|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Sept 1, 2009 9:21:07 GMT -8
I am so damned tired of this losing to UCLA! And I say that despite my long-time status (mid '50s to the '80s) as a huge Bruin fan. Do we have a chance Saturday? Will there even be a game on Saturday?
Saturday will mark my fourth trip to the Rose Bowl to see the Aztecs take on the Bruins. The only one that was close was the 20-10 loss several years ago, a game that we might well have won had we not lost our #1 QB earlier.
So much rides on this game. An inept performance by S.D.S.U. by a score in the 35-7 or 42-10 range will be a huge setback. On the other hand, if we are in the game after 3 quarters and lose by only 10-14 points, we will be justified in feeling a bit of optimism regarding the rest of the season.
My guess is that we will lose by a score such as 31-14, or perhaps something even closer. We can only hope for a win, which would change everything!
My son and I will be driving up to Pasadena. Who else is going? (What's the latest word on TV?)
AzWm
|
|
|
|
Post by davdesid on Sept 1, 2009 13:30:06 GMT -8
There were a couple of close losses in SD. 15-18 in '84, and 25-28 in '89.
Your guess sounds about right to me.
TV: Last I heard it's on Directv Fox Sports West channel 692 @ 4:30pm PDT.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bob Forsythe on Sept 1, 2009 15:46:35 GMT -8
Ugh, that damn 18-15 loss drove me nuts. That was close to being as depressing as the $C tie.
=Bob
|
|
|
|
Post by AlwaysAnAztec on Sept 1, 2009 16:26:20 GMT -8
Will be interesting. I think that Skippy will try and protect his new QB by playing a lot of smashmouth with some short stuff thrown in. If they attempt to go long or use a route that might take some time to develop, we might get to him.
Come on rush defense.
|
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Sept 1, 2009 18:07:57 GMT -8
Oh, yes, 1989! But I was only speaking of games I had attended at the Rose Bowl. (I also saw UCLA beat Penn State at the Coliseum in 1964 when I was a grad student in Westwood.)
There's one thing about 1989. I think Lugie's team did about as well as it could. On the other hand, the 2003 Aztecs faced the Bruins without an outstanding QB. I remain convinced that an Aztec victory would have been possible, perhaps probable, had we been up to par at QB.
It's too bad that we are not facing the Bruins with a team as strong as the Aztecs of 1992, 1995, or 1996. (Or perhaps even 1969, 1976, or 1977.)
AzWm
|
|
|
|
Post by sdsuaztecs on Sept 2, 2009 7:04:25 GMT -8
UCLA by 19?  Don't think so. UCLA won't even score that much. www.docsports.com/football-odds.html We need 2-3 turnovers to win......Rocky's defense can do it. An early turnover could set the tone for the whole game. I like our chances. |
|
|
|
Post by Bob Forsythe on Sept 2, 2009 9:54:11 GMT -8
UCLA by 19? Don't think so. UCLA won't even score that much. www.docsports.com/football-odds.html We need 2-3 turnovers to win......Rocky's defense can do it. An early turnover could set the tone for the whole game. I like our chances. Given past history, especially last year, I don't think 19 is unreasonable. =Bob |
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Sept 2, 2009 11:52:53 GMT -8
UCLA by 19? Don't think so. UCLA won't even score that much. www.docsports.com/football-odds.html We need 2-3 turnovers to win......Rocky's defense can do it. An early turnover could set the tone for the whole game. I like our chances. Given past history, especially last year, I don't think 19 is unreasonable. =Bob Perhaps. Still, the betting lines usually understate the disparity between two teams (or at least that's my understanding). Therefore, if A is favored to beat B by 8 or 9, a final winning margin of 14 or more points should not be considered a big surprise. A team that won only 4 games last year and is starting a new QB might well be rated a 10-12 point favorite in this case, but 19 is just huge. One should not forget that the two teams had a common opponent in 2008. UCLA lost 59-0 to BYU, and we lost 41-12. Let's see; that's a losing margin of 59 points for UCLA and just 12 for S.D.S.U. Plus, our last game in '08 was an impressive win over a team fighting for bowl eligibility. Finally, Chuck Long is no longer HC for the Aztecs. All that adds up, in my mind, to seeing 19 points as way too wide a disparity. But, we shall see. AzWm |
|
|
|
Post by Bob Forsythe on Sept 4, 2009 6:52:56 GMT -8
Given past history, especially last year, I don't think 19 is unreasonable. =Bob Perhaps. Still, the betting lines usually understate the disparity between two teams (or at least that's my understanding). Therefore, if A is favored to beat B by 8 or 9, a final winning margin of 14 or more points should not be considered a big surprise. A team that won only 4 games last year and is starting a new QB might well be rated a 10-12 point favorite in this case, but 19 is just huge. One should not forget that the two teams had a common opponent in 2008. UCLA lost 59-0 to BYU, and we lost 41-12. Let's see; that's a losing margin of 59 points for UCLA and just 12 for S.D.S.U. Plus, our last game in '08 was an impressive win over a team fighting for bowl eligibility. Finally, Chuck Long is no longer HC for the Aztecs. All that adds up, in my mind, to seeing 19 points as way too wide a disparity. But, we shall see. AzWm All, true, but my point was that the bookies (I refuse to call them "odds makers") are going to look at where we were last year and base it upon the record more than anything else. =Bob |
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Sept 4, 2009 20:34:53 GMT -8
Perhaps. Still, the betting lines usually understate the disparity between two teams (or at least that's my understanding). Therefore, if A is favored to beat B by 8 or 9, a final winning margin of 14 or more points should not be considered a big surprise. A team that won only 4 games last year and is starting a new QB might well be rated a 10-12 point favorite in this case, but 19 is just huge. One should not forget that the two teams had a common opponent in 2008. UCLA lost 59-0 to BYU, and we lost 41-12. Let's see; that's a losing margin of 59 points for UCLA and just 12 for S.D.S.U. Plus, our last game in '08 was an impressive win over a team fighting for bowl eligibility. Finally, Chuck Long is no longer HC for the Aztecs. All that adds up, in my mind, to seeing 19 points as way too wide a disparity. But, we shall see. AzWm All, true, but my point was that the bookies (I refuse to call them "odds makers") are going to look at where we were last year and base it upon the record more than anything else. =Bob And therefore many novice gamblers will look only at win/loss records of last year and place their bet. They won't take into consideration particular changes one or both of the teams have made. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Sept 6, 2009 6:16:28 GMT -8
19 was a pretty good spread. Games like that make a pretty good argument for the half point so there are no pushes.
|
|
|
|
Post by sdsuaztecs on Sept 6, 2009 6:29:49 GMT -8
Pretty disappointing loss after getting up 14-3. When you have the other team "on the ropes" you cannot let them run back the following kick-off 80 yards. If SDSU had kept UCLA on their side of the 50 and somehow come up with a stop, that game would have been a lot different game. Aztec special teams need some work.
|
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Sept 6, 2009 6:33:23 GMT -8
Pretty disappointing loss after getting up 14-3. When you have the other team "on the ropes" you cannot let them run back the following kick-off 80 yards. If SDSU had kept UCLA on their side of the 50 and somehow come up with a stop, that game would have been a lot different game. Aztec special teams need some work. Special teams AND we need to upgrade the lines. Our passing game was out of sync because we were just out manned. |
|
|
|
Post by steveaztec on Sept 7, 2009 7:45:27 GMT -8
I didn't like the loss, but I like what I am hearing.
It sounds like we fought hard right to the end.
|
|
Don't think so. UCLA won't even score that much.