A place for the discussion of all things not closely related to the sport and its competitive side. (Locked down several times a year during the major championships)
jazzcyclist wrote:I heard an analyst point out that Stanford's biggest weakness is their lack of speedy recievers, which means that Luck would be throwing into very small passing windows against teams like LSU and Alabama with great lockdown cornerbacks.
That analyst did not know much about Stanford's offense. Their bread-and-butter is a three tight end set, that can set up a power running play or put all three out into patterns that force the linebackers to try and cover them, which they most often can not. Owusu, their speedy guy, does sometimes get loose in crossing patterns or underneath, but Luck rarely tries to hit him deep because he always has the safety's attention. The long TD passes that Luck throws are to guys up a seam that the safeties have been drawn away from. Luck's best 'skill' is his ability to get the ball to the open receiver, even if that guy is way down his check-list. Defenses must try and stop SU's run first and that sets up all sorts of mismatches for the tight ends to exploit. Alabama or LSU could stop the SU running game, but they can't stop Luck too. The game would end up 35-34 - whoever scored last would win.
The bad news for SU is that Oregon poses all sorts of problems, because their O is unstoppable. That's going to be a barn-burner and I HOPE SU can reverse last year's second-half blow-out.
Avante wrote:Stanford does get that unique athlete as compared to the SEC, Big12
Big brain, no brawn?
As we know this has to be done delicately.
Billy Bob Bodine is 6-4 240 pounds and has a lazer for an arm. He can bench 220 24 times, he can run a 4.45. He can make all the throws. He has it all, the total package! Billy Bob hates to read and his idea of a stimulating situation is a few beers with a fishing pole as Black Oak Arkansas sings about how Jim Dandy is about to rescue. His favorite movie..."The Exorcist"...he thinks it's funny. There will be no scouts from Stanford looking for Billy Bob Bodine. He does however have offers from a dozen Div 1 schools.
Avante wrote:There is no such thing as a "lockdown" corner, that is a myth. They all get beat, some a little less than others.
You need to watch more football. When the Patriots played the Jets and Darrelle Revis switched to the slot position where Wes Welker plays, Tom Brady not only quit throwing to Welker, he quit looking in his direction altogether. Last year, Reggie Wayne complained that Peyton Manning wouldn't even look his way when the Colts played the Jets in the playoffs because of Revis. It was the same with Champ Bailey in his prime, even the best quarterbacks wouldn't even look in his direction, and it's why Marvin Harrison dreaded playing Denver. I didn't make up the term "lockdown cornerback" and Hall of Famers such as Deion Sanders use it all the time, and if it's good enough for them, it's good enough for me.
Avante wrote:You also don't need sprint speed to be a great receiver. Ray Berry, Fred Biletnikoff and Steve Largent were as lethal as any 4.3 guy.
They may have been great recievers deserving of their accolades, but don't tell me that Raymond Berry was as lethal as Bob Hayes or that Fred Biletnikoff was a lethal as Cliff Branch or that Steve Largent was as lethal as Randy Moss. "Lethal" is not a term I would ever use to describe a posession receiver.
Marlow wrote:Defenses must try and stop SU's run first and that sets up all sorts of mismatches for the tight ends to exploit. Alabama or LSU could stop the SU running game, but they can't stop Luck too. The game would end up 35-34 - whoever scored last would win.
I hope we get to see this play out, Andrew Luck against the best the SEC has to offer. Wouldn't it be great to see the Stanford's greatest team in school hoistory face LSU's greatest team in school history? Another matchup that would intrigue me is Andrew Luck vs Kellen Moore, the cream of American academia vs the glorified community college, a school with a $19 billion endowment vs a school with a $62 mullion endowment, the bluebloods vs the trailer park trash.
Marlow wrote:The bad news for SU is that Oregon poses all sorts of problems, because their O is unstoppable. That's going to be a barn-burner and I HOPE SU can reverse last year's second-half blow-out.
Oregon is unstoppable for Stanford, but they're not unstoppable for the best SEC defenses.
Avante wrote:There is no such thing as a "lockdown" corner, that is a myth. They all get beat, some a little less than others.
You need to watch more football. When the Patriots played the Jets and Darrelle Revis switched to the slot position where Wes Welker plays, Tom Brady not only quit throwing to Welker, he quit looking in his direction altogether. Last year, Reggie Wayne complained that Peyton Manning wouldn't even look his way when the Colts played the Jets in the playoffs because of Revis. It was the same with Champ Bailey in his prime, even the best quarterbacks wouldn't even look in his direction, and it's why Marvin Harrison dreaded playing Denver. I didn't make up the term "lockdown cornerback" and Hall of Famers such as Deion Sanders use it all the time, and if it's good enough for them, it's good enough for me.
