Recruiting Forum Football Talk XXXVI

Status
Not open for further replies.
#501
#501
volatil said:
Dang dude save some piss and vinegar for actual losses.

You have to pace yourself. Don't burn out early.
Click to expand...

He can't save it for losses, because when that happens, he is looking at some type of positive which is the minority amongst everyone complaining in here about the loss.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#502
#502
BigZiti09 said:
I think the defensive game plan was horrible. That doesn't mean it will be that way each week for the rest of the season.

Your argument about App state has zero merit. Defense played great that game and the offense stalled. We also went on to blast Florida after that and beat UGA as well. Went toe to toe with top 10 Texas A&M before losing in overtime. The app state argument is beyond dumb.
Click to expand...

The Appy state game showed us the team was careless with the ball. Cough cough Texas A&M. And didn't prepare for games well. Cough cough USCe.

2 losses that could be seen coming from a mile away.
 
#505
#505
Last edited:
#507
#507
BruinVol said:
The Appy state game showed us the team was careless with the ball. Cough cough Texas A&M. And didn't prepare for games well. Cough cough USCe.

2 losses that could be seen coming from a mile away.
Click to expand...
Interesting.

So if you could see those losses coming from a mile away and the reason we lost, let's get it on the record what games we will lose this year and the reasons after week 1.

Don't just blow hot air, back it up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#508
#508
BruinVol said:
Same argument said last year after Appy State. It came back to bite us.

Also color me shocked that this board all off season said Ga tech offense is easily prepared for with plenty of time it's those teams that only have 1 week to prepare that struggle. Shocked that has changed now
Click to expand...

Then even more players would've been tired. The defense was on the field for 3/4 of the game. Part of that is on the offense. Part of that is on the defense. Part of that is on the coaches. Part of that is playing a gimmick offense led by a coach that knows how to throw off a defense that isnt used to defending that gimmick offense.

We took 70 players on the travel roster. If you take out offense and special teams, that leaves about 30 guys on defense. Now take out the ones they are trying to red shirt or are banged up and they were only going to play if injuries piled up and you are left with about 25 guys. If you look at the participation roster, that's about how many played. If they all played equal minutes, that is still 20 minutes each in a hot closed dome stadium against a grinding physical offense that runs the ball 90% of the time.

THEY WERE ALL GASSED! GET OVER IT!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#509
#509
volfanngatorland said:
Interesting.

So if you could see those losses coming from a mile away and the reason we lost, let's get it on the record what games we will lose this year and the reasons after week 1.

Don't just blow hot air, back it up.
Click to expand...

Georgia, Florida, Bama and lsu.

Won't shock me at all if we lose to Vandy, South Carolina, Mizzu or Kentucky to go 7-5
 
#510
#510
I will sadly and unfortunately agree with Bruin about one thing... outside of a handful of players, I felt like we looked extremely soft Monday night. They were easily the more physical team all night long, and they looked to hit us hard no matter what side of the ball they were on. Because the game plan was so conservative, I am hoping that made our defensive players play tentative which caused the softness. I am not going to fully judge them based off of one game, but if this continues over the next couple games, I will be extremely concerned.
 
#511
#511
I went and watched a little of Clemson's game with GT last year and they were not playing a yard off the Los.
 
#513
#513
dyllisvol42 said:
If his ass was a football I bet you would kick it. No one care if you were right. God forbid he didn't play in the first game after switching positions. Maybe his offensive coordinator, you know the one who coached with the patriots thought he would make a good receiver.
Click to expand...

He was an unbelievable WR in HS
 
#519
#519
volatil said:
Probably had depth at DT
Click to expand...

I'm sure they did but giving the opponent a 1 yard running start was not a game plan that I think would work. I don't see having less depth means sacrificing the ones you have. Think Shoop's inexperience with this offense showed and I'm not sure he sought help outside the program. The strategy was pathetic but that's JMO.
 
#523
#523
InVOLuntary said:
I'm sure they did but giving the opponent a 1 yard running start was not a game plan that I think would work. I don't see having less depth means sacrificing the ones you have. Think Shoop's inexperience with this offense showed and I'm not sure he sought help outside the program. The strategy was pathetic but that's JMO.
Click to expand...

I understand wanting to avoid the chop blocks but I say go low on them before they can go low on you. Crowd the line and take out their blockers before they can take you out. Then there isn't anybody but their backs and our LBs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#524
#524
volfanngatorland said:
What about the D? Don't waffle now Bruin. You made the statement, now put it on paper.
Click to expand...

Seriously?
Already been said


Bad leader in Shoop
Soft soft soft
Zero depth on the DL
Bunch of 4/5 stars underperforming
LBs aren't up to par
Only one safety worth a damn
No "attitude"
No confidence
Bad leader in shoop
 
New posts
Status
Not open for further replies.

VN Store



Back
Top