(09-29-2014 02:54 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  

(09-28-2014 03:40 PM)Knightsweat Wrote:  Oklahoma deserves to be #1. Know that.

Well, Alabama and Oklahoma now have a similar opponent in West Virginia....

But lets ignore that, and ignore the Sugar Bowl last year and go ahead and stick Alabama #1

the good news for Oklahoma, is all you have to do is win out and you're in....

I don't know that you can tell much from the common opponent angle. One was first game of the year, one was at home, one neutral sight, etc. What I did see happen was both of them started jamming it down WVU's throat once they got a lead and wore the defense down.

(09-29-2014 03:07 PM)Tigeer Wrote:  

(09-29-2014 02:54 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  

(09-28-2014 03:40 PM)Knightsweat Wrote:  Oklahoma deserves to be #1. Know that.

Well, Alabama and Oklahoma now have a similar opponent in West Virginia....

But lets ignore that, and ignore the Sugar Bowl last year and go ahead and stick Alabama #1

the good news for Oklahoma, is all you have to do is win out and you're in....

I don't know that you can tell much from the common opponent angle. One was first game of the year, one was at home, one neutral sight, etc. What I did see happens was both of them started jamming it down WVU's throat once they got a lead and wore the defense down.

Well, you can use the "one was at a neutral site, one was the beginning of the year, etc." for FSU as well....

One was without Jameis Winston, one was on the road at an undefeated NC State

Suck on that coaches poll

(09-29-2014 03:13 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  

(09-29-2014 03:07 PM)Tigeer Wrote:  

(09-29-2014 02:54 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  

(09-28-2014 03:40 PM)Knightsweat Wrote:  Oklahoma deserves to be #1. Know that.

Well, Alabama and Oklahoma now have a similar opponent in West Virginia....

But lets ignore that, and ignore the Sugar Bowl last year and go ahead and stick Alabama #1

the good news for Oklahoma, is all you have to do is win out and you're in....

I don't know that you can tell much from the common opponent angle. One was first game of the year, one was at home, one neutral sight, etc. What I did see happens was both of them started jamming it down WVU's throat once they got a lead and wore the defense down.

Well, you can use the "one was at a neutral site, one was the beginning of the year, etc." for FSU as well....

One was without Jameis Winston, one was on the road at an undefeated NC State

Suck on that coaches poll

Plus Alabama struggled with Florida.

(09-29-2014 03:43 PM)FloridaJag Wrote:  

(09-29-2014 03:13 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  

(09-29-2014 03:07 PM)Tigeer Wrote:  

(09-29-2014 02:54 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  

(09-28-2014 03:40 PM)Knightsweat Wrote:  Oklahoma deserves to be #1. Know that.

Well, Alabama and Oklahoma now have a similar opponent in West Virginia....

But lets ignore that, and ignore the Sugar Bowl last year and go ahead and stick Alabama #1

the good news for Oklahoma, is all you have to do is win out and you're in....

I don't know that you can tell much from the common opponent angle. One was first game of the year, one was at home, one neutral sight, etc. What I did see happens was both of them started jamming it down WVU's throat once they got a lead and wore the defense down.

Well, you can use the "one was at a neutral site, one was the beginning of the year, etc." for FSU as well....

One was without Jameis Winston, one was on the road at an undefeated NC State

Suck on that coaches poll

Plus Alabama struggled with Florida.

Ifs, ands and buts..... heck if Auburn doesn't pull off the FG miracle return in the Iron Bowl last year, FSU might not win the title, as they would have been playing a Bamer team with Saban with a month to prepare.

(09-29-2014 04:11 PM)Tigeer Wrote:  

(09-29-2014 03:43 PM)FloridaJag Wrote:  

(09-29-2014 03:13 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  

(09-29-2014 03:07 PM)Tigeer Wrote:  

(09-29-2014 02:54 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  Well, Alabama and Oklahoma now have a similar opponent in West Virginia....

But lets ignore that, and ignore the Sugar Bowl last year and go ahead and stick Alabama #1

the good news for Oklahoma, is all you have to do is win out and you're in....

I don't know that you can tell much from the common opponent angle. One was first game of the year, one was at home, one neutral sight, etc. What I did see happens was both of them started jamming it down WVU's throat once they got a lead and wore the defense down.

Well, you can use the "one was at a neutral site, one was the beginning of the year, etc." for FSU as well....

One was without Jameis Winston, one was on the road at an undefeated NC State

Suck on that coaches poll

Plus Alabama struggled with Florida.

