[metsjetsfan]

So after watching the "game of the century," I came away with a few insights:

-Both defenses are legit.  I'm sure the innate ineptitude of both offenses contributed to the defenses looking great, but wow.  After watching the OSU/Stanford game, it is CLEAR that the Alabama/LSU defenses are on another level.  Each team seems to have an endless supply of freakishly athletic and fast players in both the secondary and front 7.

-I now know why defenses win championships (usually).  Crowd noise, weather, etc. make no difference for defenses.  A great defense will be good on any day in any environment.

-I see little chance that an OK State beats either team.  My perception is that spread offenses, in general, have trouble against teams with front 7s that dominate the line of scrimmage (see Oregon v Auburn, Oregon v LSU).  And both team's secondaries are FAST and opportunistic.

-Surprised to learn that Nick Saban defenses actually make repeated checks before the snap.  I would LOVE to watch a game of chess between Luck and the Alabama defense, with both sides making constant checks at the line of scrimmage a la Peyton/Brady vs Ray Lewis/Ravens defense.  It'd also be a great opportunity to see how Luck's skills will translate to the NFL level.





The question is: how would we matchup against either defense in a NCG (should we go undefeated) or Sugar Bowl (should we only lose to Oregon)?

Answer: I don't like our chances.  I do believe our defense would do well enough to hold the opposition to under 25 points, as neither offense is on par with many teams we faced this year.

BUT, our success thus far has depended on the offensive line controlling the line of scrimmage to establish the running game.  But after watching today's game, I have serious doubts that we will be able to impose our will against either team.  Add the fact that our RBs are, simply put, not better than Richardson and Alabama's host of RBs.  I also question whether our WRs are athletic/quick enough to gain consistent separation against their DBs.

Thus, our only wildcard becomes, you guessed it, Mr. Luck (and maybe the TEs).  But unlike much of his career, I don't think he can count on an established running game setting up playaction.  It likely would be all on him.  He'd need to call the right audibles every time, make tough throws into tight windows, feel/evade constant pressure, and basically show why he could be the next Peyton Manning.  Because that's what Peyton has done for the past decade to more than make up for the Colts' deficiencies.




Even with these doubts, I would kill to watch Luck and Stanford against LSU/Alabama.  A Big 10 team in the Rose Bowl is awesome, but watching Luck prove all those SEC doubters wrong would provide a different kind of satisfaction.  Not to mention all the recruiting benefits, as high schoolers could start to see Stanford as an elite academic institution with an SEC-type identity.  Now wouldn't that be amazing/irresistible  ;).

Hard to think this is all even close to a reality...makes me truly cherish every moment this year.  Saturday vs. Oregon cannot come soon enough...

[metsjetsfan]

So after watching the "game of the century," I came away with a few insights:

-Both defenses are legit.  I'm sure the innate ineptitude of both offenses contributed to the defenses looking great, but wow.  After watching the OSU/Stanford game, it is CLEAR that the Alabama/LSU defenses are on another level.  Each team seems to have an endless supply of freakishly athletic and fast players in both the secondary and front 7.

-I now know why defenses win championships (usually).  Crowd noise, weather, etc. make no difference for defenses.  A great defense will be good on any day in any environment.

-I see little chance that an OK State beats either team.  My perception is that spread offenses, in general, have trouble against teams with front 7s that dominate the line of scrimmage (see Oregon v Auburn, Oregon v LSU).  And both team's secondaries are FAST and opportunistic.

-Surprised to learn that Nick Saban defenses actually make repeated checks before the snap.  I would LOVE to watch a game of chess between Luck and the Alabama defense, with both sides making constant checks at the line of scrimmage a la Peyton/Brady vs Ray Lewis/Ravens defense.  It'd also be a great opportunity to see how Luck's skills will translate to the NFL level.





The question is: how would we matchup against either defense in a NCG (should we go undefeated) or Sugar Bowl (should we only lose to Oregon)?

Answer: I don't like our chances.  I do believe our defense would do well enough to hold the opposition to under 25 points, as neither offense is on par with many teams we faced this year.

BUT, our success thus far has depended on the offensive line controlling the line of scrimmage to establish the running game.  But after watching today's game, I have serious doubts that we will be able to impose our will against either team.  Add the fact that our RBs are, simply put, not better than Richardson and Alabama's host of RBs.  I also question whether our WRs are athletic/quick enough to gain consistent separation against their DBs.

