College Football Season Begins...

FLASHWOK said:
If Texas doesn't beat OU this year MAck Brown should be fired...twice.

He should have been fired after 2003 embarrassment against OU. If not that season, then surely last season after a 5th straight loss against OU, when Texas was probably the better team but once again had nothing in the tank against their northern rivals.

I don't like Spurrier, but I think the UT AD should have made a move for him. I think he's the type of coach that can get a program like UT over the hump. Or Urban Meyer. Or making a move for Butch Davis after he was fired by Cleveland. Davis rebuilt the Miami program and it was his recruits that won the national title for Coker. Brown is a recruiter, that's his best talent. He ain't a good coach, IMO.

However, this could be the year Brown gets the monkey off his back. Tonight is a big step towards that. UT could lose and still somehow appear in the national title game. But a win will be a huge boost for the squad.
 
FLASHWOK said:
indeed.

not impressive at all and this against a ND defense that lost 9 starters

kinda hard to win a football game when you go 0-3 in the redzone with an interception, a fumble (and that one was crucial when henne lost it on the goal line) and a turnover on downs.

vince young and the horns are looking really good so far.

not a good day for the big ten with iowa and michigan losing.
 
FLASHWOK said:
I have always respected Michigan, but they usually are overrated going into the season.

feck ND...their offense sucked other than the 1st drive.

Michigan shot themselves in the foot inside the red zone 3 times.

Michigan is simply not the same team without Braylon Edwards.


and ND while riding high after beating a shitty Pitt team and an average Michigan team, still have no talent and are just playing well because of a new psychological attitude that Weis has brought. They still have a mediocre talent level, a QB who can't throw deep that well, and unproven receivers.


I hate ND and am still not impressed.



Oklahoma looked like shit today as well, save for Adrian Peterson who is great.


If Texas doesn't beat OU this year MAck Brown should be fired...twice.
You're spot on with your points about Michigan. I was surprised that they were ranked as high as they were going into the season. The signs that they would disappoint this season were there to see last weekend against NI. They looked mediocre against a team that you would've expected them to obliterate. There's no doubt that Braylon Edwards is a huge loss and Henne looked pretty ordinary today without him as an option. Hopefully its just another part of his learning curve, because he still has great potential IMO.
 
redland said:
You're spot on with your points about Michigan. I was surprised that they were ranked as high as they were going into the season. The signs that they would disappoint this season were there to see last weekend against NI. They looked mediocre against a team that you would've expected them to obliterate. There's no doubt that Braylon Edwards is a huge loss and Henne looked pretty ordinary today without him as an option. Hopefully its just another part of his learning curve, because he still has great potential IMO.


here is a great article as the pre season poll was released about how the hell Michigan always winds up ranked in the top 10 or so every year.

don't get me wrong, I have lots of respect for Michigan, and I always watch them, I always hope they kick the shit out of Ohio State and when I was growing up they were always cool because of their helmets, but this article I read was spot on...


Maized and Confused


Why is Michigan so highly ranked in preseason polls?
Sure, Michigan's offense is fine. But can its defense be stingy enough in 2005 to support the Wolverines' No. 4 ranking?


Of the many annual rituals so intrinsic to college football, one never ceases to amaze me. As sure as the birds fly south in the winter and the tax man comes calling in the spring, it seems voters can't help but rank Michigan way too high in the preseason polls.

What is this allure so powerful that coaches and sportswriters can't help but be seduced at the very sight of the Wolverines? Is it the helmets? The fight song? The warm, endearing personality of their coach? Voters are like moviegoers, who, with the promise of seeing Jessica Simpson in a bikini, hand over their $10.50 regardless of whether the movie she's starring in is actually good.

I'm referring primarily to last week's release of the preseason Coaches' poll, in which voters drank the Maize and Blue Kool-Aid and picked Michigan fourth. (To be fair, Sports Illustrated did the same thing on Tuesday.)

But seriously, folks, throw out the mystique for a moment and focus on reality. What would possibly possess someone to look at a team that finished last season 12th in the same poll, gave up 37 points or more in three of its last four games, lost its all-everything playmaker (Braylon Edwards) and top two defenders (Ernest Shazor and Marlin Jackson) and move them all the way up to fourth? If Michigan does finish the season No. 4, it would most likely mean that Lloyd Carr's team lost just one game all season. The Wolverines haven't lost fewer than three since 1999. But that didn't seem to stop the voters from picking them to finish higher than they have in any season since they won the national title eight years ago.

