Florida's offense was horrid for 3 plus quarters against an inferior Miami of Ohio team. If they were playing a halfway decent team, they would have been blown out of the Swamp. 2 big road games for the Big East in Week 1, 2 losses for the Big East in Week 1. Does ABC get some sort of sick thrill having Matt Millen do Michigan games? Notre Dame looks like they can run the ball and actually tackle people, while not committing idiotic backbreaking personal fouls. Whether that holds up, who knows. Would comment on Florida State, but Samford didn't seem to do as well without his son. Any word on the front-runner position on the coaching position at Illinois for 2011? K-State seems to have rediscovered their running game from a few years ago. Either that or UCLA is an extremely soft Pac-10 team.
LSU dodged the bullets of all bullets. A lot of respect to UNC as a Duke fan for not laying down in this game. I don't know what this week says about LSU or Florida or Ol' Miss or even the SEC other then its week one. Yet, I am thinking everyone complaining about Boise St and TCU's easy schedule, Bama's maybe as easy after the PSU game. As for TCU and Boise State as much as I love an underdog, I like an underdog that plays more then two good teams a season. I am routing for Virginia Tech in what is going to be an interesting Big East conference. Notre Dame's defense showed up and while Kelly's offensive doesn't seem as explosive as Charlie's offense however I like the misdirection plays and its week one against a decent Purdue defense. Michigan looks dangerous and next week's game should be interesting.
Well, TCU won their one semi major game this year, so they'll likely go undefeated.
Utah and BYU will give them problems. Top of Mountain West (at least for this year) is respectable. With Cincy losing at Fresno State, that's 3 bad road losses for the Big East. From Orange Bowl to losing to North Dakota State in 3 seasons. Perhaps Kansas will start missing the Round Mound soon.
Originally posted by wmatisticYou know, I kinda like Jake Locker, though I don't think he's going to make a good pro QB, but man Washington still isn't very good.
BYU is better than you think, but Washington SHOULD have won that game and might have if Sark hadn't gotten a case of the Les Miles and gone for it on 4th-and-2 with about 11 minutes to go when a FG would've closed it to 23-20. Not Sark's best coaching job to start the year.
I still don't think it is super-crazy that Washington could get to 8-4, but 7-5 seems more likely now that they will probably be 1-2 out-of-conference.
Holy fuck shit motherfucker shit. Read comics. Fuck shit shit fuck shit I sold out when I did my job. Fuck fuck fuck shit fuck. Sorry had to do it....
Revenge of the Sith = one thumb up from me. Fuck shit. I want to tittie fuck your ass. -- The Guinness. to Cerebus
Well, how memorable has Virginia Teach been in the ACC tournament? The Big East is a world of trouble and I don't know if I would count that Pitt lose too much against them since they were the underdog and lost in overtime. Rich Rod finally has the QB that he wants and not the typical Michigan QB that Ann Arbor is used to.
Originally posted by ekedolphinKansas lost at home. To North Dakota State. An FCS team, for crying out loud. This is gonna be a rough year for the Jayhawks.
My Kent State Golden Flashes annihilated Murray State 41-10 at home, my Indiana Hoosiers pummeled Towson 51-17 at home, and my Old Dominion Monarchs lost at home to Jacksonville, 35-25.
As a Mizzou fan, this makes me VERY happy. I actually saw a few magazines picking them 2nd in the North, which really made no sense given that a)they were terrible last season, and b)they lost a lot of people from their offense. Not that Mizzou exactly looked like world beaters against Illinois.
I couldn't believe the LSU collapse the second half. Well, I mean, I can believe it but not against a depleted North Carolina. The dueling fumbles just sealed, amazing last quarter to an otherwise average game. A number of SEC teams outside of Alabama looked pretty decidedly average, wonder what that means. If anything.
One thing I noticed last night was there were an unusual number of safeties caused by bad snaps. Obviously it's the first game of the season and if those were going to happen, it'd have been this weekend, but it seemed every game I watched had at least one out-the-back-of-the-endzone safety.