Thus, our only wildcard becomes, you guessed it, Mr. Luck (and maybe the TEs).  But unlike much of his career, I don't think he can count on an established running game setting up playaction.  It likely would be all on him.  He'd need to call the right audibles every time, make tough throws into tight windows, feel/evade constant pressure, and basically show why he could be the next Peyton Manning.  Because that's what Peyton has done for the past decade to more than make up for the Colts' deficiencies.




Even with these doubts, I would kill to watch Luck and Stanford against LSU/Alabama.  A Big 10 team in the Rose Bowl is awesome, but watching Luck prove all those SEC doubters wrong would provide a different kind of satisfaction.  Not to mention all the recruiting benefits, as high schoolers could start to see Stanford as an elite academic institution with an SEC-type identity.  Now wouldn't that be amazing/irresistible  ;).

Hard to think this is all even close to a reality...makes me truly cherish every moment this year.  Saturday vs. Oregon cannot come soon enough...

[OutsiderFan]

Don't buy the SEC hype machine.  Yes, both those teams have good defenses, but so to do NFL teams, and NFL defenses give up points because they face competent QBs.  What stands out to me is how horrible the offenses are, and in particular how bad the QBs are on LSU and Alabama. 

Stanford's OL is as physical as LSU and Alabama's, and Stanford has a mobile QB that can make accurate throws.  Stanford's defense would give up some points, but Stanford's offense would put up more than 6 points through four quarters.  Stanford would have a real shot at beating LSU or Alabama if they played each other.

I also think Arkansas can beat LSU.  I think Oklahoma can beat Okie State.  And I think Oregon can beat Stanford.  It may be that the only two undefeated teams are Boise State and Houston. 

But here's the real truth.  If Stanford beats Oregon (who is a much greater challenge than Kansas State), and wins out, Stanford deserves to be in the BCS Championship game.  The reason is because that will demonstrate they have the best combination of offense and defense in the country.

[OutsiderFan]

Don't buy the SEC hype machine.  Yes, both those teams have good defenses, but so to do NFL teams, and NFL defenses give up points because they face competent QBs.  What stands out to me is how horrible the offenses are, and in particular how bad the QBs are on LSU and Alabama. 

Stanford's OL is as physical as LSU and Alabama's, and Stanford has a mobile QB that can make accurate throws.  Stanford's defense would give up some points, but Stanford's offense would put up more than 6 points through four quarters.  Stanford would have a real shot at beating LSU or Alabama if they played each other.

I also think Arkansas can beat LSU.  I think Oklahoma can beat Okie State.  And I think Oregon can beat Stanford.  It may be that the only two undefeated teams are Boise State and Houston. 

But here's the real truth.  If Stanford beats Oregon (who is a much greater challenge than Kansas State), and wins out, Stanford deserves to be in the BCS Championship game.  The reason is because that will demonstrate they have the best combination of offense and defense in the country.

[fullmetal]

OutsiderFan, you are the salve of reasoning on the festering wound that is the SEC hype machine.  I sure hope Oregon goes down next weekend.

[fullmetal]

OutsiderFan, you are the salve of reasoning on the festering wound that is the SEC hype machine.  I sure hope Oregon goes down next weekend.

[metsjetsfan]

Let me make this clear: I do not buy the SEC hype machine.  I do not think the SEC is by far the best conference that we should all bow down to.  It is pretty clear that the SEC is very top-heavy and average as a whole.

BUT, I think it would be foolish to dismiss the LSU/Alabama defenses as any less than what they are, and that is the best defenses in the nation.  I do not think either defense is amazing because they are in the SEC.  I think they are exceptional because, looking at them from a completely unbiased standpoint, they simply have incredible athletes all over the defense and particularly in the front 7.  Watching the Stanford/OSU game then the Alabama/LSU game, you cannot objectively say that Stanford possesses or has faced an opponent that has defensive players of LSU/Alabama's caliber.  Their freshman DT Anthony Johnson weighs 315 and runs a 4.8--I mean, come on, that is absurd!

