College Football 2011 2.0

Off Topic
941

[quote]DixiesFinest wrote:

[quote]gregron wrote:

[quote]Spike9726 wrote:
Go Clemson![/quote]

^^LOL

West Virginia is absolutely DEMOLISHING Clemson right now. They almost hung half a hundred on em and its only half.

I knew they put up 21 points on LSU’s defense and racked up well over 500 yards but WOW… their offense is really good.[/quote]

Though to be fair, they have been helped by that 99 yard fumble return (great heads up play by the WV defender), followed by Clemson throwing a ball right to the WV defender, followed by Clemson fumbling on bout the 25.

All in all, Clemson looks horrible. Major adjustments needed at halftime. [/quote]

This game is awesome, i love it. I go to USC, and clemson is a huge rivalry. Ive had to hear clemson friends brag for the past month how their ACC champs and a BCS bowl blah blah blah

942

This is a massacre, no longer any fun to watch.

943

I think I jinxed them.

944

that wasnt a BCS game… that was a public raping.

945

LOL, so much for WVU not being deserving of a BCS game. Can’t wait till they are in the Big 12 (hopefully for the 2012 season).

946

[quote]gregron wrote:

[quote]Spike9726 wrote:
Go Clemson![/quote]

^^LOL

West Virginia is absolutely DEMOLISHING Clemson right now. They almost hung half a hundred on em and its only half.

I knew they put up 21 points on LSU’s defense and racked up well over 500 yards but WOW… their offense is really good.[/quote]

Thats WVU MO the last decade or so isn’t it?

They’ll look like world beaters in a game and then a couple of weeks later they’ll look like absolute shit.

They have the same consistancy as a methed out stripper.

947

Good for the Mountaineers.

Clemson annoys me, I hope they’re embarrassed beyond all measure. They chose not to show up at all, you could see it almost right away.

948

[quote]BradTGIF wrote:
Good for the Mountaineers.

Clemson annoys me, I hope they’re embarrassed beyond all measure. They chose not to show up at all, you could see it almost right away.[/quote]

Thats the thing about those kinds of offenses… they rely too much on the big play IMO.

Admittedly I havent seen a lot of Clemson games but from what I have seen of them this season I noticed that they were always getting 65+ yard TD’s. I didnt see a lot of methodical drives from them, more like a lot of “home run” plays. If you live and die by that (kinda like a team in basketball that lives and dies by the 3 pointer) when you arent getting those plays you pretty much screwed and IMO thats what happened to them last night.

They werent getting behind the WVU defense consistently and then a couple of turnovers happened and they folded like a house of cards.

949

[quote]gregron wrote:

[quote]BradTGIF wrote:
Good for the Mountaineers.

Clemson annoys me, I hope they’re embarrassed beyond all measure. They chose not to show up at all, you could see it almost right away.[/quote]

Thats the thing about those kinds of offenses… they rely too much on the big play IMO.

Admittedly I havent seen a lot of Clemson games but from what I have seen of them this season I noticed that they were always getting 65+ yard TD’s. I didnt see a lot of methodical drives from them, more like a lot of “home run” plays. If you live and die by that (kinda like a team in basketball that lives and dies by the 3 pointer) when you arent getting those plays you pretty much screwed and IMO thats what happened to them last night.

They werent getting behind the WVU defense consistently and then a couple of turnovers happened and they folded like a house of cards.[/quote]

You’re right about that. Clemson didn’t have an answer and they seemingly gave up.

Credit where credit is due, though, WVU is fast man. I remember seeing one of their games earlier in the season, Miami I think, and remarking how GD fast they are.

950

[quote]gregron wrote:

[quote]BradTGIF wrote:
Good for the Mountaineers.

Clemson annoys me, I hope they’re embarrassed beyond all measure. They chose not to show up at all, you could see it almost right away.[/quote]

Thats the thing about those kinds of offenses… they rely too much on the big play IMO.

Admittedly I havent seen a lot of Clemson games but from what I have seen of them this season I noticed that they were always getting 65+ yard TD’s. I didnt see a lot of methodical drives from them, more like a lot of “home run” plays. If you live and die by that (kinda like a team in basketball that lives and dies by the 3 pointer) when you arent getting those plays you pretty much screwed and IMO thats what happened to them last night.

They werent getting behind the WVU defense consistently and then a couple of turnovers happened and they folded like a house of cards.[/quote]

I think a lot of the reason for that is the conference they play in. It can’t be that hard to score points and have big plays when your in the ACC.

ACC is now 2-13 in BCS games.

951

So what do you all think about Richardson and Ball staying in college for another season?

I’m baffled. Strike while the iron is hot man, make that money while your body is letting you.

Are either of them going to honestly have BETTER seasons than they did this season? Is their marketability giong to improve that much more? I love college football much more than the NFL, but these two cats have nothing to prove by wearing their alma-maters’ colors next year. None at all. Especially as running backs when the window for them to be dominant so small.

I just don’t get it.

This years’ draft is going to be boring.

952

[quote]BradTGIF wrote:
So what do you all think about Richardson and Ball staying in college for another season?
[/quote]

Richardson? Are you talking about Trent Richardson???

Ball is staying because he submitted his paperwork about where he would be drafted and it came back that he’d be a 3rd rounder so thats why he’s coming back, to try and improve his draft stock.

953

[quote]gregron wrote:

[quote]BradTGIF wrote:
So what do you all think about Richardson and Ball staying in college for another season?
[/quote]

Richardson? Are you talking about Trent Richardson???

