Texas is lucky as hell

[BigBadBen]

That pathetic candy ass horse collar penalty gave them the game.

Way to panzy up tge game NCAA. You suck!


The Tide will roll the horns.

[wood911]

Nebraska was definitely playing against UT and the officials. There were several questionable pass interference calls that went Texas' way. Still, if Neb kicks the ball down the middle of the field on the last kickoff, they win the game.
Watching the replay, the whistle blows just as the clock rolls to 0:00. The game was over. No better than Texas played, I'd like to see TCU jump past them and play Alabama.

[jbug]

BUT the team the Big 12 needed to win....WON! More than I can say for our Pokes......

[OSUFan]

Yes, Texas was Suh close to losing. But I was cheering for Texas. I'd rather have a Big 12 team in the national championship game than some other team.

[BigBadBen]

I was pulling for a BCS cluster, so we would be a step closer to playoffs.

I would like to have seen TCU sneak in.


Not to mention, with a Nebraska victory, the Big 12 would have had 2 BCS bowls.

[superpoke]

Ndamukong Suh should win the Heisman Trophy. He won't, but he should. He was awesome tonight and all season.

But, honest to God, is anyone surprised that the game-deciding break went in favor of Texas?

I'd like to say that someday, all such things will come back on them, but karma tends to ignore college football.

They were disgraceful tonight. TCU deserves to play for the title (but there's no way in hell they get that chance).

[CaliforniaCowboy]

That pathetic candy ass horse collar penalty gave them the game.

Way to panzy up tge game NCAA. You suck!


The Tide will roll the horns.


So now CONFERENCE referees are part of the "NCAA conspiracy"?

:stupe:

[GoPokes83]

&^%^$ I hate that Mack Brown, his sorry a$$ facelift, AND TEXAS! Their winning did nothing for us but hurt us even more in recruiting. So a team that beat the dog out of us squeaks by the #23 team in the country? How does that make our division look good? I was pulling for Nebraska the whole way.

[PokesFanatic]

I'm of the opinion that we aren't anywhere near UT's level on recruiting in Texas. They get who they want out of that state. More likely, we compete with the TTU, NU, et al of the conference.

Mack Brown's success has very little to do with who we will land in recruiting.

[BigBadBen]

So now CONFERENCE referees are part of the "NCAA conspiracy"?

:stupe:



Here is an idea.
If you are going to quote what I said, and make an idiotic statement, at least read and understand what I said.

I will break it down for you:

That pathetic candy ass horse collar penalty gave them the game. The penalty for horsecollar is pathetic. The NCAA implements the rules, and the officials must call the game within those guidelines. Unfortunately, the NCAA is trying to turn the game into glorified touch football.

If that rule wasnt in place, the official wouldnt have called it, and Texas wouldnt have been in Field Goal range.

Understand now?

Way to panzy up the game NCAA. You suck!Should be self explanatory. But, comprehension isnt always your best attribute. So, it means that the NCAA is making the game of football a sissy sport, and I think the NCAA sucks.


The Tide will roll the horns.Bama will win.

[CaliforniaCowboy]

Okay, I get you now, Nebraska should not have to play by the same rules of every body else, right?

Since they are forced to play by the same rules, then it's a NCAA conspiracy.

That's it, right? geesh.

[BigBadBen]

Still, if Neb kicks the ball down the middle of the field on the last kickoff, they win the game.

Watching the replay, the whistle blows just as the clock rolls to 0:00. The game was over.


1.
Yeah, I agree. I hate it when teams try to get cute on kickoffs. It always backfires and sets up the other team with good field position. As ofter as that happens, you would thinks coaches would catch on.

2.
I think the call was correct to put one second back on the clock. I wanted Texas to miss it though. I really wanted to see the BCS all screwed up!

[BigBadBen]

Okay, I get you now, Nebraska should not have to play by the same rules of every body else, right?

Since they are forced to play by the same rules, then it's a NCAA conspiracy.

That's it, right? geesh.


Are you really that dense?
What conspiracy are you talking about?

