Blog Entry

QUICK HITS: Baylor 67 Washington 56

Posted on: December 30, 2011 1:26 am
Edited on: December 30, 2011 1:27 am

Posted by Tom Fornelli

BAYLOR WON. Well, Baylor did win the game, but in reality anybody who watched the Alamo Bowl on Thursday night won. Except for defensive coordinators around the country who no doubt found themselves curled up in the fetal position mumbling something about open-field tackling while drooling on themselves by the time this one was over. This is not an easy game to recap because so much happened. It's kind of like the night you went out to celebrate your 21st birthday. You know you had a good time doing it, but you don't remember most of it.

Still, I shall try.

There were 17 touchdowns scored in this game. That's one touchdown for every 3 minutes and 31 seconds of game time. Baylor and Washington combined for 123 points (2.05 points per minute) and 1,397 yards of total offense. Robert Griffin had 350 total yards and 2 touchdowns and he wasn't even the best quarterback in San Antonio as Washington's Keith Price went for 477 total yards and 7 touchdowns. And his team lost! Then there was Baylor's Terrance Ganaway, who rushed for 200 yards and 5 touchdowns (as a team Baylor rushed for 482 yards). Of the 17 touchdown drives in this game, 11 took less than 3 minutes off of the clock.

I'm not sure who the leading tackler was, but if he had more than 3 tackles I'll be shocked because I'm not sure there were 3 tackles in this entire game. It was insane, it was never-ending, and it was one of the greatest things that ever happened.

WHY BAYLOR WON. There's really no one thing that happened in this game that you can pinpoint as the reason that Baylor won, but if you had to give one of the "defenses" credit, I'd guess it would have to be Baylors. Not only did they hold Washington under 60, but the Bears outscored the Huskies 43-21 in the second half.

WHEN BAYLOR WON. The game came to an end when Washington faced a 4th and 8 in the final minutes while down 60-56 and couldn't convert. Though when Ganaway broke loose for a 43-yard touchdown a few plays later to make the score 67-56 with 2:28 left in the game, you legitimately wondered if Baylor had left too much time on the clock.

WHAT BAYLOR WON. Baylor won it's tenth game of the season, which is a huge milestone for the program. It also helped showcase just how insanely good a year Heisman winner Robert Griffin had. I mean, Griffin played on a Baylor team that allowed 35.7 points per game coming into this game, and gave up 56 points on the night, and the Bears still won 10 games. Wrap your head around that one. 

WHAT WASHINGTON LOST. Well, each player on Washington probably lost about 15 pounds in this game from running up and down the field for 60 minutes. Other than that, I'm not sure you can say the Huskies lost all that much. We saw the same Huskies tonight that we've seen all season: a team that is very capable of putting 50 points on the board but just as capable of allowing 60. Much like the team they played. Yes, this is a loss that stings as all losses do, but it won't be long before everyone on this Washington team looks back on this game and can do nothing but laugh at the insanity of it all.

THAT WAS CRAZY: Have you read this recap? This entire game was crazy.

FINAL GRADE: A++++++++. I'd give it more pluses but you probably get the point. No, this game was not the type of game that defensive-minded football fans would enjoy, but it was 60 minutes of pure entertainment. There is not a single doubt in my mind that anybody who watched will forever remember this Alamo Bowl.

Since: Nov 6, 2010
Posted on: December 31, 2011 6:32 am

QUICK HITS: Baylor 67 Washington 56

I did watch it toolbox......that is why it was horrible....moron

Since: Feb 4, 2007
Posted on: December 30, 2011 4:43 pm

QUICK HITS: Baylor 67 Washington 56

I love how a lot of the people down-grading this game in these comments didn't watch much of the game. So who cares if there was no defense? Anybody who knew about this game before it happened knew there wasn't going to be any defense whatsoever. It was a lot like a boxing match against two greats: you knew the powerful punches would come, entertaining everybody, but you weren't sure who exactly would land the knockout punch (and no, I am not implying that these two teams are "great"; everyone knows that "great teams" have defense). If you had watched the game, you knew that no lead was safe; how is that not entertaining? For you defensive purists (and I'm not trying to insult you), is that not part of exciting thing about your games? Knowing that one score could change the entire game? I love defensive games. Every little mistake is magnified. But to say that this game was horrible when you didn't watch it is simply ignorant. 

