Unfortunately, the vast portion of the nation are only going to see the final score, and chalk it off as a blow-out loss for the MAC.

(12-17-2012 11:48 AM)CMUprof Wrote:  Why did it take so long to bring in Owens? What was the problem with the wasted time outs, delays getting calls in? Tough to move the ball without your stud RB, too one-dimensional.

You might not have watched the game, so I'll tell you even though the announcers talked about it a few times. Owens was limping around and they even said his ankle was tightening up on him. They eventually brought him in to see if he could provide a spark because Dantin just wasn't getting it done, but they really didn't want to play him because they didn't want him doing any worse damage to his ankle.

It was tough losing Fluellen. Toledo has a very good young RB that they really like, but he was a true freshman and they made the decision earlier this year to redshirt him. When Flu couldn't play against Akron in the regular season finale they said they just couldn't pull the redshirt off him even though he's been tearing it up as of late in practice and has really got a lot better as practices have gone on this year. With that in mind, no way he was going to play in the bowl game either, and McDowell and Pasquale were not getting it done. The other RB got injured just before the season started and missed all season. So in the 2nd half Toledo started giving Reedy some looks at RB and he did pretty well there in the 2nd half. Reedy played some RB and some WR in high school, so it wasn't too hard of a transition for him.

Even with Reedy opening up the running game some, Utah State has one of the best defenses in the country and it showed. Their two losses were to Wisconsin and BYU. They gave up 16 points to Wisconsin and just 6 points to BYU. That was a really tough defense Toledo played against without two of the three most explosive offensive players because of injury.

....and right after Owens came in he threw a couple of nice passes that were dropped...one was a long one that could've been a game changer.

(12-17-2012 03:14 PM)BrianNowicki Wrote:  

(12-17-2012 11:48 AM)CMUprof Wrote:  Why did it take so long to bring in Owens? What was the problem with the wasted time outs, delays getting calls in? Tough to move the ball without your stud RB, too one-dimensional.

You might not have watched the game, so I'll tell you even though the announcers talked about it a few times. Owens was limping around and they even said his ankle was tightening up on him. They eventually brought him in to see if he could provide a spark because Dantin just wasn't getting it done, but they really didn't want to play him because they didn't want him doing any worse damage to his ankle.

It was tough losing Fluellen. Toledo has a very good young RB that they really like, but he was a true freshman and they made the decision earlier this year to redshirt him. When Flu couldn't play against Akron in the regular season finale they said they just couldn't pull the redshirt off him even though he's been tearing it up as of late in practice and has really got a lot better as practices have gone on this year. With that in mind, no way he was going to play in the bowl game either, and McDowell and Pasquale were not getting it done. The other RB got injured just before the season started and missed all season. So in the 2nd half Toledo started giving Reedy some looks at RB and he did pretty well there in the 2nd half. Reedy played some RB and some WR in high school, so it wasn't too hard of a transition for him.

Even with Reedy opening up the running game some, Utah State has one of the best defenses in the country and it showed. Their two losses were to Wisconsin and BYU. They gave up 16 points to Wisconsin and just 6 points to BYU. That was a really tough defense Toledo played against without two of the three most explosive offensive players because of injury.

I did watch. Owens came in, threw a few passes, caught a pass, and ran the ball. He provided a nice spark when Dantin clearly wasn't getting it done. Still don't see why he didn't come in sooner given how well he moved.

(12-17-2012 03:37 PM)CMUprof Wrote:  

(12-17-2012 03:14 PM)BrianNowicki Wrote:  

(12-17-2012 11:48 AM)CMUprof Wrote:  Why did it take so long to bring in Owens? What was the problem with the wasted time outs, delays getting calls in? Tough to move the ball without your stud RB, too one-dimensional.

You might not have watched the game, so I'll tell you even though the announcers talked about it a few times. Owens was limping around and they even said his ankle was tightening up on him. They eventually brought him in to see if he could provide a spark because Dantin just wasn't getting it done, but they really didn't want to play him because they didn't want him doing any worse damage to his ankle.

It was tough losing Fluellen. Toledo has a very good young RB that they really like, but he was a true freshman and they made the decision earlier this year to redshirt him. When Flu couldn't play against Akron in the regular season finale they said they just couldn't pull the redshirt off him even though he's been tearing it up as of late in practice and has really got a lot better as practices have gone on this year. With that in mind, no way he was going to play in the bowl game either, and McDowell and Pasquale were not getting it done. The other RB got injured just before the season started and missed all season. So in the 2nd half Toledo started giving Reedy some looks at RB and he did pretty well there in the 2nd half. Reedy played some RB and some WR in high school, so it wasn't too hard of a transition for him.

