Oregon - Kansas State - ND

[I Bleed Garnet]

Originally Posted by imabeastonu

They had just as good offenses the past 2 years also and both times... lost when they played against a good d-line a la LSU and Auburn. If they had to play in the East and had our 4 game stretch they would lose 2 at least

That's not what I'm saying.
If they played any of those teams I mentioned they'd put up points.
Because those teams are AWFUL

[I Bleed Garnet]

I actually believe ND is the best out of all of these because they actually play defense.
We'll see what happens when they play @ USC the last game of the season.
That will be a good way to judge.

[Lalli25]

Originally Posted by CockyCyclone

Why not use the A&M example instead of Mizzou? Mizzou has had a ton of injuries and would suck in the Big 12 now too, they were 6-6 last year as was A&M, but A&M's offense seems to be doing just fine in the SEC.

A&M O isn't why they are being successful, but their D has been solid even when in the Big 12. Missouri has never had a good D, but just out scored people. Also A&M isn't doing well against the teams listed in this conversation.

[Lalli25]

If ND beats So Cal by a TD, 27-20, what does that say about them? Does Oregon still get considered the better team since they scored 60+ points, even though they gave up 50+ points?

All 3 of the teams mentioned are flawed, but feel like Oregon gets a pass since they look good scoring a bunch of points, but play no D.

[CockyCyclone]

Originally Posted by Lalli25

A&M O isn't why they are being successful, but their D has been solid even when in the Big 12. Missouri has never had a good D, but just out scored people. Also A&M isn't doing well against the teams listed in this conversation.

You just proved you have no idea what you are talking about with this post. Go look at the stats on A&M's defense for the past few years including this year.

A&M barely lost to Florida and LSU and could have won both, more than we can say.

[USCgamecocks]

Originally Posted by Lalli25

If ND beats So Cal by a TD, 27-20, what does that say about them? Does Oregon still get considered the better team since they scored 60+ points, even though they gave up 50+ points?

All 3 of the teams mentioned are flawed, but feel like Oregon gets a pass since they look good scoring a bunch of points, but play no D.

Oregon is 50th in total defense while aTm is 46th

[Lalli25]

Originally Posted by CockyCyclone

You just proved you have no idea what you are talking about with this post. Go look at the stats on A&M's defense for the past few years including this year.

A&M barely lost to Florida and LSU and could have won both, more than we can say.

They almost won...so they lost. I also said that their D was why they were competitive against SEC teams, not the O. Why don't you look at those scores, before you make yourself look bad.

[Lalli25]

Originally Posted by USCgamecocks

Oregon is 50th in total defense while aTm is 46th

And A&M isn't #3 in the nation? So what's the point? You mean Oregon would be a 3 loss team in the SEC, thanks for agreeing.

[CockyCyclone]

Originally Posted by Lalli25

They almost won...so they lost. I also said that their D was why they were competitive against SEC teams, not the O. Why don't you look at those scores, before you make yourself look bad.

59-57 to Louisiana Tech, their D is not the reason they are doing good.

Just because crappy SEC teams aren't scoring a bunch doesn't mean their D is good.

[USCgamecocks]

Originally Posted by Lalli25

And A&M isn't #3 in the nation? So what's the point? You mean Oregon would be a 3 loss team in the SEC, thanks for agreeing.

You say Oregon plays no D, then you say aTm plays decent D, yet the stats say Oregon plays better defense against better offenses then aTm. So your argument holds no water.

[Lalli25]

Originally Posted by USCgamecocks

You say Oregon plays no D, then you say aTm plays decent D, yet the stats say Oregon plays better defense against better offenses then aTm. So your argument holds no water.

Yes, they have a crappy D to be the top team in the land. They have a good enough D, like A&M to go 7-5 or 8-4 in the SEC. It really isn't that hard to follow.

[Cock Kool-Aid]

Originally Posted by Lalli25

If ND beats So Cal by a TD, 27-20, what does that say about them? Does Oregon still get considered the better team since they scored 60+ points, even though they gave up 50+ points?

