09-01-2019, 09:18 AM
<p>What part of Auburn was better in the trenches isn't getting through?</p><p><br></p><p>I'm a big Formula 1 fan, and come to realize the best car almost always wins. Even when they have early setbacks, the best car/driver/team can come back to win in the end. Some cars will get ahead by wearing out their tires to get a lead position, but in the end, the better car that wears tires more efficiently will win. </p><p><br></p><p>Oregon wasn't going to win that game by running more clock. They needed a better car that didn't wear out the tires to stay in front. Ultimately the better car eked out the victory at the end. You could second guess hundreds of things both teams did. Hell, if Nix was stopped 3 inches sooner, Oregon gets a 4th down stop and wins.</p><p><br></p><p>We argue here routinely about Shaw going turtle vs. being aggressive at crunch time. But the reality is Stanford has to be good enough on O and/or D to win those games, no matter what option is chosen. Oregon wasn't good enough. It was very close and Oregon outplayed Auburn for several stretches, but again, the better team won in the end. Blame Oregon's coaches for losing to Stanford last year, but this was Auburn ultimately asserting its line of scrimmage superiority.</p><p><br></p><p><br></p><p><br></p><p><br></p>