Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
On Twitter: TerpsInsider and PostSports  |  Facebook  |  E-mail alerts: Redskins and Sports  |  RSS

Ralph: We Need More than 14 Points

I just listened to the ACC teleconference with Ralph Friedgen. He was pressed by one reporter on how his team can possibly beat Cal after losing to a Sun Belt team. Ralph said the Terps need to score more than 14 points to have a chance to win. That would seem obvious, particularly because Cal is averaging 52 points per game and it will be difficult to keep the Golden Bears to fewer than 30 points. In two games combined, Maryland has 28 points. Cal scored 66 in a conference road game last week.

Ralph repeated that he thought Maryland missed some opportunities to score against Middle Tennessee. He said they didn’t throw or catch the ball very well.

How many points does Maryland need to beat Cal? I’ll say at least 35.

By Eric Prisbell  |  September 10, 2008; 11:38 AM ET
Categories:  Football  | Tags: Ralph Friedgen  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Franklin on Final Drive of First Half
Next: Cal QB Knows How Chris Turner Feels


I think 29 should do it. This is from a finite number of points being scored in the game will be around 60 with both teams scoring and running the ball a lot. So lets say thats a 29-28 Terps win. Every point less the Terps score Cal will score a point more. 55-3 or 49-10 also a possibility...

Posted by: Lee | September 10, 2008 11:52 AM | Report abuse

One more than Cal has will be all it takes!! :-) Go Terps!!!

Posted by: TerpGrad | September 10, 2008 12:03 PM | Report abuse

At least 24.

My guess is we put a lot in the box, pressure them to pass the ball, and hope that our linebackers and secondary can make a lot of plays. We can't let them beat us running the ball, and we can't give them a lot of time to pass. No pressure, no win.

Posted by: ckstevenson | September 10, 2008 12:22 PM | Report abuse


Posted by: Sam | September 10, 2008 12:53 PM | Report abuse

67 should do it.

Posted by: Markc | September 10, 2008 3:53 PM | Report abuse

Dunno why, but I think 31.

Posted by: Lindemann | September 10, 2008 9:08 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company