One thing we know: Oregon can't play defense worth a lick.

DI-A is so boring. There's no parity, no draft, whcih is sorely needed to flatten out the spread. The PAC-12 is so lopsided it's nearly as good as an NFL Division. I.E. the best PAC-12 team may lose 3-4 games the PAC-12 conf is so loaded with players and coaches. in the NFL, USC has the most players, coaching staffs and head coaches year after year after year. Ore, Stan, Cal etc. get the leftovers, ummm... mutha effin butthole poppin badasses like Aaron Rogers, Andrew Luck...

[quote]aight dudes wrote:

It's GOING to happen unless there is a media conspiracy to keep Oregon out of the BCS title game because the SEC is fearful of playing against the Ducks of Doom. Also, the SEC teams do not travel out of state for out of conference away games. It would be comical to watch the stiffs at Bama try to stay within 30 points of the Ducks at Autzen stadium.

Didn't realize spanking Michigan in Jerry Jones' palace was an in-state cupcake game for Alabama

Southerner wrote:

ecin wrote:

Considering LSU had the 79th ranked offense. EVERYONE outside of the south looks forward to one of these possible matchups as well. Hopefully that mighty Alabama defense, from last night, shows up again.

Until last year, the whole country had five straight opportunities against four different SEC teams. How did those work out? It will be the same this year. You realize that besides last year, the SEC team that made it to the BCS title game has NEVER lost?

And once again, always referring to the past. Why not look in the present and future? Different team(s).

thing we know wrote:

ecin wrote:

Considering LSU had the 79th ranked offense. EVERYONE outside of the south looks forward to one of these possible matchups as well. Hopefully that mighty Alabama defense, from last night, shows up again.

That Arkansas St. offense must be pretty good to put up 34 on the mighty Ducks. Or maybe I'm thinking about the 530 total yards they had. Wait, maybe it was their two running backs that averaged 6.8 and 10.3 yards per carry. Those Red Wolves are an offensive powerhouse!

You apparently don't pay attention. Oregon starters and second string played a good 1.5 quarters of that game. Unlike the SEC teams who play starters for a majority of the game.

If this obvious point is that hard for you to figure out on your own. It's not worth the conversation. E for effot though.

Sagarin wrote:

A Duck, just chill. I told you UO would leap ND this week and they did, but ND is going to lose anyway. I suspect KSU is going to be challenged somewhere along the away. But you're already talking like it's a foregone conclusion that the Ducks are going to be in the BCS title game. It's not.

And this crap about a team like Oregon putting up 40-50 points on Alabama's defense? Seriously? As much as LSU gave that game away, it ain't going to happen.

Sag, I am not talking like the Ducks already in the natty, I never think that far ahead. Just let the games unfold and seasons play out.

I do look at things like how accurate is the new Duck QB, what is up with the Duck's center and his misques, same with place kicker. I also look at how much better this team blocks than the 2012 team etc.

Anyone who has their lifelong roots in the Pac 8-10-12 knows that we tend to beat each other up in recruiting, and then in in season play. It has been that way forever.

You are right that LSU gave that game away. One time a conservative coach would have been handy.

We need Parity in DI-A wrote:

DI-A is so boring. There's no parity, no draft, whcih is sorely needed to flatten out the spread. The PAC-12 is so lopsided it's nearly as good as an NFL Division. I.E. the best PAC-12 team may lose 3-4 games the PAC-12 conf is so loaded with players and coaches. in the NFL, USC has the most players, coaching staffs and head coaches year after year after year. Ore, Stan, Cal etc. get the leftovers, ummm... mutha effin butthole poppin badasses like Aaron Rogers, Andrew Luck...

Exactly, Pac 12 out duels each other in recruiting and on the field.

geographically confused? wrote:

Didn't realize spanking Michigan in Jerry Jones' palace was an in-state cupcake game for Alabama

That's fair, Alabama at least gave it a shot with scheduling a Big 10 team. But let's be honest, Michigan has turned out to be a tremendous disappointment this year. They were hardly a strong opponent.

I agree Michigan has been a big bust (denard who?), but all you can do is beat the team that shows up.