Avante wrote:You also don't need sprint speed to be a great receiver. Ray Berry, Fred Biletnikoff and Steve Largent were as lethal as any 4.3 guy.
They may have been great recievers deserving of their accolades, but don't tell me that Raymond Berry was as lethal as Bob Hayes or that Fred Biletnikoff was a lethal as Cliff Branch or that Steve Largent was as lethal as Randy Moss. "Lethal" is not a term I would ever use to describe a posession receiver.
Berry, Largent and Belitnikoff....Receptions-2039/TDs-244 Hayes, Moss and Branch...Receptions-1826/TDs-220
What award does the best college receiver win?
If I watched more football I'd be divorced. How's about....hmmm?...7/8 games a week? I wish I had a dollar for everytime I've seen Deion, Bailey, Revis beaten on a play. If you watched more football you'd know that if given the time no DB can cover any NFL receiver for very long. You cannot defend an out or crossing pattern if done right. Don't tell me you honestly believe..."oh no, what do we do now, noway we can throw...."...come on man. A "lockdown" corner is like a..."he has a glass jaw".."he swims like a fish"..."he has a bazooka for an arm". Sure there are the elite cornerbacks just like any other position has it's elite. There are no..."shutdown".."lockdown"...anythings. They all get beat.
Somebody at NFL Films could put together a video of all those times Deion, Revis and Bailey were beaten, you'd never think..."lockdown"..."shutdown"...again.
Avante wrote:Berry, Largent and Belitnikoff....Receptions-2039/TDs-244 Hayes, Moss and Branch...Receptions-1826/TDs-220
What award does the best college receiver win?
What does this have to do with the price of rice in China?
Avante wrote:If I watched more football I'd be divorced. How's about....hmmm?...7/8 games a week?
It's not about how many games you've seen or how much meaningless trivia you can regurgitate. It's about insightful analysis. Your problem is that you confuse dogma and trivia with analysis.
Avante wrote:They all get beat.
Anybody can get beaten when he makes a mistake. After all, we are talking about humans. But the great lockdown cornerbacks seldom make mistakes which is why they command so much respect from quarterbacks. I thought you were smart enough to know that sports metaphors weren't meant to be taken literally.
Avante wrote:Berry, Largent and Belitnikoff....Receptions-2039/TDs-244 Hayes, Moss and Branch...Receptions-1826/TDs-220
What award does the best college receiver win?
What does this have to do with the price of rice in China?
Avante wrote:If I watched more football I'd be divorced. How's about....hmmm?...7/8 games a week?
It's not about how many games you've seen or how much meaningless trivia you can regurgitate. It's about insightful analysis. Your problem is that you confuse dogma and trivia with analysis.
Avante wrote:They all get beat.
Anybody can get beaten when he makes a mistake. After all, we are talking about humans. But the great lockdown cornerbacks seldom make mistakes which is why they command so much respect from quarterbacks. I thought you were smart enough to know that sports metaphors weren't meant to be taken literally.
I thought you wanted to compare receivers, as you saw those slow pokes were more productive than the speedsters. So much for speed.
Analysis? How about facts, can we start there? The facts are this, you do not need great speed to be a great receiver. You should know that. Another fact is all NFL receivers can beat every single DB that ever played the game. If you wanna go with...."makes less mistakes"...cool. If you wanna try.."best in the game"...nice. Just don't try to sell...lockdown/shutdown...I thought you were smart enought to know that was ridiculous. You line up a good high school QB and his favorite receiver, they are completing passes vs any NFL cornerback. Some patterns cannot be defended. Receiver runs 15 yards then curls "back towards" the QB, you complete that pass 100% of the time, it cannot be defended.
Trust me I understand that..."shutdown"....bit. It's just not real or accurate. You get a guy who is good at defending the pass so you lock him on the stud receiver, you can now bring that safety man up to defend the run or help in other areas. You won't be needing any help for our..."shutdown/lockdown"...corner. That doesn't mean we see a guy "glued" to a receiver. It's like hitting a baseball...345...average is great.
Jazz
How many times have you seen some 10.4 in high school receiver..."he has world class speed"..? Long jumpers/receivers have "world class" speed. A fullback with a 3.8 average..."he's a battering ram"...when in reality he gets battered most the time. This.."shutdown"..bit is just like that. Cute...but not overly accurate.
