NCAA Football '12-13

[Valmy]

That's all great and all, but they managed to lose to now 3-2 Arizona by 20 or whatever it was.

Yeah and that was because they committed a shitload a turnovers and penalties and the fact their DC did not make the trip was a huge problem for their defense.  They also gained over 600 yards of offense and made it look easy.  It mean it really takes something to put up over 600 yards with a Freshman QB while playing mistake prone FB.  Unless they are going to be turning it over 4  times and committing 150+ yards of penalties every game I don't think that really meant much.  Well ok it probably meant something but it did not mean they were a team that was going to be an easy win for anybody.  That was OSU's 'oh crap' game of the year.

They're just not the same team, and just because they matchup well and are all fired up to ruin the Horns season doesn't make it some sort of war between titans of college football.  They are what they are:  a pretty good team that probably isn't going to win the conference unless some silly shit happens.

No it is a huge monster game for 2012 Texas.  There were five teams on Texas' schedule I thought were as good or better than they are and, except for WV of course, have owned their ass the last two years.  OSU, WV, OU, Baylor, and K-State.  I was thinking if they can beat two of those five teams, win the bowl game and finish 10-3 that would be a fantastic year.  All of Texas' losses will come at the hands of those five teams.

It's not like last year where they were a choke away from going to the National Championship.  If Texas (this year's version) was playing THAT team last night, that's a huge game.

They are not as elite as last year but I am not buying they are that much worse.  At least they have not played like they are that much worse than last year this year.

This one was more of the usual college football thing:  Don't lose.  If that's what makes for a monster game, then every game every week is gigantic, right?

When you are playing a team on your level that has beaten you the past two years in a tight wide open Conference race on the road that is a big game.  Playing Kansas and Iowa State and Mississippi is not.

Because WVU is not Baylor, and is an undefeated top 10 team?  Why do you think Baylor is some huge game, or at least any more so than any other game in college football where if you lose once you could ruin your season?  Florence is good, and it'd be cool to have him playing for Texas, but RG3 he isn't, and holy fuck that D is bad.

He doesn't have to be RG3.  That Baylor team is loaded at every position on the offense they have no weaknesses.  And we better be grateful both WV and Baylor have horrid defenses because if they didn't Texas would have no chance.

They're still conference games and they're good teams, but let's not get crazy and start calling them monster matchups.

They are monster matchups for this team.  They will show us how good they are.

They are all equally big in my mind because I do not think OSU, WV, Baylor, OU, and Kansas State are all that much better than each other or Texas.  Any win any of these six teams can get against each other is big and I don't think anything we have seen from OU-K-State, WV-Baylor, or OSU-Texas suggests I am wrong about that.  But it is still early in the year I may look like an idiot later on.  OU may yet completely implode for example.

[MadBurgerMaker]

Yeah and that was because they committed a shitload a turnovers and penalties and the fact their DC did not make the trip was a huge problem for their defense.  They also gained over 600 yards of offense and made it look easy.  It mean it really takes something to put up over 600 yards with a Freshman QB while playing mistake prone FB.  Unless they are going to be turning it over 4  times and committing 150+ yards of penalties every game I don't think that really meant much.  Well ok it probably meant something but it did not mean they were a team that was going to be an easy win for anybody.  That was OSU's 'oh crap' game of the year.

Of course it means something.  It means they lost to the only team they had played that was worth a shit.   And now they've done it again.

No it is a huge monster game for 2012 Texas.  There were five teams on Texas' schedule I thought were as good or better than they are and, except for WV of course, have owned their ass the last two years.  OSU, WV, OU, Baylor, and K-State.  I was thinking if they can beat two of those five teams, win the bowl game and finish 10-3 that would be a fantastic year.  All of Texas' losses will come at the hands of those five teams.

We're going to have to agree to disagree that Oklahoma State minus guys like Weeden and Blackmon and coming off a mouthfucking by Arizona is some sort of massive game.  Same thing with Baylor minus RG3.  Important?  Sure, they're important games, but Texas is better than both of them and should beat them (well, they already beat the first one).   

They are not as elite as last year but I am not buying they are that much worse.  At least they have not played like they are that much worse than last year this year.