All 3 of the teams mentioned are flawed, but feel like Oregon gets a pass since they look good scoring a bunch of points, but play no D.

Oregon does play D though. You make it sound like they are WVU and getting ran over by terrible teams. The USC game is the first time they have had an outing like that. Like I said their D is not elite or even great, but I think it's a decent unit and they are definitely playing D.

[Lalli25]

Originally Posted by CockyCyclone

59-57 to Louisiana Tech, their D is not the reason they are doing good.

Just because crappy SEC teams aren't scoring a bunch doesn't mean their D is good.

A&M has played solid D and has the size to play D against SEC, one game isn't the gage of a team. Oregon has shown consistently not to perform well on D when it matters. When was the last time Oregon won a game, 20-14. They don't and can't win the style they play. They are like the Phoenix Suns when Nash was there, they try to outscore you. That works well in the regular season against average teams, but elite teams and playoff time that doesn't work.

[Lalli25]

Originally Posted by Cock Kool-Aid

Oregon does play D though. You make it sound like they are WVU and getting ran over by terrible teams. The USC game is the first time they have had an outing like that. Like I said their D is not elite or even great, but I think it's a decent unit and they are definitely playing D.

Oregon is small and just relies on speed. They try to get up big and then force teams to just pass and they use their speed to blitz and get turnovers. They can't stop a powerful team, like the SEC teams, and their O can't outmatch the SEC Ds like they do in the Pac 12.

[Cock Kool-Aid]

Originally Posted by Lalli25

Yes, they have a crappy D to be the top team in the land. They have a good enough D, like A&M to go 7-5 or 8-4 in the SEC. It really isn't that hard to follow.

I think Oregon's offense is better than A&M's though. So, they would probably win more games than A&M. You can argue that Oregon's defense looks bad because they play more dynamic offenses in the Pac12. This is all speculative BS and no way to prove either point, so it's either you are one of the guys who think outsiders just simply can't compete in the big bad SEC or you are one of the guys who believes football exists outside the SEC. Oregon lost to a beastly Auburn team by 3 points, so I don't see how people can say they can't compete and can't play any semblance of defense.

[Cock Kool-Aid]

This debate is exactly why I want Oregon and Bama to play for the BCS title. Great matchup. Amazing matchup really.

[imabeastonu]

Originally Posted by I Bleed Garnet

That's not what I'm saying.
If they played any of those teams I mentioned they'd put up points.
Because those teams are AWFUL

i should have specified specifically that I meant good dlines and good SEC dlines which is 5-6 teams. I honestly think we would give them fits bc we would keep them off the field and our dline is just so fast

[uscjeremynca]

Originally Posted by Cock Kool-Aid

Oregon does play D though. You make it sound like they are WVU and getting ran over by terrible teams. The USC game is the first time they have had an outing like that. Like I said their D is not elite or even great, but I think it's a decent unit and they are definitely playing D.

I agree. Living on the west coast, I see Oregon play more than most of you. Their D is decent. It's not the best but they are opportunistic, get a lot of takeaways, are decent against run and pass, and score points.

[b381l]

I'm so hoping for 4 undefeated teams......which 2 don't go to the big dance.
ND and K St.

[Lalli25]

Originally Posted by Cock Kool-Aid

I think Oregon's offense is better than A&M's though. So, they would probably win more games than A&M. You can argue that Oregon's defense looks bad because they play more dynamic offenses in the Pac12. This is all speculative BS and no way to prove either point, so it's either you are one of the guys who think outsiders just simply can't compete in the big bad SEC or you are one of the guys who believes football exists outside the SEC. Oregon lost to a beastly Auburn team by 3 points, so I don't see how people can say they can't compete and can't play any semblance of defense.

I don't disagree that they could compete but they wouldn't look elite like they do now. PAC 12 has been shown consistently to be poor defenses that make their offense look better than they really are. If Oregon was in the SEC the grind would probably cause them to have 2 losses. I am sure they'd have their years where they ran the table, but they wouldn't be some Juggernaut offense that no one could keep under 50, like they are in the PAC 12.