After watching South Carolina tonight...

#103
#103
GAMECOCK said:
The smartest post yet. USC had a couple of D breakdownqs.....lost the starting QB for a half in the first game of the season. Vandy is not that bad.....they have many returning players. Bottom line they won the game and are still leading the east and are in the top 10.:rock:
Click to expand...

Unless you had a WR that didn't play and Shaw is a much better passer than he showed, you are in for a long season. You do not have anyone who looks like a big play weapon. Even Lattimore looked like a grinder. When you play someone who has a decent O that can put up points... what you did vs Vandy won't work.

I actually didn't expect your D to look as bad as they did. Alot of Rogers' pressure was self-induced. Their OL did a pretty good job of creating and maintaining a pocket. Their relatively slow WR's were getting open but dropped balls all over the field. There were running lanes for Vandy's RB's. There are 7 QB's on your schedule better than Rogers and most of them have much better receivers.

The players you lost may well have been the difference between that 10-2 team and a 6-6 team. You had 4 games decided by less than a TD.
 
#106
#106
sjt18 said:
Unless you had a WR that didn't play and Shaw is a much better passer than he showed, you are in for a long season. You do not have anyone who looks like a big play weapon. Even Lattimore looked like a grinder. When you play someone who has a decent O that can put up points... what you did vs Vandy won't work.

I actually didn't expect your D to look as bad as they did. Alot of Rogers' pressure was self-induced. Their OL did a pretty good job of creating and maintaining a pocket. Their relatively slow WR's were getting open but dropped balls all over the field. There were running lanes for Vandy's RB's. There are 7 QB's on your schedule better than Rogers and most of them have much better receivers.

The players you lost may well have been the difference between that 10-2 team and a 6-6 team. You had 4 games decided by less than a TD.
Click to expand...

I have disagreed with you quite a bit about SC. You hit the nail on the head here.
 
#107
#107
GAMECOCK said:
The smartest post yet. USC had a couple of D breakdownqs.....lost the starting QB for a half in the first game of the season. Vandy is not that bad.....they have many returning players. Bottom line they won the game and are still leading the east and are in the top 10.:rock:
Click to expand...

USuC will be back to the bottom portion of the sec east before long. May even be behind Mizzou.
 
#109
#109
sjt18 said:
Unless you had a WR that didn't play and Shaw is a much better passer than he showed, you are in for a long season. You do not have anyone who looks like a big play weapon. Even Lattimore looked like a grinder. When you play someone who has a decent O that can put up points... what you did vs Vandy won't work.

I actually didn't expect your D to look as bad as they did. Alot of Rogers' pressure was self-induced. Their OL did a pretty good job of creating and maintaining a pocket. Their relatively slow WR's were getting open but dropped balls all over the field. There were running lanes for Vandy's RB's. There are 7 QB's on your schedule better than Rogers and most of them have much better receivers.

The players you lost may well have been the difference between that 10-2 team and a 6-6 team. You had 4 games decided by less than a TD.
Click to expand...

Agree, the game in Columbia is very much in play.
 
#111
#111
tim said:
Any news leaking out regarding Shaws shoulder?
Click to expand...

Nothing substantial. Shaw said in the post-game pressed that he would absolutely play against ECU. I take that as he feels just fine, but that's just me. Just because you feel fine doesn't mean you are fine.

All in all, we look like a seven or eight win team. I am so thankful we don't get UGA next week.
 
#113
#113
DjCrenshaw said:
And UGA could come out and suck just like USC did last night. Im still not sold on UGA either. In Richts type of offense he has to have a RB. That was their problem a couple years ago.
Click to expand...

We have some question marks, no doubt. I'm thrilled that Crowell's gone! Malcome, and Samuel have had some good carries. I really like Samuels toughness. He's not afraid of anything (thus the injury last season). Gurley and Marshall have both looked good in the spring. People are raving about Gurley's size and speed for a freshman. But until they get a few carries on gameday, you can just never tell. Our D should be solid, maybe one of the best, if not the best, we've ever had. We have good recievers and a proven QB. Whether or not everyone performs and stays healthy is anyone's guess. After all, they're very young men.
 
#114
#114
Not being a dick, truly wondering, who are the impact receivers other than King?
 
#115
#115
For those proxy whiners for Vandy not getting the INT call... if they catch half the passes they drop, that call doesn't matter.
 
#116
#116
005 said:
Not being a dick, truly wondering, who are the impact receivers other than King?
Click to expand...

Bulldog Receivers See Improvement, Look For More - The University of Georgia Bulldogs

We're not gonna be lining up many household names. We've got some guys who have worked hard and are "lunchpail" types. We'll see how they work out but Murray seems to like 'em. I think Conley's the guy who's in for a breakthrough year. Mitchell will get some work both ways. Out of 7 returners and 5 freshmen, hopefully we can find some guys who can run their routes and make catches. We've recruited pretty well the past few years. Hopefully it'll pay off one of these days.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top