Gator Country

grant1 · 01-04-2013, 12:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by acegator

I was going to be wondering for a while about what would have happened had we not fumbled the ball one last time against UGA and had a chance at Bama. Now I feel like we didn't miss out on much except an even worse butt kicking by Bama.

I totally disagree. Does anyone honestly think we would have played bammer with the same enthusiam as we did the angry birds? Plus, we would have matched up better with bammer than looeyville with their on-fire qb.

UL played in their most important game of their program. We played in maybe the 4th most important game of THIS SEASON!

Bushmaster · 01-04-2013, 12:54 PM

I think this team plays much differently in a SECCG with a berth in the BCSNCG at stake.

**OaktownGator** · 01-04-2013, 12:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bushmaster

I think this team plays much differently in a SECCG with a berth in the BCSNCG at stake.

I agree. Don't know if we'd beat Bama, but we'd have been focused and made it a game.

regator · 01-04-2013, 01:03 PM

The players and coches not taking it easy over the off season because they think we are good, maybe.

Recruits see an opportunity to play.

acegator · 01-04-2013, 01:03 PM

I agree our players as a whole would have been more motivated had we played Bama. Jeff had trouble reading defenses and hitting open receivers. Our OL couldn't block a much less talented DL. These are things we saw most of the year. Maybe I am wrong, but I just don't see it.

mac4lyfe · 01-04-2013, 01:15 PM

Our abortion of an offense has no business being on a national stage, especially a BCS bowl. Driskel is a poor college QB. Playing Bama wouldn't have changed anything, motivation or not.

regator · 01-04-2013, 01:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mac4lyfe

Our abortion of an offense has no business being on a national stage, especially a BCS bowl. Driskel is a poor college QB. Playing Bama wouldn't have changed anything, motivation or not.

This but with a softer delivery.

**regurgigator** · 01-04-2013, 01:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by acegator

I agree our players as a whole would have been more motivated had we played Bama. Jeff had trouble reading defenses and hitting open receivers. Our OL couldn't block a much less talented DL. These are things we saw most of the year. Maybe I am wrong, but I just don't see it.

Yes, this was exactly what we saw most of the year...as our team went 4-1 against Top 25 teams.

Yes, we have some flaws that made most of our games look pretty ugly even when we won, but the results ended up in victories over tough teams (and close victories over some not-so-tough teams) and the best resume in the country.

The outlier was the bowl game, and bowl games are often outliers in these match-ups between lower ranked teams who want to make their season and higher-ranked teams that just missed the big show and aren't as motivated by the prospects of a "big victory" over Louisville or whoever.

mac4lyfe · 01-04-2013, 01:36 PM

The first step in recovery is acknowledgement of the problem. Too many people are sugarcoating/hiding what every honest person can see the past 2 years.

Quote:

Originally Posted by regator

This but with a softer delivery.

GatorLaw · 01-04-2013, 01:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mac4lyfe

The first step in recovery is acknowledgement of the problem. Too many people are sugarcoating/hiding what every honest person can see the past 2 years.

O.K., I'll bite. What is that we can see the past 2 years that we're sugarcoating/hiding?

Dreamliner · 01-04-2013, 02:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ThePlayer

Best thing: Mohammad Ali needed something to ease his pain.

He would have gotten open vs. our defensive backs.

grant1 · 01-04-2013, 02:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mac4lyfe

The first step in recovery is acknowledgement of the problem. Too many people are sugarcoating/hiding what every honest person can see the past 2 years.

I guess you are in the "Muschamp is not the answer" crowd (of IMHO, idiots). I don't think there are too many people sugar coating anything of the last 3 years. WM inherited a broken program by the former staff's own admission. Anyone who believes turning around that overnight is not rational.

We have acknowledge the problem(s) of the last 2 years and they include new staff, Charlie Weiss (failed gamble), QB depth (Urban's fault), lack of WR playmakers (on Urban), OL, lack of depth (Urban, again), and so on.

This will be WM's 3rd year and burden will be shifting to him, but some fault still with the broken program that WM is rebuilding.

That said, WM is learning on the fly (or at least I hope that he is learning). He has said that we need more passing attack production.

**DuPontGator** · 01-04-2013, 02:29 PM

Insulting a whole group of people is so wrong.

mac4lyfe · 01-04-2013, 02:30 PM

Quarterback play or the lack thereof has damaged our offense. Everyone blames the Oline and the receivers but it always goes back to the QB. Everyone seems to want to deflect the real issue.

Bridgewater had less time to throw the other night then Driskel. He's just smart enough to get rid of the ball and move away from the rush. He threw the ball in tight spaces that only his WR could get to. He made several throws in the middle of the field where we had several defenders in coverage but he threw it to there opposite shoulder where they couldn't backtrack and get to it.

This is CFB, there's no such thing as having time to throw when teams this day and time have sophisticated blitz packages. You have to make a decision in about 1.5 seconds and everything is contingent on that decision. There's also no such thing as WR's being open. A quality QB has to put the ball in a spot that only his receiver can get to. Talk to anyone that knows football and if Driskel and Bridgewater changed jerseys. UF wins this game by 40 points. Blame everyone that you want to but facts/history tells otherwise. Just look at the Denver Broncos. The same Bronco's that people were saying had crappy receivers and poor lineman.