I don't know why people are surprised at Michigan's performance. It wasn't the offense that sunk us last year, it was the defense. The horribly putrid, useless defense. And yesterday the offense did what I expected. Keep in mind that outside the Ohio State debacle, they had been scoring in bunches last year with a far less dynamic QB at the helm. With Denard and the O-Line getting more reps under their belt, things were only going to get better. The surprise (but still a question) was the defense. It didn't matter what formation they were in last year, they were always caught off-guard and in bad positions and made poor tackles. Switching to a 3-3-5 raised a bunch of eyebrows during the offseason, since this is...y'know....the Big 10, and yesterday was going to be the big test of its effectiveness against the run. Because say what you will about UConn, they have a sick running attack. It's really all they do. And the defense, a 3-3-5, actually held its own. That was incredibly surprising. The question now is, can they stop being the world's largest sieve against a passing attack? We'll see.
Though not against Notre Dame. Brian Kelly is going to murder us, regardless of defensive improvements.
Michigan against the SEC: 20-5-1 (7-3 in bowl games)
Nobody was anointing Denard. But if you're gonna question his health, you'd have to question Pat White's and he held up just fine. Ohio State's been running a modified spread with a scrambling QB for years now; it's not like Denard is Tate Forcier, who while he had the heart he had the frame of a toothpicked kid out of high school.
Boise friggin' State. I honestly want to know what more BCS-backers want these guys to do before they get their shot at the championship. First, it was "you need to go undefeated". Then it was "you don't play anybody of worth". What excuse is going to be next? That they didn't play VaTech in Blacksburg, even though that "neutral" field basically was Lane Stadium? When Boise goes undefeated again and a 1-loss Big 12/SEC gets in ahead of them, I can't wait to hear what the BCS-backers come up with this time.
Because this game was damn good, especially for a first game of the season for both teams. There were the usual undisciplined plays as befits a first game, and yet again the center-QB snap reared its ugly head, but there was also a lot of great play. Boise dominated until the weather and VaTech's talent balanced the scales again. And VaTech wasn't the patsy of the past few years in this first marquee game; after the 1st quarter drubbing, they showed up big time. It's a shame they had to lose this game because while it goes into the books as another first game loss that knocks them out of title contention, they have the talent and the heart to be a championship team.
Even if they don't have the uniforms for it. Good god those things were hideous. I get the whole "logo in the numbers" thing, but it looked like someone puked bright orange onto otherwise decent all-black uni's. And while Boise's were better, the random dark grey spots everywhere were odd. It made them look like they had all sweat-stained their uniforms even before kickoff. And just having the blue spot on one shoulder was distracting, almost to the point of inducing a headache. But with just those things modified, those Boise uniforms were great. VaTech, not so much.
Michigan against the SEC: 20-5-1 (7-3 in bowl games)
Jesus, all the other games are played and everyone says it's just one game, can't tell too much. Boise plays one and it's a crime if they don't play for the championship? How about we let the season run it's course first?
It was a great game between Boise St and Virginia Tech. That said, I don't know if they can go the rest of the season and beat an Oregon State team that is unranked while coasting through their conference and get in to the title game. Their defense looked soft against a Virginia Tech team with only 4 starters returning on each side. Their offense did what it needed to do and looked dominate in the first half, but not the second half. I am not that convinced they deserve to be in that game since it seems to be a two game schedule.
Now, as of today, I would rank then number 1 since they actually played someone instead of Bama and Ohio State. I am tired of week one being a way to get alumni to write checks to the schools by throwing lambs to slaughter with a hope that the alumni thinks they have a real shot at the title thus opening up the checkbook.