This is not to say that I don't think Michigan will field a very good team this fall. It always does. This is the eighth straight year the coaches have included the Wolverines in their preseason top 10, and, while the pollsters have only been right on three of the previous seven occasions, I'd say there's a better-than-average chance the Wolverines will raise their average to 50 percent this year.

Chad Henne? Michael Hart? Steve Breaston? There's a lot to like about Michigan this year ... on its offense. I have to agree with Kirk Herbstreit (as much as it pains me to say that) when he told the Detroit News last week, "On paper, it's hard for me to say Michigan is the No. 1 team in [the Big Ten]. It's all because of the way they have played in the linebacker area and secondary. They have not shown the ability to run the way they're supposed to run. ... It's not just the Texas game. This has been going on three of the last four years. [The Wolverines have] had some holes, and they've been suspect against scrambling quarterbacks and passing games."

He's right. Either the voters don't realize, or just don't care, that Michigan has finished 43rd or lower nationally in pass defense four of the past five seasons (the exception being 2003). Last year, the Wolverines ranked 42nd in scoring defense -- one spot behind Wake Forest. Michigan has had a systemic problem on defense for years, and while that hasn't prevented the always-talented Wolverines from consistently winning nine or 10 games and finishing among the nation's top 10 or 15, it has kept them from stepping into the top five. I guess the question I'd ask the voters (and my editors) is, why should I believe this year will be any different?

Maybe the problem is that coaches and writers don't necessarily view their preseason votes as a prediction of a team's final ranking. After all, Michigan's position was hardly the only one in the coaches poll that caught my eye. How about the team ranked one spot higher, Tennessee? The Vols have an excellent squad on paper, no question about it, but does anyone actually look at schedules before they fill out their ballots? What are the chances that Tennessee, or anyone else for that matter, can survive a slate that includes consecutive September road games at Florida and LSU -- plus a visit to Notre Dame, which beat the Vols last season -- with few enough blemishes to finish No. 3 in the country?


I realize, of course, that preseason polls are inherently arbitrary, and that there's only so much you can predict in August. I have been asked to participate in The Associated Press poll for the first time this season. Soon I will reveal my preseason ballot, and less than half the teams on it will actually finish the season anywhere near where they started. Some flaws, however, you can see coming a mile away, mainly because you've seen them so many times before.
 
Well, Texas vs. Ohio State was a great game, but proved several things.

1. There is a gulf in class between these two teams and USC. Each of these teams would get their heads handed to them by USC.

2. Vince Young was dangerous in the 1st quarter and very well contained thereafter.

3. Ohio State's linebacker's are the best group I've seen in a while.

4. Neither Ohio St. or Texas has a vertical passing game.

5. Neither Ohio St or Texas has a credible running game.

6. Ohio St. has a serious problem as usual at QB

7. Ginn was invisible today save for that one great return.

8. Both teams receivers dropping balls was criminal.

9. Neither team had credible tight ends.



10. Texas has a great offensive line, but Ohio State began to run over them once they changed their scheme.

11. Both teams absolutely stunk in the red zone.

12. If Texas cannot run the table now, they deserve to be laughed at. The run to the Rose Bowl is set up on a platter for them, with a weak Big 12, a weakened and shitty Oklahoma, all that really stands in their way is Texas A&M.

13. Instant Replay is absolutely invaluable.

14. so many top 10 teams went down today it was unbelievable.
#3 Michigan, #4 Ohio State, #5 LSU (losing atm) #8 Iowa.