Last edited by Avante on Wed Oct 26, 2011 7:52 am, edited 1 time in total.
Avante wrote:Stanford does get that unique athlete as compared to the SEC, Big12 etc. Not everyone can play for Stanford.
Just because we can't get EVERYone we want (like certain other institutions!), doesn't mean we don't get some of the very best cuts of beef! How many parents are going to let their kid pass up a scholarship to SU? I bet all it takes is 1200 (now 1800 with the new SAT) and 3.5 to play sports there. As I've said before, the hard part is getting in. They'll bend over backwards to keep you there (if only so they won't have to admit their the Admissions Dept made a mistake!!). The O-line is a buncha 300-pound monsters, so they're out there!
Avante wrote:Analysis? How about facts, can we start there? The facts are this, you do not need great speed to be a great receiver.
True.
Avante wrote:Another fact is all NFL receivers can beat every single DB that ever played the game. If you wanna go with...."makes less mistakes"...cool.
True, but if the receiver can only beat the cornerback 5% of the time, it's not worth the quarterback's effort to throw in his direction.
Avante wrote:If you wanna try.."best in the game"...nice. Just don't try to sell...lockdown/shutdown....
I don't need your permission to use the words or terminology in my posts that I want to.
Avante wrote:I thought you were smart enought to know that was ridiculous.
What's ridiculous is you trying to stop me from using a commonly used and widely accepted football term.
Avante wrote:You line up a good high school QB and his favorite receiver, they are completing passes vs any NFL cornerback. Some patterns cannot be defended. Receiver runs 15 yards then curls "back towards" the QB, you complete that pass 100% of the time, it cannot be defended.
False. A true lockdown corner can anticipate the route. I once saw John Gruden interview Darrelle Revis and he showed him video of him making an interception on a perfectly thrown pass in which the ball was thrown before the receiver turned to catch it. Revis actually made his break before the reciever did and Gruden couldn't figure out how he did it since the receiver did nothing to tip him off that the ball had been thrown. Revis said that his internal clock is what let him know that it was time for the ball to be thrown and he wasn't relying solely on the reciever's body language. New Orleans' Tracy Porter revealed a similar thought process to explain how he was able to turn a perfectly thrown pass from Peyton Manning to Reggie Wayne into a pick-6. When asked if he was worried about jumping the route only to have Wayne do a double move, he said that he wasn't because the blitz package that they had on that play meant that Manning wouldn't have time to hit Wayne on a double move. The great ones are not only athletic, but they're smart as well. They know what the receiver is going to do before the receiver even does it which is why folks like Brady, Manning and Brees usually try to avoid them.
Avante wrote:Trust me I understand that..."shutdown"....bit. It's just not real or accurate. You get a guy who is good at defending the pass so you lock him on the stud receiver, you can now bring that safety man up to defend the run or help in other areas. You won't be needing any help for our..."shutdown/lockdown"...corner. That doesn't mean we see a guy "glued" to a receiver. It's like hitting a baseball...345...average is great.
But a 10% completion percentage is unacceptable and that's what you're looking at if you try to challenge a true lockdown cornerback consistently.
gh wrote:Occupy The BCS! <<Shenanigans are nothing new with the Bowl Championships Series. It's the reason the cartel was created in the first place,....>> Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.c ... z1bu4jTGYm
If Bama and OkSt and Clemson and Stanford were to go undefeated, the BCS would indeed be seen as having a fatal cancer. The stop-gap measure would be to institute semis and a final BCS Bowl, but eventually I think it's going to HAVE to go to an 8-team playoff, working into the Bowls as they already exist, quarters after the Conference Games, semi's before Christmas and the Final the second week of Jan.
For Stanford to reach the national championship game, at the Superdome in New Orleans on Jan. 9, the Cardinal will need to win their remaining games, including the Nov. 12 matchup against Oregon (the last team to beat Stanford), and have misfortune befall five of the other six contenders:...>>
gh wrote:and have misfortune befall five of the other six contenders
It's not THAT dire because SU will start to pass other undefeated teams (BoiSt and Clemson) as the formula catches up with SoS and the human polls. The only team in SU's way is Lonewolf U and I really doubt they can run the table. Even if that were to happen, SU's win-streak and Mr. Luck will tip the scales in our favor. if we win out, I'm confident we'll play the SEC champ for all the marbles.