Also, both teams average 39 points a game, so these are NOT "horrible" offenses.  Limiting ANY offense to only field goals is not a small feat!  In fact, I'm rather confident in saying that, since we couldn't do it against any team but SJS, we would not able to do that against LSU/Alabama.  Although again, I think our defense is good enough to limit either team to maybe 15-25 points.

And it's not as if both LSU/Alabama have been facing mediocre offenses all year.  LSU, for all intents and purposes, shut down an Oregon offense that will likely score in bunches against us.  Alabama limited a powerful Arkansas offense to only 2 touchdowns.  Stanford and Luck has not faced a defense of the caliber of either LSU or Alabama, and that is simply a fact.  So let's give credit when credit is due!

Let me also be clear in saying this: I do not think either team would roll over Stanford.  A great quarterback can overcome a great defense.  However, Luck has not done that yet (Virginia Tech's defense is NOT at the same level of either team).  Not saying that he wouldn't!  Just saying he hasn't done it yet, and going against LSU/Alabama would be a great chance to prove the hype is true.

By listing out all the factors that make Stanford seem inferior, I know I'm sounding like a very pessimistic Stanford fan and pro-SEC stan.  But I believe I'm being fair in my evaluation of how we'd do against either team.  Now, I just hope to God that we'll have a chance to actually watch the game happen.

The reason I started this thread was because I think it would be fascinating to discuss how'd we matchup against these ballyhooed defenses.  And it'd be nice to revisit this post should our dreams actually come to fruition and we face LSU in the NCG! Of course, let's beat the Ducks on Saturday!!!

[metsjetsfan]

Let me make this clear: I do not buy the SEC hype machine.  I do not think the SEC is by far the best conference that we should all bow down to.  It is pretty clear that the SEC is very top-heavy and average as a whole.

BUT, I think it would be foolish to dismiss the LSU/Alabama defenses as any less than what they are, and that is the best defenses in the nation.  I do not think either defense is amazing because they are in the SEC.  I think they are exceptional because, looking at them from a completely unbiased standpoint, they simply have incredible athletes all over the defense and particularly in the front 7.  Watching the Stanford/OSU game then the Alabama/LSU game, you cannot objectively say that Stanford possesses or has faced an opponent that has defensive players of LSU/Alabama's caliber.  Their freshman DT Anthony Johnson weighs 315 and runs a 4.8--I mean, come on, that is absurd!

Also, both teams average 39 points a game, so these are NOT "horrible" offenses.  Limiting ANY offense to only field goals is not a small feat!  In fact, I'm rather confident in saying that, since we couldn't do it against any team but SJS, we would not able to do that against LSU/Alabama.  Although again, I think our defense is good enough to limit either team to maybe 15-25 points.

And it's not as if both LSU/Alabama have been facing mediocre offenses all year.  LSU, for all intents and purposes, shut down an Oregon offense that will likely score in bunches against us.  Alabama limited a powerful Arkansas offense to only 2 touchdowns.  Stanford and Luck has not faced a defense of the caliber of either LSU or Alabama, and that is simply a fact.  So let's give credit when credit is due!

Let me also be clear in saying this: I do not think either team would roll over Stanford.  A great quarterback can overcome a great defense.  However, Luck has not done that yet (Virginia Tech's defense is NOT at the same level of either team).  Not saying that he wouldn't!  Just saying he hasn't done it yet, and going against LSU/Alabama would be a great chance to prove the hype is true.

By listing out all the factors that make Stanford seem inferior, I know I'm sounding like a very pessimistic Stanford fan and pro-SEC stan.  But I believe I'm being fair in my evaluation of how we'd do against either team.  Now, I just hope to God that we'll have a chance to actually watch the game happen.

The reason I started this thread was because I think it would be fascinating to discuss how'd we matchup against these ballyhooed defenses.  And it'd be nice to revisit this post should our dreams actually come to fruition and we face LSU in the NCG! Of course, let's beat the Ducks on Saturday!!!

[estephan500]

I thought those defenses looked mighty strong also. No big deal to say that. As for projecting how we would do against them, I personally will pass. I can't even figure out matchups closer to home.  and I attribute a bigger portion of football outcomes to random fate than most people. I'm happier when people start talking about "over 10 games, we would win X..."

[estephan500]

I thought those defenses looked mighty strong also. No big deal to say that. As for projecting how we would do against them, I personally will pass. I can't even figure out matchups closer to home.  and I attribute a bigger portion of football outcomes to random fate than most people. I'm happier when people start talking about "over 10 games, we would win X..."

