2009 NCAA football thread!!

[valo403]

Originally Posted by moon

I know USC has a history of losing to lesser teams but how do you see Oregon's season relying on them getting past the first few weeks without a loss?

Oregon's, like every other team in the PAC-10, season rely's 100% on whether they can beat USC or not.

Depends on the expectations, if you're looking to win the conference beating USC is obviously the key point. If the goal is a good bowl game those first 4 games set it all up, come out 4-0 and a top tier bowl is all but guaranteed, come out 1-3 and you can all but kiss it goodbye.

If anything a schedule like that to start the season is a tone setter, struggles there are going to be hard to overcome down the road.

[zukes]

I don't really cheer for anyone in college football. Just like to watch the top teams and am actually pretty stoked to watch some football that means something on Thursday. I can't get into the NFL pre-season, other than watching whatever camp battles there are. The CFL is not my cup of tea (was a big Stamps fan as a kid though).

The Boise/Oregon game starts at 10:00 out here, but I will be watching.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by valo403

Unless you're new to CFB you know that an offense like USC's relies heavily on QB play, if he struggles they will struggle to score. That said, Corp is sitting there waiting to fill in and I don't see them both struggling.

No...im not at all new to college football, but thanks for the heads up.

Barkley was the concensus #1 high school player, and although that guarentees nothing its pretty clear he won the job out of no where in camp after Corp got hurt. Again, USC's offense will be fine...its the defense that is the question mark this year.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by transplant99

No...im not at all new to college football, but thanks for the heads up.

Barkley was the concensus #1 high school player, and although that guarentees nothing its pretty clear he won the job out of no where in camp after Corp got hurt. Again, USC's offense will be fine...its the defense that is the question mark this year.

It's my understanding that Barkley won the job outright and that Corp's injury had little to do with it (other than Barkley getting more reps in practice). By the time they announced the starter Corp was healthy.

As for me and division 1, I just want to see someone bring the U of Washington back to respectability again. I miss the days of Don James.

I also root for Colorado a bit.

My heart lies with Championship Division football and my Montana Grizzlies though, which I have probably made very clear already.

[transplant99]

My heart lies with Championship Division football and my Montana Grizzlies though, which I have probably made very clear already

Yeah...being 90 minutes from Boone and surrounded by App. St. alumni, i get ears full of this every year as well.

It sure is entertaining football for sure.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by transplant99

No...im not at all new to college football, but thanks for the heads up.

Barkley was the concensus #1 high school player, and although that guarentees nothing its pretty clear he won the job out of no where in camp after Corp got hurt. Again, USC's offense will be fine...its the defense that is the question mark this year.

I never said you were new to it, but if you think that QB struggles won't prevent a team from scoring consistently I'm not sure what game you've been watching. Whether or not Barkley struggles is to be seen, but you made it seem like the potential for a frosh QB to be rattled in a hostile environment is a non-issue to USC's offense, that's absurd.

USC isn't a team that simply requires the QB to dump off a few balls and make crisp handoffs, if Barkley/Corp struggles they will struggle to score. A productive offense isn't at all a slam-dunk without strong play from whoever is under center.

[Flames in 07]

Originally Posted by valo403

I never said you were new to it, but if you think that QB struggles won't prevent a team from scoring consistently I'm not sure what game you've been watching. Whether or not Barkley struggles is to be seen, but you made it seem like the potential for a frosh QB to be rattled in a hostile environment is a non-issue to USC's offense, that's absurd.

USC isn't a team that simply requires the QB to dump off a few balls and make crisp handoffs, if Barkley/Corp struggles they will struggle to score. A productive offense isn't at all a slam-dunk without strong play from whoever is under center.

yea cause USC's RB's are some of the worst in the country.

I'm no USC fan by any means but at the other 21 spots they are across the board better than everyone else in the PAC 10 or any other conference not called the BigXII or SEC.

USC with a learning qb may not be their biggest issue, it could be that they have what seems to be the best team not named the trojans in the last 6 years of PAC10 football in Berkley.

[moon]

Originally Posted by wpgflamesfan

It might have something to do with the fact that USC has a freshman quarterback,playing at Autzen (one of the toughest places to play) on halloween night.

My issue isn't with whether or not you think Oregon is going to beat them but why you think those first 4 games are easier than the USC game?

USC may have a freshman QB playing for them, but he is the top freshman in the nation and they have great RB's and WR's to help him out.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Flames in 07

yea cause USC's RB's are some of the worst in the country.

I'm no USC fan by any means but at the other 21 spots they are across the board better than everyone else in the PAC 10 or any other conference not called the BigXII or SEC.

USC with a learning qb may not be their biggest issue, it could be that they have what seems to be the best team not named the trojans in the last 6 years of PAC10 football in Berkley.

I don't care if they have Walter Payton in the backfield, if whoever is taking the snaps can't move the team there will be 9 in the box and the running game will struggle. USC's line isn't built to pound the ball down the defense's throat, it's an athletic line that pass blocks well and takes advantage of the all around ability of the team. Take out half of the equation and they will struggle, this isn't rocket science.