Ball is staying because he submitted his paperwork about where he would be drafted and it came back that he’d be a 3rd rounder so thats why he’s coming back, to try and improve his draft stock.[/quote]

And run the risk of blowing up a knee or injuring himself further while NOT getting paid? I think it can be roundly agreed that these two guys are NFL ready. Why not get paid, get benefits, and get endorsments now?

How do you feel about it Greg

Yes I meant Trent Richardson.

954

[quote]BradTGIF wrote:
And run the risk of blowing up a knee or injuring himself further while NOT getting paid? I think it can be roundly agreed that these two guys are NFL ready. Why not get paid, get benefits, and get endorsments now?

How do you feel about it Greg

Yes I meant Trent Richardson.
[/quote]

no way trent richardson stays. he basically already said during the middle of the season that he was leaving. During an interview he said something to the effect of “man, i’ve got kids to take care of. I gotta do what I gotta do.” With regards to staying in school or going to the draft.

Richardson is 100% gone after this season and will be a first rounder.

I think its tough for ball because people are saying that if he comes back he could raise his stock and become a 1st rounder. The difference in money from a 1st rounder RB to a 3rd round RB is a ton… and he isnt going to be getting any endorsement deals as a 3rd round pick ya know?

If i was Ball I would probably go. He’s got the stats/tape from this year and if he can work with a good outfit like API and have a great combine then he could work his draft stock up a bit without playing another season. its a tough call. he really could just love going to school at Wisconsin though?

955

RB’s no you go no matter what, low demand in all truth. I think we are at a point in the NFL that the 1st round RB may never be seen again, kind of like the safety position.

QB’s you stay

956

[quote]Derek542 wrote:
RB’s no you go no matter what, low demand in all truth. I think we are at a point in the NFL that the 1st round RB may never be seen again, kind of like the safety position.

QB’s you stay[/quote]

Safetys are at a premium right now… there will most definitely be first round safetys… every team needs a safety who can play the run and can also cover really well.

957

[quote]gregron wrote:

[quote]Derek542 wrote:
RB’s no you go no matter what, low demand in all truth. I think we are at a point in the NFL that the 1st round RB may never be seen again, kind of like the safety position.

QB’s you stay[/quote]

Safetys are at a premium right now… there will most definitely be first round safetys… every team needs a safety who can play the run and can also cover really well.[/quote]

I agree but look back man on the draft, Ingram is 1st round talent for sure, but he was the only one last year.

Safety’s do go in the later part of the first round, however teams will go after the more prime DB’s and of course all the big positions, OL, DL and QB.

I mean there are only 32 1st round picks.

958

[quote]Derek542 wrote:

[quote]gregron wrote:

[quote]Derek542 wrote:
RB’s no you go no matter what, low demand in all truth. I think we are at a point in the NFL that the 1st round RB may never be seen again, kind of like the safety position.

QB’s you stay[/quote]

Safetys are at a premium right now… there will most definitely be first round safetys… every team needs a safety who can play the run and can also cover really well.[/quote]

I agree but look back man on the draft, Ingram is 1st round talent for sure, but he was the only one last year.

Safety’s do go in the later part of the first round, however teams will go after the more prime DB’s and of course all the big positions, OL, DL and QB.

I mean there are only 32 1st round picks.[/quote]

true… I mean its all about who are the best players available (obviously)

959

[quote]gregron wrote:

[quote]BradTGIF wrote:
And run the risk of blowing up a knee or injuring himself further while NOT getting paid? I think it can be roundly agreed that these two guys are NFL ready. Why not get paid, get benefits, and get endorsments now?

How do you feel about it Greg

Yes I meant Trent Richardson.
[/quote]

no way trent richardson stays. he basically already said during the middle of the season that he was leaving. During an interview he said something to the effect of “man, i’ve got kids to take care of. I gotta do what I gotta do.” With regards to staying in school or going to the draft.

Richardson is 100% gone after this season and will be a first rounder.

I think its tough for ball because people are saying that if he comes back he could raise his stock and become a 1st rounder. The difference in money from a 1st rounder RB to a 3rd round RB is a ton… and he isnt going to be getting any endorsement deals as a 3rd round pick ya know?

If i was Ball I would probably go. He’s got the stats/tape from this year and if he can work with a good outfit like API and have a great combine then he could work his draft stock up a bit without playing another season. its a tough call. he really could just love going to school at Wisconsin though?[/quote]

As for Richardson, here’s what I’m going off of.

http://www.timesdaily.com/stories/Richardson-says-hes-staying,184622

But then this writer doesn’t think so

As for Ball, I still don’t understand it.

Maybe not enough people got to see him play? I saw him in both games against MSU, the loss to OSU, and the Rose Bowl. He dominates, he’s a stud, he’s ready now.

I get that going to Wisconsin might very well be the bees knees, but he’s an RB that will take a ton of reps next season. That wear and tear takes ticks off his money making clock IMO.

960

[quote]gregron wrote:

[quote]Derek542 wrote:

[quote]gregron wrote:

[quote]Derek542 wrote:
RB’s no you go no matter what, low demand in all truth. I think we are at a point in the NFL that the 1st round RB may never be seen again, kind of like the safety position.

QB’s you stay[/quote]

Safetys are at a premium right now… there will most definitely be first round safetys… every team needs a safety who can play the run and can also cover really well.[/quote]

I agree but look back man on the draft, Ingram is 1st round talent for sure, but he was the only one last year.

Safety’s do go in the later part of the first round, however teams will go after the more prime DB’s and of course all the big positions, OL, DL and QB.

I mean there are only 32 1st round picks.[/quote]

true… I mean its all about who are the best players available (obviously)
[/quote]

There are select teams that need certain positions, I mean I hope the Boys go DB. With the new rookie wage scale some safeties may go higher, I just really doubt it.