Oregon can play defense. The first 8 games of the season are evident of that. The 51 points put up against Oregon is more an issue of excellent offensive execution rather than defense breakdown.

Oregon also had 2 interceptions and it is important to note that USC scored their last touchdown in trash time-Oregon just lolly-gagged because a win was in the bag at that point.

So really, it should be looked as 62-44. A performance like that is quite impressive considering Oregon was against the top 2 receivers in the country and one of the best QB's.

Obviously their defense can't compete with Alabama's but neither can Bama's D compete with Oregon's offense; if you saw the LSU game, Bama couldn't tackle for shit. LSU showed the world how very beatable they are.

Ugh people are just saying the same dumb things over and over again in this thread on both sides.

The SEC is clearly a dominating conference. That does not mean they are guaranteed to win this year. When Oregon played Auburn two years ago it took a last minute drive and a last second field goal to win the game. Oregon's offense had some struggles against the Auburn defense, but they were a damn good team and they made it a close game, which is what you would want out of a national championship game.

It is definitely arguable that this is a better Oregon team this year, though it is also arguable that Alabama is more well-rounded than the Auburn team two years ago. Either way, if the two team's matched up it would probably be another good, close game. SEC's string of national titles certainly makes it fair to call Alabama the solid favorite for the national title, but its stupid to think they would just roll over any team not in the SEC. Oregon is a highly dynamic team, Chip Kelly is probably the best coach in college football, and they play a very different game on offense than what the SEC is used to. Yes the SEC has always won in the past, but a 3 point victory 2 years ago is not particularly good evidence that Oregon's team doesn't stand a chance in a national title game.

I knew someone would say the starters weren't in the whole game against Arkansas St. If your second and third string give up 34 points and 530 yards to Arkansas St., there's a problem.

A Duck wrote:

--Just like I bet an ahole like you kept your mouth shut until an SEC team won it again.

Why don't you try and do some actual game analysis -- you can start by actually reading some:

http://www2.registerguard.com/cms/index.php/xs-and-os/comments/ducks-last-ones-standing-in-62-51-shootout-over-usc/

Not sure what that first sentence means. It's been so long since someone outside the SEC won the BCS title that I can't remember what anyone was saying back then.

Also, thanks for giving us the link that said that if the two teams played right now, Bama would win. That really helps your pro-Oregon argument.

phillybummer wrote: Ugh people are just saying the same dumb things over and over again in this thread on both sides.

The SEC is clearly a dominating conference.

Dominating conference???? What a joke. Stop drinking the SEC kool-aid.

If the SEC is so dominating, with at least six of the top five teams every years, then why has a team gone undefeated each of the past five years? No team should go undefeated in the SEC.

The SEC cheats the BCS system. That is all.

Six in a row. Quit crying.

dominating conference???? wrote:

If the SEC is so dominating, with at least six of the top five teams every years, then why has a team gone undefeated each of the past five years?

Those of us in the South didn't even know we were that dominant. Six of the top five teams? That's pretty good!

I don't live in Alabama wrote:

I knew someone would say the starters weren't in the whole game against Arkansas St. If your second and third string give up 34 points and 530 yards to Arkansas St., there's a problem.

I'm not an Oregon fan, but in their DEFENSE, they were up 50-3 over Arkansas State at one point. The game was never in any kind of doubt. Sure, their second and third stringers didn't play great, but last time I checked, it was the starters that play the majority of the game.

No national contender's second or third string should give up 34 points and 530 yards to Arkansas State.

I heard some Ducks fans crapped their pants when they watched Kevin Hogan take over as Stanford QB.

plastic cup wrote:

No national contender's second or third string should give up 34 points and 530 yards to Arkansas State.

Yes. And the Oregon starters were only up 23-19 at halftime to Washington State (2-7 overall, 0-6 in the PAC 12). The 51 they gave up to USC was the most points USC has scored this year.

Oregon has one thing going for it, their running game. The defense is mediocre and the passing game is 76th in the country. Shutting down running attacks is Alabama's forte.

Games are won in the trenches. Alabama O-Line averages 315 pounds. Oregon D-line averages 282. Oregon O-line averages 299. Alabama D-line averages 299.