[CaliforniaCowboy]

Are you really that dense?
What conspiracy are you talking about?

the one that suggested that it's the NCAA's fault that nebraska committed a penalty.

The NCAA is interested in protecting the athletes, not in the outcome of the game.

You might think that horse collering is not dangerous and should not be a penalty, but the University Presidents that voted for that rule change evidently do not agree with you.

You all but flat out said that Texas won because of the NCAA and their rules.... as if nebraska had nothing to do with it.

It doesn't matter to me. I think it's a good rule.

I think that Nebraska committed a penalty and it cost them the game.

(not any different than our loss to the Aggies a few years back where we committed a penalty that cost us the game.)

[jbug]

FOLKS...geez can't we get along here?? Bottom line is that the team that won is the BEST team for our Conference (money/prestige). Neb is OK on D but sux on O and they are has beens (until they get ROME).
And again, TEXASS won ...did their job...and OSU lost, didn't do their job!

[BackHomePoke]

The biggest difference that I see between our game with Texas and Nebraska's, besides the score, is turn overs. Texas turned the ball over and gave Nebraska the short field repeatedly just as we did with them. We held Texas to 275 yrds, Nebraska held them to 200 yrds. We gained 277 yrds on them, Nebraska had 106 yrds. It wasn't their high powered offense that beat us, it was their defense,special teams and use turning over the ball. More so than anything was the turnovers giving them the short field.

[BigBadBen]

the one that suggested that it's the NCAA's fault that nebraska committed a penalty.

The NCAA is interested in protecting the athletes, not in the outcome of the game.

You might think that horse collering is not dangerous and should not be a penalty, but the University Presidents that voted for that rule change evidently do not agree with you.

You all but flat out said that Texas won because of the NCAA and their rules.... as if nebraska had nothing to do with it.

It doesn't matter to me. I think it's a good rule.

I think that Nebraska committed a penalty and it cost them the game.

(not any different than our loss to the Aggies a few years back where we committed a penalty that cost us the game.)




Okay, so anyone who disagrees with rules set forth by a governing body is a conspiracy theorist. Now that I know how you think, it explains a lot.

[Poke John I]

No team can expect to win a game when they can only generate 106 yards of offense. I also saw another Nebraska horsecollar that was not called. I'm not really in favor of the horsecollar rule but since it is a rule, all teams need to comply.

Nobody seems to think Texas has a chance against Alabama. A lot of that is based on their last games with Alabama easily handling Florida and Texas squeeking by Nebraska. They seem to forget that a few games ago Alabama squeeked by Tennessee 12-10. I'm sure Alabama will be favored by 7 to 10 points but I look for Texas to give them a good game with a 60/40 chance of winning.

[JimBob]

Sadly, this thread is about "other" teams playing for the championship; something Gundy will only dream about.:vomit-smiley-001:

[OSUFan]

Sadly, this thread is about "other" teams playing for the championship; something Gundy will only dream about.:vomit-smiley-001:

How true! On another board, they are complaining about why the Big 12 Championship is being played at Jerry's World when they ought to be complaining about OSU having a snowball chance in hell of ever getting there.

[CoachOSU]

How true! On another board, they are complaining about why the Big 12 Championship is being played at Jerry's World when they ought to be complaining about OSU having a snowball chance in hell of ever getting there.

And I GOT RIPPED a couple of weeks ago for saying we won't compete with the Texas/OU's of the conference until we start getting more of the athlete's that these teams bring in every year and change our mentality....

Geez the coach gets no free pass or love... :music-smiley-019: :biggrin:

[CaliforniaCowboy]

And I GOT RIPPED a couple of weeks ago for saying we won't compete with the Texas/OU's of the conference until we start getting more of the athlete's that these teams bring in every year and change our mentality....

Geez the coach gets no free pass or love... :music-smiley-019: :biggrin:

Yeah, either that or we can make it though a season without losing half of our starters.... :rolleyes:

[PokesFanatic]

Yeah, either that or we can make it though a season without losing half of our starters.... :rolleyes:

I think you're proving his point for him, because that's exactly the scenario when quality depth would make a big difference.

