Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
saevel25

2018 NCAA Football

10 posts / 2271 viewsLast Reply

Recommended Posts

Starting this topic early, but it's never too early!

Excited to see how well Ohio State does this year. The defense should be really good this year. We return a lot of production on the D-Line.

dxm37mP.gif

The headline for this GIF is, "When seven are incapable of blocking five, you're in deep trouble".  :-D

Maybe the only D-Line better than OSU this year is Clemson. They might have 3 top 15 picks in next years NFL draft!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Want to hide this ad? Register for free today!

57 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

Starting this topic early, but it's never too early!

Excited to see how well Ohio State does this year. The defense should be really good this year. We return a lot of production on the D-Line.

dxm37mP.gif

The headline for this GIF is, "When seven are incapable of blocking five, you're in deep trouble".  :-D

Maybe the only D-Line better than OSU this year is Clemson. They might have 3 top 15 picks in next years NFL draft!

Pretty patsy schedule (as usual, sorry) so I’m sure they’ll do just fine. TCU and PennSt of late are good ball games. MI/MSU a total throw up at this point. My game of choice would be to open with OSU vs UCF. I don’t buy the National Champ nonsense they’ve run with as SoS is critical in NCAA football. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

15 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

Pretty patsy schedule (as usual, sorry) so I’m sure they’ll do just fine. TCU and PennSt of late are good ball games. MI/MSU a total throw up at this point. My game of choice would be to open with OSU vs UCF. I don’t buy the National Champ nonsense they’ve run with as SoS is critical in NCAA football. 

OSU plays 3 teams that were in the top 15 as of the final AP poll last season, 2 of those on the road (Penn St. and MSU) and one at a neutral location (TCU). 

I dont consider playing 3 top 15 teams all away from home to be a pasty schedule. It might not be a top notch SEC schedule, but its not terribly weak IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Well PennSt would be the only ‘strong kudos’ win of those 3, and PennSt lost SB to the NFL. MSU as I said is a mystery but I doubt they’ll be of any force this year. It’ll be interesting, but most likely OSU will gain their ‘spot’ by blowing out cupcakes...and hopefully not get humiliated (Iowa) again. That was ugly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

They don’t play Iowa this year. 

As for schedule, Big Ten did only lose one game in the bowls last year. The Big Ten east is going to be a gauntlet this year. 

It isn’t like the other playoff contenders have tough schedules except ND. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

45 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

They don’t play Iowa this year. 

As for schedule, Big Ten did only lose one game in the bowls last year. The Big Ten east is going to be a gauntlet this year. 

It isn’t like the other playoff contenders have tough schedules except ND. 

This is true...damn good bowl performance for sure. I know they don’t play Iowa...I meant hopefully they don’t have another fluke happen like it did with Iowa. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

28 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

This is true...damn good bowl performance for sure. I know they don’t play Iowa...I meant hopefully they don’t have another fluke happen like it did with Iowa. 

Losing by 34 (iir) is not a fluke-- that is a whoopin'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Just now, upndown21 said:

Losing by 34 (iir) is not a fluke-- that is a whoopin'

Whoopin's can be flukes

The stars aligned. The QB played a Big Ben All Pro type of game. He had a 6'5" 265 defensive end grabbing his legs, trying to take him down, and he flicks a fade route to a perfect spot. This was the prototypical, every player played out of their minds. The game calling was perfect. They obviously stole the OU playbook that worked really well against OSU earlier in the season.  There are some places you do not want to play, and it is at Iowa, when they are the underdog. It's shocking how some places can develop a history of upsets. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

23 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

Whoopin's can be flukes

The stars aligned. The QB played a Big Ben All Pro type of game. He had a 6'5" 265 defensive end grabbing his legs, trying to take him down, and he flicks a fade route to a perfect spot. This was the prototypical, every player played out of their minds. The game calling was perfect. They obviously stole the OU playbook that worked really well against OSU earlier in the season.  There are some places you do not want to play, and it is at Iowa, when they are the underdog. It's shocking how some places can develop a history of upsets. 

I agree. Everything went wrong for OSU and Iowa would’ve given any team in the country a run that day. It happens in all sports...I mean ...Danny Willet wins the Masters? Lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

As a football coach for the past 16 years I can honestly say you never really know what can happen when your dealing with a group of kids. Granted kids at that level should know better but they don't. They are still kids and they still make kid mistakes. And on top of that...they are not anywhere near as tough as previous generations. They get by on great athletic ability and don't think they need to know the basics. Once things start going bad....they tend to blame someone else. It's an unfortunate byproduct of our ever changing generations character decline.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  