[Griffins78]

Think that the closest defense to LSU/Bama we've seen has been SC in terms of size, speed, and athleticism, though probably not the same breadth of quality and probably not the same depth. These last points make a difference because a defense is as weak as its weakest link. If there isn't any weak spot to exploit, it becomes very tough for the offense.

We didn't exactly bowl over SC and they are younger, less experienced. But it does give you a sense.

[Griffins78]

Think that the closest defense to LSU/Bama we've seen has been SC in terms of size, speed, and athleticism, though probably not the same breadth of quality and probably not the same depth. These last points make a difference because a defense is as weak as its weakest link. If there isn't any weak spot to exploit, it becomes very tough for the offense.

We didn't exactly bowl over SC and they are younger, less experienced. But it does give you a sense.

[socalstanfan1]

Think that the closest defense to LSU/Bama we've seen has been SC in terms of size, speed, and athleticism, though probably not the same breadth of quality and probably not the same depth.

We didn't exactly bowl over SC and they are younger, less experienced. But it does give you a sense.

Agree about the SC defense being the one the team faced that is closest to SEC quality.  And, not surprisingly, it was our toughest test.  I wonder, though, how the offense would have looked if they had all three tight ends available.  Those have definitely been the most dangerous plays in the Stanford playbook all year, and present the most problems for opposing defenses.  If the team can get past Oregon and get Ertz back to finish out the year, (and assuming Toilolo and Fleener stay healthy), I would LOVE to see how those SEC defenses respond to the Tree Amigos.

[socalstanfan1]

Think that the closest defense to LSU/Bama we've seen has been SC in terms of size, speed, and athleticism, though probably not the same breadth of quality and probably not the same depth.

We didn't exactly bowl over SC and they are younger, less experienced. But it does give you a sense.

Agree about the SC defense being the one the team faced that is closest to SEC quality.  And, not surprisingly, it was our toughest test.  I wonder, though, how the offense would have looked if they had all three tight ends available.  Those have definitely been the most dangerous plays in the Stanford playbook all year, and present the most problems for opposing defenses.  If the team can get past Oregon and get Ertz back to finish out the year, (and assuming Toilolo and Fleener stay healthy), I would LOVE to see how those SEC defenses respond to the Tree Amigos.

[washingtonismoney]

[quote author=Griffin78 link=topic=4833.msg34558#msg34558 date=1320594060]
Think that the closest defense to LSU/Bama we've seen has been SC in terms of size, speed, and athleticism, though probably not the same breadth of quality and probably not the same depth.

We didn't exactly bowl over SC and they are younger, less experienced. But it does give you a sense.

Agree about the SC defense being the one the team faced that is closest to SEC quality.  And, not surprisingly, it was our toughest test.  I wonder, though, how the offense would have looked if they had all three tight ends available.  Those have definitely been the most dangerous plays in the Stanford playbook all year, and present the most problems for opposing defenses.  If the team can get past Oregon and get Ertz back to finish out the year, (and assuming Toilolo and Fleener stay healthy), I would LOVE to see how those SEC defenses respond to the Tree Amigos.
[/quote]

To me the biggest factor re: the SC defense was our stubborn playcalling. We kept on running on first down into a stacked box, putting us behind schedule and allowing their defensive line to rush the passer with abandon.

In the third quarter we started passing on first down--we had thirteen total passes on first down for the game, ten after the second drive of the second half--and not coincidentally we scored on six of the ensuing eight possessions.

[washingtonismoney]

[quote author=Griffin78 link=topic=4833.msg34558#msg34558 date=1320594060]
Think that the closest defense to LSU/Bama we've seen has been SC in terms of size, speed, and athleticism, though probably not the same breadth of quality and probably not the same depth.

We didn't exactly bowl over SC and they are younger, less experienced. But it does give you a sense.

Agree about the SC defense being the one the team faced that is closest to SEC quality.  And, not surprisingly, it was our toughest test.  I wonder, though, how the offense would have looked if they had all three tight ends available.  Those have definitely been the most dangerous plays in the Stanford playbook all year, and present the most problems for opposing defenses.  If the team can get past Oregon and get Ertz back to finish out the year, (and assuming Toilolo and Fleener stay healthy), I would LOVE to see how those SEC defenses respond to the Tree Amigos.
[/quote]

To me the biggest factor re: the SC defense was our stubborn playcalling. We kept on running on first down into a stacked box, putting us behind schedule and allowing their defensive line to rush the passer with abandon.

