I'll be damned. I'll admit it. I did not expect Nebraska to beat UCLA (Even though I did say if the score was going to be within a touchdown or whatever then Nebraska would have a sure-fire edge). The defense held it's ground (and UCLA decided to not exploit our defense for whatever reason). The special teams made some good plays, and our offense hardly turned the ball over! Wait...you're saying Armstrong threw the ball less than 20 times? (his season average ended up being 30 attempts per game). And we...hang on; ran the ball three times as much with our two tanks and everyone else that's significantly better than Tommy's arm? Wow. Like I said, I'll be damned. I didn't think that kind of combination would actually win a game.
That last part was extreme sarcasm by the way, I'm not sure how well that travels over the internet. This was shades of last year's Dallas Cowboys when they held Tony Romo to a career low in terms of throwing the ball and ran the damn ball with DeMarco Murray as they ripped their way to a 12-4 record (and a decent playoff run, until, of course, Dez didn't catch it. I don't blame him with Romo throwing). I'm just saying it must be a coincidence that if you don't give a guy that's prone to turnovers the opportunity to turn the ball over, then you'll see less turnovers and more long term success. It's science I tell you! Now again, I can't rip on Armstrong (or Romo it seems) too much, as we have seen in both instances that without Armstrong we'll lose to a shitty team (cue Purdue) and without Romo the Cowboys can't do a damn thing (cue this entire season when Romo got injured). What is done is done though, Nebraska ended the year with a 6-7, still losing, record. Which is interesting to note, as Nebraska was 5-7 coming into their bowl game (a losing record), yet they ended up with a similar record than a team who entered 6-6 (a non-losing record) who would end up losing their bowl game. Weird how the world works. It still wasn't the 9-win ideal season that every Nebraska fan is used to (in fact I still say it was worse given our schedule and team talent should have been a minimum 7 wins). But there is some hope. Sure we lose our two tanks (Cross and Janovich) but we still have Newby who has shown improvement (he's no Abdullah by ANY means) and our new tank Ozigbo is showing some great promise to fill in the shoes of Cross and Janovich. Westerkamp should be returning, and Morgan Jr. has shown to be one heck of a freshman receiver. On defense, it really can't get any worse than it was this year. The secondary will have more experience, and the only major name we're losing up front is Gangwish. Oh yeah, I almost forgot about a guy named De'Mornay.
Way too early prediction for 2016: 10-2 (7-2) (Yes, I have currently slated an upset of Oregon at home, which unfortunately might not be as great of a game as it'll seem now. Still will be one hell of a game to go to. Better be a night game.)
Bowl Season Recap/National Championship:
Well, it wasn't pretty...but here were the results of me vs. my computer in the bowl picks:
Computer: 18-22 (45%)
Me: 26-14 (65%)
Well, my percentage went up, but the computer took a hit. Some interesting notes however:
-Let's chalk BYU/Utah as another win for me ok? That one was a toss-up. *27*
-The computer will get some credit for calling games being closer than it should: Ohio/App State, Akron/Utah State, Tulsa/Virginia Tech, Penn State/Georgia
-However there were some very heavy misses by the computer: Cincy/SDSU, Pitt/Navy, Northwestern/Tennessee, Florida/Michigan, Notre Dame/Ohio State
-Of course some very heavy misses by the nation: Bowling Green/Georgia Southern, UCLA/Nebraska, North Carolina/Baylor, Memphis/Auburn
But there's one more game to wrap up the college football season, and this will come courtesy of Alabama and Clemson for the national title. Alabama doesn't have as quite of a dynamic offense as Clemson provides, but if you sleep on them, it won't be long before you're down a couple touchdowns courtesy of Derek Henry. But that's all Alabama can bring to the table on offense. They are The Derek Henry Show. Take him out of the equation (much easier said than done, he did win the Heisman for a reason), and you have a very soft Alabama offense that can't do much. However, their defense still stands as one of the best in the nation. They shutout a slightly potent Michigan State offense, and is up there leading the nation with allowing less than 15 points a game.
On the other side of the field you have possibly one of the most balanced teams in years. Clemson isn't exactly you're Big 12 explosive offense, but they can get the job done when needed. Their defense isn't quite as shut down as Alabama's, but very stout, especially against the run which will be critical against Alabama. I liked Clemson in the pre-season and will still hold that true; but let's get the official breakdown:
Alabama O vs Clemson D: Edge Clemson. Again, Clemson has better run D than pass D, but both defenses are great, and with Alabama's not-so-explosive pass game, they will be testing Henry early and often. The game will be decided based on who wins that battle.
