Started By
Message
re: True or False -- Auburn could've beaten Oregon w/o Cam.
Posted on 1/14/11 at 10:31 am to lowspark12
Posted on 1/14/11 at 10:31 am to lowspark12
True. Cam had an average game and Oregon was perhaps the weakest team ever to play in a NC game it appeared. Aub didnt play particularly well I thought.
0
Posted on 1/14/11 at 10:33 am to parkjas2001
Without Cam we are not in the game, but I think with the way the D played we would have won easily... we would have gone more power with Trotter at QB and a steady dose of Dyer...
Posted on 1/14/11 at 10:34 am to auburntiger77
quote:
Without Cam we are not in the game, but I think with the way the D played we would have won easily...
yeah ok
Posted on 1/14/11 at 10:34 am to auburntiger77
Won easily? You're joking right?
Posted on 1/14/11 at 10:34 am to auburntiger77
quote:
Without Cam we are not in the game, but I think with the way the D played we would have won easily... we would have gone more power with Trotter at QB and a steady dose of Dyer...
You contradicted yourself.
Posted on 1/14/11 at 10:34 am to lowspark12
nope
Posted on 1/14/11 at 10:40 am to parkjas2001
quote:
Nobody can prove what would have happened with or without any player.
That is correct, it's impossible to know for certain. My point is that even with the best player in the country, yall had about 7 regular season games that weren't decided until late/very late in the ball game. Removing that player, logically, would pretty much guarantee that a handful of those Ws turn into Ls.
Posted on 1/14/11 at 10:41 am to lowspark12
False.
Even when a dual threat QB has a "bad" game you still have to plan for them and keep a guy close to the line.
Even when a dual threat QB has a "bad" game you still have to plan for them and keep a guy close to the line.
Posted on 1/14/11 at 10:42 am to WG_Dawg
quote:
Removing that player, logically, would pretty much guarantee that a handful of those Ws turn into Ls.
Remove the bolded word and you and i are on the same level.
NObody guaranteed tha UGA woudl suck so bad without their top WR.
Posted on 1/14/11 at 10:42 am to lowspark12
quote:
I'm curious if people think we could've beaten the #1 team in the country with another QB.
1. I thought Auburn was the #1 team in the country. A somewhat Freudian slip?
2. Cam, no matter how underachieving his game was against Oregon, was still a player they had to scheme against, which made life easier for Dyer et al. If Oregon had known 3 weeks before the game that Newton was not playing, I suspect their defense would have been a good bit more successful than it was (which wasn't bad).
Posted on 1/14/11 at 10:44 am to lowspark12
That night, probably. Our defense, particularly the defensive line, was fantastic and dominated the game. I don't think it's out of the realm another QB could have lead us to 20 points against Oregon.
Posted on 1/14/11 at 10:45 am to lowspark12
False...Oregon had to gameplan for cam just like teams had to gameplan for Tebow...moving safties up leaving them out of coverage leaving huge pass opportunities open
AU won because of what Oregon knew Cam could do, not because what he did do
AU won because of what Oregon knew Cam could do, not because what he did do
Posted on 1/14/11 at 10:49 am to nycajun
quote:
2. Cam, no matter how underachieving his game was against Oregon, was still a player they had to scheme against, which made life easier for Dyer et al. If Oregon had known 3 weeks before the game that Newton was not playing, I suspect their defense would have been a good bit more successful than it was (which wasn't bad).
Agree with this. Would Auburn have been able to run the ball as efficiently without the threat of Cam? I'll say no, especially since it did take a last minute drive to win.
Posted on 1/14/11 at 11:02 am to lowspark12
False, Cam was the Auburn team.
Posted on 1/14/11 at 11:03 am to LSU ATC
I think the fact Cam had 330+ yards and two touchdowns and everyone is acting like he played terrible is a pretty good indicator of what kind of player he is.
Posted on 1/14/11 at 11:07 am to AUTigLN11
quote:
I think the fact Cam had 330+ yards and two touchdowns and everyone is acting like he played terrible is a pretty good indicator of what kind of player he is.
This thread isn't about "what kind of a player he is." We all pretty much know what kind of a player he is. (That would be highly effective at the college level and highly dishonest on pretty much every level).
The OP posited that his game against Oregon was not up to his normal standards:
quote:
It was far and away Cam's worst game since the 2nd week of the year against Mississippi State..
The replies simply have taken that hypothesis and responded to it. Take your man/felon love somewhere else.
This post was edited on 1/14/11 at 11:09 am
Posted on 1/14/11 at 11:07 am to lowspark12
Could have-True
Would have-false
Would have-false
Posted on 1/14/11 at 11:11 am to lowspark12
False. Pretty much agree with our perspective. Any decent mobile QB who could throw an accurate pass would have sufficed. I will say that Newton's 64 rushing yards were important to a few first downs but this is not to say they could not have been picked up in other ways. Newton apparently was hurt pretty badly because he did not look like the same player in the 2nd half.
Posted on 1/14/11 at 11:12 am to lowspark12
Never would have gotten to the game without Cam, but to answer the question, no, I don't think so.
Posted on 1/14/11 at 11:12 am to lowspark12
It doesn't matter.
Auburn would not have been there without Cam.
Auburn would not have been there without Cam.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News