SportsAndLady
Posts: 35,632
Jan 8, 2013 11:09am
Why the fuck are we talking about this?
V
vball10set
Posts: 24,795
Jan 8, 2013 11:12am
Which, IMO, would have been a better game. ND prolly wins, but the game would've been more competitive.Pick6;1360932 wrote:Moot point. The game would have been OSU vs ND anyways.
sherm03
Posts: 7,349
Jan 8, 2013 12:11pm
That was absolutely horrible to watch. I haven't been that disappointed in Notre Dame's defense since the back-to-back losses to Navy and Tulsa. Bama ran through every tackle.
I really thought ND could win. I though at worst it would be a low scoring loss. Hats off to Bama, they are hands down the better team.
I really thought ND could win. I though at worst it would be a low scoring loss. Hats off to Bama, they are hands down the better team.
Automatik
Posts: 14,632
Jan 8, 2013 12:16pm
I don't think OSU would win, but I'm VERY confident that Meyer would have them motivated and ready to give their all.....something ND did not.Sonofanump;1360910 wrote:I strongly disagree with that contention.
karen lotz
Posts: 22,284
Jan 8, 2013 12:45pm
Automatik;1360977 wrote:I don't think OSU would win, but I'm VERY confident that Meyer would have them motivated and ready to give their all.....something ND did not.
I don't think motivation and giving their all had anything to do with the outcome of the game. Tackles weren't missed because there was a lack of effort. Alabama was better than Notre Dame.
sherm03
Posts: 7,349
Jan 8, 2013 12:47pm
I think Notre Dame was absolutely motivated. And I think they gave it their all. Alabama was just that good.Automatik;1360977 wrote:I don't think OSU would win, but I'm VERY confident that Meyer would have them motivated and ready to give their all.....something ND did not.
Alabama ran through just about every tackle and completely gashed the defense. The defense was on the field just about the entire first quarter because Notre Dame was never able to establish a run game, and that killed them.
Automatik
Posts: 14,632
Jan 8, 2013 1:05pm
You don't think they came out flat and listless?karen lotz;1360993 wrote:I don't think motivation and giving their all had anything to do with the outcome of the game. Tackles weren't missed because there was a lack of effort. Alabama was better than Notre Dame.
Maybe it was the break, maybe Kelly didn't have them ready, but they sure as hell didn't play to their potential. I'm sure every ND fan can agree with that.
Pick6
Posts: 14,946
Jan 8, 2013 1:07pm
Notre Dame's defense was also on the field the entire first quarter because they couldnt tackle. Not a fan of blaming offense for defensive struggles, especially in the first quarter.sherm03;1360995 wrote:I think Notre Dame was absolutely motivated. And I think they gave it their all. Alabama was just that good.
Alabama ran through just about every tackle and completely gashed the defense. The defense was on the field just about the entire first quarter because Notre Dame was never able to establish a run game, and that killed them.
T
thavoice
Posts: 14,376
Jan 8, 2013 1:32pm
Ya get this argument alot in team sports. Many times when a team gets beat ya have fans say that their team didnt play well, or didnt play up to their potential, etc. This is as old of an argument as there has been games.Automatik;1361016 wrote:You don't think they came out flat and listless?
Maybe it was the break, maybe Kelly didn't have them ready, but they sure as hell didn't play to their potential. I'm sure every ND fan can agree with that.
An answer to that comment could be that the other team had alot to do with it. The opponant has alot to do with how poorly one team plays. I have seen teams look amazing in some games and then look horrible against a great opponant.
Why? Well because the other team was just that good. I think that was the answer to last night as well. Alabama was just that good. Their lines were just dominant and made ND look bad.
karen lotz
Posts: 22,284
Jan 8, 2013 1:32pm
Automatik;1361016 wrote:You don't think they came out flat and listless?
Maybe it was the break, maybe Kelly didn't have them ready, but they sure as hell didn't play to their potential. I'm sure every ND fan can agree with that.
Flat and listless? No. Didn't play to potential? Yes.
It is possible to play hard and not play well. I think they came out a little too energized, like teams making their first appearance on that kind of stage do. Bama came out calm, focused, under control and before ND settled down it was 21-0.
T
thavoice
Posts: 14,376
Jan 8, 2013 1:36pm
I do think the call on the fair catch interferance was bogus no matter what their expert said. Ya notice how Herbie didnt say anything after he chimed in and Muskberger just commented 'so ya think it was the right call'. On the flipside I thought the call on the ND catch out of bounds early was the right call with him bobbling it.
If ND gets that fumble..who knows what happens. I still think Alabam wins going away. Good chance the Irish dont even score on that drive but who knows.
If ND gets that fumble..who knows what happens. I still think Alabam wins going away. Good chance the Irish dont even score on that drive but who knows.
Automatik
Posts: 14,632
Jan 8, 2013 1:37pm
Obviously Bama had a lot to do with it and I still think they cover with ND firing on all cylinders, but I stand by my statement. They came out flat, just like OSU against Florida. Golson sure didn't look energized, he had that "deer in headlights" look during pregame warmups.thavoice;1361034 wrote:Ya get this argument alot in team sports. Many times when a team gets beat ya have fans say that their team didnt play well, or didnt play up to their potential, etc. This is as old of an argument as there has been games.
