Too much good stuff on Aaron Murray.. Why UGA Loses

• ULL- 90th vs Pass- Murray- 160 yards 3 TDs/1 INT
• South Carolina- 107th, 192, 0/0
• Arkansas- 16th-  253, 1/1
• Miss State- 89th, 274 1/0
• Colorado- 110th, 221, 3/1
• Tenn- 82nd, 266, 2/0
• Vandy- 78th, 287, 2/0
• Kentucky- 18th, 113, 0/0
• Florida- 13th, 313, 3/3
• Idaho State- ?, 228, 2/0
• Auburn- 105- 273, 3/0
• GT- 47th, 271, 3/0
• UCF- 45th, 198 0/2

• 63/114 or 55%,
• 877 passing yards or average of 219 yards/game,
• 4 TDs
• 6 INTs

When comparing these two teams stats are completely meaningless becasue of the huge disparity in competition.  All of Boise's stats are grossly over-inflated to the point of being completely meaningless for any type of comparison purposes.

Without completely beating a dead horse to death, I would be curious as to what your projected final score for this game is.

Apple, meet Orange.

I wonder if we have something we could look back on, something to compare this game to? Say, 2005, when the Broncos took a 48-13 drubbing in Athens?

And your point on Aaron Murray is well taken.  Without even looking at the stats, however, it would stand to reason that a freshman QB will struggle a bit against tougher competition.  Most QBs do.

I disagree with your premise that Boise has a great defense.  They played two tough teams (even though I really don't consider Nevada all that tough) last season.  They went 1 & 1 in those games and gave up 30 and 34 points respectively.  Nothing about that even remotely suggests to me that Boise has a "great" defense.  Sure they have a great defense when they play New Mexico State, but so does every other team in the nation.

Lastly, do you consider a team that is having to travel 2500 miles to play in a hostile environment who you think will cover the spread by 1 point is a sound bet?

But even the numbers in the VT game are skewed a bit.

VT only had 7 offensive plays in the first quarter (6 runs and a fumbled QB/center exchange).  They didn't attempt a single pass until the 2nd quarter.  That's why TT only had 22 pass attempts despite being behind by 17 points when he attemped his first pass.

Boise's rushing numbers were also skewed a bit by a 71-yard run on a dive play that was designed to pick up a 1st down on 3rd and incles.  A broken defensive assignment allowed Harper to run untouched for a 71-yard TD.

As I have said several times, there is no value in betting Boise in this spot.  Either bet the Dawgs, or, do like you are doing, stay away.

As far as 1, 2 & 3 are concerned, all are pretty much tied together.  If Boise gets into the 20s, Georgia won't win by DD.  I think the only way they do that is by holding Bosie around that 14-point mark or under.  If they do that, then a score like 27-13 would certainly be within the realm of possibility.

Yea, but still- holding VT to under 3 yards per rush with 40+ attempts is VERY impressive..

Not sure UGA will average more than that anyway..

Agree with you that it should be low scoring, would be shocked to see a 33-30 type game that happened with VT in 2010

Boise's defense played very, very well in the 1st quarter.  There is no question about that.  They were stacking the box to stop the run, and VT kept trying to run right into the teeth of their defense.  Boise was really keying heavily on Williams.  But stacking the box left Tech's receivers in man coverage, and TT and Boykin were able to exploit that pretty successfully from the second quarter on.

It will be interesting see how Boise will attempt to defend Georgia.  Last season VT was suppose to have one of the nation's best running attacks, so Boise keyed on that.  I'm not sure they'll play the 8 in the box against Georgia.

If Boise's defense can step up big and hold Georgia under 20 points, then this game will be interesting.  I believe Georgia will be able to get in the high 20s/ low 30s however, and that'll be sufficient to win the game.

I agree that the UNDER is the play here.

Quote Originally Posted by Boom_Boom:



let me ask you a question jimmy.

Just thinking outside the box here, so stay with me.

If the Green Bay Packers played the Carolina Panthers 16 times last season and then played them 3 times in the playoffs and then again in the super bowl...... Would you have considered them a team not " worthy " because of the competition they played/

What about Alabama 2 years ago when they won the NC. Lets say they played Boise S.T schedule that year. Would you have considered them a team not " worthy " because of the level of competition they played?