Even if I give you the whole other 21 spots argument, which I don't agree with at all, that 1 spot is so much more important than any of the other 21 that the argument is nonsense.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by moon

My issue isn't with whether or not you think Oregon is going to beat them but why you think those first 4 games are easier than the USC game?

USC may have a freshman QB playing for them, but he is the top freshman in the nation and they have great RB's and WR's to help him out.

I don't think he ever said those games are easier, just that they would define the season. Those are completely different things.

[Flames in 07]

Originally Posted by valo403

I don't care if they have Walter Payton in the backfield, if whoever is taking the snaps can't move the team there will be 9 in the box and the running game will struggle. USC's line isn't built to pound the ball down the defense's throat, it's an athletic line that pass blocks well and takes advantage of the all around ability of the team. Take out half of the equation and they will struggle, this isn't rocket science.

Even if I give you the whole other 21 spots argument, which I don't agree with at all, that 1 spot is so much more important than any of the other 21 that the argument is nonsense.

With 9 in the box anybody can play quarterback. College is different than pro. USC would win 8 games with a monkey taking the snaps. 9 if the monkey could change it's cadence.

And Trent Dilfer, Brad Johnson, Tee Martin and many others I'm sure Id think about it if I gave it more than 15 seconds would beg to differ with your second paragraph.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Flames in 07

With 9 in the box anybody can play quarterback. College is different than pro. USC would win 8 games with a monkey taking the snaps. 9 if the monkey could change it's cadence.

And Trent Dilfer, Brad Johnson, Tee Martin and many others I'm sure Id think about it if I gave it more than 15 seconds would beg to differ with your second paragraph.

We're not talking about a QB who is executing, we're talking about a QB who is struggling. Even against 9 in the box a guy who's lost out there is going to have trouble moving the ball.

And thanks for naming 3 guys who while not all-time great QB's are perfect examples of efficient passers, which again is not what we're talking about here.

It's a hypo, I don't think Barkley will struggle to that degree, but this is a response to a previous post that made it seem like he could be downright horrible and they still wouldn't struggle to score. That's just plain wrong.

[Flames in 07]

trent dilfer struggled. I'd crash the internet posting the mistakes he made ... all they let him do was hand the ball off the way you described earlier.

Yes it's it's the most important role, but this isn't the CFL, they can win the PAC10 with a servicable QB. There's many cases of freshman qb's who weren't the number one qb in the country who did very well in their first year. Colt McCoy won 10 games in his first year, and I remember them dumbing down the offence for him that year.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Flames in 07

trent dilfer struggled. I'd crash the internet posting the mistakes he made ... all they let him do was hand the ball off the way you described earlier.

Yes it's it's the most important role, but this isn't the CFL, they can win the PAC10 with a servicable QB. There's many cases of freshman qb's who weren't the number one qb in the country who did very well in their first year. Colt McCoy won 10 games in his first year, and I remember them dumbing down the offence for him that year.

With a servicable QB yes, but again, that's not what we are talking about here.

And Dilfer was more than servicable, he could consistently complete the easy throws and occasionally hit a more difficult pass that kept the defense at least needing to respect the possibility. He wasn't good, but he could do the job, and this admittedly unrealistic hypo is about a QB who can't do that.

[moon]

Originally Posted by valo403

I don't think he ever said those games are easier, just that they would define the season. Those are completely different things.

He said that if they could get past those first 4 games they could go undefeated.

I thought it was odd that he thought those would be the toughest games in terms of going undefeated when USC is by far the toughest game they will have all season.

It would seem to me that toughest game on your schedule, a team who is also much better than you, would be the key to going undefeated.

[ResAlien]

As a CU fan, I can say this is Hawkins last year, contract extension be damned. If he doesn't go to a bowl game, he's fired. Bench your son and but in Hanson for the love of god. At least they are planning on running a power running scheme and actually using Darrel Scott

[valo403]

Originally Posted by moon

He said that if they could get past those first 4 games they could go undefeated.

I thought it was odd that he thought those would be the toughest games in terms of going undefeated when USC is by far the toughest game they will have all season.

It would seem to me that toughest game on your schedule, a team who is also much better than you, would be the key to going undefeated.

Well every game is key to going undefeated, but I'd agree that a season that starts as Oregon's does is the key portion of the schedule. If they come into the USC game undefeated the fact that it's at home and on Halloween makes that a pretty even matchup. USC is better than Oregon, but not "much better". They have some areas to establish themselves in before they get to that point though, which is why the openers are the key point to any chance of an undefeated season.

It's a pretty reasonable assessment if you actually consider it.

[carom]

Originally Posted by ResAlien

As a CU fan, I can say this is Hawkins last year, contract extension be damned. If he doesn't go to a bowl game, he's fired. Bench your son and but in Hanson for the love of god. At least they are planning on running a power running scheme and actually using Darrel Scott

go play intramurals brother

[MRCboicgy]

I'm really looking forward to this season. I love these games, even though I don't have anything invested in these schools. My roomie went to a large football-mad school down there and is totally amped right now, even though his team doesn't play till saturday. We are watching the Score for both games tonight...damn I wish Shaw gave us the ScoreHD

[ricoFlame]

so pumped for oregon @ boise.....8:00!