Marlow wrote:If Bama and OkSt and Clemson and Stanford were to go undefeated, the BCS would indeed be seen as having a fatal cancer. The stop-gap measure would be to institute semis and a final BCS Bowl, but eventually I think it's going to HAVE to go to an 8-team playoff, working into the Bowls as they already exist, quarters after the Conference Games, semi's before Christmas and the Final the second week of Jan.
The plus-one system (four-team playoff) is what we're going to end up with. There will never be any clamoring for an eight-team playoff, because no one has ever argued that the 5th placed team in the final BCS rankings was the best team. The reason folks aren't satisfied with the current system is because of the times that worthy undefeated teams have finished third and fourth (2004, 2009, 2010), and not gotten a shot at the title. With a four-team playoff format, all reasonable folks will be satisfied that the best team was given a fair shot.
gh wrote:and have misfortune befall five of the other six contenders
It's not THAT dire because SU will start to pass other undefeated teams (BoiSt and Clemson) as the formula catches up with SoS and the human polls. The only team in SU's way is Lonewolf U and I really doubt they can run the table. Even if that were to happen, SU's win-streak and Mr. Luck will tip the scales in our favor. if we win out, I'm confident we'll play the SEC champ for all the marbles.
With non-conference wins over South Carolina and Auburn, an undefeated Clemson might actually be stronger than Stanford in the computers, but the humans would probably tip the scales in Stanford's favor because of the "Luck" factor. Also, don't forget that an undefeated Donley2 U presents another potential obstacle for Stanford.
gh wrote:and have misfortune befall five of the other six contenders
It's not THAT dire because SU will start to pass other undefeated teams (BoiSt and Clemson) as the formula catches up with SoS and the human polls. The only team in SU's way is Lonewolf U and I really doubt they can run the table. Even if that were to happen, SU's win-streak and Mr. Luck will tip the scales in our favor. if we win out, I'm confident we'll play the SEC champ for all the marbles.
Is this the week that we stop hearing about Stanford? I think they lose this weekend on the road at USC and then we will have no more rantings from you on this. If they do get by this weekend, they will have a very difficult time beating Oregon and then the conference championship game, probably against Arizona State, who will likely be getting some key defensive players back by then. Good luck with all of that!
Marlow wrote:I bet all it takes is 1200 (now 1800 with the new SAT) and 3.5 to play sports there.
To get in to Stanford? Jason Colwick jumped 17'0" in high school, graduated 4th in his class and scored over 1400 on the old SAT scale and wasn't admitted. So, he settled for Rice. It turned out alright for him.
Avante wrote:Stanford does get that unique athlete as compared to the SEC, Big12 etc. Not everyone can play for Stanford.
Just because we can't get EVERYone we want (like certain other institutions!), doesn't mean we don't get some of the very best cuts of beef! How many parents are going to let their kid pass up a scholarship to SU? I bet all it takes is 1200 (now 1800 with the new SAT) and 3.5 to play sports there. As I've said before, the hard part is getting in. They'll bend over backwards to keep you there (if only so they won't have to admit their the Admissions Dept made a mistake!!). The O-line is a buncha 300-pound monsters, so they're out there!
The thing is Stanford is limited. There are tons of athlete they simply cannot recruit. It does hurt their chances. It's surprising that they do as well as do with those limitations. Fast kid out of Alameda High with great hands but struggles to maintain a C average won't be heading to Stanford. There are far more of those kinds of athletes than that kid with that 3.5. Then there is no gurantee our 3.5er wants to attend Stanford.
Marlow wrote:If Bama and OkSt and Clemson and Stanford were to go undefeated, the BCS would indeed be seen as having a fatal cancer. The stop-gap measure would be to institute semis and a final BCS Bowl, but eventually I think it's going to HAVE to go to an 8-team playoff, working into the Bowls as they already exist, quarters after the Conference Games, semi's before Christmas and the Final the second week of Jan.
The plus-one system (four-team playoff) is what we're going to end up with. There will never be any clamoring for an eight-team playoff, .....
That may be the conventional wisdom in the SEC, but out here in the hinterlands we hear non-stop argumentation for an 8- (and occasionally even a 16-) team playoff.
Assuming both the loser and the winner run the table after 11/05/11, I believe this game has the potential to surpass the 2006 Michigan-Ohio State game, and rank right up there with the 1971 Oklahoma=Nebraska football game.
jazzcyclist wrote:The Hype http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zm-1baEo ... r_embedded Assuming both the loser and the winner run the table after 11/05/11, I believe this game has the potential to surpass the 2006 Michigan-Ohio State game, and rank right up there with the 1971 Oklahoma=Nebraska football game.
