quote:
Luck? That's called football. I constantly see Bama fans point to this one "lucky" play by Ole Miss, but never see them point out the incredibly lucky bounce Bama received to recover and return the onside kick to the Ole Miss 30 yardline. This couldn't be replicated if it were tried another 500 times.

Again, as I said before, it isn't taking anything away from Ole Miss. The point is you are looking at this from an analytical perspective. Clemson is not expecting to have 70 yards on a play that tips of a guys helmet, bounces in the air and is caught for a TD.

The whole point of your post is taking things that happened and trying to see how we can use those events to predict future events. If you honestly think that past event should be used to predict a future event, then have at it. I think everyone else understands that it isn't.

The other drives that Ole Miss had when they scored quickly? Sure, that is something you can use to compare to Clemson. The freaky ball off the helmet play? I mean, you can if you want, but that would be really dumb.

For the third time, just to emphasize, there is a BIG DIFFERENCE in talking about that play from a "discredit Ole Miss" point of view and a "use the Ole Miss game as a point of reference to figure out how Clemson will do" point of view. It SHOULD NOT discredit what Ole Miss did. That is football, things happen, they made the play. It also would be asinine to use that in an assessment of how what Ole Miss did could translate to what Clemson can do.

It's a pretty simple different set of concepts that you don't seem to be able or willing to differentiate between.

This post was edited on 1/7/16 at 9:38 am