SO, UF's game in the rain against Ohio got them ready for UT and gave them a 17 point difference? I just thought UT came out flat. UF knocked the wind out of them, they had trouble with the snap, the rest is history. Besides, I'm sure alot of college players have played in the rain. My only question is, does rain only slows down the faster team? I think the slower team slows as well. The great equalizer in both cases would be if it rained only while the loser was on offense. This is a very Aggiesque remark. NO offense btw. If UT plays UF next week, I think UT would win. I also think FSU would beat UL by 14 if they played tomorrow. It was just one of those games. A break here, a break there, etc. But, if UL would have executed on a couple of endzone plays, they may have won by 2 TD's. UL made some mental mistakes.
Please elaborate. I've seen several instances of "lesser" teams winning in inclement weather, but I'm not sure that there's some kind of hard and fast rule where the weather is to blame for the outcome. Both teams played in the same conditions last night; both teams like to throw the ball. Why was FSU effected more than Louisville last night? Who's to say Ragone wouldn't have outplayed Rix on a dry field? As for the Tenn/Florida game, that had little if anything at all to do with weather. The Vols defense would have had problems tackling me that game, they missed more tackles in that game than just about any good team I've seen in a while.
So, just because they won the Big 12 that year, they had a great offense?? Seriously, I was being "tongue-in-cheek" when I said since the 1950's, but when I think of Texas A&M football, I don't think of great offenses. I think of great defenses, the wrecking crew, the 12th Man, and those dorky Corp people, but not powerhouse offenses.
Please elaborate. I've seen several instances of "lesser" teams winning in inclement weather, but I'm not sure that there's some kind of hard and fast rule where the weather is to blame for the outcome. Both teams played in the same conditions last night; both teams like to throw the ball. Totally agree. It would have been one thing if there were a few freak plays that caused FSU to lose, like the fumble problems for Tennessee, or missed field goals due to the slick ball and that type of thing. But UL just dominated on both sides of the ball. They actually had 2 first-and-goals that they scored only 3 pts on in the 1st half as well, so it could have been much worse. This wasn't a case of rain screwing with a team. This was a case of FSU's weak pass defense being exploited all night long (notice ISU did this as well) and Chris Rix having a sucky game.
Alright, you all want an explanation, and I'll give you one. First off, Dave Ragone's numbers are only slightly better than Rix's. It's the timing of what happened that makes Rix's performance look bad. Ragone: 15/27, 182yd, 2 TD/1 INT Rix: 14/33, 173yd, 2 TD/1 INT UF's game in the rain allowed them to be better prepared for another game in the rain. Have you ever tried holding on to a ball or throwing one when it is slightly wet, yet alone pouring rain? Experience counts when the field is dry; experience counts even moreso when the field is wet and the game is played in the rain. Tennessee had a lot of trouble with holding onto the ball, all due to the rain - not because UF was forcing them to fumble. And not that many college football players have played in the rain, at least not as of late. Many of the players from the west coast may have never played in the rain, for one. Interesting to note as Chris Rix is from Los Angeles. The Seminoles practiced in the rain, as I'm sure Louisville did, but that's no substitute for actual game action. Rain should aid the faster team, but that depends on the quarterback being able to get the ball downfield for the big play; neither QB could do that in this game. It would slow the slower team down a little as well, but not to the same degree. What happened for FSU? Louisville's safeties stuffed the line, stopping the run in the rain, while Rix couldn't get the longball down field to exploit it due to the rain. No, the weather is not a hard and fast rule; in fact, there is no hard and fast rule for any situation. But, what the rain does is that it gives the underdog an advantage. Ragone's numbers are only slightly better than Rix's numbers for the game and near-even over the full season: Rix 70/123 971yd 8td Ragone 89/170 1167yd 7td In 47 more attempts, Ragone has only completed 19 more passes and thrown for 190 more yards. Why hasn't Rix thrown that many times? Because of the emergence of Greg Jones and the reliance on the running game. On a dry field, Louisville would not have been able to sell out against one aspect of the game as well as they did