[ostatedan]

1) No one forced the Nebraska kicker to kick the ball out of bounds.

2) The horse collar was a correct call. It doesn't matter if you disagree with the existence of the horse collar rule, the fact is that it does exist, it was violated, and it was the right call.

3) There is no question that there was one second on the clock when the ball hit the ground. It was the right call to allow Texas to kick the field goal.

4) The refs did not interfere in letting the Texas kicker get the ball between the uprights.

If you disagree with any of this, you just dislike Texas and hate that they won. If anything, criticize Mac for almost blowing the game by running clock, then letting Colt run a meaningless sprint out and almost let the clock expire. But at the end of the day, Texas won the game fair and square.

[CaliforniaCowboy]

I think you're proving his point for him, because that's exactly the scenario when quality depth would make a big difference.

I don't think so, IMHO, we would "compete" with Texas and OU if our players were not injured. I understand that OU had losses too and their depth took over, but we played Texas with them at full strength.

If we had been able to play our schedule at full strength, or closer to it, would we have caught up with the UTs and OUs of the league? I think our depth is/was sufficient to keep us in those games (as opposed to failing in the 4th quarter). Clearly our depth is not sufficient to REPLACE half the team, and STILL have quality 3rd stringers make significant contributions. I don't think that is what we were talking about.

IMHO, we had clearly caught up, and most had us with a good chance of making a strong run for the title. Even with all of the personnel losses we went into the final week with a chance at a BCS birth... then we lost Booker and Antoine (and Zac's ankle) in that game.

Those were "record" personnel losses for an OSU program, and are not the norm...

[BigBadBen]

2) The horse collar was a correct call. It doesn't matter if you disagree with the existence of the horse collar rule, the fact is that it does exist, it was violated, and it was the right call.



I never argued that it was a bad call. I don't understand the confusion.
I just hate the rule. That is what I was expressing.

Was the rule broken? Yes. Again, I never argued that point.


The NCAA has implemented a lot of rules in recent years that really limit the players on the field. They have to make a judgments call in a millisecond, or face the consequences of being penalized for playing too rough.

My argument is against the rule itself, not the enforcement.

:stupe:

[PokesFanatic]

I don't think so, IMHO, we would "compete" with Texas and OU if our players were not injured. I understand that OU had losses too and their depth took over, but we played Texas with them at full strength.

If we had been able to play our schedule at full strength, or closer to it, would we have caught up with the UTs and OUs of the league? I think our depth is/was sufficient to keep us in those games (as opposed to failing in the 4th quarter). Clearly our depth is not sufficient to REPLACE half the team, and STILL have quality 3rd stringers make significant contributions. I don't think that is what we were talking about.

IMHO, we had clearly caught up, and most had us with a good chance of making a strong run for the title. Even with all of the personnel losses we went into the final week with a chance at a BCS birth... then we lost Booker and Antoine (and Zac's ankle) in that game.

Those were "record" personnel losses for an OSU program, and are not the norm...

Fine. You translate "getting more of the talent of the OU's and UT's" however you want. How it is this topic excludes depth is beyond me, as depth is usually the biggest difference between the 'good' teams and the 'great' ones.

I personally can't imagine the statement not meaning greater depth in addition to overall skill level.

[CaliforniaCowboy]

Fine. You translate "getting more of the talent of the OU's and UT's" however you want. How it is this topic excludes depth is beyond me, as depth is usually the biggest difference between the 'good' teams and the 'great' ones.

I personally can't imagine the statement not meaning greater depth in addition to overall skill level.

I did not see and "exclusion of depth" in any post. It appears that at some point you took it beyond simply first and second unit depth (which is where we have been deficient by most accounts) down to third and fourth team depth.

OU still beat us with their 3rd team depth, but IMHO, that was only after Zac ALSO sprained his ankle and we continued to lose players during the game. OU lost a boat load of games this year because they did not have the depth they had in the past to overcome their injuries... same as us.

I don't see how that puts us behind them, per se. Our 3rd and 4th team depth was still sufficient to beat TTech and CU.

The comment was about us getting talent, not necessarialy about that level of talent going 3 and 4 deep everywhere.