In the third quarter we started passing on first down--we had thirteen total passes on first down for the game, ten after the second drive of the second half--and not coincidentally we scored on six of the ensuing eight possessions.

[fullmetal]

I didn't mean to imply that Stanford fans were promoting the SEC hype, but I do hear this a lot from people around me in Big 12 land.  Stanford earns its shot at the evil empire of hired-gun lineman if they can beat Oregon this weekend.  We'll see.

[fullmetal]

I didn't mean to imply that Stanford fans were promoting the SEC hype, but I do hear this a lot from people around me in Big 12 land.  Stanford earns its shot at the evil empire of hired-gun lineman if they can beat Oregon this weekend.  We'll see.

[MDKern123]

Being a Louisiana native who has lived in Palo Alto for the last 20 years, I know a fair amount about LSU and Stanford football.  I have seen almost all of both teams games for the past few years.  A few points from my perspective....

1.  There is nothing more I would like to see then an LSU/Stanford National Championship Game....  I think most people without a dog in the fight would like to see this matchup as well..... everyone nationally wants to see Luck tested, let Alabama address the Boise issue in the Sugar Bowl.....

2.  Don't underestimate LSU's offense....  they have scored a ton of points this year on ranked teams (see details below).  The talent on these two defences is absolutly unreal.  A lot of these guys are going to be playing on Sundays....    a lot.  You would be making a fatal flaw if you thought Stanford would be able to stop LSU's running game....  which of course opens up their passing game.... Sound familiar?

3.  I really do love watching Stanford, but they are not in a great place right now.  Injuries on offense and defense are taking their toll and their team speed is very suspect, especially on defense.  Oregon is really going to be a challenge this coming week.  If they get by that game.... they should be able to get thru the rest of their schedule....

4.  I still think last year the team was much better....  National Championship good, one bad half of football in Oregon killed it....  I sure hope that helps motivate them for this coming week.....  as if they need it....

Stanford and LSU are my two favorite teams,  it has been a joy to watch both of them these past few years....

LSU Points
40 - #3 Oregon, away (rankings at the time of game)
49 - Northwestern State
19 - #25 Mississippi State, away
47 - #16 West Virginia, away
35 - Kentucky
41 - #17 Florida
38 - Tennessee, away
45 - #20 Auburn
9 - #2 Alabama, away

[MDKern123]

Being a Louisiana native who has lived in Palo Alto for the last 20 years, I know a fair amount about LSU and Stanford football.  I have seen almost all of both teams games for the past few years.  A few points from my perspective....

1.  There is nothing more I would like to see then an LSU/Stanford National Championship Game....  I think most people without a dog in the fight would like to see this matchup as well..... everyone nationally wants to see Luck tested, let Alabama address the Boise issue in the Sugar Bowl.....

2.  Don't underestimate LSU's offense....  they have scored a ton of points this year on ranked teams (see details below).  The talent on these two defences is absolutly unreal.  A lot of these guys are going to be playing on Sundays....    a lot.  You would be making a fatal flaw if you thought Stanford would be able to stop LSU's running game....  which of course opens up their passing game.... Sound familiar?

3.  I really do love watching Stanford, but they are not in a great place right now.  Injuries on offense and defense are taking their toll and their team speed is very suspect, especially on defense.  Oregon is really going to be a challenge this coming week.  If they get by that game.... they should be able to get thru the rest of their schedule....

4.  I still think last year the team was much better....  National Championship good, one bad half of football in Oregon killed it....  I sure hope that helps motivate them for this coming week.....  as if they need it....

Stanford and LSU are my two favorite teams,  it has been a joy to watch both of them these past few years....

