• The KillerFrogs

Gameday Thread, Sun Bowl Rematch: TCU vs USC

I think that the first down play call to Manjack on the sideline at the five was a bad play call because you need yards on first down - one can’t afford to waste a first down play in a must score scenario. That wasted play set up the sack on 2nd down. The USC time-out, the tough run by Payne, and the horrible missed tackle has us forgetting about that first down play call. Manjack did juggle the ball so the incomplete overrule was the correct call; even if you disagree with that, it took an incredible catch to make that play work, and it didn’t.

Prior to that, Mitch Kirsch and Dykes called a good game. A good comeback and good win, but considering how many USC players were absent (12 starters?) not an upset in my mind. I am very happy for Ken Seals and the team, and pleased for TCU and Sonny Dykes.
 
Last edited:

froglash88

Full Member
It was a catch. The ball moved with his hand/arm. Everyone on the broadcast said it was a catch including the "expert" who commented on it.

Definitely a catch. Agree with everything else in your post.
 

Paint It Purple

Active Member
Maybe I missed it somewhere in the thread but what was the deal with the young guy constantly patting Riley on the back the whole game?
The kid would look at video/scoreboard first, then tap Riley's shoulder. I wondered if it alerted him that he was on camera so he wouldn't pick his nose. ;)

Happened once when their DC was on camera.

Someone suggested the play clock theory. Most likely best guess
 

NewFrogFan

Full Member
I think that the first down play call to Manjack on the sideline at the five was a bad play call because you need yards on first down - one can’t afford to waste a first down play in a must score scenario. That wasted play set up the sack on 2nd down. The USC time-out, the tough run by Payne, and the horrible missed tackle has us forgetting about that first down play call. Manjack did juggle the ball so the incomplete overrule was the correct call; even if you disagree with that, it took an incredible catch to make that play work, and it didn’t.

Prior to that, Mitch Kirsch and Dykes called a good game. A good comeback and good win, but considering how many USC players were absent (12 starters?) not an upset in my mind. I am very happy for Ken Seals and the team, and pleased for TCU and Sonny Dykes.
The Qb that USC still had, makes that an upset all day long, the press thinks so too.
 
NSIP:



Then he replied:


Jennifer Lawrence Ok GIF


Every single tweet he makes is about football, but the cryptic negative tweet that posted right at the conclusion of his alma mater’s bowl game loss was about something else, and he neglected to say what that was.
 
The Qb that USC still had, makes that an upset all day long, the press thinks so too.
So you agree with the press; that TCU with veteran Seals is a lesser team than USC without 12 starters (whatever the number was)? If so, then maybe not a good reflection on where TCU football is now. And the TCU QB next year will be starting from scratch.
 
Last edited:

HornyWartyToad

Active Member
So you agree with the press; that TCU with veteran Seals is a lesser team than USC without 12 starters (whatever the number was)? If so, then maybe not a good reflection on where TCU football is now. And the TCU QB next year will be starting from scratch.
So you disagree with Vegas which made USC a touchdown favorite? I don’t understand why you are so determined to water down a great TCU win.
 

82 Frog Fever

Active Member
So you disagree with Vegas which made USC a touchdown favorite? I don’t understand why you are so determined to water down a great TCU win.
Vegas lines have -0- to do with which team may be stronger.
The lines are only a reflection of which team has the greatest amount of bets placed in their favor.
No one should be surprised that a 9-3 USC Big10 team with over 500k living alums would have a greater amount of favored bets than TCU & its 100k living alums.

It was a very nice win to end a positive season at 9-4, and assuming TCU picks up a pretty good 1 year starting QB like Craig, Colandrea, Houser, Barnett, etc…; they should be improved in ‘26.
 
So you disagree with Vegas which made USC a touchdown favorite? I don’t understand why you are so determined to water down a great TCU win.
Think - I am only watering down, “upset,” because I think this TCU team with Seals should be able to beat a USC team that had so many starters bug out. You folks who believe it was an “upset” are watering down the Frogs team and Seals, jeepers - I am the one here holding TCU higher; expecting more than you did.

The “Vegas” line - I believe it was around 4.5-6.5, and that is likely largely a reflection of college football fans recognizing Hoover was gone, the Trojans being ranked #16 and the nation not believing little ole TCU was equally competitive with big brand USC; like you I guess. The Trojans minus those starters is not the same #16 team, and a line is a bit more like a line in the first week of the season with more unknowns than deeper into a season - the smart play is to not bet the line on that game.
 
Last edited:
Top