Even with Reedy opening up the running game some, Utah State has one of the best defenses in the country and it showed. Their two losses were to Wisconsin and BYU. They gave up 16 points to Wisconsin and just 6 points to BYU. That was a really tough defense Toledo played against without two of the three most explosive offensive players because of injury.

I did watch. Owens came in, threw a few passes, caught a pass, and ran the ball. He provided a nice spark when Dantin clearly wasn't getting it done. Still don't see why he didn't come in sooner given how well he moved.

Because it was a close game and no one could have predicted that Owens would do that good considering that he was literally walking the sideline with a limp. Not sure why it's so hard to see both sides of the coin here.

Reedy dropped a perfectly thrown Dantin pass that could have been a game changer as well. Too many big drops to beat a team as good as USU.

Bottom line: we (UT and the MAC) lost to a better team that day. No shame in that, especially given the key injuries. Am I happy that our guys got caught up in it the last 5 minutes or so & it became a blowout? No, but sometimes that happens. Now, when we lost a couple years ago to Florida International, even I was p***ed off & embarassed (that game shouldn't even have been close). But next to the NIU/FSU bowl, this was the toughest draw for a MAC bowl team this time around, imo. I wish our MAC brethren the best as the bowls progress!

(12-16-2012 05:11 PM)GFlash68 Wrote:  Hate to kick the horse while it is down, but this is football. Most teams are tired and hurt at the end of the season. I did not see USU as that good of a team. Good, yes, great no. I believe that they played as many games as Toledo did. I am just a little bitter because I pull for all MAC teams in bowls and Toledo did more harm to the MAC in one game, than we can imagine. It was just a very weak effort.

I kind of agree. To put yourself in a position to win late in the game, not come through, and then self implode was inexcusable. I know a lot of Rocket fans think this was a good season...perhaps they are right but I think the word "disappointment" sums up 2012 for Toledo.

Regardless Toledo was the 4th best team in the MAC, going against a ranked WAC champ. We're better than OU, BG, and CMU, and worse than NIU, Kent, and BSU. Seasons over for us, and Toledo has not moved anywhere above or below where they were before they played the bowl game.

USU was #18 in the AP Poll, #20 in the USA Today/ Coaches, and #22 in the BCS Poll.

Have to laugh about the 2 guys complaining about UT embarassing the MAC.. The BG guy, whose team was on the short side of the worst modern day Bowl game loss in the 2008 GMAC Bowl 63-7 against Tulsa and the KSU dude whose team got blown out by a 2-10 Kentucky program 47-14. The UK loss keeps coming up when anybody questions how good KSU and the MAC are.

(12-17-2012 12:43 AM)MidnightBlueGold Wrote:  

(12-16-2012 05:11 PM)GFlash68 Wrote:  Hate to kick the horse while it is down, but this is football. Most teams are tired and hurt at the end of the season. I did not see USU as that good of a team. Good, yes, great no. I believe that they played as many games as Toledo did. I am just a little bitter because I pull for all MAC teams in bowls and Toledo did more harm to the MAC in one game, than we can imagine. It was just a very weak effort.

You better hope Kent doesn't 'harm' the MAC in their bowl game.

But tell me, how many teams will lose their top defensive player - and heart of the defense - on the very first play of the game, and then lose one of the top RBs in the nation in the 1st quarter, and are still able to win a game? And don't give me the bulls*** about 'injuries are a part of the game.' Just because they are a part of the game doesn't make injuries ok. No team is ready for their top offensive and defensive player to both be knocked out in the first quarter.

Not only that, UT St won the WAC handily this year while Toledo was at best was #4 in the MAC. Not sure how these pairings of teams were made but a win by Toledo in this one would have been a large upset.

(12-17-2012 10:38 AM)BrianNowicki Wrote:  

(12-17-2012 09:14 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(12-17-2012 09:00 AM)BrianNowicki Wrote:  I'm disappointed in the last 7:30 minutes of the game, but injuries this year showed two things, first it showed that Ohio University was not deep enough to overcome all of their injuries. 2nd it showed Toledo was not deep enough to overcome all of their injuries. They still had good seasons, but not quite the seasons they hoped for. Ohio had several guys out for the season, as did Toledo. Halfway through the season Toledo moved a tight end to the defensive line because so many DL players were out with injuries, many for the season.

