09-29-2017, 07:38 PM
WSU-SC just started off...and WSU is, in the first drive, gashing the LA guys.
week 5 in opponents
WSU-SC just started off...and WSU is, in the first drive, gashing the LA guys.
09-29-2017, 08:11 PM
SC already with two sacks on 11 attempts from Falk. Very disruptive defensively. SC up 7-3 and looking better, if not dominant.
SC already with two sacks on 11 attempts from Falk. Very disruptive defensively. SC up 7-3 and looking better, if not dominant.
09-29-2017, 08:13 PM
wow. Apparently all grounding is intentional grounding after a flea-flicker. (Darnold tried a flea flicker and was going to get overrun by the pass rush before chucking it away -- only to suffer an intentional grounding penalty for the aforementioned reason.) Have never seen that before.
SC just lost OT Chuma Edoga as well. They're down two tackles by injury.
SC just lost OT Chuma Edoga as well. They're down two tackles by injury.
wow. Apparently all grounding is intentional grounding after a flea-flicker. (Darnold tried a flea flicker and was going to get overrun by the pass rush before chucking it away -- only to suffer an intentional grounding penalty for the aforementioned reason.) Have never seen that before.
SC just lost OT Chuma Edoga as well. They're down two tackles by injury.
SC just lost OT Chuma Edoga as well. They're down two tackles by injury.
Interesting that all of Wazzou's games have been at home thus far.
09-29-2017, 08:27 PM
(09-29-2017, 08:24 PM)French Rage link Wrote:Interesting that all of Wazzou's games have been at home thus far.
Mike Leach knows how to schedule like an SEC squad.
Coogs up 10-7 and Darnold just got picked in SC territory.
(09-29-2017, 08:24 PM)French Rage link Wrote:Interesting that all of Wazzou's games have been at home thus far.
Mike Leach knows how to schedule like an SEC squad.
Coogs up 10-7 and Darnold just got picked in SC territory.
09-29-2017, 08:34 PM
First time watching the Cougs this season. They appear high beta on offense. It looks like the kind of drive that can either move quickly and efficiently or get stalled very quickly.
Possessions:
1) 8 plays, 55 yards
2) 6 plays, 13 yards
3) 3 plays, -4 yards
4) 4 plays, 89 yards
5) 3 plays, 5 yards (maybe going for it on 4th)
to be fair, much of these tonight seems to be due to dropsies from Coug receivers. Although not all the balls have been as spot on as the commentators would have you believe.
Possessions:
1) 8 plays, 55 yards
2) 6 plays, 13 yards
3) 3 plays, -4 yards
4) 4 plays, 89 yards
5) 3 plays, 5 yards (maybe going for it on 4th)
to be fair, much of these tonight seems to be due to dropsies from Coug receivers. Although not all the balls have been as spot on as the commentators would have you believe.
First time watching the Cougs this season. They appear high beta on offense. It looks like the kind of drive that can either move quickly and efficiently or get stalled very quickly.
Possessions:
1) 8 plays, 55 yards
2) 6 plays, 13 yards
3) 3 plays, -4 yards
4) 4 plays, 89 yards
5) 3 plays, 5 yards (maybe going for it on 4th)
to be fair, much of these tonight seems to be due to dropsies from Coug receivers. Although not all the balls have been as spot on as the commentators would have you believe.
Possessions:
1) 8 plays, 55 yards
2) 6 plays, 13 yards
3) 3 plays, -4 yards
4) 4 plays, 89 yards
5) 3 plays, 5 yards (maybe going for it on 4th)
to be fair, much of these tonight seems to be due to dropsies from Coug receivers. Although not all the balls have been as spot on as the commentators would have you believe.
09-29-2017, 08:45 PM
That Jones run sure makes me more optimistic about Love vs this defense. USC's running game wasn't doing much before that, that I could see anyway (WatchESPN is hot garbage).
09-29-2017, 08:46 PM
(09-29-2017, 08:45 PM)stupac2 link Wrote:U$C's running game wasn't doing much before that, that I could see anyway (WatchESPN is hot garbage).
SC's offense was pretty good before their OL were felled.
(09-29-2017, 08:45 PM)stupac2 link Wrote:U$C's running game wasn't doing much before that, that I could see anyway (WatchESPN is hot garbage).
SC's offense was pretty good before their OL were felled.
Feels like Wazzu's O-line is a notch better than past years. Their guys are winning a lot of one-on-one battles. Not surprised they "pounded it in" from near the goal line right before half (ok, their guy scored on a nice cutback).
Tied 17-17 at halftime.
The schedule favors a Wazzu upset, as they're playing their *fifth* straight home game. U$C definitely hurt by injuries. I'll be impressed if U$C pulls out a victory.