Ifs, ands and buts..... heck if Auburn doesn't pull off the FG miracle return in the Iron Bowl last year, FSU might not win the title, as they would have been playing a Bamer team with Saban with a month to prepare.

"but" bama did not beat Auburn and were "rolled" by Oklahoma in the Sugar Bowl.

(09-29-2014 03:43 PM)FloridaJag Wrote:  Plus Alabama struggled with Florida.

Struggled? For what, ten minutes? Due to turnovers. I'd hardly call the can they opened on the Gators a struggle.

(09-29-2014 03:43 PM)FloridaJag Wrote:  

(09-29-2014 03:13 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  

(09-29-2014 03:07 PM)Tigeer Wrote:  

(09-29-2014 02:54 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  

(09-28-2014 03:40 PM)Knightsweat Wrote:  Oklahoma deserves to be #1. Know that.

Well, Alabama and Oklahoma now have a similar opponent in West Virginia....

But lets ignore that, and ignore the Sugar Bowl last year and go ahead and stick Alabama #1

the good news for Oklahoma, is all you have to do is win out and you're in....

I don't know that you can tell much from the common opponent angle. One was first game of the year, one was at home, one neutral sight, etc. What I did see happens was both of them started jamming it down WVU's throat once they got a lead and wore the defense down.

Well, you can use the "one was at a neutral site, one was the beginning of the year, etc." for FSU as well....

One was without Jameis Winston, one was on the road at an undefeated NC State

Suck on that coaches poll

Plus Alabama struggled with Florida.

Struggled?

Florida had 200 yards to Alabama's 645.

Alabama was sloppy as all hell with turnovers but it wasn't a "struggle." Florida was uncompetitive without Alabama's turnovers.

(09-29-2014 04:37 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(09-29-2014 03:43 PM)FloridaJag Wrote:  Plus Alabama struggled with Florida.

Struggled? For what, ten minutes? Due to turnovers. I'd hardly call the can they opened on the Gators a struggle.

More like 36 minutes. It was all tied up at 21 into third quarter. UF caused those fumbles.

(09-29-2014 04:38 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(09-29-2014 03:43 PM)FloridaJag Wrote:  

(09-29-2014 03:13 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  

(09-29-2014 03:07 PM)Tigeer Wrote:  

(09-29-2014 02:54 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  Well, Alabama and Oklahoma now have a similar opponent in West Virginia....

But lets ignore that, and ignore the Sugar Bowl last year and go ahead and stick Alabama #1

the good news for Oklahoma, is all you have to do is win out and you're in....

I don't know that you can tell much from the common opponent angle. One was first game of the year, one was at home, one neutral sight, etc. What I did see happens was both of them started jamming it down WVU's throat once they got a lead and wore the defense down.

Well, you can use the "one was at a neutral site, one was the beginning of the year, etc." for FSU as well....

One was without Jameis Winston, one was on the road at an undefeated NC State

Suck on that coaches poll

Plus Alabama struggled with Florida.

Struggled?

Florida had 200 yards to Alabama's 645.

Alabama was sloppy as all hell with turnovers but it wasn't a "struggle." Florida was uncompetitive without Alabama's turnovers.

All I'll say about this conversation is that I wish WVU had played the same Alabama team Florida did. They didn't make a single mistake, outside of dropping a wide open TD pass against us. Had they fumbled the ball as much as they did against Florida, we'd have done much better.

However, them's the breaks. You can't change history.

(09-29-2014 04:38 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(09-29-2014 03:43 PM)FloridaJag Wrote:  

(09-29-2014 03:13 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  

(09-29-2014 03:07 PM)Tigeer Wrote:  

(09-29-2014 02:54 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  Well, Alabama and Oklahoma now have a similar opponent in West Virginia....

But lets ignore that, and ignore the Sugar Bowl last year and go ahead and stick Alabama #1

the good news for Oklahoma, is all you have to do is win out and you're in....

I don't know that you can tell much from the common opponent angle. One was first game of the year, one was at home, one neutral sight, etc. What I did see happens was both of them started jamming it down WVU's throat once they got a lead and wore the defense down.

Well, you can use the "one was at a neutral site, one was the beginning of the year, etc." for FSU as well....

One was without Jameis Winston, one was on the road at an undefeated NC State

Suck on that coaches poll

Plus Alabama struggled with Florida.

Struggled?

Florida had 200 yards to Alabama's 645.