My point is

If Boise would have proven to us over the years that they are a team that doesn't deserve our respect...Guess what? They would have lost all the games they played on the big stage. But guess what? The DID WIN ALL OF THOSE GAMES


It's time for you to respect that program.



I dont care who you are.... the points I just brought up. ARE DEAD ON.

We are comingling many issues that have no bearing on the Boise/Georgia game, but here goes.

I don't think the NFL comparison is relevant because there is not much seperation between the top NFL teams and the bottom NFL teams.  You almost never see a team go undefeated, and  you almost never see a team go winless.  And even in the most extreme cases a 20-point spread is about the highest line you'll ever see in the NFL, where in college 30-40 point spreads are routine.  In short, there is a much bigger seperation between the haves and the have nots in college football.

Secondly there is a playoff system in the NFL so that pretty much weeds out the pretenders.

As to your second point, no Bama should not have played for a national championship if they had played Boise's schedule.

Playing for a national championship, a BCS bowl or even a top 10 ranking is something that needs to be earned, and it is not earned by playing a 1 or 2 game season.  In my opinion if Bosie wants top 10 consideration, they would need to play and win 3-4 non-conference road games against legitimate BCS conference teams like the teams from BSC conferences have to do.  Then they would have a legitimate resume to be considered for a top 10 ranking and a national championship.

During the same period of time that Boise beat the Oregon schools twice, Oklahoma, and VT, Georgia beat the following teams:

Georgia Tech (4 times)

Auburn (3 times)

South Carolina (2 times)

Mississippi (2 times)

Colorado

Virginia Tech

Oklahoma State

Alabama

Florida

Arkansas

Arizona State

Texas A&M

Tennessee

but yet Boise is great, and Georgia is mediocre?   

Nobody said Georgia or Alabama were worthy of playing for a national championship after they beat Virginia Tech.  But after Boise got a lucky win against a VT team that was clearly better than them, Boise is worthy of playing for a national championship?  That is beyond absurd.

Moreover, rewarding teams for playing nobody just encourages all teams in the country to schedule as many weaklings as they can cram on their schedule.  After all, what incentive would anyone have to play a good team.  They can just pull a "Boise," and have smooth sailing right into the national championship game.

Rewarding teams who take the easiest possible path with a shot at the national championship would make a complete mockery of college football.  Teams that play for national championships should have national championship worthy resumes, not a resume of beating the most pathetic teams in the country.  Yes, I can see the day when Troy is playing Ball State for a national championship.

Morevover, just because I think Boise has virtually no shot of of covering the spread against the Dawgs in the Georgia Dome doesn't mean I'm "disrespecting" them in any way.

On Covers you can bet against any team in the country without repercussions, but the minute someone fades Boise, whoa, they are disrespecting them.  That's utter nonsense!!!  That is particularly so with me, because I have mad respect for Boise.  I touted them heavily on Covers for years, and have made a ton of money betting on them.  Why would I disrespect a covering machine like Boise?  That makes no sense.

Just because I don't think Boise is, or ever has been a top 10 team (except maybe the 2007 season when they beat Oklahoma), or that I think Boise will lose to a team with superior talent doesn't make me a hater.  It makes me a realist, and a gambler on the right side of a wager.

I heart Boise, but I'm betting against them in this game because they are not going to win.

You are right.. Boise is just the luckiest team on the planet..

Were they lucky to beat Oklahoma, Oregon, Oregon as well?

• 3-9 ULL
• 6-7 Tennessee
• 2-10 Vandy
• 6-7 Kentucky
• 1-10 Idaho State
• 6-7 Georgia Tech
• 7-6 South Carolina
• 8-5 Arkansas
• 4-8 Arizona State
• 6-5 Tennessee Tech
• 2-10 Vandy
• 8-5 Auburn
• 11-3 Georgia Tech
• 6-7 Texas A&M

I just updated your list for you.

Three rolly heads for a Bosie fan critiqing the quality of a SEC teams wins.  How bout you actually play a competitive game against a SEC team before you mock one.