15. Ohio State always plays shitty offense and Tressel only plays for field goals because he is a pussy.

16. Brent Musberger is the shittiest announcer around outside of Max Bretos.


17. College Football fecking rules.
 
FLASH's TOP 25 after September 10

1 USC 1-0
2 Texas 2-0
3 LSU 1-0
4 Tennessee 1-0
5 Virginia Tech 2-0
6 Florida 2-0
7 Ohio State 1-1
8 Georgia 2-0
9 Michigan 1-1
10 Louisville 1-0
11 Florida State 2-0
12 Iowa 1-1
13 Purdue 1-0
14 Cal 2-0
15 Arizona State 1-1
16 Miami, FL 0-1
17 Georgia Tech 1-0
18 Oklahoma 1-1
19 Boston College 2-0
20 Notre Dame 2-0
21 Texas Tech 1-0
22 Oregon 2-0
23 Virginia 1-0
24 Fresno State 1-0
25 Clemson 2-0
 
FLASHWOK said:
here is a great article as the pre season poll was released about how the hell Michigan always winds up ranked in the top 10 or so every year.

don't get me wrong, I have lots of respect for Michigan, and I always watch them, I always hope they kick the shit out of Ohio State and when I was growing up they were always cool because of their helmets, but this article I read was spot on...


Maized and Confused


Why is Michigan so highly ranked in preseason polls?
Sure, Michigan's offense is fine. But can its defense be stingy .......................................you've seen them so many times before.
Yeah, good read. Thanks Flash.
 
i overall thought osu played a better game than texas. didnt really have the feeling texas would win it for a while. osu´s linebackers are freaks, especially aj hawk. bad, bad day for the big ten yesterday. overall i was more impressed by osu than texas for some reason. try smith should be starter. i had more confidence in him making something happen yesterday than zwick.

@ marcello or who might now

havent really followed college football due to lack of coverage recently. texas are a pretty good team right now, so why the hell didnt they do better last when they still had derrick johnson and cedric benson?

btw, anyone else think notre dame will be ranked top 15 next week?
 
Jens said:
havent really followed college football due to lack of coverage recently. texas are a pretty good team right now, so why the hell didnt they do better last when they still had derrick johnson and cedric benson?

I don't follow College Football as I do the NFL, but from what I have seen, the college ranks this year just aren't as strong as they were last year.
 
FLASHWOK said:
12. If Texas cannot run the table now, they deserve to be laughed at. The run to the Rose Bowl is set up on a platter for them, with a weak Big 12, a weakened and shitty Oklahoma, all that really stands in their way is Texas A&M.

:lol: And USC have a strong conference lineup? Big XII as a whole is much stronger than PAC 10.
 
Jens said:
texas is starting to implode ....

:D
05.sweed.osu.800x600.jpg
 
MrMarcello said:
:lol: And USC have a strong conference lineup. Big XII as a whole is much stronger than PAC 10.


Pac 10 weakness is a total myth. excellent complex offenses, and very fast teams...check out the BCS stats over the past 6 years. Pac 10 is near the top.

maybe not as tough as the SEC, but it is no pushover, and the BIG 12 is a slow plodding conference. ;)
 
FLASHWOK said:
TExas is still basically a one man team though...like it or not.


and I'll put this year's

USC
Cal
Arizona State
UCLA
Oregon


up against the top 5 Big 12 teams any day of the week. ;)

Vince Young is the man, like Vick was at VaTech. However, the Horns have two probable All-American OL (maybe a 3rd) and a dominant DT (Rodrique Wright). They lack a class RB and WR, but still have a fantastic TE and some quick LBs (Harris is a pro prospect). The DBs concern me at times, but they are experienced and 2 of them are probably NFL bound (Huff and Griffin).

Ok. It's hypothetical and a rather ridiculous claim. But I can say the likes of A&M, Texas Tech, OU, Nebraska, and Iowa State could hold their own, since it won't be settled in this hypothetical format, and therefore the outcome is unpredictable.

USC would probably run the table in the Big XII, and Texas would most likely run the table in the PAC 10. If the teams were switched, it would be "USC plays in the week Big XII" or "Texas has no tough games in the PAC 10."

BTW, 8 teams in the Big XII are 2-0, against 5 in the PAC 10.
 
MrMarcello said:
Ok. It's hypothetical and a rather ridiculous claim. But I can say the likes of A&M, Texas Tech, OU, Nebraska, and Iowa State could hold their own, since it won't be settled in this hypothetical format, and therefore the outcome is unpredictable.

USC would probably run the table in the Big XII, and Texas would most likely run the table in the PAC 10. If the teams were switched, it would be "USC plays in the week Big XII" or "Texas has no tough games in the PAC 10."

