What Went Wrong, Part II: Gilbert Misses Shipley

== My point in bringing up the 2007 K-State game was to show you that I’ve seen McCoy take heavy beatings before and not get knocked out of the game

That was never in dispute. When did I ever say this? Never. I had this example in mind to point out that McCoy does in fact go down when he is hit hard enough, arguing against the idea that he is as tough as nails.

== far worse than he took from Alabama, which refuted your assertion that it was just SEC physicality.

I noticed you conveniently left out the evidence I mentioned to prove my point. You failed to acknowledge that Alabama has knocked out many key players this year, making McCoy’s incident just a different chapter in the same story for Bama’s defense.

== I was merely bringing up a prime example of the kind of beatings I’ve seen Colt take (in 2007, he actually took a lot of them from several teams), to again, refute this silly idea that Colt never took hits in the Big 12.

I never said this. I’m saying SEC is generally more physical, which is probably why Big 12 fans think this hit must have been a fluke as opposed to the result of a truly hard hit. You keep downplaying the force of impact, but the video shows McCoy’s head snap back at an awkward angle. He braced himself and still seemed unprepared for the force of the blow.

== Also, go watch the Nebraska game again: Colt got knocked around, and not just on sacks. I’m not proving any point you made; I’m refuting them if you could see clearly.

You don’t even understand the points. Go look at the Suh vs. McCoy clip on youtube. In all of these sacks McCoy was either 1) running in the same direction of Suh, who tackles him going out of bounds, 2) gives him a big Hug and pulls him to the ground, or 3) grabs him by the waist and slings him across the field. In all examples from that game, none were high impact collisions.

== This makes me laugh because clearly you went to the archives and looked up play by play stuff, recited it to me, and are now pretending that this makes your argument worthwhile.

Actually I went to the recap area, since the play by play doesn’t give this kind of information. Forgive me for daring to have my ducks in a row before speaking.

== Unfortunately for you, this entire paragraph is irrelevant. The point of …

It is relevant to the point I was making, which seems to have gone way over your head.

== bringing up the K-State game was to simply show that Colt has taken far worse hits than what he sustained against Alabama

Please show me where I said the hit by Dareus was the hardest hit he ever withstood. I’m guessing this will be another comment you ignore completely.

== I know, it’s not like he had comeback victories against Ohio State in 2008, Nebraska in 2006, Oklahoma State in 2007, and against Oklahoma in 2008. Uh huh. But "year after year," he fails in the spotlight.

I didn’t say "in the spotlight" now did I? I am making the point that McCoy doesn’t meet the standard of "champion" (Is English a second language for you?) He has been given more opportunities than most QBs to win it all, but he always comes up short at the end of the season.

Again, proving my point but too daft to figure it out, while ranked fifth in the nation, he had a comeback against barely ranked Nebraska in 2006, but he also lost the last two regular season games, ruining their chance at the title. The last rivalry game against A&M was particularly embarrassing, throwing 160yds and 3 interceptions.

In 2007 he had a comeback against OSU, true. But they were unranked and Texas never should have been behind that late in the game to begin with. But that same year he lost the final game of the regular season against rival A&M, again failing to give his team a shot at the national title (LSU was a two loss champion that year and Texas losing three games made that decision all the more easier).

He had comeback wins in 2008 but these were not when the national title was on the line. It was his careless interception against Texas Tech that ruined their shot at the national title that year. Again, McCoy has failed every time when given a shot at the title. So there is plenty of precedent in arguing that he wouldn’t have necessarily made much of a difference. His presence would have changed the game plan for sure, but Texas went into this game as underdogs for a reason. They would have continued to be underdogs after their first four plays, with or without McCoy.

== This is merely your deluded interpretation of this post, not the intent of the post itself.

Oh no? Then explain its purpose.

== Every team, win or lose, and every fan base, looks at what went wrong.

Maybe if they like to live in misery by reliving the same ordeal over and over. I mean seriously, are any of you hired analysts by the Longhorns? If not, then what purpose does this serve? Your audience isn’t the coaching staff. They are overpaid to do their own analyses. Your audience is a slew of fans looking to find comfort from wherever they can, and nothing makes a losing fan base fee better than to be convinced that they weren’t really beat, and that they lost due to a chain of fluky and unfortunate circumstances. And I notice you don’t address the point I made about the author’s claim that Gideon’s failed tackle on Ingram was "inexplicable."

== I’m calling you insecure, because no other Alabama fan is reacting like you.

What a dumb argument. I suspect others don’t feel it is worth it, and are more interested in internet friendships. I’m not. I call it as I see it, and there are plenty who agree with me on the Bama blog at foxsports. Of course, my arguments are generally apologetic in the sense that they are always in response to stupid commentary by Texas fans. I don’t see anyone at RBR making these arguments, so there is no point in me presenting a counter-argument over there, to an argument that doesn’t exist.

== You latch onto ONE first down, the only one we got for quite a long time after McCoy went out, as proof that McCoy wasn’t needed.

And you latch onto one possession, where McCoy managed to orchestrate 10 yards on three plays, and suddenly Texas is lost without him. My point was your wide sweeps were successful without McCoy. Most of Gilbert’s attempted passes were rushed or swatted down.

