Outgain your opponent (481-477), achieve more first downs (28-23), decidedly win third down (10-of-20 vs. 3-of-8), win the turnover battle (1-0), dominate time of possession (43:17 vs. 16:43), and lose the game? Yes, a CUSA team did this to an SEC team. Guess who?
Rice vs aTm. Incredibly Rice had no fumbles or interceptions that might explain how they managed to not only lose but get blown out
I made that game, Rice held out players on both sides of the ball, they start conference play next week. How did USCE look so bad against a&m, then look so much better against uga? Oh, former LSU player, Hairston, missed a FG early. a&m maybe a little overrated. Time will tell. Rice got good yardage from their Speed Option.
AtM and Oregon are similar in philosophy but not necessarily execution. When they match up to a physically deep, fast, disciplined defense, their rythm goes to shit. Every year we see this and the experts still load the wagon.
This, among other things is correct. We only suited 52 players against Stanford and they are a physical team, not to mention a conference rival and we played in their house. To recover and leave for the East Coast 5 days later was not good. To add to the litany, Sarkisian's love for the middle run (on multiple 1st downs, GOD!) was Kiffin's bubblescreen, we had the wrong equipment (cleat-wise we got zero speed off the ball or to the sides), we clearly overlooked BC, a lack of leadership on the field (Pullard for the 1st half and Shaw), inability to contain their QB, we are still a very young team. I don't want to take anything from BC, they played a solid game and came prepared. 9 out of 10 times we win that game and still only lost by 6. Why we waited until 53 minutes in to go with the up tempo and pass, I don't know.
While I am not a Hindu or Buddhist, it's not difficult to say that your continued application of this concept to college football is wrong. Intelligent action and dispassionate reaction. Yes.
