2010 College Football Thread

[Mysterio2000X]

While he very well may not ever translate into the pro game, McCoy certainly isn't everything you just described. In fact, you illustrated perfectly the issue guys have coming from any school that throws the ball more than 50% of the time. I'll preface by saying that I completely agree with the whole "system" argument explaining the successes of plenty of QB's ... I won't however do what you just did.

Harrell was anything but weak armed. In fact, he got more attention that the previous Tech QB's because of his arm strength.

McCoy had to throw the ball on numerous "out" patterns and on many "read" routes at Texas. That's the offense that Mack likes. If you'd ever actually paid attention to Texas games you'd also know that his pocket awareness was just fine for the college game. His intelligence was actually one of his strong suites. He doesn't have the down the field arm but can throw passes on a rope in the 40yd range more often than not ....

... you know what, I'm actually very interested in what reports you're talking about because uh .... yeah.

Obviously, that was just a large generalization of all of the problems most system quarterbacks tend to come with. Obviously, not all of those qualities apply to all of those quarterbacks, but every single one of them has enough of those faults that did (or should) have prevented them from going in the first half of the draft.

That being said, for the love of god, PLEASE show me Colt McCoy zipping a ball 40 yards down. He struggles getting velocity/zip at 20 yards; I can't imagine how much he has to loft it up to overcompensate for his girly arm on a 40 yard pass.

And like I said, I was just regurgitating what the only in-depth scouting reports I could find off of google said. Seriously, I didn't even go past the first page, you can just google "Case Keenum Scouting Reports" if you want.

[JStarr]

Chase, any Bears fan of a certain age could have easily told you that Wannstedt couldn't coach Superman out of a phone booth.

Just saying.

[HailtotheYo]

Pitt has some extremely talented skill players (Baldwin, Shanahan, Lewis, Graham) and they're being absolutely wasted with this asshole under center.

And I was foolishly optimistic about Dave Wannstedt when Pitt hired him. The guy has proven that he can recruit talented players.

That's the most mind blowing part to the whole thing. Tons of fantastic players have shuffled through the door under his stint there. Yet they have really, absolutely nothing to show for it. It is kind of mind boggling.

That being said, for the love of god, PLEASE show me Colt McCoy zipping a ball 40 yards down. He struggles getting velocity/zip at 20 yards; I can't imagine how much he has to loft it up to overcompensate for his girly arm on a 40 yard pass.

Seriously ? Half of the Texas passing offense is the 15-25yd out, which he regularly nailed. In fact, your favorite boy Mel Kiper even tabbed him a, and I quote, "strong armed Jake Plummer" .... Everybody has stated that his arm strength was adequate (Gruden, Carroll, Holmgren ... the list goes on) and that he unquestionably can make the throws he needs too. I'm not saying the man has a rocket arm ... but you're trying to say he's got a noodle attached to his shoulder.

A quick search led me to this throw against Rice which shows what I've been saying:

45yds in the air

[Evil Chase K]

Chase, any Bears fan of a certain age could have easily told you that Wannstedt couldn't coach Superman out of a phone booth.

Just saying.

I don't doubt it. I gave him the benefit of the doubt because some guys are just better suited to coach in college. That and he's clearly a great recruiter. But now I've had it with Wannstache.

Pitt has some extremely talented skill players (Baldwin, Shanahan, Lewis, Graham) and they're being absolutely wasted with this asshole under center.

And I was foolishly optimistic about Dave Wannstedt when Pitt hired him. The guy has proven that he can recruit talented players.

That's the most mind blowing part to the whole thing. Tons of fantastic players have shuffled through the door under his stint there. Yet they have really, absolutely nothing to show for it. It is kind of mind boggling

Yeah they constantly underachieve and the local media always sticks up for Wannstedt and gives excuse after excuse. I understand blaming the players for poor execution, but when you're blaming the players for poor execution time after time after time that tells me it's a coaching problem.

Wannstedt has exactly ONE marquee win since taking over Pitt and that's beat #2 ranked WVU in 2007. Since then Pitt's done fuck-all with talented team after talented team.

[DMN in the House]

[Meacon Keaton]

UCLA crushing Texas and Arkansas beating Alabama is the only thing keeping me from blowing my brains out. I know Stanford is better than us, but God damn, we suck.

[DMN in the House]

Don't feel too bad, look at what a team Stanford beat 35-0 is doing to Texas IN Austin. Notre Dame is a better team than they were last year, they just don't have a lot of team speed. Kelly has them playing more physical, he just needs to get some recruiting classes in there.

Man, that Stanford/Oregon game is going to be a hell of a shoot-out. They're gonna break records.

[Meacon Keaton]

Alabama and Oklahoma both sneak out wins due to Arkansas and Cincinatti being turnover happy. LAME.

[Lowerdeck]

This Boise St/Oregon St game is getting ugly. Couple punches thrown, lots of late hits, bunch of personal fouls, James Rodgers got laid out and got a nice blow to the head.

[gunnar hendershow]

Don't feel too bad, look at what a team Stanford beat 35-0 is doing to Texas IN Austin. Notre Dame is a better team than they were last year, they just don't have a lot of team speed. Kelly has them playing more physical, he just needs to get some recruiting classes in there.

Man, that Stanford/Oregon game is going to be a hell of a shoot-out. They're gonna break records.

When Kelly has his classes all set in 2-3 years, then we'll see whether he can revive ND.