Since: Dec 4, 2010
Posted on: December 30, 2011 10:18 am

QUICK HITS: Baylor 67 Washington 56

Back in September a pinhead writer (at least THEN I thought he was) stated that the Heisman was about 'production' NOT RPI (opponents).  I must apologize....he was correct.  RG 3 was not the best QB on the field last night...IF you look at simply production. (yeah yeah Baylor won, but...)  How can you really evaluate a QB's greatness in a game like this?  Or in a season of games like this?  I guess in the future, the Heisman will be judged by the candidates "entertainment value". Sad.

Since: Dec 24, 2009
Posted on: December 30, 2011 9:29 am

QUICK HITS: Baylor 67 Washington 56

This game was HIGH DRAMA! It was like watching a scary movie where you knew someone was going to get chain-sawed, but you didn't know who or when.

If you had skin in the game, you were on the edge of your seat the whole game knowing that a 14 point lead did not equate to sanctuary. Knowing that 2 minutes could mean 21 points more if the time that had expired was any measuring stick.

No, this is not the kind of game you want see on a steady basis, but in a bowl game... just what the bowl committee ordered. And I would guess even the fans of the losing team went away feeling entertained and with feeling that if there had just been more time their team would have come back.

I wasn't able to watch the game on tv because it wasn't being shown over the air. But I did watch it on the CBS Sportsline animation and the excitement still came through my computer. I can only imagine how it felt to actually be there.

Since: Dec 9, 2008
Posted on: December 30, 2011 9:18 am

QUICK HITS: Baylor 67 Washington 56

some games have defense, some offense. personally i thought it was ragged, but at least they scored a td.  better than 9-6

Since: Jan 17, 2008
Posted on: December 30, 2011 8:37 am

QUICK HITS: Baylor 67 Washington 56

Have no idea what fans you are talking about. There was no entertainment to this game at all. I couldn't wait until it was over to the point I finally just turned it off. Flag football at its best without the flags. Both teams should be ashamed of themselves. I'm not going to remember this game. I'm going to forget it.

Since: Aug 18, 2010
Posted on: December 30, 2011 8:33 am

QUICK HITS: Baylor 67 Washington 56

I thought this game was interesting for a while, but when it became obvious that I was watching an Arena League football game, I turned the game off.  Plus, it was late as hell and I had to work this morning.  I did make it until mid way through the fourth quarter, so I saw most of this. 

Since: Aug 15, 2006
Posted on: December 30, 2011 8:28 am

QUICK HITS: Baylor 67 Washington 56

Hooray for Baylor, dut DAMM, this wasn't a football game.  Did anyone check to see if the ball was orange and round, and the players tossed it through a ten-foot-tall metal ring?


This was CFB's equivalent of a home run derby.

Since: Mar 22, 2008
Posted on: December 30, 2011 4:43 am

QUICK HITS: Baylor 67 Washington 56

nice excuse on trying to sell no offense vs the snore of the century. they are both bad. watching botched field goals for offense vs no tackling.
both = joke

im pretty sure oklahoma state vs stanford or wisky vs oregon will be very entertaining despite a couple of these posters pretending the football world would rather watch a 3-3 snore game than this one. this was the extreme bad defense. still its more entertaining than watching the snore of the century II. the fact that griffin wasnt even the best qb on the field justifies the heisman popularity contest of an award vs the most deserving was what the college football fan was more focused on

Since: Nov 6, 2010
Posted on: December 30, 2011 4:37 am

QUICK HITS: Baylor 67 Washington 56

Embarassing football game......Baylor's Def coord should be coaching something else..........horrible

The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or