I wrote on Oct. 30 and 31:
"Finally, as I mentioned some time ago, college football is largely about passion, determination and energy and who wants it more, even among teams that are not exactly evenly matched. THAT'S the real wild card. Will ND come out fired up and concentrate for most of the game (given normal lapses virtually every team has in every game)? If so, I can see ND actually winning by double digits. Now, I don't expect it to go that way, but it is possible.....
"I would say we should be the favorite this particular Saturday night...The fact is their QB hasn't performed any better than Pyne has. They are not Georgia. The main thing is, will our guys stay focused and determined for 60 minutes? If that happens, Clemson loses."
mostly quiet when they are right and are more apt to say something when they are wrong, but you do you.
I am happy to admit that I was wrong and you were right with what would happen in this game.
I'll be even happier to admit that I was wrong and you were right, if this game turns out to be an accurate indicator of how Coach Freeman's teams will play in the future.
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
purposes only ;-)...just kidding...you have a good sense of this team's potential.
(no message)
after a top 5 win.
highly debate-able.
is not highly debatable.
9-17 and 9-19. Was even worse putrid against Stanford, Mrs. Pyne. He is an average back up qb.
(no message)
He in large part lost the Stanford game.
Backup, average at best. QB rating of 59 confirms.
(no message)
year is even funnier. If Buchner was putting up his numbers even if we were 6-1 you would be singing a different tune.
(no message)
4 games to go and that should do it for Pyne as the starter.
He has done a good job as the back up, but that's what he is, a back up.
(no message)
No hate there, but you who were clamoring for him as the second coming even last year should acknowledge that. You won’t though.
In the first two games, the O line was like a sieve. There were free rushers almost every play. Tom Brady wouldn't have made a difference. The vast improvement of the O line play after that has more to do with the 6-1 record than anything else.
(no message)
So what was different about our OL in games 1 & 2 vs games 3-9?
The answer is so obvious yet I don't think I've seen it mentioned. Patterson was UA in game 1 and still dinged up and way less than 100% in game 2. Add in missing a key cog of your unit with the rest of the OL (while very talented) not having played very many games together and it'sso clear. It's pretty common knowledge in football that the more games an offensive line plays together, the more they gel and begin to play better as a unit.
So in game 3 not only had the rest of the OL notched 2 more games together, they also added a near fully healthy Patterson back to the mix...Walla, suddenly an OL that looked high school level in games 1 & 2 looked like a quality college unit. Were they dominant like vs Clemson? No, but the comparison of game 3 to games 1 & 2 was night and day, and the OL then gained 5 more games together plus a fully healthy Patterson by the time we played Clemson.
This notion that the OL got better because of Pyne is just plain silliness...the OL performance was a stark difference vs Cal compared to vs tosu and Marshall games, but did Pyne play well vs Cal? Heck no, for most of the game he couldn't hit the broad side of a barn and was bumbling and fumbling too. His play was so bad we saw Rees for the first time literally lose his shit on national television. No other QB we've had has brought Rees to this point of frustration, yet with Pyne's subpar play the OL still made a vast jump. Why? Because the OL themselves actually got better not because Pyne is an OL whisperer and 'made' them better.
And I'm someone who isn't down on Pyne like many are...I think since the Cal game when the coaches have set him up for success with a good game plan he's played pretty well (disclaimer: I didn't watch the UNLV game) but the notion that "he" is the reason the OL has become dominant just doesn't hold water in my eyes.
(no message)
I am 41 and have never played QB or football at all
(no message)
(no message)
But seriously, all I did was try to look objectively without emotion at the facts. At that point it became pretty obvious what was possible.
I said you were delusional because you said we "should" be the favorite in this game and based it off Pyne having almost as good of numbers as the Clemson long name dude.
It was a great victory. Now will it be repeatable? What say you? Or will we revert to Marshall/Stanford behavior?
Yes, I am worried the team might revert to Stanford/Marshall form. As I said, it has been my observation college football results can be very prone to a team's mental state - energy, motivation and determination.
(no message)
(no message)