We had excellent DEPTH this year, and would have run the table if we had been able to sustain that level of depth.

When you get down to the 3rd string, then we're talking more about EXPERIENCE than "talent". (and preparation / development)


I just don't think that you're allowing for the extroidinary level of injury that we sustained this year; which was atypical. If we had even a "normal" number injuries, then our talent and depth would have been comperable to everyone in the conference. As it was, it was still better than most of our competition.

[GoPokes83]

I think the horse collar rule should be like a face mask penalty, incidental or deliberate.

[Inky29]

There is no more incidental and deliberate face mask penalty in college football.

The horse collar rule is a good rule, with the speed, size, and strength of the guys these days you are greatly increasing the risk of serious injuries. Yes I know there are always going to be chances for injury but I think making it illegal to do things that greatly increase the odds is a good idea.

I was pulling for chaos too but I can't fault UT for taking advantage of 2 stupid plays by Nebraska.

[JimBob]

1) No one forced the Nebraska kicker to kick the ball out of bounds.

2) The horse collar was a correct call. It doesn't matter if you disagree with the existence of the horse collar rule, the fact is that it does exist, it was violated, and it was the right call.

3) There is no question that there was one second on the clock when the ball hit the ground. It was the right call to allow Texas to kick the field goal.

4) The refs did not interfere in letting the Texas kicker get the ball between the uprights.

If you disagree with any of this, you just dislike Texas and hate that they won. If anything, criticize Mac for almost blowing the game by running clock, then letting Colt run a meaningless sprint out and almost let the clock expire. But at the end of the day, Texas won the game fair and square.

+1.

[wickerbill]

Doesn't the NFL have the same horse collar rule?

[PokesFanatic]

I don't think so, IMHO, we would "compete" with Texas and OU if our players were not injured. I understand that OU had losses too and their depth took over, but we played Texas with them at full strength.

If we had been able to play our schedule at full strength, or closer to it, would we have caught up with the UTs and OUs of the league? I think our depth is/was sufficient to keep us in those games (as opposed to failing in the 4th quarter). Clearly our depth is not sufficient to REPLACE half the team, and STILL have quality 3rd stringers make significant contributions. I don't think that is what we were talking about.

IMHO, we had clearly caught up, and most had us with a good chance of making a strong run for the title. Even with all of the personnel losses we went into the final week with a chance at a BCS birth... then we lost Booker and Antoine (and Zac's ankle) in that game.

Those were "record" personnel losses for an OSU program, and are not the norm...

I disagree about the quality of our depth. I don't think we were sufficiently stocked but in a couple of positions this year. Other than at RB and DBs, we have a pretty noticeable dropoff in performance when the starter goes down. LB corps is experienced and talented, but not very deep. DTs are never very deep (per Gundy not a legitimate 2 deep). We lose one offensive lineman and the line caves in all bedlam long. We lose Dez and 2nd place was distantly behind him. TEs were thin and not as effective as we would have liked.

I think there's quite a big damn lot of ground to be made up in quality depth when you compare us to UT and OU. We're closer than we've ever been, but (like you pointed out) we lose a couple of starters and crater badly to anything other than middling teams.

I think Coach is exactly right when he says that we won't readily compete with the top two programs in our conference until we're competing with and winning recruitment among them.

[CaliforniaCowboy]

I disagree about the quality of our depth. I don't think we were sufficiently stocked but in a couple of positions this year. Other than at RB and DBs, we have a pretty noticeable dropoff in performance when the starter goes down. LB corps is experienced and talented, but not very deep. DTs are never very deep (per Gundy not a legitimate 2 deep). We lose one offensive lineman and the line caves in all bedlam long. We lose Dez and 2nd place was distantly behind him. TEs were thin and not as effective as we would have liked.

I think there's quite a big damn lot of ground to be made up in quality depth when you compare us to UT and OU. We're closer than we've ever been, but (like you pointed out) we lose a couple of starters and crater badly to anything other than middling teams.

I think Coach is exactly right when he says that we won't readily compete with the top two programs in our conference until we're competing with and winning recruitment among them.

