This is why the "lol cfn" tag exists
Normally I'm a proponent of "don't link to stupid things and give them hits they shouldn't get," but sweet merciful crap:
OREGON’S OFFENSE ONLY WORKS AGAINST REALLY, REALLY BAD DEFENSES.
Yeah, that's a CFN column. I also enjoyed this line:
... the gimmicky, sped-up attack works great against most of the squishy-soft Pac 10 defenses, but as this close call proves, there’s no way, no how the Ducks could get through the ACC ... undefeated.
Yeah, the ACC is loaded with juggernauts. I'd be surprised if Oregon even went .500 against the murderer's row of Maryland, NC State, etc.
I just thought everybody could use a laugh on a boring Monday afternoon.
November 15th, 2010 at 5:36 PM ^
Those same folks had better hope Auburn wins out/TCU moves up to #2. If Oregon plays Boise this year, it will be a waste of an evening for everyone not rooting for Oregon. They are doing mean, mean things to people.
November 15th, 2010 at 6:34 PM ^
I'm not a spread is dead devotee, but are you serious? This exact same Boise State team beat Oregon's pants off last year, physically dominating them in every facet of the game. You're now saying that Boise has no chance this year, despite the fact that, literally, the exact same lineup, one year older and minus one very good free safety out of 22 starters (Kyle Wilson) would take the field? I'm not even saying Boise would win, but the idea that Boise can't win the game is so myopically devoted to the idea of spread offenses as the sine qua non of football prowess that it barely deserves a response.
November 15th, 2010 at 6:49 PM ^
This might be the same Boise team, but it's a far better Oregon team.
November 15th, 2010 at 7:20 PM ^
Oregon offense: 542 yards, up from 424 yards
Oregon defense: 315 yards, down from 329 yards
Boise offense: 530 yards, up from 460
Boise defense: 240 yards, down from 299
It's possible Oregon has improved more than Boise, but it definately appears on the surface that Boise did too. Anyone more willing to dive into those numbers than me, go for it.
November 15th, 2010 at 7:31 PM ^
...the competition was stiffer for Oregon. I'd be curious to see how Boise's offense fared against Va Tech and Oregon State. Then compare Oregon's numbers against USC and Stanford. It's hard to compare the two schools when one of them is playing the likes of Wyoming and Idaho.
November 15th, 2010 at 7:24 PM ^
It's somewhat myopic to suggest that a single arbitrary game's outcome is the definition of that team's ability across a month, let alone a season or between years. Boise State had to squeak by a Virginia Tech team who spotted them 21 points in the first quarter, and that is THIS season. Oh and that same team lost to James Madison. (Side note, purdue SHOULD have beaten oregon last year and lost by 2. Is Boise State = Purdue from last year valid? then again that purdue team dominated OSU so you can see whatever you want)
If we're going to pick arbitrary games. Boise State this season is as good as Virginia Tech. Virginia Tech is somewhere between a good team and an FCS team. We've built up a lot of evidence that teams like that have no shot against Oregon. No problem.
Anything can happen but when both teams have a one-game season instead of just Boise State, considering Oregon has probably beaten more actual teams this year than Boise has in the past 3 years, it's well within reason to think Oregon is going to bury them just like they have everyone else (and if they'd just scored the TD at the end of the Cal Game instead of kneeling it out there'd be less outrage, but the box score makes it look like an escape)
November 15th, 2010 at 8:10 PM ^
Despite Oregon's domination of all things football this season, I still have reason to believe that they are very beatable, but then again so is Auburn.
Oregon's offense operates primarily on speed, both from individual players and the system.
Other than raw, nasty speed, their offensive system is relatively simple and can be shut down for stretches if you can stop the zone-read on first and second down. I watched Cal do it the entire game, and ASU/Stanford/USC do it for a half before Oregon was able to break through.
Darron Thomas is a very average QB when faced with predicable passing situations. His accuracy is questionable and he takes a lot of big hits. And since Costa is out for the year, Oregon is set up for another 2007 repeat if Thomas goes down like Dixon did.
Also lets not forget that the Pac-10 is pretty weak this year despite being touted as one of the deepest conferences before the season. I was looking on ESPN the other day an it looks like they conference may only end up with 4 bowl eligible teams (Oregon, Stanford, Arizona, and Cal?).
Personally, I don't think Oregon would be undefeated in the SEC, Big Ten, and possibly the Big 12 or ACC either.
I think Auburn would beat them in the MNC and that Boise/TCU would also have a shot.
Lets not forget Boise beat Oregon each of the past TWO seasons. I know one game does not define how good a team is, especially the following seasons, but it counts for something in my mind.
November 15th, 2010 at 9:45 PM ^
How is it arbitrary? They played each other... It's not like he picked two random games, it was BSU vs Oregon. And stop trying to use the transitive property in football. It doesn't work. Saying things like, well Purdue SHOULD of beat Oregon so that means Purdue and BSU are on the same level and Purdue is no national champion is just ridiculous.
How about this? Boise State is a GOOD team. Crazy right?! Who knew teams not in BCS conferences could ACTUALLY play football!! Keep doubting them, because every damn time Boise State beats Oregon, Oregon State, Oklahoma, Virginia Tech, etc. everybody goes "It was a fluke!!" How many flukes are they going to get? With legit NFL picks on their team (not a ton but a couple), why is it crazy to think that they could actually be good?
Tired of the non-BCS conference hate. It's stupid and ridiculous. Football is football in the end and anybody can beat anybody.
