Football: Top 10, Week 3 results

Your quick recap of the games played by the top 10 teams. "Top 10" for now, anyway.

  1. Laval (3-0): L 18-14 at Sherbrooke. Wow, they lost! I can't believe it!

    Oh, wait, sorry, that was the halftime score. They actually won by 13 points (40-27). Never mind, everyone. Sorry for the false alarm.

  2. Western (3-0): W 41-13 vs. Ottawa. Do people still want this televised?

  3. Calgary (3-0): W 51-1 at Regina. They had the ball for 36 minutes and three seconds, which is 36 minutes and four seconds longer than it takes Steven Lumbala to run for a first down.

  4. Saskatchewan (2-1): L 16-26 at Manitoba. "There’s a lot of work to be done with this team."

  5. Sherbrooke (2-0): L 40-27 vs. Laval. Out-touchdown-ed 3 to 1 after a halftime lead.

  6. Montreal (2-1): W 11-10 at SMU. How do you cause four turnovers, but only score 11 points? They also had nearly as many penalty yards (160) as net yards from scrimmage (167).

  7. McMaster (2-1): W 21-19 at Windsor. Game 1 of ... many? ... without Kyle Quinlan naturally came down to the defence, stopping Windsor's one-yard, two-point conversion attempt with (essentially) zeroes on the clock.

  8. Saint Mary's (1-1): L 11-10 vs. Montreal. When you tend not to score for the first 70% of a game, you're lucky to lose by just one point.

  9. Ottawa (2-1): L 41-13 at Western. Their only major came 58:56 into the game. Either Western is that good, or the rest of this conference is that bad.

  10. Windsor (2-1): L 21-19 vs. Windsor. If I know the Top 10 voters (and I really don't), the Lancers will be pushed out for losing to Mac, but will come back in after beating Waterloo next week.
Next PostNewer Post Previous PostOlder Post Home

3 comments:

  1. I gather that we (the royal "we") are going to start deciding the merits of a game based upon the final point spread on the scoreboard?

    Com'on, get serious . . .

    ReplyDelete
  2. Yeah, but no. I think you're reading too much into a six-word throwaway line in a quick-hit top-10 post.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I needed a target for this Sunday's blog article; no malice was meant by the comment.

    After writing way too much for a comment, I decided to put it on my blog.

    I'm not picking on you or this blog; you guys do great work!

    ReplyDelete