Reply With Quote
Matt Scott has been much worse than his stats indicate this season. He misses way too many easy throws a game, a lot of which occur on 3rd and short. If he has another couple of games like this, it's Vanilla Vick time.
In reality it should have been much closer. How many games does a team get in the red zone 6 times with zero points to show for it? They had multiple attempts from within the 10. Credit Oregon for withstanding their early turnovers and making second half adjustments.
Matt Scott has been much worse than his stats indicate this season. He misses way too many easy throws a game, a lot of which occur on 3rd and short. If he has another couple of games like this, it's Vanilla Vick time.
In reality it wasn't.
This prediction was close
Hey, whats up man, new mavs forum, good to hear from you man, etc., imo, fwiw, lamborghini mercy, jason witten no helmet
No, the reality of the outcome wasn't close, but the reality of the game says it should have been closer. But don't let little things like scoring opportunities, redzone trips, moving the ball up/down the field get in the way of your bias.
Fact is Arizona played like in the closing plays of some nice efforts on both sides of the ball.
lol bias
What should the final score have been in your reality?
Damn BR, can't you ever just enjoy being right about something for more than a week without completely besmirching your prediction record?
You really suck at picking fights, and also reading, but apparently you are great at reading too far into comments with a qualifier of "really should have been" accompanied by drive facts of six redzone trips and zero points. The score is what it reads, but the reality of the drives dictates a blown opportunity, especially early, to score points and a lot of them, hence the comment.
Blake is an idiot.
You're great at getting butthurt over a simple question.
lolz ... yes sons I got skull ed on this one. last time I ever bet on Arizona.
And you couldn't dare stand someone who actually watched the game say that a team with six redzone appearance with nary a point should have scored more than zero points, first on common sense, next on opportunity, and lastly just simply by the law of averages.
Not sure why you felt the need play contrarian to my initial "should have" qualified statement. I didn't say anything that wasn't accurate. When a team has six redzone trips and four within the 10 yard line, they should have scored more points, thus ipso facto the score should have been closer.
My comment was actually a critical indictment upon just how poorly the offense played in those situations and not the "defense" of team you seem to have perceived it to be. Like I said, you read way too far into the qualified and factual statement.
I don't see any mention of what the score should have been in that butthurt mess of a post.
I'll try again.
What should the final score have really been in your opinion?
Is someone actually trying to qualify this slapping?
If you look at the final score, it's a slapping. I've never argued against it and have been extremely critical of Arizona's play. However, as someone who actually watched the game, Arizona had six redzone appearances, four within the 10, yet they got shut out. I merely pointed out that this is an extremely rare occurrence, and that Arizona blew several opportunities to make the score closer. Early on, they had more redzone appearances than Oregon (3 to 2) and yet were trailing 10-0.
My point was the Wildcats sucked so badly their suckdom transcends game trends.
No qualifying, other than saying the score "Should have been closer", more a lament and critique than an excuse if you read every other post of mine in this thread.
Blake is just trying to play contrarian, reading too far into a simple comment, failing to acknowledge my explained greater context.
lol contrarian
You're reading way too far into my simple question.
Which you still haven't answered.
Law of averages says if their ceiling was roughly 42 points (6 redzone, all six TDs), that their likely scoring should have been, roughly half that at least. If you go on their previous three weeks statistics, including a top-20 win, it probably should have been in the 30s.
The fact the score was 49-0 is truly a testament to how ty Arizona's offense was at finishing great defensive plays (two first half turnovers, handful of punts), and solid offensive drives.
I don't want to guess what you think the law of averages is in this case.
spit out a score man.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