November 16th, 2010 at 11:35 AM ^
Football is not rocket science and anything can happen (see App. St. vs. UM 2007). Significant talent disparities aren't fatal if a team executes in fundamentally sound manner, minimizes/eliminates mistakes, and is physical at the point of attack. Last year Boise won last year because their line wreacked havoc on Oregon's mesh point and effectively shut down the read option. I'm not saying Boise would definitely win or anything (that would be just as stupid as saying Oregon would win), but its so ridiculous people don't even give Boise a chance after the same exact lineup beat Oregon last year.
November 15th, 2010 at 5:37 PM ^
i know. a really good offense would've put up way more than 52 against stanford (26th in total D).
November 15th, 2010 at 5:42 PM ^
(yea, I know overtimes and all...but still)
November 15th, 2010 at 5:39 PM ^
don't link to stupid things and give them hits they shouldn't get
November 15th, 2010 at 5:43 PM ^
Must ... fight ... evil ... temptations
November 15th, 2010 at 6:00 PM ^
~75% stupid stuff people link to because they think it's funny/stupid
~23% porn
~1% useful content
~1% places to buy anything you want
A little stupid is going to slip in, but let's keep it mostly useful content + MGoStore
November 15th, 2010 at 6:05 PM ^
I find it hard to believe that the internet isn't at least 50% porn.
November 15th, 2010 at 6:09 PM ^
you're confusing internet content and % time of your day.
November 15th, 2010 at 6:15 PM ^
I'd break it down like this:
Porn: 90%
People wanting to sell stuff: 6%
Youtubes of cats, exploding zits, MLive comments, etc.: 3%
Useful information: 1%
The only conclusion is that MGoBloggers are a highly discerning, tiny top strata of the total internet population.
November 15th, 2010 at 7:52 PM ^
Porn: 40%
Facebook: 15%
Blogs: 10%
Shopping: 10%
News: 5%
Internet humor: 10%
Wikipedia: 9%
Horrid things you would only find on 4chan: 1%
November 15th, 2010 at 10:22 PM ^
Needs more porn.
November 15th, 2010 at 5:40 PM ^
This is also why Brian has a section in UV called "Fiutakin' it".
November 15th, 2010 at 5:54 PM ^
i also hate this:
But this was a tough win over a Cal team that got obliterated by Oregon State two weeks ago (yeah, the same one that just lost to Washington State). Ooooooh.
i hate when MSM writers use the transitive to prove one team is better than another when it works to prove their point, but goes all "that's not how football works" when it doesn't. the same year of the horror we beat florida, but florida beat kentucky and kentucky beat LSU, but LSU won the national championship over OSU, who we lost to. ergo universe assplode.
November 15th, 2010 at 6:39 PM ^
It's been the case all year that Cal is a completely different team at home than on the road -- they've annihilated teams at home all year, and generally played like garbage on the road.
Home record 4-1 (Ws 52-3 UC Davis, 52-7 Colorado, 35-7 UCLA, 50-17 Arizona State, L 13-15 Oregon)
Road record: 1-4 (W 20-13 Wazzu, Ls 52-31 Nevada, 10-9 Arizona, 48-14 USC, 35-7 Oregon State)
November 15th, 2010 at 6:39 PM ^
AppState>Michigan>Florida<Wofford>AppState
lol wut?
Transistive properties are dumb. Just like last year when Oregon made the point over and over that they beat Purdue and USC (our only loses) so they are going to beat OSU. That worked out well, right?
Oregon's offense is a death machine, you need to hope for a turnover of two (thanks LeGarette Blount) to stop them from scoring 30. That being said, a dominant D-line screws them up pretty good, see Bowl, Rose.
November 15th, 2010 at 6:49 PM ^
the 19-8 domination at the hands of Boise State
November 15th, 2010 at 6:50 PM ^
don't bring that kind of logic to peter fiutak! he'll just....ah, i guess keep on writing stupid stuff.
November 15th, 2010 at 7:16 PM ^
certain that Delaware Valley was one of the best teams in the nation in 2007:
http://www.cfbanalyzer.com/cgi-bin/chain.cgi?year=2007&mode=chain&teams…!
November 15th, 2010 at 7:33 PM ^
easily.
November 15th, 2010 at 8:21 PM ^
Listen, you can't argue with the math... (note - not posted for political beliefs, just for humor)
November 15th, 2010 at 5:58 PM ^
ACC - A Crappy Conference.
I am sure this material was put together by the whiz kids who brought you our "August of Angst" regarding the Big East and quarterback star Zach Frazer and that monster offense of UConn.
November 15th, 2010 at 6:59 PM ^
How about "Amazingly Crappy Conference?"
I'm really glad I didn't follow the link to the "article" now. Seeing the second-worst conference in the BCS used as the quintessence of inpenetrable defense and yet another tired "example" of why "the spread doesn't work" doesn't really inspire me to read any further.
November 15th, 2010 at 6:26 PM ^
After what they did to Stanford and USC.....They had a down game because they where looking ahead to next week, it happens. Shoot I remember Alabama almost losing a few times last year as well.
So yeah even though they have blown everyone else out I agree because of ONE bad game against Cal that they are just a gimmik.
I just like the comments. Seems like anytime anyone is discussing college football ohio state fan is right there to put in their two cents and tell everyone how they suck.
November 15th, 2010 at 8:54 PM ^
Your profile photo first gave me the hives, then made me LOL. And now I have that remix in my head for chrissakes!!
My .02 - Vegas would favor Oregon by 7, but I truly believe BSU or TCU would give them a game - those teams are for real.
November 15th, 2010 at 6:37 PM ^
Normally I'm a proponent of "don't link to stupid things and give them hits they shouldn't get," but
Don't deviate from this principle.