It sounds like an opinion, not really based on any fact.

We had quality backups at QB; and competed and stole our #2 guy from the big boy LSU.... Weeden ain't no slouch. Perhaps we haven't developed them as well as we should have, but then, that's not the issue.

Our coaches said that this was the most DLine talent that we've had in a while, and there wasn't much drop off at DT when the 2nds came in. I don't know what you're reading or to whom you're listening. Jarka and Donaldson played significant minutes (as did Nicholas), and some of these guys were in at the end (which is reported to be more significant than starting).

LB, Safety, CB, etc. were as deep or deeper than I can ever remember. McGee was really coming along before we lost him in the OU game, as were some of the others.

Didn't we win Cox, Cate, Bryant, and others like Webb, Barnett, etc. from the big boys?

It sounds to me like you're mostly using perception and inuendo as fact in your discussion.

[CoachOSU]

It sounds like an opinion, not really based on any fact.

We had quality backups at QB; and competed and stole our #2 guy from the big boy LSU.... Weeden ain't no slouch. Perhaps we haven't developed them as well as we should have, but then, that's not the issue.

Our coaches said that this was the most DLine talent that we've had in a while, and there wasn't much drop off at DT when the 2nds came in. I don't know what you're reading or to whom you're listening. Jarka and Donaldson played significant minutes (as did Nicholas), and some of these guys were in at the end (which is reported to be more significant than starting).

LB, Safety, CB, etc. were as deep or deeper than I can ever remember. McGee was really coming along before we lost him in the OU game, as were some of the others.

Didn't we win Cox, Cate, Bryant, and others like Webb, Barnett, etc. from the big boys?
It sounds to me like you're mostly using perception and inuendo as fact in your discussion.


Sure but that is one here, one there..... PokesFanatic is right... we can't just snatch one here and there... we need consistant gain of top notch recruits EVERY year...

Also, think about all the ones we LOST the minute OU/Texas showed interest in them.. I would venture to say we lost more than we have gained (I am going off of Rivals who shows all the recruits and the schools that have offered)

In fact even after a 9-3 record, more stadium upgrades, and more national tv attention..we are still ranked behind Texas, OU, Texas A&M, and (on some sites) behind Texas Tech as well...

No one says we CAN'T beat Texas and OU consistantly... I am saying we need to improve recruiting to do this... One/two 4 star athlete here and there won't beat the Texas's/OU's that get 6- 4 star or 7- 4 star athletes..

[CaliforniaCowboy]

once again you're making up numbers...

We will NEVER get a recruit out of Texas that wants to go to UT. Never. OU/LSU however is a different story. However, Texas can only take 25 out of the Texas Top 100, that leaves plenty for us to get and compete. Plenty.

We got 4-star kids.
2010 = 6
2009 = 4
2008 = 3
2007 = 7
2006 = 9

and you all know what I think of recruiting rankings in the first plays.... not much, but this was your metric.

[osupride97]

Bottom line is the Cowboys got their collective asses handed to them in three games - and the Houston game HAD DEZ !

In three big games, the HEAD COACH once again failed to have his team ready to play and looked like a fool. I don't mind the Texas loss so much. They are the #2 team in the country. However, we NEVER should have lost to Houston and especially the goons. They practically limped out onto the field and still managed to make the Cowboys look like Ponca City High.

And I have read over and over and over on these message boards that we finally have the depth. Well, if that's the case, then losing some to injury shouldn't have mattered much. Thing is, Gumbalina likes to keep playing the same players, injured or not, and doesn't allow the 2nd/3rd string any significant playing time.

I just hope they show up in Dallas. I'll be there, yelling my head off and I'll stay until the end, but I refuse to get my hopes up for what will surely be another disappointing loss.

[GoPokes83]

I just hope they show up in Dallas. I'll be there, yelling my head off and I'll stay until the end, but I refuse to get my hopes up for what will surely be another disappointing loss.

I can't speak for everyone, but I think if you replace words "will surely", with "may", you probably have a pretty good handle on the collective thoughts of most Pokes fans right now.