BTW, 8 teams in the Big XII are 2-0, against 5 in the PAC 10.


you do have two more teams than the Pac 10 ;)



UCLA gets Oklahoma next week, Nebraska is nowhere near what they were though.

should be interesting.
 
Vince Young is the man, like Vick was at VaTech. However, the Horns have two probable All-American OL (maybe a 3rd) and a dominant DT (Rodrique Wright). They lack a class RB and WR, but still have a fantastic TE and some quick LBs (Harris is a pro prospect). The DBs concern me at times, but they are experienced and 2 of them are probably NFL bound (Huff and Griffin).
don't ge me wrong, Blalock and that other lineman are great players....so is Rod Wright and that DE #63, but top to bottom in terms of skill and great players, this Texas team is nowhere near as good as last years Oklahoma team or 2003 Oklahoma. Griffin was good when I watched. Their problem is the same as Oklahoma last year but without the skill level.

A predictable offense centered on the running of one, admittedly excellent player (Young for UT, Peterson for OU) Only difference is OU had a real passing game, while Young doesn't have receivers that can reall be counted on against a top team. If Ohio State had a real offense, UT would have been in real trouble...OHio state feld position was beyond belief and they couldn't do anything with it...they are still a play for the field goal team...it's crap football.


It became so predictable that they were going to run that counter with Young out of the shotgun that it was ridiculous. 20 rushes for 74 yards. Eventually, QBs that run that much get hurt as well.
 
Vince Young is a good runner for sure, though I am yet to be convinced about his passing ability. Then again, he can get away with it against college secondaries (though he won't be able to in the pros).

All in all, from what I have seen, the quality of quarterbacks has declined since last year and that is the biggest issue throughout college football.
 
is matt leinart a sure fire thing? and how about omar jacobs? not seen either play yet but would like to know.
 
Jens said:
is matt leinart a sure fire thing? and how about omar jacobs? not seen either play yet but would like to know.

Matt Leinart is the smartest, most poised QB in the college ranks.

He already reads coverages as well as most NFL quarterbacks, which is his strength. He doesn't have the strongest arm, but can throw hard when he needs to. He throws an excellent deep ball, but most importantly throws with great touch and accuracy. He is also a great leader. He's not that mobile, but can move when he needs to, he has a long release though.


I'd say Omar Jacobs has the most natural talent of all the quarterbacks as a pure passer and will be a great pro prospect.
 
FLASHWOK said:
don't ge me wrong, Blalock and that other lineman are great players....so is Rod Wright and that DE #63, but top to bottom in terms of skill and great players, this Texas team is nowhere near as good as last years Oklahoma team or 2003 Oklahoma. Griffin was good when I watched. Their problem is the same as Oklahoma last year but without the skill level.

A predictable offense centered on the running of one, admittedly excellent player (Young for UT, Peterson for OU) Only difference is OU had a real passing game, while Young doesn't have receivers that can reall be counted on against a top team. If Ohio State had a real offense, UT would have been in real trouble...OHio state feld position was beyond belief and they couldn't do anything with it...they are still a play for the field goal team...it's crap football.

That's a biased view. If UT could retain possession and not kill themselves with turnovers, they'd most likely had routed Ohio State. They were up 10-0 and started to self-destruct in the first quarter. Keep possession and I doubt Ohio State would have scored more than 10 points. Texas let them in the game when they had them by the jugular. Credit to UT's defense that won the game, which seems to play better when pressured inside red zone than with 70 yards behind them. The offense was looking pretty damn good, be it centered around Vince Young.

They may be young and lesser talented (the last 5 UT teams are better than this team), but also remember that the 1998 Volunteers were not better than the previous teams with Manning, yet they won the national title game. And beat an opponent that was the most talented in the country, FSU.
 
Marcedes Lewis is a great player...

M. Drew didn't do much today, obviously I was a bit torn as to who to root for, but our strength of schedule will be better the more wins you guys have etc.

Oklahoma utterly blows this year, and it is very very funny :lol:
 
FLASHWOK said:
Marcedes Lewis is a great player...