Alabama D vs Clemson O: Edge Clemson. Remember Alabama's lone loss? Against an aerial attack from Ole Miss. Courtesy reminder that Clemson's quarterback was also a Heisman finalist for the work he's done both on the ground and in the air. Alabama's poor pass D should be exposed if Clemson wants to win, or to at least counter if they can't stop Henry.
But here's a quirky stat: Since 2000, only 5 of the Heisman winners have gone on to win the national championship with their team (for a total record of 5-10) but when you think about it, the stat isn't so quirky. The Heisman is a form of MVP honors, and the way I always interpret MVP is "This team would absolutely suck without this player" meaning that they can't do anything else outside of that player, which is why I think Alabama is very one dimensional, if Clemson can limit Henry, Bama is screwed (And hence why I have grown to accept that Henry is more deserving of the Heisman than Watson, Clemson can at least maintain without Watson. Although McCaffrey made a very compelling case in the Rose Bowl). A national championship team should be a team that can get it done in every aspect, which is why I truly think Clemson will be able to get the best of Alabama.
Prediction: Clemson 34, Alabama 28
Meanwhile...in the NFL...Playoffs?!
If you haven't looked at my NFL playoff model I suggest you do because it was pretty damn accurate since Week 4 (Well to get at least the teams in the playoff, not necessarily their seeds). But today is the beginning of the playoffs. So let's make some predictions! But we're going to do things differently, my computer disagrees with me (or I disagree with it whatever), so we're going to lay the land based on our perspectives (as the match-ups differ due to how the playoffs work) then we'll get some wild card details:
Computer:
Wild Card:
Chiefs @ Texans - Texans
Steelers @ Bengals - Bengals
Packers @ Redskins - Redskins
Seahawks @ Vikings - Vikings
Divisional:
Texans @ Broncos - Broncos
Bengals @ Patriots - Bengals
Redskins @ Panthers - Panthers
Vikings @ Cardinals - Cardinals
Championship:
Bengals @ Broncos - Broncos
Cardinals @ Panthers - Panthers
Super Bowl: Panthers over Broncos
Me:
Wild Card:
Chiefs @ Texans - Chiefs
Steelers @ Bengals - Steelers
Packers @ Redskins - Redskins
Seahawks @ Vikings - Seahawks
Divisional:
Steelers @ Broncos - Steelers
Chiefs @ Patriots - Patriots
Seahawks @ Panthers - Seahawks
Redskins @ Cardinals - Cardinals
Championship:
Steelers @ Patriots - Patriots
Seahawks @ Cardinals - Seahawks
Super Bowl: Seahawks over Patriots (As it should have been last year)
Wild Card Weekend:
Chiefs @ Texans: This game is pitting teams with excellent defenses, but not so great offenses. But you know how that saying goes, defense wins championships. Both teams aren't exactly dynamic on offense, but Smith and Hoyer get the job done, somehow. This game will come down to which defense can make the most of their opportunities, and quite frankly I think the Chiefs defense is more dynamic than the Texans (They led the NFL in creating turnovers, and taking advantage of them). Prediction: Chiefs 27, Texans 17
Steelers @ Bengals: AJ McCarron is playing. Enough said. Also, he would also need to out gun Big Ben, also enough said. However, if you are a Chiefs fan, you better be hoping that AJ McCarron can hold up his end of the deal, because if the Bengals end up winning and the Chiefs prevail over the Texans, then the Chiefs will play the Broncos instead of the Patriots, a much simpler task if they want to make a Super Bowl run.
Prediction: Steelers 31, Bengals 20
So Chiefs Fans: Your postseason is in the hands of this guy (Assuming business is taken care of in Houston):
Packers @ Redskins: Some have said that the Packers did themselves a favor by losing to the Vikings and getting a first round date with the Redskins. I say not so fast. Kirk Cousins has picked an absolute best time to peak and with a very slow Packers offense this year, this may end up as an "upset" (even though the Redskins are the home team, gotta love playoff rules right?). If Rogers saved his best for last, then we better see it if the cheeseheads want to move on, because the defense won't be stopping Cousins. (On the other hand, the Redskins defense is no slouch, but very exposable if Rogers can get going)
Prediction: Redskins 27, Packers 24 (You like that?)
Seahawks @ Vikings: Again, while the Vikings may have won the north, they won the right to get demolished by the Seahawks New Groove. Like the Redskins, the Seahawks have picked a great time to peak and in fact they look like the old Super Bowl contenders that they should have been from Week 1, they have demolished their last few opponents, one of which, was the Vikings...on this same field. Is there a saving grace for the Vikings? It's gonna be hellah cold, so they'll be inclined to give it to AP and the Seahawks may be limited in throwing the ball which means they'll have to run it against a stout Vikings D.
Prediction: Seahawks 30, Vikings 20
No comments:
Post a Comment