[osupride97]

I can't speak for everyone, but I think if you replace words "will surely", with "may", you probably have a pretty good handle on the collective thoughts of most Pokes fans right now.

I was trying to throw in a little positive. :D

[CaliforniaCowboy]

Bottom line is the Cowboys got their collective asses handed to them in three games - and the Houston game HAD DEZ !

1) In three big games, the HEAD COACH once again failed to have his team ready to play and looked like a fool. I don't mind the Texas loss so much. They are the #2 team in the country. However, we NEVER should have lost to Houston and especially the goons. They practically limped out onto the field and still managed to make the Cowboys look like Ponca City High.

2) And I have read over and over and over on these message boards that we finally have the depth. Well, if that's the case, then losing some to injury shouldn't have mattered much. Thing is, Gumbalina likes to keep playing the same players, injured or not, and doesn't allow the 2nd/3rd string any significant playing time.

I just hope they show up in Dallas. I'll be there, yelling my head off and I'll stay until the end, but I refuse to get my hopes up for what will surely be another disappointing loss.

That's not the bottom line... that's not even a storyline.

1) We turned the ball overr FIVE times against Houston; most of them were Zac Robinsons fault. Our SENIOR. How is that a "coaching" problem? We had FIVE turnovers against Texas, but still out gained them by 2 yards, and had only two fewer first downs and had a 7 minute TOP advantage. How are 4 interceptions the coaches fault? OU took advantage of our poor kick coverage and had field position on us most of the game. We stunk it up against OU, in all phases... maybe coaching maybe not, but we're talking about TALENT in this thread. Did we play the 1988 bedlam game without Gundy/Sanders/Dykes? Was anybody injured in the 1993 bedlam game (last Cotton Bowl birth) with Fields/Woods/Bell? Were any of them injured that season? Did you know Zac would sprain his ankle in the first quarter of this year's bedlam game to add to his bumb shoulder? Was Hunter 100%? Was Dez playing? We lost the 1993 bedlam game 52-7... you don't think that 27-0 is an IMPROVEMENT under those conditions?

2) I can't speak for Gundy's decision to start an injured QB. I don't agree with the decision, but clearly I'm not the "insider" that he is. We were talking about overall talent... my beef was already stated that our 3rd stringers do not have EXPERIENCE. That has nothing to do with recruiting talent.

I don't really care about your "hopes", this game is not about you. You can do what you like, but this thread was more about our ability to get topo talent, than about hopes in a bowl game.

[osupride97]

I didn't ever say this game is about me. And I am a fan, as much as anyone else on here, and can HOPE that they do show up and give it their all. I'm just not getting my hopes up any more. I would like to live to see them beat the goons and the horns, again, in my lifetime.

And I would slightly disagree with you on the TO's by Zac, in all games. If my starting QB is not playing up to his ability, then the coach needs to pull his ass out. And most of you know that I love, love, love Zac, but he still needed to sit. Putting Cate or Weeden in wouldn't have been much worse in all scenarios. Plus, you put them in, they get more experience. Not rocket science. Zac was clearly not ready to play Bedlam, plus he was limping early in the first half, and yet the COACH continued to leave him in most of the game. THOSE are coaching decisions and should have been made earlier in the game. Sometimes you have to make tough decisions.

Since when is a thread all about the original topic? I've been around these boards since the 90's and not many stay on topic. Sorry to have derailed your thoughts.

[osupride97]

Plus, one more thought. We are going to bottom out on top talent when the kids see what the HEAD COACH is doing (or not doing) in big-time game situations.

[CaliforniaCowboy]

Plus, one more thought. We are going to bottom out on top talent when the kids see what the HEAD COACH is doing (or not doing) in big-time game situations.

and you base that assumption on which facts?

come on folks... wild speculation about things that might never occur is just out of hand. Our program deserves better than to have our own fans sitting around and making things up that may never happen just to bash them over the head with.

we can do better than that as a fan base.

[CoachOSU]

once again you're making up numbers...