We have not put a premium on the most important position in football. Brantley and now Driskel weren't just bad, they were God awful in our systems. It could be an indictment on the system but I personally think neither guy had "it". Can Driskel get better? I don't think so in a pro set. He's better off in a spread attack where he doesn't have to go through a lot of progressions.

It seems like Brantley and now Driskel are privileged coaches kids that no matter how much they suck will continue to play. I can think of several games including Wednesday where I'm saying to myself that Driskel has to be benched. You can't honestly put him back out there? I can show you links from a couple gambling forums where guys thought Driskel was point shaving. They really couldn't get their heads around him being that bad.

Quote:

Originally Posted by GatorLaw

O.K., I'll bite. What is that we can see the past 2 years that we're sugarcoating/hiding?

mac4lyfe · 01-04-2013, 02:35 PM

I'm in the Muschamp camp. I think he has a lot to learn but he has done a good job thus far. The future is bright.

I am not in our QB camp. Our problem is at QB. Teams know that our QB can't make the throws to beat you so they focus on stacking the box, take away any run threat and wait for our QB to make a mistake.

The only reason we struggle against cupcakes is because we have a QB that can't throw the ball.

Quote:

Originally Posted by grant1

I guess you are in the "Muschamp is not the answer" crowd (of IMHO, idiots). I don't think there are too many people sugar coating anything of the last 3 years.

**OaktownGator** · 01-04-2013, 02:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mac4lyfe

Quarterback play or the lack thereof has damaged our offense. Everyone blames the Oline and the receivers but it always goes back to the QB. Everyone seems to want to deflect the real issue.

Bridgewater had less time to throw the other night then Driskel. He's just smart enough to get rid of the ball and move away from the rush. He threw the ball in tight spaces that only his WR could get to. He made several throws in the middle of the field where we had several defenders in coverage but he threw it to there opposite shoulder where they couldn't backtrack and get to it.

This is CFB, there's no such thing as having time to throw when teams this day and time have sophisticated blitz packages. You have to make a decision in about 1.5 seconds and everything is contingent on that decision. There's also no such thing as WR's being open. A quality QB has to put the ball in a spot that only his receiver can get to. Talk to anyone that knows football and if Driskel and Bridgewater changed jerseys. UF wins this game by 40 points. Blame everyone that you want to but facts/history tells otherwise. Just look at the Denver Broncos. The same Bronco's that people were saying had crappy receivers and poor lineman.

We have not put a premium on the most important position in football. Brantley and now Driskel weren't just bad, they were God awful in our systems. It could be an indictment on the system but I personally think neither guy had "it". Can Driskel get better? I don't think so in a pro set. He's better off in a spread attack where he doesn't have to go through a lot of progressions.

It seems like Brantley and now Driskel are privileged coaches kids that no matter how much they suck will continue to play. I can think of several games including Wednesday where I'm saying to myself that Driskel has to be benched. You can't honestly put him back out there? I can show you links from a couple gambling forums where guys thought Driskel was point shaving. They really couldn't get their heads around him being that bad.

I agree that if we switched QBs, we'd have won the bowl game... although not by 40 points.

This was effectively Driskel's first year playing. Most first year QBs tend have problems reading defenses and finding the open receiver. When their OL is porous, its just that much tougher. And Driskel is very raw as his HS offense didn't help develop him.

I think there should be open competition at QB for the coming season, and it wouldn't surprise me if another QB won an open competition, but I don't think anyone should write off Driskel. His relative lack of experience, combined with his physical talent, means he has a lot of upside.

mac4lyfe · 01-04-2013, 03:00 PM

^^ Once again, the priviledged coaches kid mentality. Making excuses for poor play. This is not Driskel's first year. He practiced and played last year. He's been in CFB the same amount of time as Bridgewater and an entire year more than Johnny Manziel but for some reason they can actually pass the ball while Driskel is taking WTH sacks. You can see a noticeable improvement by Manziel this year while Driskel seems to be clueless.

I hate to sound so negative because I truly like the kid and I want him to turn it around but I think he's made more for a spread offense. If we're going with a pro style then Driskel isn't our guy IMO.

orangeblueorangeblue · 01-04-2013, 03:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mac4lyfe

Bridgewater had less time to throw the other night then Driskel.

No.

orangeblueorangeblue · 01-04-2013, 03:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mac4lyfe

He's been in CFB the same amount of time as Bridgewater and an entire year more than Johnny Manziel but for some reason they can actually pass the ball while Driskel is taking WTH sacks.

You might want to check on both of these "facts" as well. Maziel is in his second year and while this is Bridgewater's second, he had 9 starts as a true freshman. Night and day.

mac4lyfe · 01-04-2013, 03:19 PM

So you give Bridgewater credit for more starts but discount Driskel playing last year versus being redshirted?

The only thing night and day is both of those guys play compared to JD.

Quote:

Originally Posted by orangeblueorangeblue

You might want to check on both of these "facts" as well. Maziel is in his second year and while this is Bridgewater's second, he had 9 starts as a true freshman. Night and day.