Alabama was sloppy as all hell with turnovers but it wasn't a "struggle." Florida was uncompetitive without Alabama's turnovers.

I am no Bamer fan, but I hope they are not sloppy this week and beat the hell out of Ole Miss. The offensive players need to watch their backs. The Ole Miss defense plays dirty and they are nasty good on top of that.

(09-29-2014 05:09 PM)FloridaJag Wrote:  

(09-29-2014 04:37 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(09-29-2014 03:43 PM)FloridaJag Wrote:  Plus Alabama struggled with Florida.

Struggled? For what, ten minutes? Due to turnovers. I'd hardly call the can they opened on the Gators a struggle.

More like 36 minutes. It was all tied up at 21 into third quarter. UF caused those fumbles.

It was not tied up at 21 "into" the third quarter. Alabama was up, and then committed another turnover, and Florida scored. Then Alabama came right back down and scored again, to go up for good. Florida scored on drives of 31 and 16, and on defense. No one watching that game, remotely thought Alabama in anyway was "struggling." The turnovers just kept the game from being a horrific blowout.

(09-30-2014 09:35 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(09-29-2014 05:09 PM)FloridaJag Wrote:  

(09-29-2014 04:37 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(09-29-2014 03:43 PM)FloridaJag Wrote:  Plus Alabama struggled with Florida.

Struggled? For what, ten minutes? Due to turnovers. I'd hardly call the can they opened on the Gators a struggle.

More like 36 minutes. It was all tied up at 21 into third quarter. UF caused those fumbles.

It was not tied up at 21 "into" the third quarter. Alabama was up, and then committed another turnover, and Florida scored. Then Alabama came right back down and scored again, to go up for good. Florida scored on drives of 31 and 16, and on defense. No one watching that game, remotely thought Alabama in anyway was "struggling." The turnovers just kept the game from being a horrific blowout.

Turnovers are a part of the game. Florida scored on them and it is a fact that the game was close until the 3rd quarter.

Heck, there have been many, many games where team A rolls up 500 yards and team B can only manage 250, but team B wins because of turnovers and other big plays (kick returns, etc.).

Football is a game of big plays, or at least structured such that big plays can trump mundane, play-in play-out effectiveness. You can 'win' four plays out of five, but if those four plays are 8 yard gains and the fifth that the other team wins is a pick-6, you are behind 7-0 despite statistical domination.

Lots of sports are like that, e.g., in baseball team A can have twice as many hits as B but if those hits don't produce runs A can lose, in Soccer or Hockey one team can dominate ball or puck possession and have lots more shots on goal but if their shots don't go they can lose, etc.

In contrast, in a sport like basketball, moment by moment domination almost always translates into a lead on the scoreboard and that's because play translates into points quickly. It's basically impossible for one team to dominate statistically in any meaningful sense and still lose. That's a cool thing about basketball.

(09-30-2014 09:58 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Turnovers are a part of the game. Florida scored on them and it is a fact that the game was close until the 3rd quarter.

Heck, there have been many, many games where team A rolls up 500 yards and team B can only manage 250, but team B wins because of turnovers and other big plays (kick returns, etc.).

I get what you are saying, but no one who actually watched that game felt in any way that Alabama was in trouble. Only those who just read the box score thought it was a struggle.

(09-30-2014 10:10 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(09-30-2014 09:58 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(09-30-2014 09:35 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(09-29-2014 05:09 PM)FloridaJag Wrote:  

(09-29-2014 04:37 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  Struggled? For what, ten minutes? Due to turnovers. I'd hardly call the can they opened on the Gators a struggle.

More like 36 minutes. It was all tied up at 21 into third quarter. UF caused those fumbles.

It was not tied up at 21 "into" the third quarter. Alabama was up, and then committed another turnover, and Florida scored. Then Alabama came right back down and scored again, to go up for good. Florida scored on drives of 31 and 16, and on defense. No one watching that game, remotely thought Alabama in anyway was "struggling." The turnovers just kept the game from being a horrific blowout.

Turnovers are a part of the game. Florida scored on them and it is a fact that the game was close until the 3rd quarter.

Heck, there have been many, many games where team A rolls up 500 yards and team B can only manage 250, but team B wins because of turnovers and other big plays (kick returns, etc.).

I get what you are saying, but no one who actually watched that game felt in any way that Alabama was in trouble. Only those who read the box score thought it was a struggle.

On that, I agree. I watched the game until it got out of hand, and at no time did I think UF would win and thought it just a matter of time before it did get out of hand. Which it did.