Tied 17-17 at halftime.
The schedule favors a Wazzu upset, as they're playing their *fifth* straight home game. U$C definitely hurt by injuries. I'll be impressed if U$C pulls out a victory.
Feels like Wazzu's O-line is a notch better than past years. Their guys are winning a lot of one-on-one battles. Not surprised they "pounded it in" from near the goal line right before half (ok, their guy scored on a nice cutback).
Tied 17-17 at halftime.
The schedule favors a Wazzu upset, as they're playing their *fifth* straight home game. U$C definitely hurt by injuries. I'll be impressed if U$C pulls out a victory.
Tied 17-17 at halftime.
The schedule favors a Wazzu upset, as they're playing their *fifth* straight home game. U$C definitely hurt by injuries. I'll be impressed if U$C pulls out a victory.
09-29-2017, 10:05 PM
Maybe our defense really is Swiss cheese. Darn old looks awful tonight.
BC
BC
Maybe our defense really is Swiss cheese. Darn old looks awful tonight.
BC
BC
09-29-2017, 10:09 PM
Never thought Id see WSU run it on three consecutive plays.
The pirate should have gone for it on fourth and three from midfield.
BC
The pirate should have gone for it on fourth and three from midfield.
BC
Never thought Id see WSU run it on three consecutive plays.
The pirate should have gone for it on fourth and three from midfield.
BC
The pirate should have gone for it on fourth and three from midfield.
BC
09-29-2017, 10:24 PM
(09-29-2017, 10:05 PM)Boston Card link Wrote:Maybe our defense really is Swiss cheese. Darn old looks awful tonight.
On one hand, I do think there are a number of extenuating circumstances going against SC in this game, so their perseverance is admirable. On the other hand, they've scuffled in so many games now that the most logical conclusion at this point is simply that they're not much good.Â
(09-29-2017, 10:05 PM)Boston Card link Wrote:Maybe our defense really is Swiss cheese. Darn old looks awful tonight.
On one hand, I do think there are a number of extenuating circumstances going against SC in this game, so their perseverance is admirable. On the other hand, they've scuffled in so many games now that the most logical conclusion at this point is simply that they're not much good.Â
09-29-2017, 10:33 PM
(09-29-2017, 10:24 PM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=17538.msg203399#msg203399 date=1506747948]
Maybe our defense really is Swiss cheese. Darn old looks awful tonight.
On one hand, I do think there are a number of extenuating circumstances going against SC in this game, so their perseverance is admirable. On the other hand, they've scuffled in so many games now that the most logical conclusion at this point is simply that they're not much good.
[/quote]
Lets qualify that. They are 4-0 and tied on the road with a ranked team. I think they are good. Theyre easily a top-25 team and may have an argument to be a top-10 to 15 team. What they are probably not, unless they can straighten things out, is a playoff caliber team. But few teams are, and lots of teams are in that level below... which is pretty good.
BC
(09-29-2017, 10:24 PM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=17538.msg203399#msg203399 date=1506747948]
Maybe our defense really is Swiss cheese. Darn old looks awful tonight.
On one hand, I do think there are a number of extenuating circumstances going against SC in this game, so their perseverance is admirable. On the other hand, they've scuffled in so many games now that the most logical conclusion at this point is simply that they're not much good.
[/quote]
Lets qualify that. They are 4-0 and tied on the road with a ranked team. I think they are good. Theyre easily a top-25 team and may have an argument to be a top-10 to 15 team. What they are probably not, unless they can straighten things out, is a playoff caliber team. But few teams are, and lots of teams are in that level below... which is pretty good.
BC
09-29-2017, 11:14 PM
And, SC goes down to the Pirate of the Palouse 30 to 27. Darnold finishes on of his worst games with a fumble while being sacked.
Put a glide in your stride and a dip in your hip.
09-29-2017, 11:22 PM
Cougs win, 30-27. Despite their record, I'm still not ready to think they're among the top four teams in the Pac. If they beat Oregon on the road, that would be a different story...and the Cougs would definitely deserve a return to the top 10 (first time since 2003). Unsure if they'll get in the top 10 based on this win alone.
USC needs to get healthy. But Darnold also not looking great. Can someone challenge them in the South?
USC needs to get healthy. But Darnold also not looking great. Can someone challenge them in the South?
Cougs win, 30-27. Despite their record, I'm still not ready to think they're among the top four teams in the Pac. If they beat Oregon on the road, that would be a different story...and the Cougs would definitely deserve a return to the top 10 (first time since 2003). Unsure if they'll get in the top 10 based on this win alone.
USC needs to get healthy. But Darnold also not looking great. Can someone challenge them in the South?