  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • 2018 TST Partners

    PING Golf
    FlightScope Mevo
    More to come…
  • Posts

    • Oy. I don't give a shit about two top ten finishes in a decade. Nor am I comparing Jack to Vijay Singh, a guy whose putting stroke has been AWOL since roughly 2011. He wasn't. That's easily refuted. As for straighter you're not comparing like to like - you don't know what the fairway widths were, how far the ball bounced, etc. But we do KNOW that Tiger was longer than Jack. Tiger at 43 with a fused back is longer than Jack was when Jack was 40, 41, 42, or 43. Tiger @ 43: 297.8 Jack @ 40: 269.0 Jack @ 41: 264.3 Jack @ 42: 264.6 Jack @ 43: 266.1 Tiger was almost 30 yards longer at 43 than Jack was at 40, 41, 42, or 43. Now, several posts in, you're changing that up to say that, given modern equipment or whatever, Jack would probably have been as long as Tiger. But that's not what you said. Uhhhhh… He didn't do that. Neither did I. No they aren't. Furthermore, if all Tiger had to do was hit the ball 266 yards, he could probably hit 80% of the fairways. Fairways that are likely narrower, etc. So you lost the distance one, and if you want to measure "accuracy" by "fairway hit percentage" I again will point out you're not comparing like to like. They aren't playing the same golf courses, the same fairways, or hitting it the same distances. Furthermore, and more importantly, I don't care about stats like this when determining who the GOAT is. If you do, that's cool, but what I care about is wins, dominance, scoring averages, that sort of thing. I don't care who had a better short game (Tiger by far), who was a better putter (tie?), who hit a better 7-iron (almost surely Tiger), or whatever. I care about Ws. So not only are you provably wrong on distance, possibly off-base on accuracy, but you're arguing about things that most people don't even care about. Nobody considers Calvin Peete in the GOAT discussion because of how accurate he was off the tee. Huh? No. 🤦‍♂️ Uhhh, according to Jack, it was 118 MPH. I call bullshit on that. Oy. I don't give a shit about two top ten finishes in a decade. Nor am I comparing Jack to Vijay Singh, a guy whose putting stroke has been AWOL since roughly 2011. He wasn't. That's easily refuted. As for straighter you're not comparing like to like - you don't know what the fairway widths were, how far the ball bounced, etc. But we do KNOW that Tiger was longer than Jack. Tiger at 43 with a fused back is longer than Jack was when Jack was 40, 41, 42, or 43. Tiger @ 43: 297.8 Jack @ 40: 269.0 Jack @ 41: 264.3 Jack @ 42: 264.6 Jack @ 43: 266.1 Tiger was almost 30 yards longer at 43 than Jack was at 40, 41, 42, or 43. Now, several posts in, you're changing that up to say that, given modern equipment or whatever, Jack would probably have been as long as Tiger. But that's not what you said. Uhhhhh… He didn't do that. Neither did I. No they aren't. Furthermore, if all Tiger had to do was hit the ball 266 yards, he could probably hit 80% of the fairways. Fairways that are likely narrower, etc. So you lost the distance one, and if you want to measure "accuracy" by "fairway hit percentage" I again will point out you're not comparing like to like. They aren't playing the same golf courses, the same fairways, or hitting it the same distances. Furthermore, and more importantly, I don't care about stats like this when determining who the GOAT is. If you do, that's cool, but what I care about is wins, dominance, scoring averages, that sort of thing. I don't care who had a better short game (Tiger by far), who was a better putter (tie?), who hit a better 7-iron (almost surely Tiger), or whatever. I care about Ws. So not only are you provably wrong on distance, possibly off-base on accuracy, but you're arguing about things that most people don't even care about. Nobody considers Calvin Peete in the GOAT discussion because of how accurate he was off the tee. Huh? No. 🤦‍♂️ Uhhh, according to Jack, it was 118 MPH. I call bullshit on that. Ha ha ha.
    • I’ve never been one to sit on my donkey for too long. The past four and half decades have pretty much been work for me , as so I know, for many others as well.  Developing my golf game will (not) dominate my new found free time. It will though give me a new avenue of pursuits that I hope will keep my mind expanding. Thanks for the input and reply. 
    • That sort of extrapolation is not possible.  You are talking that he would be hitting the golf ball further than the average long drive competitor. I am not buying it. He would be one of the longer hitters on tour. Jack is not the physical freak like Dustin Johnson. I would put him probably a top 10 in distance yearly if he was in his prime competing today.
    • Guess it must be really hard to justify / recoup the corporate investment necessary for this tour - seems like its a new name every 5 years or so. Only people who must love this are the logo companies!
    • The first time Jack had his clubhead speed measured, he was 58 years old and he was at 118 mph. From 1995-1998, aged 55-58, Jack made 11 cuts out of 14 majors, finished in the top 50 in seven of them, and finished 6th at the 1998 Masters. A 25 year-old Jack Nicklaus playing today with today's equipment would average 360+ in driving distance. And would be winning majors and be one of the best players in the game.
  • TST Blog Entries

  • Blog Entries

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. Dan42nepa
      Dan42nepa
      (63 years old)
    2. James Dalton
      James Dalton
      (78 years old)
    3. JMHARDING
      JMHARDING
      (29 years old)
    4. mwh1023
      mwh1023
      (52 years old)
    5. Skeesh
      Skeesh
      (47 years old)

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...