We will NEVER get a recruit out of Texas that wants to go to UT. Never. OU/LSU however is a different story. However, Texas can only take 25 out of the Texas Top 100, that leaves plenty for us to get and compete. Plenty.

We got 4-star kids.
2010 = 6
2009 = 4
2008 = 3
2007 = 7
2006 = 9

and you all know what I think of recruiting rankings in the first plays.... not much, but this was your metric.


Well not sure where you got 6 4-star recruits for us... on Rivals we have 4 4-star recruits - Barnett, Deaton, Lewis, and Randle.... where is the other two??

Guess you are looking somewhere I am not...

[MemphisPoke]

[QUOTE=osupride97;100714]
And I would slightly disagree with you on the TO's by Zac, in all games. If my starting QB is not playing up to his ability, then the coach needs to pull his ass out. And most of you know that I love, love, love Zac, but he still needed to sit. Putting Cate or Weeden in wouldn't have been much worse in all scenarios. Plus, you put them in, they get more experience. Not rocket science. Zac was clearly not ready to play Bedlam, plus he was limping early in the first half, and yet the COACH continued to leave him in most of the game. THOSE are coaching decisions and should have been made earlier in the game. Sometimes you have to make tough decisions.


QUOTE]



I have to agree with Pride on this one. In too many cases when a star is not performing to his ability (for what ever reason) or is just having an off day it is the coaches decision to make that move. I've done it in coaching youth here in Memphis. Both in Basketball and Football. It is sometimes the best thing you can do for the kid and FOR THE TEAM.

Now I understand the desire to leave Zac in because he is a senior and a leader.....but if you don't think that the other team members weren't aware that he was not close to 100% then you are fooling yourself.

And the last time I checked Football is a TEAM sport. There was a lot riding on the uO game and it slipped through the TEAMS fingers. Heavens knows our defense was busting their butts out there. They deserved better.

[CaliforniaCowboy]

[QUOTE=osupride97;100714]
And I would slightly disagree with you on the TO's by Zac, in all games. If my starting QB is not playing up to his ability, then the coach needs to pull his ass out. And most of you know that I love, love, love Zac, but he still needed to sit. Putting Cate or Weeden in wouldn't have been much worse in all scenarios. Plus, you put them in, they get more experience. Not rocket science. Zac was clearly not ready to play Bedlam, plus he was limping early in the first half, and yet the COACH continued to leave him in most of the game. THOSE are coaching decisions and should have been made earlier in the game. Sometimes you have to make tough decisions.


QUOTE]



I have to agree with Pride on this one. In too many cases when a star is not performing to his ability (for what ever reason) or is just having an off day it is the coaches decision to make that move. I've done it in coaching youth here in Memphis. Both in Basketball and Football. It is sometimes the best thing you can do for the kid and FOR THE TEAM.

Now I understand the desire to leave Zac in because he is a senior and a leader.....but if you don't think that the other team members weren't aware that he was not close to 100% then you are fooling yourself.

And the last time I checked Football is a TEAM sport. There was a lot riding on the uO game and it slipped through the TEAMS fingers. Heavens knows our defense was busting their butts out there. They deserved better.

I think everybody is in concenses on that topic... I'm not sure why it's even in this thread. It's not germain to the topic.

[osupride97]

Actually, THIS is what BBB started:

That pathetic candy ass horse collar penalty gave them the game.

Way to panzy up tge game NCAA. You suck!


The Tide will roll the horns.


Nothing about talent at all. It's all about how the NCAA sucks !!!!!! :music-smiley-005:

[CaliforniaCowboy]

Actually, THIS is what BBB started:

That pathetic candy ass horse collar penalty gave them the game.

Way to panzy up tge game NCAA. You suck!


The Tide will roll the horns.


Nothing about talent at all. It's all about how the NCAA sucks !!!!!! :music-smiley-005:


oh, yeah, my bad... I forgot it started out with the conspiracy theory of the NCAA costing the Huskers the game. ;)

[BigBadBen]

oh, yeah, my bad... I forgot it started out with the conspiracy theory of the NCAA costing the Huskers the game. ;)



Quick, everyone get your aluminum foil hats!

CC is talking conspiracy again.