It is now safe to say that non aq teams should be respected more
January 1st, 2011 at 10:09 PM ^
And yet, when they needed 2 yards, they didn't run. It's almost as if I were specifically referring to a time like this. Nah, probably not.
Beside that obvious facet, can you find anybody who thinks that Wisconsin needed to run less?
January 1st, 2011 at 8:25 PM ^
I wonder if the Big Ten fans (including some of ours) that obsess over RichRod's "midgets," the superiority of pro-style offenses, and all things SMASHMOUTH can explain:
* MSU's whuppin' today
* How TCU's "tiny" defense managed to stand up to Wisconsin's 500-pound, 4.5-second 40 (exaggeration, sorry -- it was more like 320 vs. 284) O-line
Just looking for a silver lining, that's all ...
January 1st, 2011 at 8:35 PM ^
Please stop spinning. You're seriously going to look at today's results and try to make an argument in Rodriguez's favor? If anything, the embarassing performance of the Big 10 makes it even worse that all of those teams kicked our asses.
No one would care about the size of Rodriguez's players if they actually won some games. The fact that other teams with smaller players can win does not mean that Rodriguez is doing something right by losing with smaller players.
January 1st, 2011 at 8:40 PM ^
Sorry -- I didn't it mean that way. (Aside: I'm more than comfortable with changing coaches.)
From your post:
"If anything, the embarassing performance of the Big 10 makes it even worse that all of those teams kicked our asses."
Agreed.
"The fact that other teams with smaller players can win does not mean that Rodriguez is doing something right by losing with smaller players."
Ditto.
The point of my post (which could obviously interpreted in many ways) was to poke fun at what I believe to be RichRod's unreasonable critics. There are plenty of good reasons to "neg" him. I just get tired of the ones I mentioned.
January 1st, 2011 at 9:05 PM ^
Did you watch the game bro? Wisco rushed for 226 yards. Their line did what they were supposed to.
January 1st, 2011 at 9:19 PM ^
I agree that the rushing statistics look respectable (4.9 ypc). Still, the team was held to its lowest point total of the season by a fast defense that many people would call *small*. The point of my original post was to poke the people who were worshipping Wisconsin's style this season.
January 1st, 2011 at 8:26 PM ^
TCU was the higher ranked team and the betting line favorite. Beyond saying Auburn and Oregon deserve their spot in the BCS title game ahead of them because they played/beat stiffer competition, I don't see how the Horned Frogs have been disrespected by anybody, save your pregame prediction.
January 1st, 2011 at 8:40 PM ^
Non AQs will never get respect. Utah pummeled Pitt and then Alabama, Boise State beat Oklahoma. They were 3-1 before today. Yet, they still got no respect. Today will change nothing. They will still be seen as inferior (well, I guess Utah and TCU won't anymore)
January 1st, 2011 at 8:42 PM ^
The cynic in me says that people will interpret this as demonstrating the weakness of the Big 10, rather than the strength of TCU or non-AQ teams in general.
January 1st, 2011 at 8:57 PM ^
I don't think you can read too much into one game played a month after most of the teams last stepped onto a football field. Wiscy looked very out-of-sorts in this game, and while some credit should go to TCU, I do think that on a neutral field 10 times, Wiscy wins 6-7 of those matchups.
January 1st, 2011 at 9:00 PM ^
Not sure if this has been posted yet but that 2 point conversion call was probably the most boneheaded playcall in the history of football. Wisco out coached themselves. Why would you go away from your power run game when your backs were averaging ~6 ypa? Interesting fact, the MWC now has the best BCS winning % of any conference.
January 1st, 2011 at 9:03 PM ^
TCU's win has shown me that I should respect the Sun Belt more. TCU is good. Boise State is good. Put 'em in a play-off and I like their chances. They both suffer because they're in (or used to be in TCU's case) non-AQ conferences.
If you were dissin' them just because they were non-AQ, that's your lesson.
January 1st, 2011 at 9:08 PM ^
Really? Should I think New Mexico is better now? New Mexico State? Utah? How 'bout Boise State or Nevada? What does TCU's awesome performance say about Hawaii?
To be honest, I watched the game and have no idea what happened. Wisconsin seemed to run the ball up the middle as well, if not better than I expected (and I figured Wisconsin would win by a good margin). My only guess is that TCU crushed them in all other battles and Bielema didn't stick more with what was working best.