|
12 years 8 months
# | UVA's Mike London has made ~$2,000,000/yr since 2010. That means UVA has paid him $875,000 for each ACC win they've had. 
Recent Comments
|
12 years 8 months
# | UVA's Mike London has made ~$2,000,000/yr since 2010. That means UVA has paid him $875,000 for each ACC win they've had. 
No, I think he's pretty on point. "Willfully stupid" is a pretty accurate descriptor.
Yeah but Stephon Diggs has a broken leg. So does one of their other receivers. Injury bug biting Maryland again this year.
SO... RUN Game it is - wait 'til I tell Bud!
Clemson's strength of schedule is looking worse every week the UGA loses, but the win over UGA was a great win. They hadn't suffered any injuries yet, which is absolutely killing them.
At least if you read through the thread the rest of the LOLUVA fans are telling the OP he is delusional
We play the Hoos the way Freddy Krueger plays insomniacs.
Anyone who compares college football 2013 to college football in 1992 is being willfully stupid
Hey Michael Rocco, no need to be a dick. Hokie Respect!
I knew that was going to end with the hit on Street.
Oh that is rich. Here I am looking at the Duke game like there is only the Duke game, I'm not even completely convinced we play Virginia this year (that's how focused on this next game I am) and they're already thinking about thanksgiving day. And We don't take opponents seriously. It's this kind of thing that makes it hard for me to take an opponent seriously.
Haha but seriously, if they even give us a close game I'll be sorely disappointed
1. Ala
2. Ore
3. Fsu
4. Osu
5. Miami
6. Baylor
7. Stanford
8. Mizzou
9. TT
10. Fresno
I don't see fsu jumping Oregon quite yet, I think they'll hold steady until/if they lose one. That and Clemsons win over uga is looking less impressive every week.
Also I don't think we'll jump up too much in the polls, all those teams in the top ten that list will probably end up in the 13-19 spots.
Another gem from thesabre
hat.virginia.sportswar.com/message_board/football/2013/October/20/2957420.php
The irony of this season is that we could finally beat VaTech after 9 straight losses. Their offense isn't hi powered, but their defense is solid, however if we can limit mistakes and find ways to score, we may have a shot vs a team that may not tak us seriously.
So true. As much I want to see the ACC succeed, I want to ensure a Alabama/SEC defeat. If Alabama is in the title game, I definitely want to see Oregon against Alabama. I think they could pull it off this time around.
Don't forget Merland! Although it looks like Twerps may be stuck on their backs at the moment.
Which is why we need to win out. Dammit, if we (presumably) won't play Clemson this year, we need to set our sights on playing and defeating the team that stomped them!
Defense that scores points
Anyone who compares college football 2013 to college football in 1992 is being willfully stupid.
I posted this in another thread, but over the last 3 years VT and UVA have almost identical class recruiting according to rankings (VT is at 26, UVA is at 26.7). Yes, VT had a better 2010 class, but one class shouldn't account for the apparent gulf in the teams. The problem at UVA isn't the talent.
|
12 years 8 months
# | UVA's Mike London has made ~$2,000,000/yr since 2010. That means UVA has paid him $875,000 for each ACC win they've had. My favorite stat is that Dook has half of their ACC wins under Cutcliffe against LOLUVA
I'm worried because I don't think we match up well against FSU's offense. We typically do better against non-mobile quarterbacks and against not very tall or physical receivers. FSU has both of those things. We'll still do a better job of limiting their offense that other teams, but we've got to get our offense and the run game going to have a chance.
Most casual fans will view this as a one team conference now.
Casual fans opinions' aren't worth a damn. Even a quick look into the conference will show that we're pretty decent up top. Clemson is still a good team that simply hit a buzz saw, and got manhandled by FSU's defense. I think it speaks more about FSU than about Clemson. Clemson will probably be around 12, and back in the Top 10 in a few weeks.
HAIL TO THE REDSKINS
REDSKINS IS A GREAT TEAM NAME
WASHINGTON REDSKINS
I would argue that most of the other Native American mascots are more offensive than the Redskins. The Redskins symbol, at least, is a respectful likeness (I don't want to use that word, really, but it's the first to come to mind). The Cleveland Indians icon is a cartoony caricature, which I think is worse than the Redskins icon, regardless of the name.
|
12 years 8 months
# | UVA's Mike London has made ~$2,000,000/yr since 2010. That means UVA has paid him $875,000 for each ACC win they've had. i turned the game off when it was 22-7, we went to visit friends. we got back and i saw the final score. my reaction:
I can't help but feel like last night was bad for the ACC. If it was a close, well-played game by both teams that kept people watching we'd be much better off. FSU has obviously cemented themselves as being in the same tier as 'Bama/Oregon, and maybe putting up such a dominant performance could be the difference between #2 and a shot at the national championship versus #3 and a BCS bowl. But if Clemson would have played well, I'm pretty sure the analysts would be talking about the depth of the ACC and we'd still have 3 teams in the top 10. Most casual fans will view this as a one team conference now.
There are a few teams that I intentionally give little credit to, and one of them is Wisconsin. They're just bigger and stronger than most teams, an identity that they've solidified over a long period of time.
But Wisconsin has match up problems. If they play against another team with similar size, they're in for a game. If they play against someone with similar size and a lot more speed/talent (pretty much the entire SEC, talented B12 teams, OSU, Mich, PSU, Neb, Oregon, USCw, FSU, Clemson, Miami, Stanford), they have problems because their OL can't push around the DL and their skill players aren't fast enough to break away from anyone. Their loss to OSU was highly predictable because of this.
In general, they're the archetype of big, slow Big Ten teams. You're right that they're a team that will win a lot of games, but they'll do it against other teams who can't match up with size or don't have enough speed to overcome it. Throw in the fact that quarterbacking is an afterthought for their team (they've never successfully recruited or developed a quarterback talent), and I give them little credit for what they accomplish.
From the Roanoke Times: "In Dukes past 50 ACC games, the Blue Devils are 5-1 against the Cavaliers and 5-39 against the rest of the conference."
LOLUVA
http://www.roanoke.com/sports/colleges/2312059-12/cavaliers-suffer-ridic...