• New here? Register here now for access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Plus, stay connected and follow BP on Instagram @buckeyeplanet and Facebook.

2008 TSUN News

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
Jaxbuck;1233636; said:
And people wonder why I hate RR so much.

On top of everything else, now I find out he likes shaved beaver, which of course forces me to be a fan of unshaven beaver. I fucking hate unshaved beaver.

I hope you rot in hell Rodriguez.
Click to expand...
Word is, Rich Rodriguez is also a huge fan of beer (except Icehouse and Beast Light), women, and football.
 
Upvote 0
SNIPER26;1233531; said:
No. It's a big loss. But explain to me why Forcier isn't a perfect fit? He runs just fine. He completed 77% of his passes last year. Why isn't he a good fit?
Click to expand...

BuckeyeNation27;1233572; said:
You answered your own question. He's wasted part of his life learning to actually throw the ball.
Click to expand...
BN27 pretty much nailed it, but here's my take: Forcier would be perfect in a "West Coast" offense, where a mobile QB uses a controlled passing attack to set up the running game ... but in RR's offense, 3rd and 15 is a running down, and the QB gets to throw a pass only as the last resort.
 
Upvote 0
SNIPER26;1233544; said:
No, I used scoring defense because last I checked, you win and lose football games by points scored and points allowed.
Click to expand...

nice spin job. using your stellar logic, i can have an offense that runs the ball every down, and runs the playclock to 1 second. my defense will then proceed to give up a 10 play scoring drive. however, since there is a gameclock in football, my defense will only give up about 28 points, and therefore be considered an improvement.

bottom line is, stanford had the ball for 31 minutes a game, yet still ranked 98th in total defense. the only thing that stopped other teams from scoring was apparently the gameclock and not the stanford defense. so, if you're going to try and pimp your DC, you'll have to do better than that.
 
Upvote 0
Oh8ch;1233723; said:
I keep reading that it is not such a big loss with Forcier to take his place. Can I get a link to that commit?
Click to expand...

Scout.com: ALERT: NEWSOME BACK ON MARKET!

A number of posts to that effect in there. There's another thread over there about Newsome/Forcier/FL QB Eugene Smith with the same rabble along with the obligatory Barwis references. The linked thread also contains a number of posts saying Beaver is the better QB and at least one trotting out the standard "he was afraid of competition" excuse.

Edit: Misread oh8ch's post, I thought he was asking for the comments that Forcier was a better QB.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
tsteele316;1233714; said:
nice spin job. using your stellar logic, i can have an offense that runs the ball every down, and runs the playclock to 1 second. my defense will then proceed to give up a 10 play scoring drive. however, since there is a gameclock in football, my defense will only give up about 28 points, and therefore be considered an improvement.

bottom line is, stanford had the ball for 31 minutes a game, yet still ranked 98th in total defense. the only thing that stopped other teams from scoring was apparently the gameclock and not the stanford defense. so, if you're going to try and pimp your DC, you'll have to do better than that.
Click to expand...
31 minutes? Big deal, that's half the game. What's exciting about that?

And how is what you're doing any different than what Sniper's doing? You're cherrypicking stats the same way you claim he is. What makes yours better?
 
Upvote 0
HailToMichigan;1233760; said:
31 minutes? Big deal, that's half the game. What's exciting about that?

And how is what you're doing any different than what Sniper's doing? You're cherrypicking stats the same way you claim he is. What makes yours better?
Click to expand...

to be fair, it's 30.5 minutes per game. given that the NCAA leader in that category was at 33 minutes per game you see the differential isn't that large. however, being in the top 1/3rd of all teams in time of possession, yet being 98th in total defense is worth noting.

as for what makes mine better? well, it simply is that it's not one hand selected stat used to pimp a coordinator. it's a more thorough examination that illustrates that that 65th ranking (if that is something to be proud of) is not really indicative of the defensive futility that was Stanford.

hopefully Barwis can get him into shape as well.
 
Upvote 0
According to a December 20, 2007, article in the Charleston Daily Mail of West Virginia, Barwis was once jumped by two basketball players, Patrick Beilein and Mike Gansey. "'We thought we could catch him off guard and go get him.' That was a mistake [Beilein said]. 'Bad idea,' Gansey said. 'We both jumped on him and you know how every part of his body is like a rock? He had me on his back and gently put me on the ground and gave me a neck strangle and blacked me out for like 20 seconds. No lie. All my teammates saw it and at the click of his fingers I was back to normal. Crazy, huh? But that showed how strong he was and all the stuff he can do - and nothing was wrong with me afterward.'" After this event, the rest of the basketball team decided to jump on Barwis. "'The whole team was lying on the ground a little later,' Beilein said."
Click to expand...

:so:

for more Barwis-related hilarity, might I direct you to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Barwis#Reputation
 
Upvote 0
Maybe this has been asked before, and I'm sure the scUMers have a lengthy explination, but if he's such a badass, why didn't he win in the MMA?

Maybe he did but I never hear anyone say he was a former MMA champion, I just hear he participated in MMA.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top