USC needs to get healthy. But Darnold also not looking great. Can someone challenge them in the South?
09-29-2017, 11:33 PM
Schadenfreude. Enjoyed the game while making a pot of pea soup.
Pax et Bonum
Schadenfreude. Enjoyed the game while making a pot of pea soup.
Pax et Bonum
09-30-2017, 03:52 AM
What a pleasant surprise to wake up in the morning and see the overrated as usual Southern Cal team lost.Â
They had proved against Western Michigan, Texas, and Cal, that they weren't a great team, and they needed many breaks to beat Texas and Cal. Looks like they ran out of rabbit's feet in the Palouse.
The fact they rolled over Stanford says more about Stanford, and particularly its defense not being very good, than Southern Cal being special.Â
The Pac-12 is wide open this year it would seem. It does seem possible to me that Stanford can get back into the thick of things with the OL and QB settling down, even if the defense has real issues. A dominant run game and a capable QB will overcome a lot of defensive shortcomings.
They had proved against Western Michigan, Texas, and Cal, that they weren't a great team, and they needed many breaks to beat Texas and Cal. Looks like they ran out of rabbit's feet in the Palouse.
The fact they rolled over Stanford says more about Stanford, and particularly its defense not being very good, than Southern Cal being special.Â
The Pac-12 is wide open this year it would seem. It does seem possible to me that Stanford can get back into the thick of things with the OL and QB settling down, even if the defense has real issues. A dominant run game and a capable QB will overcome a lot of defensive shortcomings.
What a pleasant surprise to wake up in the morning and see the overrated as usual Southern Cal team lost.Â
They had proved against Western Michigan, Texas, and Cal, that they weren't a great team, and they needed many breaks to beat Texas and Cal. Looks like they ran out of rabbit's feet in the Palouse.
The fact they rolled over Stanford says more about Stanford, and particularly its defense not being very good, than Southern Cal being special.Â
The Pac-12 is wide open this year it would seem. It does seem possible to me that Stanford can get back into the thick of things with the OL and QB settling down, even if the defense has real issues. A dominant run game and a capable QB will overcome a lot of defensive shortcomings.
They had proved against Western Michigan, Texas, and Cal, that they weren't a great team, and they needed many breaks to beat Texas and Cal. Looks like they ran out of rabbit's feet in the Palouse.
The fact they rolled over Stanford says more about Stanford, and particularly its defense not being very good, than Southern Cal being special.Â
The Pac-12 is wide open this year it would seem. It does seem possible to me that Stanford can get back into the thick of things with the OL and QB settling down, even if the defense has real issues. A dominant run game and a capable QB will overcome a lot of defensive shortcomings.
09-30-2017, 04:48 AM
(09-29-2017, 10:33 PM)Boston Card link Wrote:[quote author=washingtonismoney link=topic=17538.msg203401#msg203401 date=1506749085]
[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=17538.msg203399#msg203399 date=1506747948]
Maybe our defense really is Swiss cheese. Darn old looks awful tonight.
On one hand, I do think there are a number of extenuating circumstances going against SC in this game, so their perseverance is admirable. On the other hand, they've scuffled in so many games now that the most logical conclusion at this point is simply that they're not much good.
[/quote]
Lets qualify that. They are 4-0 and tied on the road with a ranked team. I think they are good. Theyre easily a top-25 team and may have an argument to be a top-10 to 15 team. What they are probably not, unless they can straighten things out, is a playoff caliber team. But few teams are, and lots of teams are in that level below... which is pretty good.
BC
[/quote]
Yeah, as we found out in 2015, the Cougs can be awfully tough in the Palouse even when you are a very good team. If I had to bet I'd still say U$C vs Washington for the CC.
(09-29-2017, 10:33 PM)Boston Card link Wrote:[quote author=washingtonismoney link=topic=17538.msg203401#msg203401 date=1506749085]
[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=17538.msg203399#msg203399 date=1506747948]
Maybe our defense really is Swiss cheese. Darn old looks awful tonight.
On one hand, I do think there are a number of extenuating circumstances going against SC in this game, so their perseverance is admirable. On the other hand, they've scuffled in so many games now that the most logical conclusion at this point is simply that they're not much good.
[/quote]
Lets qualify that. They are 4-0 and tied on the road with a ranked team. I think they are good. Theyre easily a top-25 team and may have an argument to be a top-10 to 15 team. What they are probably not, unless they can straighten things out, is a playoff caliber team. But few teams are, and lots of teams are in that level below... which is pretty good.
BC
[/quote]
Yeah, as we found out in 2015, the Cougs can be awfully tough in the Palouse even when you are a very good team. If I had to bet I'd still say U$C vs Washington for the CC.
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »