CFB National Championship game

[YoloinOhio]

 

 

This is a more accurate description of reality (Tom Ley):

 

"Watson wasnt just busting up an all-world defense, he was exerting complete control over the game. He escaped blitzes, rifled perfect throws all over the field, and never once wavered, despite the defense and special teams unit repeatedly shooting their own dicks off. Watson was in the zone, and it showed on almost every throw he made"

his throws were sharp! And several dropped, too, that looked perfectly thrown. His #1 WR out there was a walk on due to injury and suspension. And he had no running game to lean on. He lit it up. Not your typical "running QB" by any stretch. Edited January 13, 2016 by YoloinOhio

[John in Jax]

 

 

This is a more accurate description of reality (Tom Ley):

 

"Watson wasn’t just busting up an all-world defense, he was exerting complete control over the game. He escaped blitzes, rifled perfect throws all over the field, and never once wavered, despite the defense and special teams unit repeatedly shooting their own dicks off. Watson was in the zone, and it showed on almost every throw he made"

I also agree with the above. Watson, IMHO, was just absolutely amazing in that game.

[dorquemada]

 

 

This is a more accurate description of reality (Tom Ley):

 

"Watson wasn’t just busting up an all-world defense, he was exerting complete control over the game. He escaped blitzes, rifled perfect throws all over the field, and never once wavered, despite the defense and special teams unit repeatedly shooting their own dicks off. Watson was in the zone, and it showed on almost every throw he made"

 

 

I agree to the extent that Watson played a remarkable game. My point is and was that he was going to get killed out there, and he'll end up like RG3 in the NFL with 2 torn up knees. He had a great game, but threw an INT, and several others that should have been intercepted, killing drives, and leaving Clemson at the mercy of their horrible special teams, the difference in the game.

Edited January 13, 2016 by dorquemada

[Bill from NYC]

I'm not a hater, Bill. He just doesn't look very good to me as a pro prospect. I had no preconceived ideas about him prior to this season. If he turns out to be a good pro QB, I'll gladly eat crow.

Dave.....this is post 124 on this thread. You came in on post 86. Since then, you have posted that Coker:

 

"Isn't any good." (2x)

 

"doesn't look any good." (2x)

 

"very mediocre." (1x)

 

5 times you saw fit to slam a kid who just quarterbacked a team to a National Title. A team that put up 45 points against a Clemson team that you are praising up and down, implying if not outright saying that they are better than Bama. By the way, they are not.

 

Coker is not Andrew Luck. In fact, he has only been a starter for 1 season. He needs to find open receivers quicker, and so do almost 100% of young quarterbacks.

 

He is a very clutch player. Over the course of the season, the kid has picked up a lot of key first downs and the ground and in the air. He is brave and confident. Will he be a great pro? Good chance he will not, whereas there are only 10 or 15 of these guys in the world, right?

 

Who is your college team pray tell? Whoever it is, I am sure that I'm a little sorry they went down. Maybe they will win a title some day. Or 5. Or 16.

[QuoteTheRaven83]

I think Alabama's defense is better than ours. I know for a fact their LB's and safeties are better

 

Stop...lol. It's comments like this that make me wonder how smart our fans actually are.

[dorquemada]

Dave.....this is post 124 on this thread. You came in on post 86. Since then, you have posted that Coker:

 

"Isn't any good." (2x)

 

"doesn't look any good." (2x)

 

"very mediocre." (1x)

 

5 times you saw fit to slam a kid who just quarterbacked a team to a National Title. A team that put up 45 points against a Clemson team that you are praising up and down, implying if not outright saying that they are better than Bama. By the way, they are not.

 

Coker is not Andrew Luck. In fact, he has only been a starter for 1 season. He needs to find open receivers quicker, and so do almost 100% of young quarterbacks.

 

He is a very clutch player. Over the course of the season, the kid has picked up a lot of key first downs and the ground and in the air. He is brave and confident. Will he be a great pro? Good chance he will not, whereas there are only 10 or 15 of these guys in the world, right?

 

Who is your college team pray tell? Whoever it is, I am sure that I'm a little sorry they went down. Maybe they will win a title some day. Or 5. Or 16.

 

 

Good post. Coker needs a situation like AJ McCarron or even our own Tyrod Taylor where he can go sit behind an established vet and work on his game. He has the size and smarts, but needs more experience. Sure, you could say the same about EJ 3 years ago, and be right. Perhaps if EJ had been able to sit behind someone and not get thrown to the wolves, he might have turned out better.

[Mr. WEO]

 

 

I agree to the extent that Watson played a remarkable game. My point is and was that he was going to get killed out there, and he'll end up like RG3 in the NFL with 2 torn up knees. He had a great game, but threw an INT, and several others that should have been intercepted, killing drives, and leaving Clemson at the mercy of their horrible special teams, the difference in the game.

 

 

Killing drives?? He led them to 31 first downs and personally accounted for almost 500 yards from scrimmage against the 2nd best D in the country.

 

"An INT"? He threw 4 TDs. He was the team's leading rusher. He was far and away the best player on the field.

[dave mcbride]

Dave.....this is post 124 on this thread. You came in on post 86. Since then, you have posted that Coker:

 

"Isn't any good." (2x)

 

"doesn't look any good." (2x)

 

"very mediocre." (1x)

 

5 times you saw fit to slam a kid who just quarterbacked a team to a National Title. A team that put up 45 points against a Clemson team that you are praising up and down, implying if not outright saying that they are better than Bama. By the way, they are not.

 

Coker is not Andrew Luck. In fact, he has only been a starter for 1 season. He needs to find open receivers quicker, and so do almost 100% of young quarterbacks.

 

He is a very clutch player. Over the course of the season, the kid has picked up a lot of key first downs and the ground and in the air. He is brave and confident. Will he be a great pro? Good chance he will not, whereas there are only 10 or 15 of these guys in the world, right?

 

Who is your college team pray tell? Whoever it is, I am sure that I'm a little sorry they went down. Maybe they will win a title some day. Or 5. Or 16.

I don't really care much about college ball, Bill - it's all about the draft for me. College football is too corrupt an institution for me to really support. As far as my loyalties go, I went to UB for undergrad and UCLA for grad school, and I don't really care about either team. My wife went to MSU, and she's a moderate fan of them.

 

If you really think I'm a hater of Coker because I engaged in a debate about him, then I don't know what to say. I just don't think he's very good, but of course I'm thinking about his pro potential (which is what matters to me). Time will tell.

 

In any case, don't think I'm a hater in any respect whatsoever. That's unfair.

 

As for Alabama, they're a great team and deserved to win. They just didn't look to be as talented a squad as Clemson's to me. That doesn't mean I dislike Alabama. I'm trying to be dispassionate, which I realize is difficult for a hardcore fan to understand. The fact that Alabama wins a lot is entirely meaningless to me. I don't care, so you can't rile me by pointing to championship numbers. They do have a lot of good prospects, though (as always).

Edited January 13, 2016 by dave mcbride

[Gordio]

 

 

Killing drives?? He led them to 31 first downs and personally accounted for almost 500 yards from scrimmage against the 2nd best D in the country.

 

"An INT"? He threw 4 TDs. He was the team's leading rusher. He was far and away the best player on the field.

 

 

I remember another QB that had a pretty similar game/stats in the National Championship game many years ago.

 

I don't really care much about college ball, Bill - it's all about the draft for me. I went to UB for undergrad and UCLA for grad school, and I don't really care about either team. My wife went to MSU, and she's a fan of them.

 

If you really think I'm a hater of Coker because I engaged in a debate about him, then I don't know what to say. I just don't think he's very good, but of course I'm thinking about his pro potential (which is what matters to me). Time will tell.

 

In any case, don't think I'm a hater in any respect whatsoever. That's unfair.

 

 

I do watch a ton of college football & Coker is a good system QB & nobody has a better system in place right now then Bama. Saban is a terrific coach, light years ahead of his competition. I often refer to him as the Bill Belicheck of college football. Coker is perfect for what Saban wants done out there & that is get it to the extremely talented playmakers quickly & let them go to work. Coker does this very well. My guess is at best Coker will be a career backup in the NFL.

[dave mcbride]

 

 

I remember another QB that had a pretty similar game/stats in the National Championship game many years ago.

 

 

 

I do watch a ton of college football & Coker is a good system QB & nobody has a better system in place right now then Bama. Saban is a terrific coach, light years ahead of his competition. I often refer to him as the Bill Belicheck of college football. Coker is perfect for what Saban wants done out there & that is get it to the extremely talented playmakers quickly & let them go to work. Coker does this very well. My guess is at best Coker will be a career backup in the NFL.

career backup sounds right. He has size and appears to have a decent arm, and he has played against good competition. Ryan Mallet seems like a decent comparable, but I don't know much about Coker's mental makeup.

Edited January 13, 2016 by dave mcbride

[Mr. WEO]

 

 

I remember another QB that had a pretty similar game/stats in the National Championship game many years ago.

 

 

 

I do watch a ton of college football & Coker is a good system QB & nobody has a better system in place right now then Bama. Saban is a terrific coach, light years ahead of his competition. I often refer to him as the Bill Belicheck of college football. Coker is perfect for what Saban wants done out there & that is get it to the extremely talented playmakers quickly & let them go to work. Coker does this very well. My guess is at best Coker will be a career backup in the NFL.

 

 

Vince Young threw for only 267 yards and had 0 passing TDs. Their performances were nothing alike.

[dorquemada]

 

 

Killing drives?? He led them to 31 first downs and personally accounted for almost 500 yards from scrimmage against the 2nd best D in the country.

 

"An INT"? He threw 4 TDs. He was the team's leading rusher. He was far and away the best player on the field.

 

 

Yet, Clemson lost. Weird, that. When they absolutely needed a couple scoring drives to keep up with Alabama, they couldn't. Without the garbage time touchdown by clemson (Alabama D playing in prevent to make Clemson chew clock rather than a quick strike), the game isn't as close as the score indicated. Clemson had a one dimensional offense and when your only weapon is your QB, an INT is, in fact, a pretty major mistake, especially when the other team doesn't make mistakes. The fact is, Watson HAD to play lights out in order for Clemson to be in this game. He had perhaps the best statistical game of any QB in the championship game ever, and still lost.

Edited January 13, 2016 by dorquemada

[Kirby Jackson]

 

 

Yet, Clemson lost. Weird, that. When they absolutely needed a couple scoring drives to keep up with Alabama, they couldn't. Without the garbage time touchdown by clemson (Alabama D playing in prevent to make Clemson chew clock rather than a quick strike), the game isn't as close as the score indicated. Clemson had a one dimensional offense and when your only weapon is your QB, an INT is, in fact, a pretty major mistake, especially when the other team doesn't make mistakes. The fact is, Watson HAD to play lights out in order for Clemson to be in this game. He had perhaps the best statistical game of any QB in the championship game ever, and still lost.

That never really happened. Alabama went up 7 in the 4th, Clemson responded with a FG, Alabama ran the kick back, Clemson responded with a TD drive, Alabama scored on a Henry run, Clemson responded with a TD, then the game ended. I am not sure when it was that they didn't have those scoring drives that they needed?

 

The game was an extremely close and well played game. DeShaun Watson was the best player on the field and Alabama won the game with big plays on ST (onside kick, kick return). Each team has elite defensive lines and good coaches. If these teams played 100 times on a neutral field it would be close to 50/50. That is why it made for such an exciting championship game.

[eball]

 

 

Yet, Clemson lost. Weird, that. When they absolutely needed a couple scoring drives to keep up with Alabama, they couldn't. Without the garbage time touchdown by clemson (Alabama D playing in prevent to make Clemson chew clock rather than a quick strike), the game isn't as close as the score indicated. Clemson had a one dimensional offense and when your only weapon is your QB, an INT is, in fact, a pretty major mistake, especially when the other team doesn't make mistakes. The fact is, Watson HAD to play lights out in order for Clemson to be in this game. He had perhaps the best statistical game of any QB in the championship game ever, and still lost.

 

Part of being a gracious and knowledgeable fan is knowing when the other team deserves kudos. Clemson deserved to win that game every bit as much as Alabama, and instead of continuing to try and further elevate your team's status (while denigrating their opponent) you could simply do what most rational observers of that game did -- say, "wow, what a game by two great teams, and it was a shame to see one of them lose."

 

Oh -- and you get to celebrate a national championship to boot. What are you trying to prove, other than that you are a poor winner?

[Bill from NYC]

Each team has elite defensive lines and good coaches. If these teams played 100 times on a neutral field it would be close to 50/50. That is why it made for such an exciting championship game.

I think that if Clemson had the same schedule as Alabama, it is unlikely that they would have made the playoffs. Frankly, I think that 14 games is a bit much for these kids (15 counting the Title Game).

 

Alabama seems to be a bigger and stronger team. Clemson might be a bit faster, especially at QB. The Tide is certainly deeper, especially on defense. Their front 7 consists of 10 or more players who eventually will be drafted, some early. I have never seen anything like it.

 

Once again, jmo.

you could simply do what most rational observers of that game did -- say, "wow, what a game by two great teams, and it was a shame to see one of them lose."

If you and I live to see the Bills win it all, I want to hear you say that it was a "shame" to see the other team lose, OK?

[Kirby Jackson]

I think that if Clemson had the same schedule as Alabama, it is unlikely that they would have made the playoffs. Frankly, I think that 14 games is a bit much for these kids (15 counting the Title Game).

 

Alabama seems to be a bigger and stronger team. Clemson might be a bit faster, especially at QB. The Tide is certainly deeper, especially on defense. Their front 7 consists of 10 or more players who eventually will be drafted, some early. I have never seen anything like it.

 

Once again, jmo.

 

Maybe so but this Clemson team is much better than even I thought. If you look at their bowl performances over the last few years it proves that they were probably a little better than they got credit for. They beat up on my Buckeyes in the Orange Bowl, dismantled Oklahoma last year and then beat them handily this year, followed by a back and forth game with 'Bama. They certainly have moved into the "elite" program tier that presently consists of Alabama, Ohio State, Florida State and Stanford (I would say). Those are teams that are rarely (if ever) are going to lose more than 2 games. I was tempted to throw some other team's in here but couldn't justify it.

Edited January 13, 2016 by Kirby Jackson

[eball]

I think that if Clemson had the same schedule as Alabama, it is unlikely that they would have made the playoffs. Frankly, I think that 14 games is a bit much for these kids (15 counting the Title Game).

 

Alabama seems to be a bigger and stronger team. Clemson might be a bit faster, especially at QB. The Tide is certainly deeper, especially on defense. Their front 7 consists of 10 or more players who eventually will be drafted, some early. I have never seen anything like it.

 

Once again, jmo.

 

If you and I live to see the Bills win it all, I want to hear you say that it was a "shame" to see the other team lose, OK?

 

Clemson is every bit as talented as Alabama. And if the Bills ever win it all I guarantee you I won't waste my time trying to tell everyone else why the team they beat wasn't any good.

[reddogblitz]

I often refer to him as the Bill Belicheck of college football.

 

So Saban cheats? I had suspected it, but now I know. Thanks.

[dorquemada]

 

Part of being a gracious and knowledgeable fan is knowing when the other team deserves kudos. Clemson deserved to win that game every bit as much as Alabama, and instead of continuing to try and further elevate your team's status (while denigrating their opponent) you could simply do what most rational observers of that game did -- say, "wow, what a game by two great teams, and it was a shame to see one of them lose."

 

Oh -- and you get to celebrate a national championship to boot. What are you trying to prove, other than that you are a poor winner?

 

Thanks for the lecture, dad. My response was originally to this idea that somehow Alabama stole the game, and Clemson got ripped off. Alabama used their strengths, and exploited Clemson's weaknesses, to win the game. There is more, afterall, to winning a football game than flashy QB play. it was a great game, but started to become clear in the 4th quarter that Alabama was going to grind them down, which is what happened. I also agree with the other poster - if Clemson played Alabama's schedule this year, in the SEC, they might not have been a top 10 or 20 team.

[Bill from NYC]

Maybe so but this Clemson team is much better than even I thought. If you look at their bowl performances over the last few years it proves that they were probably a little better than they got credit for. They beat up on my Buckeyes in the Orange Bowl, dismantled Oklahoma last year and then beat them handily this year, followed by a back and forth game with 'Bama. They certainly have moved into the "elite" program tier that presently consists of Alabama, Ohio State, Florida State and Stanford (I would say). Those are teams that are rarely (if ever) are going to lose more than 2 games. I was tempted to throw some other team's in here but couldn't justify it.

Now this is a post with which I fully agree. Clemson was/is much better than I expected them to be.

 

Fwiw, I watch every single Tide game. As great as this team was they were not the best Alabama team. The team which destroyed Notre Dame had a much better offense than these kids, and the best OL I ever saw. They were more balanced, and imo one of he greatest teams ever. This squad had the best front 7 I ever saw, but the team had to work harder to be where they are.

 

Now, how about a title for the Bills!!!

Clemson is every bit as talented as Alabama.

Why, because you say so?

 

How about if we agree to disagree?