The Guelph Gryphons beat the defending Vanier Cup Champion Queen's (Golden) Gaels in name only.
What Queen's rolled out onto the field at Alumni Stadium on Saturday was a paper version of the team that won the national championship a year ago.
Here's a list of who didn't take the field:
Danny Brannagan, MVP quarterback of the Yates Cup and Vanier Cup and now member of the Toronto Argos.
Jimmy Allin, the kick returner who ran three kicks back for majors against Guelph last season.
Linebacker T.J. Leeper, who in 2009 he led the OUA’s top-ranked defence with 40 tackles (32 solo, 16 assisted), five tackles for loss and one fumble recovery.
Receiver Scott Valberg, who led the Gaels with 913 receiving yards and four touchdowns.
Guelph
didn't win this game 21-15 so much as Queen's lost it or literally threw it away. Two
of Guelph's interceptions were gifts from the errant arm of starting
quarterback Justin Chapdelaine. It's up for debate whether Guelph's
defensive scheme and the solid coaching of defensive backs coach Billy
Brown had anything to do with those picks (one by Mark Durigon and one
by Jordan Duncan). But I was on the sideline and there wasn't a Gael
within 10 yards of either thrown ball. Mistakes like that are usually pinned on the pivot.
Guelph beat Queen's by six, and was the recipient of a major receiving score (Guelph's first of the year despite games against York and Toronto) that should not have counted. So, you do that math.
Not to mention, Devan Sheahan and Chris Ioannides both burned Guelph defensive backs late in the fourth and both dropped or simply did not reel in passes fifth-year receivers of their caliber should. If either comes up with a catch, they lead to at least a field goal or more than likely a major score from within 15 yards.
Oh sure, Guelph's off to an "undefeated" start — and I use that term loosely — at 3-0. But the Gryphons beat Toronto and York in succession. So what? Everyone beats Toronto and York. What should be noted about those two victories is the combined score. And, thanks goodness for Neate Sager of the CIS Blog, because he did just that earlier in the week.
And, again, thanks to Neate, who reminds us "Guelph ended up 4-4 with a first-round playoff loss the last time it started 3-0."Guelph last year beat the GTA teams by a combined 86 points last season, only by 26 this year!
If Guelph's a top-10 team in Canada it says more about the average-at-best quality of the majority of the OUA (see: Laurier's 46-1 loss; Queen's falling out of the top 10; Windsor, York and Toronto in general) than it does about Guelph's "undefeated" season thus far.
What we now know though four weeks of play in the OUA is that there is Western, Ottawa and everyone else. One of the following names simply doesn't have the ring of "national champion" and thus doesn't belong in the top 10 this week: Western, Ottawa, Guelph. I think the omission is obvious.
Yet there was Guelph, celebrating like it had won the Vanier Cup. When in reality, it barely won a football game against what has become an average football team.
Is the listing of Western before Ottawa simply an issue of closer in distance and thus first that comes to mind or, much like the OUA blog folks, do you also think that fewer penalty minutes somehow trumps a better record and a head-to-head victory?
Posted by: Basshat | 09/19/2010 at 05:47 PM
Sounds like the big man needs a really big tissue
Posted by: Jim Christie | 09/19/2010 at 08:52 PM
If the pain is met the truth, stick to the truth, you should consciously, then also cheerfully, pain will only then to happiness.Do you think so?
Posted by: Nike Shox Navina | 09/19/2010 at 08:57 PM
I wrote Western, Ottawa in that order as stream of consciousness. Please, read nothing into it (i.e. I'm not saying one is better than the other in this post). If for no other reason, I probably wrote it that way because Western is Guelph's next opponent.
Posted by: Greg Layson | 09/19/2010 at 09:06 PM
Such a good writing, or by I saw for the first time. I'm quite happy, you are a good writer
Posted by: Cheap Bikinis | 07/12/2011 at 03:33 AM
I BOUGHT THIS AFTER SEEING A LADY WEARING IT AT WORK...IT'S VERY WELL MADE AND SOLID, IT EVEN HAS A STAMP INSIDE WITH 925 THE NUMBERS FOR SILVER...I WEAR IT ALL THE TIME AND GET COMPLEMENTS ON IT...VERY NICE ACCESSORY.
Posted by: cheap tiffany | 08/25/2011 at 10:27 PM