[LuckE2Bhere]

Lucke2BeHere's early rant admonishes those complaining about Nunes to stay home and watch SC on TV.  That is precisely the longer-term problem.  This offensive output - reminiscent of the WORST days under Teevens/Harris - will keep people away.  It's just so freaking ugly to watch, especially when (as now), the output is WAY below the talent.  In a word, the offense is underperforming.

I'd prefer to think that I answered a question with a pertinent answer, but if you want to call it a rant, feel free ;-)

In any case, for some reason, SEC football seems to get decent ratings, even when its best teams play better defense than offense, no?  I had a close friend when I was in school whose dad was the interim AD at Stanford, and he told me he'd occasionally hear "rants" from certain alums who essentially suggested that they'd "rather lose every game 47-48, but see our QB throw lots of TDs, than win every game 9-7".  To each his own, I guess...  ::)

Maybe I'm old school (in an understanding how they actually determine championships kind of way), but there is a lot more to football than just offense, and that's not the only part of the game that many fans enjoy watching.  I'd like to think you are seriously underestimating the sophistication of the broader (than just Elway-nostalgic Stanford alums) spectrum of football fans. 

Maynard completed 63% of passes (with a healthy 9 yards / attempt and 2:1 TD/INT ratio) in losing to freakin' Utah last week... is that really what you think will fill our stadium?!?

[LuckE2Bhere]

Lucke2BeHere's early rant admonishes those complaining about Nunes to stay home and watch SC on TV.  That is precisely the longer-term problem.  This offensive output - reminiscent of the WORST days under Teevens/Harris - will keep people away.  It's just so freaking ugly to watch, especially when (as now), the output is WAY below the talent.  In a word, the offense is underperforming.

I'd prefer to think that I answered a question with a pertinent answer, but if you want to call it a rant, feel free ;-)

In any case, for some reason, SEC football seems to get decent ratings, even when its best teams play better defense than offense, no?  I had a close friend when I was in school whose dad was the interim AD at Stanford, and he told me he'd occasionally hear "rants" from certain alums who essentially suggested that they'd "rather lose every game 47-48, but see our QB throw lots of TDs, than win every game 9-7".  To each his own, I guess...  ::)

Maybe I'm old school (in an understanding how they actually determine championships kind of way), but there is a lot more to football than just offense, and that's not the only part of the game that many fans enjoy watching.  I'd like to think you are seriously underestimating the sophistication of the broader (than just Elway-nostalgic Stanford alums) spectrum of football fans. 

Maynard completed 63% of passes (with a healthy 9 yards / attempt and 2:1 TD/INT ratio) in losing to freakin' Utah last week... is that really what you think will fill our stadium?!?