Not much worse?  They've already lost two games, for christs sake.  They're at .500.  The Pokes didn't even lose their first game last year until they managed to piss away the 2OT game vs. Iowa State in the middle of November.  Then, you know, they won the next two, which included OU and the Fiesta Bowl.  C'mon, man.   

When you are playing a team on your level that has beaten you the past two years in a tight wide open Conference race on the road that is a big game.  Playing Kansas and Iowa State and Mississippi is not.

If we're downgrading from "huge, monster" to big, that's fine.  I can accept that.  I would just call it "important," myself, but w/e. 

He doesn't have to be RG3.  That Baylor team is loaded at every position on the offense they have no weaknesses.  And we better be grateful both WV and Baylor have horrid defenses because if they didn't Texas would have no chance.

Of course they would have a chance.  Don't be silly.

They are monster matchups for this team.  They will show us how good they are.

They are all equally big in my mind because I do not think OSU, WV, Baylor, OU, and Kansas State are all that much better than each other or Texas.  Any win any of these six teams can get against each other is big and I don't think anything we have seen from OU-K-State, WV-Baylor, or OSU-Texas suggests I am wrong about that.  But it is still early in the year I may look like an idiot later on.  OU may yet completely implode for example.

They aren't monster games, unless you're going to call every conference game one.  They're important, learning about the team type games, but monster?  That's the next two weeks, and possibly on Dec 1.  #7 WVU vs. #9 Texas.  Top ten game, two undefeated teams.  Texas - OU.  Yeah, fuck OU.  If Texas and K-State are still looking good at the end of the year, that's another one.  2 - 1 OSU vs. #12 (or whatever) Texas?  Texas better be winning that shit.  Baylor plays completely decimated TCU before the Texas game, so they might be 4-1 and in the polls again by the time Oct 20 rolls around.  Maybe. vOv

I mean, call them what you want, but I define "monster games" as top ten matchups, or big rivalries, or things like the Cotton Bowl or BCS games or something.  Not one involving unranked Okie Lite.  Again, we're just going  to have to agree to disagree on this thing, since it seems our definitions of these terms are pretty different.

[sbr]

ZOMG, Huskies made it back into AP. #23 after beating Stanford, course they get to go to Oregon and face #2 team next week, so be short stay

It's looking like my buddy is gonna get an extra ticket and take me to the Oregon/UW game on Saturday.  It will be my first Ducks game if i go.

[MadBurgerMaker]

Speaking of TCU, I'm actually kind of wondering if they're going to make it out of the ISU game next week without a loss.  Patterson is a good coach, but those personnel losses have got to catch up with them at some point.

E:  Hey Texas has opened up at -6.5 over WVU.  Heh. 

[Valmy]

Of course it means something.  It means they lost to the only team they had played that was worth a shit.   And now they've done it again.

Well sure it means that but it does not mean they are not good.  How they lost those two games means something when projecting how they will do in the rest of their games.  I thought they were a good team and would provide Texas a huge challenge.  And they did.  And they will be a big factor for the rest of the season.

We're going to have to agree to disagree that Oklahoma State minus guys like Weeden and Blackmon and coming off a mouthfucking by Arizona is some sort of massive game.  Same thing with Baylor minus RG3.  Important?  Sure, they're important games, but Texas is better than both of them and should beat them (well, they already beat the first one).

It is a distinction without a difference.  I saw this series of four games and thought 'wow what a huge monster series of games.  This will determine our season.'  So I have been calling them the huge monster games.  If by some sort of scale they should be called big or important whatever.  I am not exactly known for being super specific in my terminology.  It is semantics, the point is here is where Texas shows what they are made of.  Huge win for them, 1-0 so far.

But I did not see anything so far that indicates Texas is that much better than OSU.  What exactly about OSU is so shitty now that you saw them play?  And don't refer to their record now tell me what you saw on the field last night.

Not much worse?  They've already lost two games, for christs sake.  They're at .500.  The Pokes didn't even lose their first game last year until they managed to piss away the 2OT game vs. Iowa State in the middle of November.  Then, you know, they won the next two, which included OU and the Fiesta Bowl.  C'mon, man.