LSU Points
40 - #3 Oregon, away (rankings at the time of game)
49 - Northwestern State
19 - #25 Mississippi State, away
47 - #16 West Virginia, away
35 - Kentucky
41 - #17 Florida
38 - Tennessee, away
45 - #20 Auburn
9 - #2 Alabama, away

[Card Fan in OR]

MDKern,

I am in agreement with most of your points. Well, not the ones about watching or caring about LSU. I think we have the potential to be better than last year, but I haven't seen a game where our execution matched the Orange Bowl against VT. Getting there is going to be much more difficult with all the injuries. I hope we can get by Oregon (more than "get by" them, actually) and get a chance for the injured players to get healthy for a bowl game.

Don't get me wrong. I have enjoyed the year immensely and have no complaints. The fact that we are 9-0, ranked 2/3 (in the nation!!) by people, and talking about how the team hasn't totally jelled yet is an unbelievable testimony to how incredibly far Stanford football has come in four years.

Let's keep the run going. 22 straight, anyone?

[Card Fan in OR]

MDKern,

I am in agreement with most of your points. Well, not the ones about watching or caring about LSU. I think we have the potential to be better than last year, but I haven't seen a game where our execution matched the Orange Bowl against VT. Getting there is going to be much more difficult with all the injuries. I hope we can get by Oregon (more than "get by" them, actually) and get a chance for the injured players to get healthy for a bowl game.

Don't get me wrong. I have enjoyed the year immensely and have no complaints. The fact that we are 9-0, ranked 2/3 (in the nation!!) by people, and talking about how the team hasn't totally jelled yet is an unbelievable testimony to how incredibly far Stanford football has come in four years.

Let's keep the run going. 22 straight, anyone?

[metsjetsfan]

MDKern, really good points.  One question: how good is LSU's offensive line?  Are they, like Stanford, also dependent on imposing their will on other teams to establish the running game?  I don't think it's fair to gauge their ability based on their performance against an amazing Alabama front 7.  If so, would you say Stanford's is better?

As far as Stanford's defense, I can't help but imagine how much better we'd be with Skov (sigh...).

[metsjetsfan]

MDKern, really good points.  One question: how good is LSU's offensive line?  Are they, like Stanford, also dependent on imposing their will on other teams to establish the running game?  I don't think it's fair to gauge their ability based on their performance against an amazing Alabama front 7.  If so, would you say Stanford's is better?

As far as Stanford's defense, I can't help but imagine how much better we'd be with Skov (sigh...).

[MDKern123]

LSU's O line is good and now back to full strength....  they do not have two first round choices in it so head to head, Stanford's is better.  WIth that said, the O lines do not play each other, LSU's D line is big, fast and deep they rotate all game long so they are fresh throughout the game.... remember OT on Saturday?  LSU's secondary has no problem playing man to man which allows them to stack the box against the run.....  Trent Richardson was held under 100 yards running, and if you take away three runs of his, I think he averaged a yard or two a carry over 15 other runs....

In a game against them or Alabama, Luck would be running the ball a hell of a lot more then he should, and probably gets pounded....  It really would be a fantastic test of his skills....  and heart....  I don't think we have seen him tested yet, we really do not know where his upside boundaries are.....  that is the wildcard and intrigue for the matchup.

[MDKern123]

LSU's O line is good and now back to full strength....  they do not have two first round choices in it so head to head, Stanford's is better.  WIth that said, the O lines do not play each other, LSU's D line is big, fast and deep they rotate all game long so they are fresh throughout the game.... remember OT on Saturday?  LSU's secondary has no problem playing man to man which allows them to stack the box against the run.....  Trent Richardson was held under 100 yards running, and if you take away three runs of his, I think he averaged a yard or two a carry over 15 other runs....

In a game against them or Alabama, Luck would be running the ball a hell of a lot more then he should, and probably gets pounded....  It really would be a fantastic test of his skills....  and heart....  I don't think we have seen him tested yet, we really do not know where his upside boundaries are.....  that is the wildcard and intrigue for the matchup.

[washingtonismoney]

In the situation you describe, MDKern, I think the three TE set could really be a gamechanger for us--it introduces really unfamiliar matchups and negates some of our speed problems.

LSU on offense worried me more than Alabama mostly because of its wideouts, which are pretty spectacular.

Nevertheless, this is all a moot discussion--we've got to win out first.

[washingtonismoney]

In the situation you describe, MDKern, I think the three TE set could really be a gamechanger for us--it introduces really unfamiliar matchups and negates some of our speed problems.

LSU on offense worried me more than Alabama mostly because of its wideouts, which are pretty spectacular.