Thursday night. As for the Vols - a rainy field affects the defensive players much more so than it does the offensive players. They couldn't hold on to the ball, their defense had to continually remain on the field, and as such was likely worn down and, coupled with the inability to maneuver in the rain, was unable to make the tackle. UF was the better team that day, yes, but was their big win entirely due to that fact? No; the rain equalized things quite a bit that day. See above for the Rix numbers; his problem was the interception in overtime. Bobby Bowden's explanation: When Chris threw the interception in overtime, were you tempted to second-guess that kind of aggressive play-call to open up overtime? Actually, it was supposed to go to the right. What it was was a corner route. We had hit the post for two touchdowns, so we were going to fake the post and go back out. If you’re going to do it, to get a real good shot at it, first down is the down to do it, because they’re not expecting it. They’re not sure if you’re going to run or pass on first down. Third and long is a little different. What happened, he threw the ball to go where he wanted it, the ball just slipped out of his hand and didn’t go where he wanted it to go. Meanwhile, our receiver had already turned his back to the ball and was making his break. He couldn’t react back to knock it down. The question of whether that’s a good call – it’s not bad. It’s a safe play. If the guy’s covered, throw it out of bounds. If you do it right, it’s not a dangerous call. As you look back, we could have run it. On first and 10, they’re playing those safeties up there to make all those tackles on first down. Quote from: http://floridastate.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=129699 UL may have had the chances to go ahead, but they are the ones who threw the interception on 4th and goal and they are the ones who couldn't punch it in the end zone later on and had to settle for a field goal. Perhaps, just maybe, FSU's defense actually made the plays when they had to. This was a case with rain screwing with a team. FSU's weak pass defense was not exploited as much as you'd like to believe - 182yds is hardly exploiting matchups all night long - and Rix's performance overall was on a par with Ragone's. The difference? Inconsistancy in the second half with the defensive schemes, partially due to the rain, and the interception in overtime.
I didn't know this was a Rix vs Ragone thread. Ragone is the better nfl prospect, but what does that matter. Bottom line, Louisville beat a team that lost 4 times last year. FSU is not what it was in the hey day. There weren't many plays that seemed to be affected by the weather. UL caught lightning in a bottle. And FSU isn't as talented as everyone thought they were. Weather is a poor/horrible excuse. Both teams played in the same conditions. I think it's not even relevant. IF UL had executed, they win by 2 tds w/o overtime.
I went with Rix vs. Ragone to point out that Rix didn't really play that bad of a game when compared to Ragone. And if FSU had executed, FSU wins by two touchdowns and it's not even close until the 4th quarter. FSU is every bit as talented as they once were, but except for the offensive line, isn't as experienced - and on defense, isn't as deep as in previous years. Front-line starters make the big plays game in and game out, and several of those players come through on Thursday, such as Alonzo Jackson with 5 sacks and Talmon Gardner with 2 TDs and over 100yd receiving. But, we'll just have to see how FSU performs under ideal circumstances come two weeks from now, when they travel to Miami. After this week, I don't expect many people will give FSU much of a chance vs. Miami; I don't think they'll fall as far in the polls this week as some would think, nor will they get demolished by the Hurricanes. However, there is the more pressing matter of Clemson on Thursday night and an impressive performance against the Tigers, a borderline top 25 team in most seasons, is a must.
Won't get destroyed by Miami? You have got to be kidding me. Every team gets destroyed by Miami, no exceptions just because its your favorite team.
Hmm... what great teams has Miami "destroyed"? The Nebraska team that gave up 62 to Colorado last year? The Florida team that barely beat Kentucky at home? Miami's good, but they're beatable. Look at last year's game against Virginia Tech (the Hokies are much better this year) as an example. Hell, Miami was barely beating BC at home a week ago. Miami's very good, and they are rightfully the favorites until they lose, but to claim that they will "destroy everyone" is pretty ridiculous. I'm not sure if they've played a team the quality of FSU yet, or even Tennessee. They have a shot...