M. Drew didn't do much today, obviously I was a bit torn as to who to root for, but our strength of schedule will be better the more wins you guys have etc.

Oklahoma utterly blows this year, and it is very very funny :lol:
That was a good defense we put 41 on. I'm quite happy with the performance. Hard-hitting game and Ad Pete was held to 58 yds. rushing.

Marcedes is a handful for defenses, I'll tell you that much. I was just looking at our schedule...Dec. 3 might make for a bit more of an exciting game than either of us had anticipated. BTW, went to Doughboy's this morning with the lovely Ms. TDO. Excellent stuff - we both quite enjoyed it - thanks for the tip. We sat outside and I laughed when I noticed, sitting acroos the street (and over a bit), the Youth Acting & Drama Academy. The sign stood out and I had to have a chuckle :D

We've also decided that we want to buy SplashSpa right down the street and rename it CumBubbles! West Hollywood can be SOOOO gay sometimes!

Ending this on a bit of a negative note, we saw Parker Stevenson at "The Grove" this morning. Time's not been kind to him :eek:
 
oh. who gives a feck. American football is just rugby for panzies. Its fecking crap. Get a real sport, like proper football or cricket.
 
miley_bob said:
oh. who gives a feck. American football is just rugby for panzies. Its fecking crap. Get a real sport, like proper football or cricket.


I would hardly call it a sport for "pansies" Miley. I owuld suggest you look further back in this video forum on Page 2 and download the "NFL hardest hits video"

then come back and tell me about it... ;)



and don't use the "they wear pads" argument...american football's collisions are far more sudden and explosive than rugby

rugby requires a great deal of stamina, but the hits are simply not as hard as the highest level of American football.
 
TheDevil'sOwn said:
Anybody who thinks "Bouncebackability" is a word coined by Iain Dowie or any other cnut in English football is a bellend of the highest order.

Dick Vitale, cumbubble - Dickie V.

Haha retard. It is a word. It was entered into the english dictionary earlier this year.

1-0 me
 
Well, another impressive rout of a minnow school by the Horns. Rested most of the top players in the second half. Could easily have topped 70 points if they remained in the game, but the victory was secured and no need to 1) risk injury, and 2) run up the score on a weaker opponent.

Score by Quarters 1 2 3 4 Score
----------------- -- -- -- -- -----
Rice................ 0 0 3 7 - 10 Record: (0-2)
Texas............... 14 28 9 0 - 51 Record: (3-0)

In two weeks they should get a better test versus Missouri, though they ain't a great team by any means. After that, it's the Red River Shootout. Hopefully UT won't be looking past Mizzou towards that matchup and let a probable rout turn into a nail biter. Take care of business one week at a time.

OU appear to be in total disarray this season. But I'm still concerned come Oct 8. OU will definitely play up to par that day. And UT better not come out thinking they'll just walk that game against a sub-par OU. That's when upsets occur. Thought I do hope the Horns show up with a new confidence and swaggar and assert a new reign in the South. And hopefully Peterson will be ruing his decision to choose OU over Texas. With him, the Horns would be unstoppable on offense.
 
miley_bob said:
Haha retard. It is a word. It was entered into the english dictionary earlier this year.

1-0 me

no, he was trying to say that it wasnt coined by a brit, he wasnt arguing it wasnt a word. in fact, he admits it is a word.

you didnt score any goals mate.

its not 1-0 to you.

you just embarassed yourself.

try not to follow suit in your reply to this post.

6-0 alonso + TDO. get in.
 
Fecking Miami ... gave me a right scare but a good game. Hard for a new QB to go into the 2 most hostile ACC environments and do what he did.
 
Ive never said that bouncebackabilioty was coined by that twat Dowie. I know it originated in america. As for the irony in cricket been a real sport. Please explain. Its a totally original sport which has been around for centuries and is played at high levels, the world over. Can you say the same for american football? sadly i think not.
 
miley_bob said:
As for the irony in cricket been a real sport. Please explain. Its a totally original sport which has been around for centuries and is played at high levels, the world over. Can you say the same for american football? sadly i think not.

They play on a big round pitch, with sunscreen on their noses and, every couple of hours, take a break for tea-time. Original? Yes indeed. A real sport? Not a chance in hell.