Random Rose Bowl thoughts, congealed for your pleasure.
America can rest at last, the Rose Bowl is over. And with that, the analysis of the biggest football game since last year can begin, and the numerous ridiculous analysts can come out of the woodwork and give their two cents on what went wrong.
But some of these analysts have opinions that are flat-out misguided, and it's my personal responsibility to mankind to disspell these foolhardy ideas.
The first idea that came out of those Rose Bowl analysts was the idea that somehow, because Reggie Bush wasn't getting 25-30 carries in the Rose Bowl, he wasn't an every-down back. Wait, what? Baby, association ain't hardly causation. Maybe the reason Reggie Bush wasn't getting the ball every down was because the Trojans have Lendale-frickin'-White in the backfield, and you can't hand the same ball to two players at once, no matter how hard you try. Unlike Nebraska, USC hardly runs the option, and so maybe Reggie is doing pretty good to get 20 touches in the game. Did Reggie have a bad game against Texas? Because I thought the stats said 13 carries for 82 yards (with the TD) along with 95 yards receiving. Now, he made that brain-dead play, but that won't happen too often at the next level.
Why wasn't Reggie Bush on the field for that last play? Who cares? It's not as if LenDale White isn't a first-round pick. Maybe we should throw LenDale under the bus too; he only gets like 17 carries a game, he's definitely not a 30-carry back. That's ridiculous to say... here's something smarter. If Reggie Bush was at a different school, his stats would be better, and we wouldn't be speculating (needlessly) that he's a glorified Ronnie Harmon. Give me a break.
In fact, the only analyst who came even remotely close to getting this right was one John Lorenz, who stated that, while we don't know what Reggie Bush is capable of, we do know that he is great, and should be running the football at the next level. Amen. I'm now imposing a month-long ban on "Around the Horn," though Woody Paige is still Denver money.
People thought that USC was arrogant in the game for trying to go for a "TKO" early with Leinart's interception, but letting Texas hang around the game is never a great idea. You should get after Leinart for being an idiot for throwing that pass, (and his comments later), but not for trying to go for an early win. That's USC's style, and that's what they should do. By the way, what was Matt Leinart thinking with the whole "we're still a better team" argument? You lost what was basically a home game- do you honestly think you would fare better in Dallas, Houston, or Austin? You also got outplayed by Vince Young, who did not manage to throw any interceptions that ended drives. I hope you get drafted by the Texans... and that you get booed, followed by a seat on the bench, watching David Carr lead the Texans to glory. Put that in your pipe, and smoke it.
Does anybody else think Donovan McNabb might be a more appropriate comparison for Vince Young? Vince's 40 passes in the Rose Bowl showed a willingness to stay in the pocket and throw the football, which already put Mr. Young ahead of Mr. Vick. Now, Vince is fast, but I think he's got the smarts to know that running every play in the NFL isn't in his best interests. And who cares if he goes early? The NFL teams won't change the way they draft because of the Rose Bowl... everybody knows USC can't play any defense anyway.
USC, you should have punted. I'm out.
But some of these analysts have opinions that are flat-out misguided, and it's my personal responsibility to mankind to disspell these foolhardy ideas.
The first idea that came out of those Rose Bowl analysts was the idea that somehow, because Reggie Bush wasn't getting 25-30 carries in the Rose Bowl, he wasn't an every-down back. Wait, what? Baby, association ain't hardly causation. Maybe the reason Reggie Bush wasn't getting the ball every down was because the Trojans have Lendale-frickin'-White in the backfield, and you can't hand the same ball to two players at once, no matter how hard you try. Unlike Nebraska, USC hardly runs the option, and so maybe Reggie is doing pretty good to get 20 touches in the game. Did Reggie have a bad game against Texas? Because I thought the stats said 13 carries for 82 yards (with the TD) along with 95 yards receiving. Now, he made that brain-dead play, but that won't happen too often at the next level.
Why wasn't Reggie Bush on the field for that last play? Who cares? It's not as if LenDale White isn't a first-round pick. Maybe we should throw LenDale under the bus too; he only gets like 17 carries a game, he's definitely not a 30-carry back. That's ridiculous to say... here's something smarter. If Reggie Bush was at a different school, his stats would be better, and we wouldn't be speculating (needlessly) that he's a glorified Ronnie Harmon. Give me a break.
In fact, the only analyst who came even remotely close to getting this right was one John Lorenz, who stated that, while we don't know what Reggie Bush is capable of, we do know that he is great, and should be running the football at the next level. Amen. I'm now imposing a month-long ban on "Around the Horn," though Woody Paige is still Denver money.
People thought that USC was arrogant in the game for trying to go for a "TKO" early with Leinart's interception, but letting Texas hang around the game is never a great idea. You should get after Leinart for being an idiot for throwing that pass, (and his comments later), but not for trying to go for an early win. That's USC's style, and that's what they should do. By the way, what was Matt Leinart thinking with the whole "we're still a better team" argument? You lost what was basically a home game- do you honestly think you would fare better in Dallas, Houston, or Austin? You also got outplayed by Vince Young, who did not manage to throw any interceptions that ended drives. I hope you get drafted by the Texans... and that you get booed, followed by a seat on the bench, watching David Carr lead the Texans to glory. Put that in your pipe, and smoke it.
Does anybody else think Donovan McNabb might be a more appropriate comparison for Vince Young? Vince's 40 passes in the Rose Bowl showed a willingness to stay in the pocket and throw the football, which already put Mr. Young ahead of Mr. Vick. Now, Vince is fast, but I think he's got the smarts to know that running every play in the NFL isn't in his best interests. And who cares if he goes early? The NFL teams won't change the way they draft because of the Rose Bowl... everybody knows USC can't play any defense anyway.
USC, you should have punted. I'm out.
posted by mike at 9:53 PM
1 Comments:
Wow, that idea of comparing Young to future QB's is flat-out brilliant.
Matt Jones is a good comparison; and he was fun to watch in college. I actually got to see him play live in the Independence Bowl, and he was very good. I still think we need to compare Young to other NFL QB's, but this future idea is the way to go.
Post a Comment
<< Home