poll.
which college team has a better chance of losing this week?
louisville at uk? or ohio state at washington?
justify.
louisville at uk? or ohio state at washington?
justify.
posted by mike at 7:03 PM
posted by mike at 7:03 PM
16 Comments:
louisville's going to lose because kentucky is better....and it's in lex, and because louisville's just not very good at sports in general
This comment has been removed by the author.
It's really hard to pick because each of the 4 teams playing are really flawed right now. Washington seems to have looked the most impressive, but a ranked Boise State was a fraud this year. Will everyone please get over the freakin' statue of liberty play? Meanwhile, U of L, UK, and OSU have been beating on nobodies and looking rather mediocre while doing it.
Should I be a homer and say OSU has the better chance of losing? Should I do it because Washington has actually looked impressive and it is at Washington?
Should I set the bar low, and say Louisville has a better chance of losing in the hopes that they will go undefeated just to spite me? Should I do it just so that I can say I'm not disappointed if they do lose? After all, do not underestimate the effect of growing up a Bengals fan in the 90's.
Then again, Brian Brohm is the next Carson Palmer and Mario Urrutia is the truth.
OSU
i think osu is going to lose because they are playing the huskies. now there are 2 sets of huskies, them and uconn. since i hate connecticut, i submit that the washington huskies are the better ones. so they will obviously dominate the O H I O. clearly it's the only logical outcome.
I feel the need to add that if I were an objective person - which I'm not - I would say Louisville is more likely to get an L hung on them...
if ever louisville was going to ascend to the throne in college football, it would have to be this week.
still, like john, if i was being objective, i would take the cards. but i'm not. osu's offense only scored 3 points at the half against akron. they'll be down at least 7 if that happens against washington. i think the huskies can score 20, and that may be enough.
Louisville is more likely to lose because:
a.)they are playing UK in the third game of the season and not the first
b.)Petrino is no longer the coach of UL
I am hoping that these two things will actually make a difference. My gut tells me that they probably won't though.
Oh, and Brian Brohm is more likely the next Todd Marinovich/Heath Schuler. He's been throwing from a safe zone his whole career.
Don't underestimate how important arm strength is for an NFL quarterback. People who can complete a pass 50-60 yards down field should be successful by default.
And by the way, Carson Palmer's (or Peyton Manning, or Tom Brady, or... anyone who's ever lead a successful offense) never had to deal with a bad O-Line either - anybody would suck if they had to line up behind the Detroits, Arizonas, Miamis, etc. of this world This "safe zone" argument doesn't hold water if the quarterback is accurate and can throw deep.
(I'm aware of how bad he looked during the Rutgers game last year - by far the worst of his career. Feel free to use this as a counterexample, but I'd take Brohm's arm over pretty much anyone else in Div I-A football.)
heath shuler is a badass congressman.
there, i said it.
What John said.
"I'd take Brohm's arm over pretty much anyone else in Div I-A football."
Andre Woodson is more physically gifted than Brohm.
I think Brohm is a very good quarterback, don't get me wrong. Yes, the right situation will determine how successful he is in the NFL as it is pretty much always the case with quarterbacks. I'm not convinced that he can make throws under pressure or consistently make plays with a shoddy offensive line or hold up physically if he has to play for a team where he doesn't have the best of protection. I'm not saying he can't do these things, just that I'm a little skeptical since I haven't really seen him under those circumstances before.
I'm not going to make an argument that U of L should have beaten UK - with U of L's defense I knew we'd be extremely lucky to get out of there with a win. Actually, disappointing as a loss was, I'm very happy to see UK in the top 25. Kudos to any athletic department that brings in a coach that struggles for a few years while turning a program around, but actually give said coach time to do it (in the 4-5 year range). I just can't make Rich Brooks a villain because UK and Coach Brooks did things the right way to get UK to where it is. I've actually been watching Mississippi State closely the past few years to see if things pan out for Sylvester Croom - they could go .500 this year - so it seems like it might, which is encouraging for college football.
As for whether seeing Brohm under duress will determine whether he has high NFL potential is slightly bunk in my opinion. I would say the best indication on your potential is the number of 20+ yard throws you complete. Somebody needs to start applying sabremetrics to college QB's and see if there's anything there - and also whether "strength of defense played" is a factor. I think arm strength, accuracy, leadership, and decision making seem to be what matter most. Maybe Brohm's leadership is questionable because we don't really know if a team will rally around him under duress. But in the NFL, a quaterback just isn't going to beat a team on athleticism - Vince Young and Mike Vick excepted - because defenses are all 5-10 times better than any college D. And Woodson isn't Young or Vick, so he's going to have to complete passes. I'm not saying he inaccurate - I'm saying I would rate athleticism and arm strength high but put his accuracy at average. Meanwhile, Tom Brady would be lucky to finish a 40 yard dash in under a minute, but somehow he's the best quarterback of our generation. I just think raw athleticism at the QB position is overrated. I was dead wrong on Vince Young though - but I will say I'm seeing him make passes he never made at Texas. He also has an uncanny ability to not run at full speed, but make defenders commit before he cuts, and make them look like they're stuck in sludge as he effortlessly glides by. Young is actually a better scrambler than Vick in my opinion.
As a final thought, if Atlanta is as bad as advertised this year, anybody want to place bets on Brohm ending up with the Falcons? You have to give Bobby Petrino a mulligan on this year, right? I mean, for all intensive purposes, his evaluation period starts after this season. I'm excited about this more from a comedy perspective than anything else because nothing really inexplicably screams disaster to me than a college coach going to the NFL, then drafting his old QB. But I don't know if this has ever happened before, or at least with such a prominent draft pick. I feel like it could be some kind of fun sociological experiment.
