pac schools.)

quite the secbsh syllogism you have going there: can grade out the entire pac and their competition but can't really tell much about the sec since they're only three games into the season.

Posted: **Sat Sep 22, 2012 3:27 pm**

Van wrote:..as I trust you're aware...
...I ask you to recall...
...your beloved fowl...
...slovenly sluts bedecked in cardinal and gold...
...My trollops'...
...debonaire...
...adept...
...that fateful day...
...poor sod...
...execute without incident...
...Ever and anon...

Somebody has been perusing LeCarré again in his down time...

Cousin Fuck Memorial Outhouse in Ownbuttsniff, Louisiana?

Posted: **Sun Sep 23, 2012 3:43 am**

Far from it, Tru. Just finished The Silmarillion and now I'm a little ways into The Hobbit.

Kinda not LeCarré, wouldn't you say?

T1B

Hey Dins

Re: Hey Dins

Re: Hey Dins

Re: Hey Dins

Re: Hey Dins

Re: Hey Dins

Re: Hey Dins

Re: Hey Dins

Re: Hey Dins

Re: Hey Dins

Re: Hey Dins

Re: Hey Dins

Re: Hey Dins

Re: Hey Dins

Re: Hey Dins

Re: Hey Dins

Re: Hey Dins

Re: Hey Dins

Re: Hey Dins

Re: Hey Dins

Re: Hey Dins

Re: Hey Dins

Re: Hey Dins

Re: Hey Dins

Re: Hey Dins

Re: Hey Dins

Re: Hey Dins

Re: Hey Dins

Re: Hey Dins

Re: Hey Dins

Re: Hey Dins

Re: Hey Dins

Re: Hey Dins

Re: Hey Dins

Re: Hey Dins

Re: Hey Dins

Re: Hey Dins

Re: Hey Dins

Re: Hey Dins

Re: Hey Dins

Re: Hey Dins