Yeah well they are basically what they were before.  Granted Weeden and Blackmon were great but they are still piling on yards like crazy.  They had 576 yards against Texas...what would they have had 700 yards or something last year?  They are a little younger, a little greener and make more mistakes but I do not see some sort of massive talent drop off.

Of course they would have a chance.  Don't be silly.

Heh well Florence or Smith backed up by a good or great defense might not be invincible.  Maybe Bama or LSU or somebody with a suffocating D might take them down.  But Texas would be unlikely to.

They aren't monster games, unless you're going to call every conference game one.  They're important, learning about the team type games, but monster?  That's the next two weeks, and possibly on Dec 1.  #7 WVU vs. #9 Texas.  Top ten game, two undefeated teams.  Texas - OU.  Yeah, fuck OU.  If Texas and K-State are still looking good at the end of the year, that's another one.  2 - 1 OSU vs. #12 (or whatever) Texas?  Texas better be winning that shit.  Baylor plays completely decimated TCU before the Texas game, so they might be 4-1 and in the polls again by the time Oct 20 rolls around.  Maybe. vOv

It is because of the nature of the conference race this year.  We have five or six teams who are all roughly equal and could all win it.  And hey it looks like you are coming around that perhaps three of the remaining four games I am talking about may indeed be huge and monstrous in nature

[Eddie Teach]

Any game featuring Texas is a monstrous abomination.

[Ed Anger]

I refuse to call the red river shootout by its newer pussy name.

[Valmy]

I refuse to call the red river shootout by its newer pussy name.

And the Red River Shootout is a pussier version of the original name: The Red River War.  It will be the Red River Tupperware Party by the time these branding douches are finished.

[Berkut]

What was the call?  In the NFL the play is just blown dead when someone loses their hat, no idea it could be a penalty somewhere.

I'm not sure.  Let me find the exact call in the play by play. 

I just caught the replay when I came back from the other room.  They didn't even throw the flag at him until the play was over and he was walking back to pick up his helmet.  Announcers were calling it a bad rule, etc, but didn't say exactly what it was.

E:  Had to rewind.  15 yard personal foul for "pursuing the play after his helmet came off."  Here it is on the pbp:  Tyler Bitancurt kickoff for 56 yards returned by Demetri Goodson for 22 yards to the Bayl 46, WEST VIRGINIA penalty 15 yard Personal Foul on Troy Gloster accepted for a 1ST down.

Does anyone care enough that I should bother explaining the actual rule (which is new this year, btw)?

[CountDeMoney]

I knew having to leave the field when your helmet came off was new, but I didn't know you had to stop fucking playing or get a flag if it did.  That makes me sad.

[Berkut]

I knew having to leave the field when your helmet came off was new, but I didn't know you had to stop fucking playing or get a flag if it did.  That makes me sad.

Well, the more important rule is that if you hit someone who has lost their helmet, you get a automatic 15.

So, the corollary to that has to be that if you participate once your helmet is off, then you get a 15.

So you can actually end up with two 15 yard penalties - one of the player for participating beyond the immediate action he is engaged in, and another for someone then hitting him.

The basic idea is that a player without a helmet on is, by definition, out of the play and defenseless.

It all comes back to the recent (last 5-7 years or so) focus on concussions.

[CountDeMoney]

So, say if you're a ball carrier that happens to lose his helmet somehow coming through the pile, and you've got miles of green in front of you, you're supposed to stop?  That sounds even more dangerous.

[MadBurgerMaker]

Hey I have another question for you, Mr. Ref:

How the hell do you guys figure out where punts went out of bounds when it just flies out (as in, doesn't bounce OOB, it just crosses the line at some point while in the air)?  Seems like it would be a pita.  What do you look at, etc?

[Berkut]

So, say if you're a ball carrier that happens to lose his helmet somehow coming through the pile, and you've got miles of green in front of you, you're supposed to stop?  That sounds even more dangerous.

Actually, the rule is different when it is the ball carrier.

If anyone in posession of the ball loses their helmet, the ball becomes dead immediately.

[CountDeMoney]

That is so gay.  Concussions or no, it's so gay.