(01-02-2015 03:27 PM)That Guy 2012 Wrote:  UH wins 35-34

Deontay Greenberry did some serious work in the 4th quarter.

3 TDs in the last 4 minutes with a 2 point conversion. Recovered 2 onsides kicks.

2 insides kicks recovered also

(01-02-2015 03:29 PM)Owl75 Wrote:  2 insides kicks recovered also

One of them seemingly borrowed from one Chris Boswell. It wasn't executed quite as beautifully, but it worked.

(01-02-2015 03:28 PM)texowl2 Wrote:  Pitt needs to change from the Panthers to the Cougars as they clearly cooged it......

Perhaps it should be called Bear'ed it after that meltdown by Pitt. Was Phil Bennett on the Pitt sideline? I am sure the new Pitt coach who was the Michigan St DC will talk quite a bit about this game.

Re: college football "playoffs"
Eliminate the conference championship games and substitute another game in the playoffs (allowing 8 teams): No increase in the total number of games played in a season by playoff teams.

(01-02-2015 03:27 PM)That Guy 2012 Wrote:  UH wins 35-34

Deontay Greenberry did some serious work in the 4th quarter.

WOW

UH scores with 0:59 left. Down 33-34 with PAT pending. They go for 2 and win it 35-34.

(01-02-2015 03:31 PM)That Guy 2012 Wrote:  

(01-02-2015 03:29 PM)Owl75 Wrote:  2 insides kicks recovered also

One of them seemingly borrowed from one Chris Boswell. It wasn't executed quite as beautifully, but it worked.

Not even close, but it worked due to Pitt's inability to fall on the ball or just let it roll out of bounds before traveling 10 yards.

Karma, for the 1979 Cotton Bowl. The universe is in balance again.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1979_Cotton_Bowl_Classic

(01-02-2015 03:40 PM)Leoguy Wrote:  Re: college football "playoffs"
Eliminate the conference championship games and substitute another game in the playoffs (allowing 8 teams): No increase in the total number of games played in a season by playoff teams.

Sorry, Leo, but I have to disagree, and quite strongly so. This isn't college baseball where the conference tournaments are redundant and unnecessary given the number of regular season and conference games played...and given the 64-team post-season pool. I do think the conference championship games are an important part of college football; especially for the vast majority of conferences that are broken down into two divisions.

(01-02-2015 04:25 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Karma, for the 1979 Cotton Bowl. The universe is in balance again.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1979_Cotton_Bowl_Classic

Evidently this was the biggest comeback in Bowl history. I gave up on the game but congratulations to the Coogs!

(01-02-2015 04:00 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  

(01-02-2015 03:31 PM)That Guy 2012 Wrote:  

(01-02-2015 03:29 PM)Owl75 Wrote:  2 insides kicks recovered also

One of them seemingly borrowed from one Chris Boswell. It wasn't executed quite as beautifully, but it worked.

Not even close, but it worked due to Pitt's inability to fall on the ball or just let it roll out of bounds before traveling 10 yards.

The second onside was not even close; he started his run up, stopped, backed up, and ran and kicked the opposite direction. That kick didn't go 10 yards, and Pitt just blew it.

I was referring to the first one. The kicker ran right and kicked left. The difference between his and Bos's is that he turned his whole body at the kick. The execution was the same, but the misdirection idea/intent was the same. That kick went 13 yards and died in bounds in the vicinity of a Pitt returner.

Kansas St. failed to pull off the Rabona onsides kick. Got a brief mention of it being done in a CUSA game before.

K State kicker just pulled it off

but unlike in the Rice game the receiving team recovered

Best line of the UH game was the Bill Buckner reference on the second onside kick that went 5 hole on the Pitt player.

(01-02-2015 11:43 PM)Tiki Owl Wrote:  Best line of the UH game was the Bill Buckner reference on the second onside kick that went 5 hole on the Pitt player.

Yes, it was a good line.

(01-02-2015 08:28 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(01-02-2015 03:40 PM)Leoguy Wrote:  Re: college football "playoffs"
Eliminate the conference championship games and substitute another game in the playoffs (allowing 8 teams): No increase in the total number of games played in a season by playoff teams.

Sorry, Leo, but I have to disagree, and quite strongly so. This isn't college baseball where the conference tournaments are redundant and unnecessary given the number of regular season and conference games played...and given the 64-team post-season pool. I do think the conference championship games are an important part of college football; especially for the vast majority of conferences that are broken down into two divisions.

Walt, I wasn't clear. Eliminate the Championship game only in the so-called Power Five conferences since that's where, under the present semi-pro/ESPN system, the top 8 teams will likely come from. The other conferences can play a championship game if they wish. I realize this isn't anything like the college basketball or baseball tournaments, but that's not likely to change.

With the Okie State win over Washington last night, I believe that CUSA has now clinched the best conference record (4-1) in bowls this year. XII, MWC, and AAC all under .500.

(01-02-2015 03:27 PM)That Guy 2012 Wrote:  UH wins 35-34

Congrats to UH--- incredible victory!

(01-02-2015 11:47 AM)JustAnotherAustinOwl Wrote:  

(01-02-2015 11:06 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(01-02-2015 10:24 AM)JustAnotherAustinOwl Wrote:  Hopefully this will keep the people who were making the argument that Ohio State shouldn't be in the playoff because they lost their QB from ever making such a stupid, idiotic argument again. People can argue about who should qualify and what parts of teams' accomplishments should be emphasized, but it should be about what teams have done, not what pundits thing *might* happen in the future. Or else, why even play the freakin' games?

Ohio State's most impressive performances have come after they lost their QB. Maybe they're that deep at QB. Maybe offensive geniuses Urban and Mensa are really that. Or maybe they had the wrong QB on the field all along. Either way, they're where they want to be.

Exactly - that's why I objected so strongly to people arguing that we should guess what effect injuries would have on future games and use that to determine who gets in the playoff. At that point, why not take which coach we will think will outcoach the other into account too? Or any number of other things.

JAAO - you can keep arguing it all you want, but the fact of the matter is that injuries is one of the explicit parameters the committee is supposed to consider when trying to differentiate between close/essentially equal teams. It's in the charter for the group. Throw out other strawmen about coaches if you like, but it's right there in black and white. Clearly, they didn't think it mattered that much, or that the divide between OSU and the other 1 loss teams was wide enough to overcome it.

You can argue whether it should have applied to OSU at the time - in this case, it played out pretty well. But in most cases, going to your third-string QB (going into the season) usually doesn't result in essentially equal results. It's amazing what they've been able to pull off (albeit in a very small 2-game sample size). That same sample size with the original 2nd stringer wasn't as positive (a struggle against Navy, ugly loss to an unranked Virginia Tech).