This shows that while the MAC has a lot of talent, MAC schools just don't have the talent to play at that same level when they have so many injured.......the way an Alabama, LSU, etc do.

MAC needs to work on that. I think that's actually soluble. Ohio has depth. Not everyone is elite, but it has depth. MAC teams need to develop a bigger fan base so kids aspire to play there, and in that sense MAC teams are competing with Mt Union, Findlay, Dayton, etc.

Competing with Mt Union, Findlay, Dayton, etc is not the problem. The problem is that you have Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State and Notre Dame that get the elite Ohio and Michigan HS kids. Then you've got Cincinnati a slight grade above the MAC in terms of getting recruits from Ohio and Michigan. And finally, then you have six Ohio schools and three Michigan schools in the MAC fighting for that remaining talent. That's what really kills the depth.

I guarantee you, as long as you have the above in it's entirety you will not see the kind of depth at those schools that is needed to overcome a bunch (not just a few) of injuries and not drop some in terms of talent still playing on the field.

Fighting for talent outside the MAC footprint like Ohio does in Nebraska & Oklahoma or NIU does in Mizzou and Kansas are the only solutions to increasing depth and talent level. Everyone is hitting FL and there is only so much talent there. Nebraska is a football crazy state with only 1 team so Ohio working that state and Oklahoma(another football crazy state) is wise.

(12-18-2012 04:59 PM)onlinepole Wrote:  

(12-17-2012 12:43 AM)MidnightBlueGold Wrote:  

(12-16-2012 05:11 PM)GFlash68 Wrote:  Hate to kick the horse while it is down, but this is football. Most teams are tired and hurt at the end of the season. I did not see USU as that good of a team. Good, yes, great no. I believe that they played as many games as Toledo did. I am just a little bitter because I pull for all MAC teams in bowls and Toledo did more harm to the MAC in one game, than we can imagine. It was just a very weak effort.

You better hope Kent doesn't 'harm' the MAC in their bowl game.

But tell me, how many teams will lose their top defensive player - and heart of the defense - on the very first play of the game, and then lose one of the top RBs in the nation in the 1st quarter, and are still able to win a game? And don't give me the bulls*** about 'injuries are a part of the game.' Just because they are a part of the game doesn't make injuries ok. No team is ready for their top offensive and defensive player to both be knocked out in the first quarter.

Not only that, UT St won the WAC handily this year while Toledo was at best was #4 in the MAC. Not sure how these pairings of teams were made but a win by Toledo in this one would have been a large upset.

At best #3, worst number 4. No one can convince me we wouldn't beat Kent, OU lost to a BG team we handled easily and we handled BG easily. No way to know about Kent but to drop us to fourth at best seems a little off. If fourth at best loses to number 1 by 1 TD on the road it doesn't speak well for number 1 and I think number 1 is pretty darn good.

(12-17-2012 12:59 PM)axeme Wrote:  I think all commentary is valid or non-valid based on its own merits, not the record of the poster's school. That would be silly.

Praising Toledo's performance Saturday would be stupid: they just didn't play that well, capping off a season that was disappointing to, I would guess, almost all of their fans and players. Maybe that's a bitter pill, but it has nothing at all to do with whether KSU won 1 game or 11 this season.

9-4 with a BCS win over a ranked team would be disappointing exactly why?

(12-18-2012 11:16 AM)Boca Rocket Wrote:  Have to laugh about the 2 guys complaining about UT embarassing the MAC.. The BG guy, whose team was on the short side of the worst modern day Bowl game loss in the 2008 GMAC Bowl 63-7 against Tulsa and the KSU dude whose team got blown out by a 2-10 Kentucky program 47-14. The UK loss keeps coming up when anybody questions how good KSU and the MAC are.

Talk about a non sequitur.

(12-18-2012 05:12 PM)H2Oville Rocket Wrote:  

(12-18-2012 04:59 PM)onlinepole Wrote:  

(12-17-2012 12:43 AM)MidnightBlueGold Wrote:  

(12-16-2012 05:11 PM)GFlash68 Wrote:  Hate to kick the horse while it is down, but this is football. Most teams are tired and hurt at the end of the season. I did not see USU as that good of a team. Good, yes, great no. I believe that they played as many games as Toledo did. I am just a little bitter because I pull for all MAC teams in bowls and Toledo did more harm to the MAC in one game, than we can imagine. It was just a very weak effort.

