As Don Shennum correctly pointed out, the pro offenses of the PAC 10 teams are
proving hard to defend for the simpler teams.

Texas certainly had more talent and the better athletes, but bit the big one
against a very good Washington State team whose quarterback had not one, but
two separated shoulders.

Certain parties on this forum must be becoming increasingly nervous about their
projections on the USC-Michigan game.

On the other hand, Michigan won the beef bowl outeating USC by more than 100
pounds. Not necessarily a good sign for the Wolverines who usually win the
beef bowl, but lose the Rose Bowl.

While the PAC 10 has won all their bowls so far, it appears they will lose the
UCLA-Fresno game with the score being 17-0 at halftime. Then again, Fresno
State is another team with a West Coast offense.

ASCACHESS wrote:

As Don Shennum correctly pointed out, the pro offenses of the PAC 10 teams are
proving hard to defend for the simpler teams.

Texas certainly had more talent and the better athletes, but bit the big one
against a very good Washington State team whose quarterback had not one, but
two separated shoulders.

Certain parties on this forum must be becoming increasingly nervous about their
projections on the USC-Michigan game.

On the other hand, Michigan won the beef bowl outeating USC by more than 100
pounds. Not necessarily a good sign for the Wolverines who usually win the
beef bowl, but lose the Rose Bowl.

While the PAC 10 has won all their bowls so far, it appears they will lose the
UCLA-Fresno game with the score being 17-0 at halftime. Then again, Fresno
State is another team with a West Coast offense.

Hey and what about that fantastic Michigan State spread offense that
went against Nebraska? They put up three points. Comparative scores
are relatively meaningless. Matchups are what count. Nebraska's
secondary is one of the best in the nation with three of their four
coming back next year. They would match up extremely well versus
Washington State, probably far better than Texas did.

Nebraska has the most trouble with mobile quarterbacks who scramble. I
was very impressed with how Nebraska played considering the large
amounts of distraction caused by idiot Pederson's decision to fire a
coach whose players just finished 10-3.

Meanwhile the recruiting season is now almost half over and Nebraska
still has no coach and a bunch of assistants who don't know if they'll
be employed despite winning the bowl game convincingly with a good plan
on both sides of the ball.

There is a petition drive going on in Nebraska to remove Pederson as
AD. I doubt it will go anywhere, but if Pederson's boy doesn't win 11
games and the Big 12 North next year, they'll be people calling for his
ass to be grassed.

I think you'd better wait to talk smack about USC until after they play
Michigan.

Best Regards,

Bruce

As Don Shennum correctly pointed out, the pro offenses of the PAC 10 teams
are proving hard to defend for the simpler teams.

Oh yeah, the simple ole Fresno State country boys had a heck of a time with the
UCLA pro offense.

What was that score? Simple Fresno State 17 Pro Offense UCLA 9 (and 2 points
of that was Simple Fresno State boys batting the ball out of their own end
zone for a touchback..

It's a Simple Life for this Country Boy....

"ASCACHESS" wrote
Certain parties on this forum must be becoming increasingly nervous about their
projections on the USC-Michigan game.

No projections, just a calm urging! You know, to set things right!

On 30 Dec 2003 23:48:11 -0600, Bruce Draney wrote:

ASCACHESS wrote:

As Don Shennum correctly pointed out, the pro offenses of the PAC 10 teams are
proving hard to defend for the simpler teams.

Hey and what about that fantastic Michigan State spread offense that
went against Nebraska? They put up three points.

Michigan State's spread offense, like Texas Tech's offense, are more
gimmicky than even the option. I'd compare them to the run-n-shoot.
Every PAc-10 team has a featured RB, and a more than competent passing
attack. They usually have an above average TE, as well. THIS is what a
pro-style offense is built around.

Nebraska has the most trouble with mobile quarterbacks who scramble. I
was very impressed with how Nebraska played considering the large
amounts of distraction caused by idiot Pederson's decision to fire a
coach whose players just finished 10-3.

Great win by NU, now just don't take Tedford from Cal like some rumors
have mentioned.


Regards,
Don

On 31 Dec 2003 09:14:22 GMT, OTHERE (Fifiela) wrote:

As Don Shennum correctly pointed out, the pro offenses of the PAC 10 teams
are proving hard to defend for the simpler teams.

Oh yeah, the simple ole Fresno State country boys had a heck of a time with the
UCLA pro offense.

What was that score? Simple Fresno State 17 Pro Offense UCLA 9 (and 2 points
of that was Simple Fresno State boys batting the ball out of their own end
zone for a touchback..

It's a Simple Life for this Country Boy....

Allan,

UCLA is the most offensively-challenged team west of the Rockies.
Sheesh($1 to Jim Eade), they could only muster a 9-6 home victory
against Illinois at the beginning of the season. Plus, they were
without 3 starters on offense, including their starting RB Ebell. And,
it was a Fresno State home game, just a could hours drive across the
valley to San Jose.

Not making excuses, as Fresno State all year long proved to be the
better team than UCLA. But us Pac-10 loyalists will be the first to
admit that UCLA just stinks on offense.

Pat Hill to Nebraska!

Regards,
Don Shennum

No projections, just a calm urging! You know, to set things right!


Don't you mean get back to even?:-)

Rp

Not making excuses, as Fresno State all year long proved to be the
better team than UCLA. But us Pac-10 loyalists will be the first to
admit that UCLA just stinks on offense.

Was there another bowl team that gave up significantly more yards than it
gained?

What was UCLA doing in a bowl game anyway?

There have only been two upsets in the bowls so far and the PAC-10 has had both
of them.

Rp

"ASCACHESS" wrote
No projections, just a calm urging! You know, to set things right!
Don't you mean get back to even?:-)

Nah, just justifying the BCS (LOL!!)

sandirhodes wrote:

"ASCACHESS" wrote
No projections, just a calm urging! You know, to set things right!
Don't you mean get back to even?:-)

Nah, just justifying the BCS (LOL!!)

I have confidence that everything will unfold as it almost always
does. By January 5th or whenever the final games are played, Michigan
will have embarrassed USC (and Richard Peterson) into silence, and LSU
will have proven that Oklahoma's meltdown versus K-State was no
accident.

From the smoke and ashes will arise a new national champion not seen
for decades, LSU.

Of course I could be wrong, afterall, I thought 10-3 was a pretty darn
good year.

Best Regards,

Bruce