And DMN, could you see Neuheisel basically getting one or two big wins every year that save his job? Think of it like the aforementioned Dave Wannstedt who gets enough important wins where the athletic department settle for mediocre with false optimism.

[DMN in the House]

No, not really, because;

1) Neuheisel is a better coach than Wannstedt.

2) Neuheisel is recruiting better than Wannstedt.

3) This was going to be a transition year anyway, with UCLA moving to the Pistol.

I think Neuheisel has this program going in the right direction. Injuries have really hurt the team this year, mostly on the offensive line, but Prince has missed practice time because of it, which doesn't help. I don't think it's really a case of him needing 1 or 2 big wins to save his job, because I don't think his job is really in jeopardy. UCLA isn't going to Tyrone Willingham one of their golden boys. Unless he gets the program in deep shit with the NCAA, which, given his history, is possible, but I feel, unlikely, he's going to get his time to build a program.

Now, that's said, if he loses to USC 4 or 5 times in a row (I doubt that happens either, he's a better coach than Kiffin, and I think they could win this year with their running game and defense), all bets are off.

[MalaCloudy Black]

Alabama and Oklahoma both sneak out wins due to Arkansas and Cincinatti being turnover happy. LAME.

Man, Ryan Mallett really blew it in the second half. ROC's theory on Facebook (game was won single-handedly by Ingram) isn't too far off. We had such a good first half - scoring in the first 50 seconds and keeping Alabama at bay. And then in the second half, just. Blugh. Mallett throwing ints everywhere.

[JStarr]

I'm already circling the calendar for the day after Thanksgiving.

Nevada v. Boise State should already be a sexy matchup, and it's not out of the realm of possibility that they could both be unbeaten. Nevada made the Top 25 this week for the first time in over 60 years.

And, I got a little excited for a while when I heard Temple was up on Penn State. I'd tabbed that as a potential upset.

[DMN in the House]

I'm actually really excited about next week, and it has nothing to do with UCLA's undefeated streak! (>_>)

Stanford/Oregon is going to be a god-damned barnburner. As you all know, I'm not really a big offense-orientated guy, but I am a PAC 10 honk. This should be the game of the week, hand's down.

Also, after a shaky opening, the PAC 10 has really come alive. UCLA is maybe the 7th or 8th best team in the conference, but they dominated Texas (I don't care how 'down' Texas is supposed to be, it was still in Austin, and they're still Texas). Arizona State hung with Wisconsin. Oregon State has issues, but they'll get it together in conference play. California is Jekyll & Hyde. Washington can beat anyone if Locker is on. USC isn't 'USC', but they're probably the most talented team in the conference. Arizona might have it's best team in a decade or more, and I don't think I need to talk about Oregon and Stanford.

You can have your SEC, but the PAC 10 is clearly the second best conference at this point.

[gunnar hendershow]

I would say the PAC-10 is definitely the second best conference this season, they have a lot of teams ranked in the top 25 and they've beaten pretty good opposition. Oregon looks to be the best team in the conference and if they can knock off Stanford next week they'll be in the driver's seat for a spot in Nat'l Championship. I'm expecting the Gators to win against Alabama, and that will open the door for so many teams.

An Oregon-Boise St game isn't out of the real of possibility for the championship. A few teams have to lose, but that game seems more like a possibility every week.

[DMN in the House]

I really think that the Oregon/Stanford game can go either way. Neither team really has much of a defense, although Oregon is definitely better in that regard. Andrew Luck is probably the best drop-back QB in the game, with Mallet as the other contender.

I really think it's going to be a special type of game. I could be completely wrong, and one team could just roll up the other, most likely Oregon doing it to Stanford, but, man, it's the kind of game that makes me love college football.

I really don't think anyone is getting out of PAC 10 play unscathed. There's too many teams that can beat you. Pretty much everyone BUT Washington State could beat any of the other teams. If a team does run the table in this conference, this year, they definitely deserve a shot at the title, Ohio State be damned.

[Blaze09]

Alabama and Oklahoma both sneak out wins due to Arkansas and DJ Woods being turnover happy. LAME.

Fixed

Butch Jones didn't learn from the Air Force and Utah State games on how to beat Oklahoma, let's see if Texas picked up on it.

[Mysterio2000X]

The ASU defense just drew up the blueprint for slowing/beating Oregon. If Stanford learns from the tape, they have a far better cast of players that they could easily give Oregon it's first loss. Stanford's already in mid-season form; the Oregon starters are rusty still since they've been sitting out so much, and don't seem to have the cardio to go all 4 quarters and still be fast/hard hitting, as well.

But yeah, it's about time the Pac-10, as a whole, got it's shit together.

[DMN in the House]

Have you even watched a PAC 10 game, or do you just enjoy talking out of your ass?

Stanford can't do what ASU did. One, they don't have 'a far better cast of players'. They have better offensive players (and even then, it's more that they have Andrew Luck), yes, but ASU has one of the better/more talented defenses in the PAC 10. Stanford does not. Also, the fact that they played in 100+ degree weather in Tempe has a lot to do with it as well. Stanford will not be able to do what ASU did. They're more than capable of defeating the Ducks, but they'll have to do it their way.

I'm gonna leave that last statement alone, but to act like the PAC 10 has needed to 'get it's shit together' is laughable.

[livid]

Yeah, ASU's linebacking corp is probably better than Stanford's defense themselves.