You better hope Kent doesn't 'harm' the MAC in their bowl game.

But tell me, how many teams will lose their top defensive player - and heart of the defense - on the very first play of the game, and then lose one of the top RBs in the nation in the 1st quarter, and are still able to win a game? And don't give me the bulls*** about 'injuries are a part of the game.' Just because they are a part of the game doesn't make injuries ok. No team is ready for their top offensive and defensive player to both be knocked out in the first quarter.

Not only that, UT St won the WAC handily this year while Toledo was at best was #4 in the MAC. Not sure how these pairings of teams were made but a win by Toledo in this one would have been a large upset.

At best #3, worst number 4. No one can convince me we wouldn't beat Kent, OU lost to a BG team we handled easily and we handled BG easily. No way to know about Kent but to drop us to fourth at best seems a little off. If fourth at best loses to number 1 by 1 TD on the road it doesn't speak well for number 1 and I think number 1 is pretty darn good.

You could certainly argue:
#1 NIU
#2 Kent
#3 Ball State
#4 Toledo

So Toledo would be 4th, but I think 4th would be the worst they would be. They would've beaten Ohio I think, and did beat BG.

(12-18-2012 05:16 PM)H2Oville Rocket Wrote:  

(12-17-2012 12:59 PM)axeme Wrote:  I think all commentary is valid or non-valid based on its own merits, not the record of the poster's school. That would be silly.

Praising Toledo's performance Saturday would be stupid: they just didn't play that well, capping off a season that was disappointing to, I would guess, almost all of their fans and players. Maybe that's a bitter pill, but it has nothing at all to do with whether KSU won 1 game or 11 this season.

9-4 with a BCS win over a ranked team would be disappointing exactly why?

Because your expectations were higher? If not, then congratulations on exceeding your expectations!

And UT would be considered the 4th best team in the MAC based simply on results behind NIU, KSU, and Ball St., not Ohio who at 4-4 would not be in the discussion. And while I understand you can't accept the idea that KSU would beat Toledo, there was one common opponent that one of us beat and the other didn't: Ball St.

(12-18-2012 05:32 PM)HuronDave Wrote:  

(12-18-2012 11:16 AM)Boca Rocket Wrote:  Have to laugh about the 2 guys complaining about UT embarassing the MAC.. The BG guy, whose team was on the short side of the worst modern day Bowl game loss in the 2008 GMAC Bowl 63-7 against Tulsa and the KSU dude whose team got blown out by a 2-10 Kentucky program 47-14. The UK loss keeps coming up when anybody questions how good KSU and the MAC are.

Talk about a non sequitur.

Me? I didn't complain about UT. It happened, and the consequences are a fact.

BG's losses, both in recent bowls and this season, also hurt the perception of the conference. I'll readily concede that.

If BG loses badly to SJSU, that too will hurt the MAC. Anything else?

(12-18-2012 05:39 PM)axeme Wrote:  

(12-18-2012 05:16 PM)H2Oville Rocket Wrote:  

(12-17-2012 12:59 PM)axeme Wrote:  I think all commentary is valid or non-valid based on its own merits, not the record of the poster's school. That would be silly.

Praising Toledo's performance Saturday would be stupid: they just didn't play that well, capping off a season that was disappointing to, I would guess, almost all of their fans and players. Maybe that's a bitter pill, but it has nothing at all to do with whether KSU won 1 game or 11 this season.

9-4 with a BCS win over a ranked team would be disappointing exactly why?

Because your expectations were higher? If not, then congratulations on exceeding your expectations!

And UT would be considered the 4th best team in the MAC based simply on results behind NIU, KSU, and Ball St., not Ohio who at 4-4 would not be in the discussion. And while I understand you can't accept the idea that KSU would beat Toledo, there was one common opponent that one of us beat and the other didn't: Ball St.

I can accept the idea it could happen, just don't think it would be clear cut. Both good teams, I'd like to see the game. And yes, with Page and the head coach leaving I suspect most Rocket fans would confess, if their feet were held to the fire, to thinking 9-4 would be pretty darn good. I still do.thinking