^exactly. You still need offense to come thru in a pressure situation. Giants had Eli. Who stepped it up into second gear after that week 16 game. He played ill throughout. Had he been the same eli in the first 15 weeks, then he prolly would have thrown an INT or gone down with the sack. ~_~
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by .Ike.
ok..let me ask you this...if Oklahoma was to win the National Championship with 2 losses...you would be extremely excited right? youd probably go out and buy an OU BCS champion shirt right? youd make a thread about how your team just won the NC right? Everyone else would be inferior to your team right?...because you just won the national championship game. It would STILL be a national championship. There is 1 champion crowned every year. 06 is the same as 05...it all counts the same. They did lose 2 games (with inflated scores due to overtime..it wasnt any sort of offensive massacre..trust me)..but their defense is what carried them..NOT their offense. I dont care is Ohio State was overrated or not...they had 1 loss..and deserved a shot at the national championship..that is who LSU should have played. They won soundly...on defense.
and you say that its just "peoples opinions"..but Miami came into that game a 14 point favorite. And go back and look...then try and tell me that Miami's offense in those years werent some of the greatest in the history of the game...if you dont think that..then you didnt do any research..or you just choose to ignore it. ANYONE that was alive in that era of college football will tell you that the Miami teams of that age was amongst the most dominating ever. And you also brought up 2 analysts earlier in this thread or the other..i cant remember...but the sports world is ran halfway through the media...like it or not. The media is paid to give you these comparisons about who is the greatest at what..and a lot of the times they overexaggerate..and a lot of the times they are spot on.
USC offense...Texas offense..Miami offense?...go look at those defenses...id say youd find a lot of those same names on NFL rosters. you CANNOT win a national championship with a sub par defense. It has never happened..and never will. Now i can point out a TON of teams that have won with sub par offenses. Thats just how the game of football goes....as well as any other sport. Offense catches the eye..and looks best to the spectator...but defense will get you to the promise land.
|
lol i never said they had a weak offense. This whole debate was brought up because of the Texas-OU game being high scoring. Lot of people thinking that OU and Texas have bad defense. Hell no, if you watched game you saw plenty of great defensive plays BUT you saw even BETTER plays by Colt and Bradford. They threw the ball with such accuracy into tightly defended areas.
just look @ OU's last td to make it 35-30. dude was covered perfectly, but Bradford somehow snuck it in there. You can't stop a QB with great accuracy and decision making.
also I also said I'd rather take an A+ offense and B+ defense over an A+ defense with a B+ offense.
and as for Tebow, I completely agree with Voke. In college, he might be elite. But not in the NFL. Look @ Vince Young. I LOVE how in his first yr, iunno if you were one of them Ike, but people shitted on me for commenting how weak of a NFL QB he is. He sucks. Point blank. Fucking i was watching the Tennesse-Jags game.
I saw an awesome defense, a good fucking rookie RB. and then a horrible OVERATED QB holding them down. Just bring in a poised Veteran QB in Collins, who just needs to be a game manager and they're off to a 5-0 start. Keep Vince in there, they prolly lose that Jacksonville game, and are either 2-3 or worse. Tennesse fans booed him. Dude is good, and Fischer is like "Sit the fuck on the bench you pussy". But in college, Vince was i think voted best college player ever in the recent ranks?
same with Tebow, lot of scouts i've heard aren't too sure how good he'll be. He'll def be talented, but i don't think he'd be one of the elite NFL QB's.