Now , if there are two other undefeated teams ahead of them from BSC conferences, I would drop them to three unless the Pac-10 team is USC. I may put TCU ahead of them too if they run the table which consists of Utah and BYU, two decent teams plus they already beat Oregon State. I also think the cheering for Boise State and TCU is due to the fact that people want the BCS shattered to a thousand pieces. While I agree, it would be fun to watch, the BCS won't let it happen. They will let the TCU and/or Boise State play for the title if they go undefeated and if everyone else loses a game. It shuts up the people demanding the BCS and also stops the demand for a better system. However, I do see at least one Big Ten and maybe another BCS team going undefeated and a TCU loss down the road thus eliminating a non-BCS team from the discussion.
Boise did what they had to do. They took a punch and came back. It did help that Virginia Tech did their best Clemson special teams impersonation in the first quarter. Right now, they have the best win. As for 'Bama and Ohio State: They played a weak week 1 game, but they are playing strong teams in game 2. Better to get the kinks out against a weaker opponent than screwing up against a strong team and playing a weaker team in week 2. ACC needs at least 1 of Florida State/Miami to win this week. Can't have all your top teams, other than Georgia Tech, have 1 loss before the first Sunday of the NFL season.
Can't play much uglier than Florida did. Hopefully that problem with the snaps get fixed. Hard to mount and offense when nearly 1/4 of ALL your offensive plays wind up with the ball squirting 10 yards past the QB on the ground.
Originally posted by Mr Heel IIIf Boise State wants to make national championship level noise, they need to load up their entire non-conference season against major teams and beat them. One close game isn't going to cut it.
Boise State would argue that the major teams won't play them with that level of frequency. That they can't schedule multiple ranked out-of-conference opponents each year because BCS conference teams don't want to give up a home game for a home-and-home with Boise State and they don't want to pay Boise State to come into their stadium and beat them in a one-and-done. Plus, why should Boise State have to give up its own home games?
I don't think Boise State's undefeated seasons are nearly as impressive as Alabama's, or Auburn's from 2004, or Florida's last year before the SEC title game. I also don't want to see Boise State in the BCS title game because I think they would get destroyed, unless there was total chaos like in 2007, and a less-than-dominant BCS conference team was the opponent. But I also hope that if Boise State DOES make it to the title game, it convinces other teams to schedule them more. Other teams would, I hope, see that Boise State was going to be allowed to coast on its easier schedule unless they scheduled them and beat them. Until more schools are willing to play them, I have a real hard time accepting the "they need to play tougher teams" argument.
But I still don't think Boise State should bump a BCS conference unbeaten team for the title game. I'm willing to change my mind, though: If BSU really dominates the entire WAC and looks impressive in doing so, I'd reconsider this position. But I don't think they looked last night like a team that is so good that we should overlook its poor scheduling in judging an undefeated season (assuming they even manage to go undefeated).
In fact, and I am certain I am far from the first person to pose this possibility, my ideal title game would be TCU and Boise State (or any other two non-BCS conference schools). Only once the power conferences are left out will they start scheduling these teams. As it is, the "they don't play anybody" rhetoric is largely self-fulfilling.
Originally posted by TheBucsFanIn fact, and I am certain I am far from the first person to pose this possibility, my ideal title game would be TCU and Boise State (or any other two non-BCS conference schools). Only once the power conferences are left out will they start scheduling these teams. As it is, the "they don't play anybody" rhetoric is largely self-fulfilling.
The big schools DO offer to play Boise. Home games only sure, but if you really think you belong with the big boys, take the offer and prove it. Fresno State does it that way(well, they've been trying), FSU did it that way, why should Boise be an exception?
And not that it matters as much, but financially holding a game at Boise makes half what it does at the larger stadiums so why would a major team give up that much money AND risk a loss at Boise?
Again, we'll see what happens at the end of the year but I really don't want teams rewarded for playing crap schedules. Instead of leaving the big schools out so they schedule Boise, how about we leave Boise out until they start accepting offers from the Big schools, regardless of if they get a return game?
Vikings. At least, according to the Packers, who have now filed tampering changers against Minnesota with the NFL. The full story is here (news.yahoo.com) (Note: the link I'm providing is from Yahoo!, but to give credit where due, the Yahoo!