And Pryor opens his mouth again...

Submitted by m83econ on October 24th, 2010 at 10:10 PM

While maybe not up to the standard of past utterances, still another look into the mind of the Buckeye QB:

 

Terrelle Pryor on Wisconsin: 'They weren't better than us'

Posted by John Taylor on October 24, 2010 3:04 PM ET

A very frustrated Ohio State football team took the field Saturday, and took out the previous weekend's loss to Wisconsin on a Purdue squad that simply stood no chance.

 
Most would think that the Buckeyes would be basking in the afterglow of a 49-0 whitewashing that featured 415 total yards and 42 points in the first half alone.  The triggerman of the Buckeyes' offense, however, was in not much of a mood for the here and now.
 
Instead, Terrelle Pryor decided to travel back in time and revisit the previous weekend.
 
"Not to take anything away from Wisconsin at all - I really don't want it to come off like this - but they weren't better than us," the quarterback said according to the Columbus Dispatch as it came off just like that. "Everybody knows that if we play nine out of 10 times, we'd beat Wisconsin."

http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/10/24/terrelle-pryor-on-w…

Comments

gdavis23_goblue

October 24th, 2010 at 10:37 PM ^

I don't agree with this at all . IMO wisc is a better team . TP and this offense can't score on a good D . He plays a team like Purdue who has no D puts up 40+ and thinks he is god once again . IMO Michigan beats OSU this year . Y you ask because by the end of the year our freshman will have exp. our first year qb will have exp. and our team will be playing as a unit. OSU wins if the D can stop the O and IMO this will not happen . We moved the ball all day on Iowa a much better D and by the end of the year the turnover bug should be gone ..

Go Blue !!!!

Not a Blue Fan

October 25th, 2010 at 6:40 AM ^

How on Earth could you equate Wisconsin's offense with Iowa's? I'm genuinely curious, because I can't see it. Wisconsin's personnel is superior to Iowa's (saving possibly DJK and Stanzi). Clay, Ball, and White are much better than Robinson (individually and as a unit), and Wisconsin's OL is far better than Iowa's. There's no comparison whatsoever.

Not a Blue Fan

October 25th, 2010 at 1:49 PM ^

Oklahoma State and Boise State have similar figures, too. It must be that their offenses are the same! In fact, any two offenses that produce similar scores and yardage are IDENTICAL. Thanks for opening my eyes! If only I knew that you could use superficial information in lieu of detailed analysis, I could have saved many hours of my life in the course of my work.

Grass is green, so are trees. Therefore Grass==trees.

Sky is blue, so is water. Therefore sky==water.

Man, this is awesome. Why didn't I think of this.

BiSB

October 25th, 2010 at 3:15 PM ^

Your argument was that Wisconsin is better across the board on the offensive side of the ball, and therefore you can't compare the two offenses or call them similar. 

My response is simply that judging by, you know, moving the ball and scoring and stuff, the two are fairly similar.  I'm not saying that the two offenses have the same style, because that wasn't your argument.  I'm just saying that if the measure of an offense is yards and points, then Wisconsin and Iowa are quite comparable, regardless of any talent differential you think may exist.

COB

October 25th, 2010 at 6:09 PM ^

but I'm not sure they exactly prove equality between the two offenses.  Ohio State has a higher PPG avg than Nebraska, Nevada, Auburn and most of the rest of CFB.  That doesn't mean that they are better.  The game played being close also has no bearing on the relative offensive capabilities, they were playing different defenses.  I realize this is wheel-spinning to a degree but you can't just say "similar stats" and "close game" and say the offenses are equal.  The teams playing an close game doesn't mean the offenses are equal. 

energyblue1

October 24th, 2010 at 10:42 PM ^

when they got destroyed in the 1 game they did play, I would love to see it.  By the way, this is a repeat of last yrs game with the only difference being Tolzien did not turn the ball over.

Wisconsin whipped osu at the line on both sides of the ball 2 yrs straight now.  9 of 10 games osu loses when you get beat that bad on the line.  Last yr was that 1 win when wisconsin inexplicably kept turning the ball over.

sum1valiant

October 24th, 2010 at 10:18 PM ^

They should stop playing all these stupid games and just let him pick the winners.  That would be fun to watch every saturday.  Him and corso could just spend two hours putting on mascot heads.

Groan

October 24th, 2010 at 10:39 PM ^

The failure in my logic. Also, explain how Ohio State isn't a better team than Wisconsin. Explain how Pryor fails when he says OSU would beat Wisconsin 9 of 10.

Explain how being dominated by MSU for 60 minutes and Iowa for 55 or so minutes means we "beat ourselves."

Explain why Rodriguez apparently now needs until 2012 to contend on the national stage.

Sorry, I'm not that patient with Rodriguez. He has stunk it up at Michigan so far and I don't believe it's going to get turned around.

But I DO predict a 7-5 finish, being thrashed by Illinois, Wisconsin and OSU, but making a shit bowl game and the RR cheerleading squads here and at Scout being appeased.

Brandon? Not so much.

Groan

October 24th, 2010 at 10:50 PM ^

That's ridiculous.

UNLESS...MSU IS better than Michigan. iowa IS bette than Michigan. Massachusetts IS only five points worse than Michigan. Indiana IS only two last-minute drives from being better than Michigan the last two years. Michigan IS just slightly better than Notre Dame, who was just shellacked by Navy...

Oh, you guys are so much fun. Riddled with hypocrisy and self righteous indignation--and stuck with Rich Rodriguez.

sum1valiant

October 24th, 2010 at 10:57 PM ^

Show me again where I said we were a better team than MSU or Iowa?  Yes, we were slightly better than the teams we beat and worse than the teams we lost to.  That was fairly evident on field throughout the game and on the scoreboard afterwards.  Did you actually watch the Wisconson game or were you too busy trolling on their message boards?  OSU got their ass kicked up and down the field, it's not even debatable.

Not a Blue Fan

October 25th, 2010 at 6:42 AM ^

I think he actually makes a good point if taken generally. Fans often say "we gave it away" or "we beat ourselves". It'd be a hard argument to make that it hasn't been said here this year, and I know that I have thought the same thing about Buckeye games in the past. It's just something that sportsfans do.

BlueintheLou

October 24th, 2010 at 10:49 PM ^

I agree with being dominated by MSU, but the Iowa game, are you kidding? You can't be dominated for 55 minutes and put up 530 yards in the other 5 minutes. The we beat ourselves comes from the drive killing penalties and turnovers, which were, more or less, unforced errors (er, preventable). Even you, I feel, should be able to see that.

Groan

October 24th, 2010 at 10:56 PM ^

All of our errors are "unforced?"

Now, of course I know Michigan rolled up over 500 yards against Iowa. However, at one point we were down 35-14, and just about wheneve they needed a big play (or a conversion on 3rd down and 75)--they got it. Oh, and they didn't turn the ball over. Not even in an "unforced" way.

So, whip out the "yardage" dick measuring contest if that puts you to sleep at night. They handled UM pretty easily and won by ten. In Ann Arbor.

We're left with nothing but tantalizingly deceitful straws to try and grasp.

MaizeAndBlueWahoo

October 24th, 2010 at 11:01 PM ^

Oh, I get it.  When Ohio State loses, rationalizing it is cool.  When Michigan loses, it's because they were dominated.  Ohio State wasn't dominated, they were just feeling generous.

To make a long story short, you're a Sparty troll pretending to be an M fan.  Don't you have a pizza to deliver?