== How about a two-time Heisman finalist and one of the top college QB’s in the game. That level.

Give me a break. McCoy was a Heisman candidate every year before he even put on his helmet. He was overhyped and overrated consistently. And by what standard do you consider him one of the top college QBs in the game? One of the top 10? 20? McCoy is a better athlete, but McElroy’s accomplished more in his first season than McCoy did in four. He’s never allowed Bama to lose a game, or even his high school team for that matter.

== And if you think McElroy can take over a game, you’re deluded.

So you didn’t watch the Auburn game? He took over the game in the fourth quarter when Auburn had shut down the running game. Oh, and he won the MVP during the SEC championship game by outplaying Tim Tebow, who is widely regarded the best college football player ever.

== And no, not every rational mind that the game was over; in fact, that would be a very irrational thing to assume, if you watched enough football to see all sorts of comebacks that cover a spread greater than 18.

Yes, I understand that is a typical rule, but this game was far from typical. Again, at halftime there was every indication Texas was done. Texas obviously put all their eggs into the MCCoy basket, and Dareus squashed that basket, leaving you with a mediocre running game, a battered defense and talented receivers who had no way of getting the ball. Bama assumed they would try to rework a running game, but Texas surprised them when Gilbert started throwing again.

== I did deal with it; I pointed out the difference between a rotation and playing scrubs.

A freshman who has played in a total of three games out of fourteen is not part of a regular "rotation." He is one of those guys you play only when you think the lead is safe. I don’t know if anyone else was "rotated" aside from him and Luther Davis, but it wouldn’t surprise me if there were.

== Sure he was… that’s why when he could have killed the clock when the game was essentially over, he elected to run it.

Uh, you mean when Bama was on the Texas 27 with 1:48 left to go? The first play was a simple run play up the middle which everyone on the planet knew was coming, including the Texas defense. But Richardson ran it for 17yds and a penalty put Bama inside the 5yd line with 1:41 left. It seems Saban wasn’t about to take Texas for granted again after they came within three points in what was supposed to be a done deal. I don’t know how many time outs each team had, but from what the announcers said, if Bama sat on the ball it was technically possible for Texas to get the ball back, score, and do another onsides kick and kick a long FG to tie. This would be highly improbable of course, but not out of the realm of possibility.

== The point of bringing this up, again, was to show you how stupid your theory is that Arenas was being charitable and that took off seven points off the board.

You misunderstood the point. I didn’t say Arenas was being charitable ( I said Saban was by prematurely "rotating" crucial pass rushers). Please try to pay attention. I merely brought it up to point out Texas got its own share of breaks provided by Bama players. Why he fell on the ball is something none of us will know for sure and irrelevant anyway because my point is that he could have given Bama at least another 7 points easily.

== So you’re still fishing for hypothetical points when your argument was destroyed?

It is easy to destroy arguments custom made from straw. It doesn’t seem you’ve understood much of anything I’ve said.

== Because how long an defense is on the field has nothing to with that, right?

Ok here is where more evidence is presented about the delusion. Your inability to be evenhanded, and indeed a propensity to be hypocritical is so obvious at this point. For example, when Texas can’t stop the running game in the first quarter, it is because they’re too tired. When Alabama’s DBs give up a couple of TD passes late into the game, it is because they’re outmatched by Texas’ receivers. Never mind the fact that Gilbert threw the ball 40 friggin times and completed only 37% of his throws. And seriously, if you are arguing that your defense got too tired in the FIRST quarter, well I don’t know if that is a slam against the Texas defense or your capacity for sensible argument.

== So McCoy getting points and taking up clock has no affect on the Alabama run game? That’s delusional.

Only to those who suffer from McCoy worship syndrome. You assume he would have done so much better than he did against Oklahoma and Nebraska because…? Oh yeah, I forgot, because he managed to orchestrate 10yds on three plays. That’s just brilliant!

== Ingram did get nicked up. It’s not hard to see. It was minor and he could come back.

He had a slight cramp in his leg but it was worked out in no time and he was jumping around on the sidelines wanting to go back in long before Saban allowed him to.

== Once again: I challenge you to post this stuff on RBR (or just link this conversation to them) and see what they tell you. However, I doubt you’ll have the courage to do so.

Why the hell would I post your stupidity over there, along with my responses?

== My advice to you is this: Be happy that you won.

I am.

== Stop being so insecure by anything that does not hail Alabama as the greatest team ever (ironically, in your quest to insult Texas and Colt McCoy, all you’re doing is damaging the quality of Alabama’s win).
No, I am defending the integrity of their win by refuting cheap attempts to downplay it by people like you. DO I really have to point out how many Texas fans have said this win should have an asterik? That technically Bama won, but didn’t really beat Texas? The silly rationale posted on these blogs is what makes it easy for people to think and argue like that.

== Texas made mistakes, and there’s nothing wrong with looking into them.

Of course not, but if doing so minimizes any good Alabama might have done, then its extended purpose it to support the "you didn’t really beat us" crowd. Again, some authors can’t even accept the fact that a Heisman winner managed to outrun a Texas DB without there being some "inexplicable" reason for it. All missed catches were considered game changing plays! It is just silly because these conclusions go well beyond simple analysis.