The B12 (XII) Forum, home of the 'Front Porch, y'all' at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

So, what were the most exciting bowl games?  Wisconsin-Oregon would be up there, and the OSU-Clemson semi (I guess not a bowl game?).

The Gator Bowl was sort of I guess with an unexpected ending, but tough to get too excited about that one.  I don't think the Cotton or Sugar Bowls were that exciting.  The Texas result was most surprising I think.  

I keep thinking about how your bowl opponent is likely better than 8 or 9 teams you played regular season, so an upset should not be a shock.  

It was a psych blow to the Pac 12 teams in terms of arguing they should make the playoffs in future years.  And of course it salvaged the B12's reputation to some extent.

"We" put too much emphasis on bowl games in large part because there are so few relevant OOC games each year.

Texas is a weird team to me, they hung with LSU and whomped Utah and somehow lost 4 other games.

Seems to me that Tom Herman is good at getting his team up for a big game.

injuries matter

at one point only 5 of our original def starters were playing

Texas suffers from the same thing A&M does: lack of quality depth.  The starting guys are really good but they don’t have high quality backups.  These guys end up playing more snaps because of it and are therefore more prone to getting injured. Contrast that to UGa who lost a whole bunch of starters but seamlessly put in the backups and didn’t miss a beat.  

Injuries in one year can happen.  If it's year after year, it's coaching.  UNC had that year after year.  I think they practiced "soft" to avoid injuries and the players were not used to real game contact.  Mack stopped that apparently.

I can see that Texas could be talented but thin, and perhaps a bit young as well.  UGA was hurt on offense by injuries and folks sitting out, but not as much on defense because Kirby really goes for depth there and the 2s get a lot of meaningful PT in real games.  This is the Saban model of course, you play your 2s a LOT for next year they are ready to go.  UGA had two 1,000 yard rushers two years in a row because of "platooning".

Texas may not yet be there.  If not, good coaching could well mean a quick rise to really being back.

coaching might have something to do with it

I dont recall having major injury problems under Mack

DB's are not big guys.  They can get hurt without practicing proper technique.  Most DB's today prefer to detonate the ball carrier rather than actually tackle.  They lack the physical strength, and for the most part, the game allows it.

I think we should go back to a game of arm tackling, and flag all collision tackling.  That simplifies all these superfluous and complicated targeting rules.

But anyway, maybe a new DC will have a positive effect on keeping players healthy.

I honestly think that Texas tried to limit the amount of "targeting" ejections by having the shoulder pads be the first point of contact by the DBs. While correct in a static environment (meaning we're standing there and you get to pick your point), a ball carrier will almost certainly be trying to avoid the hit - leading to the main point of contact almost certainly further outside the shoulder (leading to largely a missed tackle) or closer to the head and neck (leading to a likely stinger or collarbone injury).

I'm adamant that football has to get the head hits out of it. The insurance companies won't let it continue if they're not eliminated. However, with current football alignments, we're going to develop a physics problem.

With 11 defenders on 11 attackers, it just isn't possible to play everybody 1 on 1. QBs are too adept at hitting receivers in stride. If a DB lines up inside, the ball is thrown outside, and vice versa. In order to defend (considering the defensive pass interference rules), you're going to have to have the threat of bracket (2 on 1 under and over the top) coverage. This means that there's always going to need to be the threat of a safety or LB running full speed opposite in direction to a receiver also running full speed.

Obviously, you can understand this without force vector diagrams. There's always going to be full force collision. It's no good telling the defender to break down and tackle. He's going to get a 230lb mass going 20mph right in his chest. Similarly, trying to arm tackle at those speeds just doubles the problem.

The ability to rapidly advance the ball in large chunks through precision passing and route running is too good to ignore. Football has moved away from the low speed pushing and shoving matches to a game inviting high speed collisions of human beings. The only solutions I can think of involve radically altering the structure of the game to make passing less attractive.