A rematch is just that, anti-climax. The 71 OK-Neb game is still the best game I've ever seen (well, equal to BoiSt's bowl win a few years ago over OK with all the gadget plays). The Bama-LSU game next week should be great, but not up to the 71 standard. A rematch, not so much.
Marlow wrote:A rematch is just that, anti-climax. The 71 OK-Neb game is still the best game I've ever seen (well, equal to BoiSt's bowl win a few years ago over OK with all the gadget plays). The Bama-LSU game next week should be great, but not up to the 71 standard. A rematch, not so much.
I made no mention of a rematch. I'm only talking about the November 5 showdown. What makes these regular season games stand the test of time is when both teams run the table afterwards, which both Nebraska and Okalhoma did in 1971. Nebraska dismantled Bear Bryant's Tide in the Orange Bowl and Oklahoma took Pat Sullivan's Tigers to the woodshed in the Sugar Bowl. In 2006, both Ohio State and Michigan lost their bowl games which rendered their regular season game meaningless after the fact. Another game worthy of discussion is the 1987 Miami-Florida State game. Both teams were loaded with future pros and ran the table after the Canes beat the Noles 26-25, finishing 1-2 in the final polls. Assuming the winner of the LSU-Alabama game takes Stanford to the woodshed, the loser will likely finish #2 on the final polls assuming they take care of business in the Sugar Bowl. In that scenario, I would compare the 11/05/11 showdown favorably to the 1971 Oklahoma-Nebraska game.
My bad. When you said, "Assuming both the loser and the winner run the table after 11/05/11, I believe this game . . ", I thought you were talking about the possibility that they could meet again in the BCS Bowl, which is possible, with losses by the other undefeateds.
A high school that won 78 games in a row, the first three years of that streak no opponet got past the 50 yard line? No opponet even scored on them until the 53rd game of that streak.
while never giving up more than 12 in a game and going 56-1 over a 5 year span. When they did lose...2-0...which happened in the last game of that five year span. In that 57 game span they gave up a total of....42 points.
Then there's that high school kickoff return man/boy that ran so many back for scores that the offense started complaining about playing time....haha!!!!!!
The best football game I have seen was that Boise State win over Oklahoma. As far as anticipation and..BIG GAME!...that Greg Pruitt vs Johnny Rodgers game.
As far as one play...gotta go with that freaky 15 lateral play that Trinity pulled off. That was incredible.
I think most football fans are aware of that 222-0 game where Georgia Tech destroyed Cumberland. Not sure everyone is aware of the fact that one player scored 18 td's in that game.
Pego wrote:Ohio St - Wisconsin is not too bad a match-up either. Ohio St is pretty much back to normal.
Obviously, I'm taking the Badgers in that game. By the way Pego, I felt for you and 26mi last Saturday night. I thought this Wisconsin team was something special. It just goes to show you, it's tough to run the table even when you're favored in every game on your schedule.
Pego wrote:Ohio St - Wisconsin is not too bad a match-up either. Ohio St is pretty much back to normal.
Obviously, I'm taking the Badgers in that game. By the way Pego, I felt for you and 26mi last Saturday night. I thought this Wisconsin team was something special. It just goes to show you, it's tough to run the table even when you're favored in every game on your schedule.
Hard to lose by an inch (out of 12 x 3 x 44 or them ) with no time left. However, there is compensation because the XC team is now moving close to a tie in the rankings for first with lonewolf U. Big Tens - battle with an Indiana team that is better than their ranking if Bayer et al are healthy, then NCAAs.
Looking forward to the possibility of hosting NCAAs in a couple of years ( and hope not another )
Pego wrote:Ohio St - Wisconsin is not too bad a match-up either. Ohio St is pretty much back to normal.
Obviously, I'm taking the Badgers in that game. By the way Pego, I felt for you and 26mi last Saturday night. I thought this Wisconsin team was something special. It just goes to show you, it's tough to run the table even when you're favored in every game on your schedule.
Yep. it was heart-breaking. I've had a few of those throughout the ages . I still think this Wisconsin team might be the best ever (or at least in my 40 years following the program closely).
) with no time left. However, there is compensation because the XC team is now moving close to a tie in the rankings for first with lonewolf U. Big Tens - battle with an Indiana team that is better than their ranking if Bayer et al are healthy, then NCAAs. 
and hope not another 
. I still think this Wisconsin team might be the best ever (or at least in my 40 years following the program closely).