Meanwhile, over in Wisconsin...

1987alum · Post by **1987alum** » Tue May 09, 2006 2:04 pm

Wow. Maybe I'd better check my orange & brown glasses, but I don't see us keeping this within two TDs.

Jacobs4Heisman · Post by **Jacobs4Heisman** » Tue May 09, 2006 2:13 pm

1987alum wrote:Wow. Maybe I'd better check my orange & brown glasses, but I don't see us keeping this within two TDs.

A blowout is definitely possible. Since we should be worse than last year, and Wisconsin should be better, at least on defense, there is a good chance we'll lose by 2 TDs or more. I think the game will play out differently though, and be more low scoring with us focusing more in the running game. The game may end up feeling like a blowout, but I don't think the score will get out of hand.

Or we could win. Stranger things have happened.

hammb · Post by **hammb** » Tue May 09, 2006 2:24 pm

1987alum wrote:Wow. Maybe I'd better check my orange & brown glasses, but I don't see us keeping this within two TDs.

As the local pessimist (although I would argue realist

), I'm inclined to agree. I'm just not convinced that our defense will be improved enough to stop their running game (no matter who they have at RB). I'm not convinced we've got the offensive firepower to put up points on what should be an improved Wisky defense either.

I plan to attend the game, but I don't expect it to be a game BG wins. I do expect to be drunk, have fun, and not really give a crap about the score

Dayons_Den · Post by **Dayons_Den** » Tue May 09, 2006 2:28 pm

hammb wrote:I plan to attend the game, but I don't expect it to be a game BG wins. I do expect to be drunk, have fun, and not really give a crap about the score

Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life, son.

hammb · Post by **hammb** » Tue May 09, 2006 2:31 pm

Dayons_Den wrote:
hammb wrote:I plan to attend the game, but I don't expect it to be a game BG wins. I do expect to be drunk, have fun, and not really give a crap about the score
Fat

Check.

Dayons_Den wrote:, drunk,

Sometimes Check.

Dayons_Den wrote:and stupid is no way to go through life, son.

Woohoo. Thanks for using "and" and not "or". I don't think I'm stupid, so I won't be going through life Fat, drunk, and stupid.

You gonna try to make the Labor Day pilgrimage back to beautiful Ohio man?

Dayons_Den · Post by **Dayons_Den** » Tue May 09, 2006 2:42 pm

Trying to figure out which games work out best for us to go to. Was thinking of trying to get to Columbus, but I've done that twice and as Betsy pointed out it would be more fun to spend a day on the gravel at the Doyt than at an away venue. I'm looking seriously at the Kent Game on Sept. 23 (not a fan of the 1pm kick though) or hte EMU game on 10/14- homecoming and a 4pm kick.

(just so you know that was an animal house quote, by the way, nothing personal . . . )

hammb · Post by **hammb** » Tue May 09, 2006 2:43 pm

Dayons_Den wrote:
(just so you know that was an animal house quote, by the way, nothing personal . . . )

Yeah, I know...love that movie...

1987alum · Post by **1987alum** » Tue May 09, 2006 4:07 pm

hammb wrote:
1987alum wrote:Wow. Maybe I'd better check my orange & brown glasses, but I don't see us keeping this within two TDs.
As the local pessimist (although I would argue realist ), I'm inclined to agree. I'm just not convinced that our defense will be improved enough to stop their running game (no matter who they have at RB). I'm not convinced we've got the offensive firepower to put up points on what should be an improved Wisky defense either.

I plan to attend the game, but I don't expect it to be a game BG wins. I do expect to be drunk, have fun, and not really give a crap about the score

Yeah, I like to think of myself as a realist. And the reality is we're looking at replacing practically all of our skill players on offense, an offense that relies heavily on timing. Oh, and we'll have a QB who has never taken a snap in a college football game playing in CBS against a Big Tenleven defense. Speaking of defense, if we are able to put the clamps on the Badgers this year, it will represent the biggest turnaround in football history. Not saying it can't be done, but those are pretty steep odds.

I think we'll give it the ol' college try, but the realist in me says it's not going to be close. Sadly, I won't be able to be enjoy the festivities in C-town like you, hammb!

San Diego Falcon · Post by **San Diego Falcon** » Tue May 09, 2006 4:15 pm

Oh, and we'll have a QB who has never taken a snap in a college football game playing in CBS against a Big Tenleven defense.

I believe that Barnes took a snap or two when Turner got banged up at Kent last year.

Therefore, your entire argument is meaningless, and BG will destroy Wisconsin.

1987alum · Post by **1987alum** » Tue May 09, 2006 4:27 pm

San Diego Falcon wrote:
Oh, and we'll have a QB who has never taken a snap in a college football game playing in CBS against a Big Tenleven defense.
I believe that Barnes took a snap or two when Turner got banged up at Kent last year.

Therefore, your entire argument is meaningless, and BG will destroy Wisconsin.

There I go, another one of those typical uninformed "Internet guys" yapping about something without any clue of the facts.

Falconfreak90 · Post by **Falconfreak90** » Tue May 09, 2006 4:55 pm

San Diego Falcon wrote:
Oh, and we'll have a QB who has never taken a snap in a college football game playing in CBS against a Big Tenleven defense.
I believe that Barnes took a snap or two when Turner got banged up at Kent last year.

Therefore, your entire argument is meaningless, and BG will destroy Wisconsin.

Actually, that was Van Johnson who took a few snaps at Kent when Turner went down...

Bleeding Orange · Post by **Bleeding Orange** » Tue May 09, 2006 5:41 pm

Falconfreak90 wrote:
San Diego Falcon wrote:
Oh, and we'll have a QB who has never taken a snap in a college football game playing in CBS against a Big Tenleven defense.
I believe that Barnes took a snap or two when Turner got banged up at Kent last year.

Therefore, your entire argument is meaningless, and BG will destroy Wisconsin.
Actually, that was Van Johnson who took a few snaps at Kent when Turner went down...

Can't we just agree that '87 just sucks anyways...

1987alum · Post by **1987alum** » Wed May 10, 2006 10:06 am

Bleeding Orange wrote:Can't we just agree that '87 just sucks anyways...

Man, this week just keeps getting better and better ...

Falconboy · Post by **Falconboy** » Wed May 10, 2006 5:36 pm

hammb wrote:
1987alum wrote:Wow. Maybe I'd better check my orange & brown glasses, but I don't see us keeping this within two TDs.
As the local pessimist (although I would argue realist ), I'm inclined to agree. I'm just not convinced that our defense will be improved enough to stop their running game (no matter who they have at RB). I'm not convinced we've got the offensive firepower to put up points on what should be an improved Wisky defense either.

I plan to attend the game, but I don't expect it to be a game BG wins. I do expect to be drunk, have fun, and not really give a crap about the score

If Wisky's running game dominates us anything like last time then it probably wouldn't matter who was at rb. A 90 year-old granny could probbly get 160 on us running behind that Wisky O-line.

Sweets9 · Post by **Sweets9** » Wed May 10, 2006 5:47 pm

I'd love to see the Falcons knock off Wisky, but I don't see us staying within 3 TDs.

Sadly:

Wisky 38
BGSU 13