Nevertheless, this is all a moot discussion--we've got to win out first.

[Redrum]

Semi-famous quip as Marx brother,  caught redhanded,  tries to weedle his way out of his jam saying,  "Who are you going to believe?  Me, or your own eyes?"

Trying to devalue what people saw in the Alabama/ LSU game is a case of not believing your own eyes.  fullmetal fired and missed with his comments about the SEC hype machine.  Those were, arguably, the #1 and #2 teams playing.  The  "Game of the Century" hype came from  ESPN,  an equal-opportunity (make that every-opportunity) self-promoter.  That a lot of SEC fans actually believe it doesn't change the character of the game itself.

If anything,  Alabama running back Trent Richardson added some legitimate cred to his Voldemort chances.  "Held' to 89 yrds. he also caught passes for an additional 80 yards.  I ended up liking him more and more as the game went on.  If you want to devalue Richardson,  just imagine how we would react if  Taylor  put up 169 yards against the #1 team in the country.  As an aside, if you want to follow the narrative that Alabama "lost" the game rather than LSU being tough enough to take it,  look at Alabama's QB.  AJ McCarron cannot thread the long ball or place it where only the receiver can get to it.  Against fast defenders,  McCarron's long passes hung enough to allow defenders a chance...and they took 'em.

I think Stanford would struggle mightily against either of those teams.  Which isn't an insult.  The games at the top should be hard.  A 9-6 final score isn't as exciting as some other outcomes,  but it's the truth and you saw it with your own eyes.

[Redrum]

Semi-famous quip as Marx brother,  caught redhanded,  tries to weedle his way out of his jam saying,  "Who are you going to believe?  Me, or your own eyes?"

Trying to devalue what people saw in the Alabama/ LSU game is a case of not believing your own eyes.  fullmetal fired and missed with his comments about the SEC hype machine.  Those were, arguably, the #1 and #2 teams playing.  The  "Game of the Century" hype came from  ESPN,  an equal-opportunity (make that every-opportunity) self-promoter.  That a lot of SEC fans actually believe it doesn't change the character of the game itself.

If anything,  Alabama running back Trent Richardson added some legitimate cred to his Voldemort chances.  "Held' to 89 yrds. he also caught passes for an additional 80 yards.  I ended up liking him more and more as the game went on.  If you want to devalue Richardson,  just imagine how we would react if  Taylor  put up 169 yards against the #1 team in the country.  As an aside, if you want to follow the narrative that Alabama "lost" the game rather than LSU being tough enough to take it,  look at Alabama's QB.  AJ McCarron cannot thread the long ball or place it where only the receiver can get to it.  Against fast defenders,  McCarron's long passes hung enough to allow defenders a chance...and they took 'em.

I think Stanford would struggle mightily against either of those teams.  Which isn't an insult.  The games at the top should be hard.  A 9-6 final score isn't as exciting as some other outcomes,  but it's the truth and you saw it with your own eyes.

[CowboyIndian]

We didn't exactly bowl over SC and they are younger, less experienced. But it does give you a sense.

What's your deal? 56 points isn't enough for you....34 in regulation? Do you think $C has a better offense than either of those $EC teams? I do.

[CowboyIndian]

We didn't exactly bowl over SC and they are younger, less experienced. But it does give you a sense.

What's your deal? 56 points isn't enough for you....34 in regulation? Do you think $C has a better offense than either of those $EC teams? I do.

[fullmetal]

CI, that depends on whether you think the Stanford defense is a legitimate and equal substitute for the LSU or Bama defenses.  Redrum, I have no doubt those LSU/Bama linemen pass my eye test, but you should at least give the Stanford linemen a chance to test themselves against such SEC talent before writing up LSU/Bama as the best teams in the nation by far and Stanford not belonging.  The Cardinal have had some rough games, but I think a (healthy) Stanford would have a gambler's chance against either of the $EC teams, and that's all that any of us could ask for.

[fullmetal]

CI, that depends on whether you think the Stanford defense is a legitimate and equal substitute for the LSU or Bama defenses.  Redrum, I have no doubt those LSU/Bama linemen pass my eye test, but you should at least give the Stanford linemen a chance to test themselves against such SEC talent before writing up LSU/Bama as the best teams in the nation by far and Stanford not belonging.  The Cardinal have had some rough games, but I think a (healthy) Stanford would have a gambler's chance against either of the $EC teams, and that's all that any of us could ask for.