An answer to that comment could be that the other team had alot to do with it. The opponant has alot to do with how poorly one team plays. I have seen teams look amazing in some games and then look horrible against a great opponant.
Why? Well because the other team was just that good. I think that was the answer to last night as well. Alabama was just that good. Their lines were just dominant and made ND look bad.
Agree to disagree I guess, but IMO ND didn't come out sharp and folded like a house of cards once they went down early.
Crimson streak
Posts: 9,002
Jan 8, 2013 1:50pm
Automatik;1361041 wrote:Obviously Bama had a lot to do with it and I still think they cover with ND firing on all cylinders, but I stand by my statement. They came out flat, just like OSU against Florida. Golson sure didn't look energized, he had that "deer in headlights" look during pregame warmups.
Agree to disagree I guess, but IMO ND didn't come out sharp and folded like a house of cards once they went down early.
Really? I thought golson played pretty good and didn't look timid. Now the offensive game plan was questionable but I thought he played good especially the 2nd half
T
thavoice
Posts: 14,376
Jan 8, 2013 1:53pm
I didnt think Golson played that well at all, but then again he was running for his life most of hte night. Also with the play calling.....those down the sideline are not high percentage throws against even the worse DBs let alone a good one. I am not saying dont try it, but they kept goin at it.
Automatik
Posts: 14,632
Jan 8, 2013 1:54pm
He came around the second half, but way too late.Crimson streak;1361056 wrote:Really? I thought golson played pretty good and didn't look timid. Now the offensive game plan was questionable but I thought he played good especially the 2nd half
SportsAndLady
Posts: 35,632
Jan 8, 2013 2:06pm
Yeah its very easy not to play timid when you're down 35-0. You're right here auto. ND came out flat and looked like they didn't belong. Domers are playing the "Alabama was THAT good" card to dodge just how bad they looked. (Despite this being the least talented bama team in some time)Automatik;1361064 wrote:He came around the second half, but way too late.
Automatik
Posts: 14,632
Jan 8, 2013 2:09pm
Bama is LOADED with talent. It will show come draft time.
SportsAndLady
Posts: 35,632
Jan 8, 2013 2:15pm
Any team that wins the national championship is loaded with talent. Point is, they're not loaded enough to say they are just too good to even come close to being able to compete with, and that ND played hard yet still came up 30 pts short.Automatik;1361076 wrote:Bama is LOADED with talent. It will show come draft time.
sherm03
Posts: 7,349
Jan 8, 2013 2:18pm
LOL at this being the least talented Bama team in some time.SportsAndLady;1361074 wrote:Yeah its very easy not to play timid when you're down 35-0. You're right here auto. ND came out flat and looked like they didn't belong. Domers are playing the "Alabama was THAT good" card to dodge just how bad they looked. (Despite this being the least talented bama team in some time)
Automatik
Posts: 14,632
Jan 8, 2013 2:19pm
I agree with that.SportsAndLady;1361084 wrote:Any team that wins the national championship is loaded with talent. Point is, they're not loaded enough to say they are just too good to even come close to being able to compete with, and that ND played hard yet still came up 30 pts short.
My friend is all about putting Bama up on the unbeatable pedestal. I got a text this morning, "Now I know what it feels like to get pounded in the title game. The difference between me and you is, I didn't think my team would win anyway."
lmao...wtf is that shit? You just get embarrassed on the biggest stage and you wake up taking shots at OSU.
A few days ago ND had "a punchers chance" and would keep it close. Now they get rolled and it's like....oh well fuck it, Alabama is all world anyway....THAT GOOD. :laugh:
Pick6
Posts: 14,946
Jan 8, 2013 2:27pm
It is probably the weakest during their "dyntasy"sherm03;1361089 wrote:LOL at this being the least talented Bama team in some time.
S
Sonofanump
Jan 8, 2013 3:52pm
He threw the ball out of bounds three times on the first two possessions, how do expect to sustain a drive doing that.Crimson streak;1361056 wrote:Really? I thought golson played pretty good and didn't look timid. Now the offensive game plan was questionable but I thought he played good especially the 2nd half
SportsAndLady
Posts: 35,632
Jan 8, 2013 3:54pm
This is what I meant by some time..least talented team in 5 years.Pick6;1361102 wrote:It is probably the weakest during their "dyntasy"
karen lotz
Posts: 22,284
Jan 8, 2013 4:02pm
Sonofanump;1361178 wrote:He threw the ball out of bounds three times on the first two possessions, how do expect to sustain a drive doing that.
Should he have forced a throw to a covered receiver? That usually leads to sustained drives, right? I mean really, what would you have liked him to do in those situations? The 3rd down throw to Eifert wasn't bad, it was a spot where only Eifert could catch it and if it weren't for the slight bobble its a first down and a sustained drive.
karen lotz
Posts: 22,284
Jan 8, 2013 4:18pm
SportsAndLady;1361179 wrote:This is what I meant by some time..least talented team in 5 years.
There are 4 potential first round offensive linemen starting on the team. McCarron is the best QB they've had. Ingram and Richardson are better than Lacy, but Richardson and Lacy were not better than Yeldon was when they were in the back up role. Yeldon will likely end up being the best out of all of them. Amari Cooper is 4 TDs short of Julio Jones' career TDs after one season.
Defensively they might be a little less talented than in previous years but they are still really good.