Two Plus Two Newer Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Newer Archives > Other Topics > Sporting Events

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #271  
Old 11-24-2007, 10:03 PM
rwperu34 rwperu34 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Tempe, AZ
Posts: 1,955
Default Re: 2007 Pac 10 football thread

[ QUOTE ]
*sigh*

Stanford, yadda yadda yadda. Moving on. The championship talk regarding Oregon was valid, with Dixon healthy they were probably the best team in the country at that point who hadn't already played their way out of the title hunt. You'll notice that when Dixon got hurt and the Ducks were suddenly out of the hunt, all that conversation stopped. The injury was unfortunate, and a shame, and it cost us a shot at the national championship, but at least we understand that injuries are a part of the game and with the injury we are out of the hunt. No Oregon fans would have claimed (even before today's loss) that "We were without Dixon against Arizona so it shouldn't keep us out of the title game." A loss is still a loss, and when you have two of them you don't play for the title, especially if one of them is to Arizona or Stanford.

[/ QUOTE ]

Huh? Nobody is claiming that USC should play for the title, I don't think. I just don't think the Ducks are as talented as USC. It's by like 15 points if you take the QB out of the equation. Of course USC played their way out early. The Stanford loss was damning and Oregon State sealed the deal. This is the exact reason I don't want a playoff in college football, because if there was one, USC would win 40% of the time and they have very clearly not had the best year (although four more wins would make it close).

For the poster above you, ASU did not lose to an injured Oregon, and USC was less injured than ASU.

Now, on to business. What are the chances that UCLA can pull off the miracle next week? I wanna go to Passadena!
Reply With Quote
  #272  
Old 11-24-2007, 10:12 PM
BobJoeJim BobJoeJim is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Ashland, OR
Posts: 1,450
Default Re: 2007 Pac 10 football thread

Combine Oregon and USC's rosters when fully healthy and the following Ducks definitely start:

QB: Dennis Dixon
RB: Jonathan Stewart
TE: Ed Dickson
WR: Brian Paysinger
OL: Geoff Schwartz
OL: Max Unger
DL: Nick Reed
CB: Walter Thurmond III
S: Patrick Chung

This is if you run a 2 WR, RB, TE, FB style offense. If you go spread and add a third WR Jaison Williams starts. If you go 2 RBs instead of a FB, Jeremiah Johnson is the second best RB on your roster. Defensively I may be selling one or two Ducks short as well. So the Ducks play at least 9 and possibly as many as 11-12 out of your 22, and the gap between Dixon/Stewart and Booty/Whoever USC's best RB committee member is is so huge that yeah, there's no question in my mind the Ducks contribute more to the team than USC does. Uninjured, Oregon is more talented than USC, and wins 6 out of 10 games on a neutral field. Period.
Reply With Quote
  #273  
Old 11-24-2007, 10:38 PM
pokergrader pokergrader is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,792
Default Re: 2007 Pac 10 football thread

Look, Oregon was a great team and I was hoping they would represent the PAC-10 in the national championship game and win. They certainly are a good squad.

However I will defend USC. The running back by committee style is intentional and isn't a disadvantage. Some plays are better off with a large power back, others prefer a small fast back with good hands. We have them all, and interchange them very well. This is an advantage. Dixon is a great QB, and certainly heisman worthy, however Booty recently has been playing exceptionally well (heisman worthy too), and if the 100% healthy game were played next week, The Dixon/Stewart advantage over Booty/USC RBs is not nearly the huge gap you think it is.

I can't get into the other individual matchups because I don't know enough about the Oregon players, but we can count members of the All PAC-10 team when it comes out and then discuss from there.
Reply With Quote
  #274  
Old 11-24-2007, 10:46 PM
rwperu34 rwperu34 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Tempe, AZ
Posts: 1,955
Default Re: 2007 Pac 10 football thread

[ QUOTE ]
TE: Ed Dickson
WR: Brian Paysinger

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree with these two. I don't know what his name is, but #85 for USC is a better reciever than anybody Oregon had out there, and he's a TE. Throw that on top of #1, and #7 and there is no way anybody on Oregon starts at WR. These guys are big and fast and have good hands. Jaison Williams wouldn't even start for ASU. I only watched today intermittantly (I couldn't have standed to watch the whole thing) and I saw Williams drop another pass!

I don't know about those o-lineman and d-linemen, but all I can say is, USC looked bigger, faster, and stronger than Oregon all the way across the defense.
Reply With Quote
  #275  
Old 11-24-2007, 11:17 PM
BobJoeJim BobJoeJim is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Ashland, OR
Posts: 1,450
Default Re: 2007 Pac 10 football thread

Paysinger got injured in preseason, and hasn't played all year, but he *was* #1 on the depth chart. He's the best receiver on a healthy Oregon team, and better than anyone USC has. Dickson has been our number one pass catching threat for a while now, and I would take him over the tight end you can't name.
Reply With Quote
  #276  
Old 11-24-2007, 11:27 PM
rwperu34 rwperu34 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Tempe, AZ
Posts: 1,955
Default Re: 2007 Pac 10 football thread

[ QUOTE ]
Paysinger got injured in preseason

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh. That explains quite a bit. Funny thing is, same thing happened to ASU. The projected #1 was Brandon Smith, and believe me, he's got talent. He got hurt in camp and hasn't played since. I haven't heard anything about the injury, but since the rest of the recieving corps has been playing so well, I assume they are just going to redshirt him. I don't know if I buy that he's better than #1 and #7, because those guys look to be about 6'4" with speed and hands, but at least that explains why I didn't notice your boy.

Dickson has 16 less catches, 370 less yards, and 4 less TDs than #85 of USC and #85 looks like an NFL first round pick. I don't know what number Dickson is. I'm sure he had plenty of catches against ASU, but didn't look like more than a Pac 10 tight end.
Reply With Quote
  #277  
Old 11-25-2007, 12:14 AM
pokergrader pokergrader is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,792
Default Re: 2007 Pac 10 football thread

Who is #85? Do you mean #83, our tight end Fred Davis? He is very good, in his 5th year and will be playing on Sundays. Very important part of the offense, and will certainly be first team all-PAC 10 as the tight end, probably first team all-american.

Our other wide receivers are all in their first years of really contributing, #1 Patrick Turner and #7 Hazelton. So they aren't the greatest receivers in the world because they are developing. Nobody knows how good they are or will become, so it is pointless to even compare skill levels against established receivers (who may or may not be hurt).
Reply With Quote
  #278  
Old 11-25-2007, 03:36 AM
MSUcougar MSUcougar is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,140
Default Re: 2007 Pac 10 football thread

Big win for WSU today in a dramatic, exciting Apple Cup. Nice to see Alex Brink end his career on a positive note.

Being in Husky Stadium for a Cougar win was awesome... [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]
Reply With Quote
  #279  
Old 11-25-2007, 03:52 AM
plaster8 plaster8 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: SHIPOOPI!
Posts: 685
Default Re: 2007 Pac 10 football thread

[ QUOTE ]
Which games did USC look so impressive? Nebraska? Neb sucks. WSU? Who doesn't kick the hell out of them?


[/ QUOTE ]

I can think of one team that doesn't kick the hell out of WSU. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
Reply With Quote
  #280  
Old 11-25-2007, 05:00 AM
bernie bernie is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Muckleshoot! Usually rebuying.
Posts: 15,163
Default Re: 2007 Pac 10 football thread

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Which games did USC look so impressive? Nebraska? Neb sucks. WSU? Who doesn't kick the hell out of them?


[/ QUOTE ]

I can think of one team that doesn't kick the hell out of WSU. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

[img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

All things aside, that was a great game.

Down to the wire, 42-35, with about 1000 yards of offense.

b
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:47 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.