[washingtonismoney]

In regulation, we basically held SC to an average performance for them, despite the insane field position and favorable noncalls they got.

****

re: SEC Game of the Century:

I will concede that those are an awesome pair of defenses on display. But don't piss on my leg and tell me it's raining. That was terrible QB play, with little knowledge of the fundamentals. AJ McCarron's last play was incredibly brain-dead. It's hard for me to respect the quality of offensive coaching when you see those offenses on display, especially when you consider the talent and athleticism of recruits they have coming in.

A further thought. We hear a lot about how good these particular SEC defenses are this year. But I submit a large portion of this is past reputation. Last year's SEC featured some actually fearsome offenses and quarterbacks--Newton, obviously, but also McElroy and Mallett. This year's SEC has who, exactly? The Pac-12 has six quarterbacks (Luck, Foles, Barkley, Price, Osweiler, Thomas) who would be either the best or second best QB in the SEC. So for me, getting it done against the Pac-12 this year is far more impressive than getting it done in the SEC.

In terms of the linemen: the defensive linemen have all the talent. Not one LSU or 'bama offensive lineman is projected to go in the first round of next year's draft.

[washingtonismoney]

In regulation, we basically held SC to an average performance for them, despite the insane field position and favorable noncalls they got.

****

re: SEC Game of the Century:

I will concede that those are an awesome pair of defenses on display. But don't piss on my leg and tell me it's raining. That was terrible QB play, with little knowledge of the fundamentals. AJ McCarron's last play was incredibly brain-dead. It's hard for me to respect the quality of offensive coaching when you see those offenses on display, especially when you consider the talent and athleticism of recruits they have coming in.

A further thought. We hear a lot about how good these particular SEC defenses are this year. But I submit a large portion of this is past reputation. Last year's SEC featured some actually fearsome offenses and quarterbacks--Newton, obviously, but also McElroy and Mallett. This year's SEC has who, exactly? The Pac-12 has six quarterbacks (Luck, Foles, Barkley, Price, Osweiler, Thomas) who would be either the best or second best QB in the SEC. So for me, getting it done against the Pac-12 this year is far more impressive than getting it done in the SEC.

In terms of the linemen: the defensive linemen have all the talent. Not one LSU or 'bama offensive lineman is projected to go in the first round of next year's draft.

[Redrum]

Your quote :"you should at least give the Stanford linemen a chance to test themselves against such SEC talent before writing up LSU/Bama as the best teams in the nation by far and Stanford not belonging.

...has no resemblance at all to what I wrote.  I never said they were the best teams in the nation by far.  I said LSU and Bama were arguably the #1 and #2 teams in the nation.  You could argue with that...but then, ummm, you'd be making my point for me. ;D

  And, I never said Stanford didn't belong among those top teams.  Positive the sports books would have us as underdogs.  The question would be only:  by how much?  So what?  I said that Stanford would struggle mightily against either team. I stand by that,  but I never said Stanford didn't deserve a chance to that matchup or that Stanford didn't belong. 

[Redrum]

Your quote :"you should at least give the Stanford linemen a chance to test themselves against such SEC talent before writing up LSU/Bama as the best teams in the nation by far and Stanford not belonging.

...has no resemblance at all to what I wrote.  I never said they were the best teams in the nation by far.  I said LSU and Bama were arguably the #1 and #2 teams in the nation.  You could argue with that...but then, ummm, you'd be making my point for me. ;D

  And, I never said Stanford didn't belong among those top teams.  Positive the sports books would have us as underdogs.  The question would be only:  by how much?  So what?  I said that Stanford would struggle mightily against either team. I stand by that,  but I never said Stanford didn't deserve a chance to that matchup or that Stanford didn't belong. 

[MDKern123]

Come Sat night we will have data points on this, not just speculation.  LSU laid 40 on Oregon.  Let's see what the Cardinal can do.  I sure hope this conversation isn't a mute point come Sunday AM.

[MDKern123]

Come Sat night we will have data points on this, not just speculation.  LSU laid 40 on Oregon.  Let's see what the Cardinal can do.  I sure hope this conversation isn't a mute point come Sunday AM.