There's so much that goes in the equation for what makes a successful NFL quarterback that I'm not even going to pretend to have any foresight as to who will be good in the NFL and who will be a bust. Look at the hype that Chris Sims received, his Brohm-like pedigree and he has a very good arm too and he hasn't taken the NFL by storm. He's a servicable QB at best. I'm not saying that Brohm will be like Sims or the guys I mentioned earlier. Just saying that it very well could happen.
To argue that Woodson isn't an accurate quarterback, he did complete 63% of his passes at UK last season and is completing 68.4% this season while averaging way over 10 years per completion. He also holds the SEC record for consecutive passes without an interception at 257 and is only 10 away from breaking the national record. Dude is pretty accurate.
Nobody thought Chris Simms was going to take the NFL by storm, considering he was a 3rd round draft pick.
You can complete a lot of passes in college and not necessarily be the most accurate passer in the world. I could probably complete 60% of my throws against U of L's defense. Tommy Chang set nearly every record conceivable at Hawaii, but he's never going to play in the NFL. Colt Brennan (who my be drafted ahead of Brohm and Woodson) will because he can complete a pass 60 yards down field. Jamarcus Russel can throw a football 70 yards from his knees. I hear scouts were impressed by that.
As a Bengals fan, I'd like to think that I know some things about how not to draft quarterbacks. They include the following:
1) No one hit wonders. At least 2 (preferably 3) years of college starting experience behind you.
2) No gimmick offense quarterbacks. Is you college quarterback running the run and shoot, fun and gun, triple option, or whatever the hell else? Then he's probably not going to play in the NFL.
3) You may be plucky, but you have woman hands. The upgrade from Jon Kitna to Carson Palmer has taught me that be 6' 4" plus and have a strong arm do benefit the average quaterback.
4) Give them an offensive line... or even a chance... helps. Throw anyone in there without protection, and they will fail like anyone else.
5) Someone who gives themself a concussion headbutting a wall probably shouldn't become your starting QB. Pretty self explanatory.
6) I'm still hurt from when Boomer Esiason came back for a single season in the mid 90's, kicked ass, and then retired to do commentary after the Bengals low balled him. I don't have a point here - just still bitter.
Of course I'm being completely biased in arguing that Brohm is definitively a better NFL prospect than Woodson. I mean, no one projected Brohm ahead of Brady Quinn before he announced he was coming back to school. But this is something I'm going to argue for until Brohm is going in for his 3rd knee surgery - he's freakin' awesome. But if Joe Horn is his #1 receiver next year, it's gonna get ugly - unless the Falcons manage to snag Urrutia as well.
But if you want to play stats, here's my couterpoint - Yards Per Attempt:
Woodson: 7.82
Brohm: 11.09
Woodson has been accurate as a passer against top notch competition. I don't think I need to tell you how brutal the SEC is.
Woodson also has a lot less effective offensive line than Brohm and he's still managed to complete numerous 40+ yard passes in his career. He's not running a dink and dunk offense by any means. He's one of the best downfield passers in college, if not the best. Seriously, have you seen some of the deep balls he throws? Amazing.
Furthermore, in their 3 head to head matchups Woodson has thrown for 9 touchdowns and 0 interceptions while Brohm has thrown for 3 touchdowns and 1 interception while their yards and completion %'s have been about equal.
I'm not making an argument that Woodson is BETTER than Brohm. I am just saying that he has improved to the point that he is at least Brohm's equal. One could argue that Woodson actually has more upside but we'll just have to wait and see.
I get that you're a UK fan and I'm a UofL fan and we're both going to defend our quarterbacks. It looks like I'm on the sinking ship, however. It's a fun argument that I'm just going to have concede because U of L might not make a bowl game this year.
Shall we revisit the subject in say 4 years when neither of them pan out in the NFL? Oden vs. Durant this is not.
I think you sell UK's offensive line short... I would say they've held up well the last 2 years.
But I feel the need to address the "Woodson plays in the SEC" issue. Look maybe I'm just bitter because of the whole "The BCS is unfair to the SEC because that conference is so tough" issue when the SEC has enough clout that if it didn't want the BCS, there wouldn't be a BCS. Auburn was the odd team out one year (rare season with 3 undefeateds) and LSU got in one year when everyone thought USC was better (the computers weighed the SEC much stronger). Anyway, everyone knows the SEC is tough. And I'm tired of the arguement that if team X ranked in the top 10 played in the SEC, they'd barely be .500. Of course this is the infuriating part of college football - highly ranked teams always schedule cake not wanting to "ruin" a season before they play a meaningful conference game. And how to rate "toughness"... is it a top to bottom thing, or what about last year when Michigan and OSU propped up an otherwise mediocre Big 10, painfully evident this year.
Wait, I'm off track... Andre Woodson is good. First Round draft pick for sure. But I refuse to give anyone bonus points "just" for playing in the SEC. I'll give mad bonus points if he lights it up against Florida and LSU - especially LSU - probably the best defense in the country. His QB rating against LSU was 39.4 (13-37 passing). I'm not pointing this out to say that Woodson sucks because he can't beat LSU - I expect that he'll do much better this year. In fact, I'll go as far to say that if UK won one of those games I'd immediately say he's the top QB prospect in the draft. But I'm begging the world to stop throwing a blanket of holy divinity over the SEC. There is top notch competition in the SEC - but there is in any BCS league - otherwise they wouldn't be a BCS league - that is unless it's the ACC. There's also bad teams in every league. So playing in a so-called "brutal league" (which, if any league is, the SEC is) doesn't mean much to me unless you put up in said brutal games.
I'm very excited to see what happens on October 13th and 20th - I think UK will surprise some people.
Post a Comment
<< Home