Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'RayGator's Swamp Gas' started by HisDoc, Sep 1, 2013.
Old guys rule.
The label is ridiculous anyway. An ESPN invention mostly. If a HS QB plays in a system that uses the QB as a dual threat he's a dual threat QB. IF he plays in a system where he runs 10 times a season, he's not a dual threat QB.
Too bad the NE Patriots don't run a dual threat system.
By what measure?
Totally. No way he sticks. I think you hit the nail on the head. If we don't pass it 60 times a game we'll never get the top receiver recruits like Demarcus Robinson, Ahmad Fullwood, Alvin Bailey, Ermon Lane, etc. if Alabama doesn't start throwing the ball more they'll probably lose Amari Cooper too. I don't see us winning another game this year with this ball control, play not to lose offense. I tell you, I just don't think Boom knows what he's doing, and I think that reflects on Foley too. It's time to clean house, from top to bottom. Maybe self-impose probation too. It's the only way we're ever going to get our players to stop smoking weed and going to bars and clubs.
No, you (not you) get jumped on for saying that we don't have a good team or coach when the facts clearly indicate otherwise. You'd think we went 7-6 last year the way people talk around here.
Good stuff! A little sarcasm for the "sky is falling" crowd.
No doubt. There is more than one way to have an exciting offense. But for my money, I thought imposing our will on LSU in the fourth quarter last year was exciting, as were big plays by Hammond and Burton against Tennessee, Driskel's big runs against Vandy or salting away A&M, turning over SC and scoring 7s off those turnovers, and Gillislee and Jones ripping off long runs to beat FSU. There are lots of ways to be exciting, but it seems often that only deep passes qualify on these boards, especially against inferior opponents.
But I agree that in the end it comes down to playmakers, as it did when Meyer was here. The better the playmaker, the higher volume of big plays, especially in the run and short pass games. Yesterday, we had our best offensive playmaker (Jones) on the sideline. Hopefully, getting him back helps matters.
You extrapolated the second paragraph from the first? You are being facetious, right?
"I think they [UF] could have played better than they did." Says nothing about offense
"They didn't play a top team" Says nothing again about the offense let alone throwing deep
" I think we could have done better." Implies that either A) he already considers himself part of the team, or B) he intends to help the team play better
"I think they will pick it up as the season goes on." Expresses optimism that whatever the unspecified problem is will improve
Unless there are some quotes missing, I saw nothing about the offense, nothing about the passing game, nothing about the deep ball, and nothing leading me to believe he would reconsider his commitment.
Sorry, but I'm not buying the "we took what the defense gave us and that's why we didn't throw vertically". We've heard that for 2 years.
We had 3rd and 11. The play we ran? A 4 yard pass to Burton, who picked up 6 more yards, still a yard short.
Under Spurrier, Zook, Meyer, a 3rd and 11 under MOST situations would call for an 11 yard or more play.
I think we have NO confidence in our passing game. And if Toledo was playing us to "not get beat over the top", please tell me how our SEC or ACC foes will play us differently.
We run, run, then pass if we have to (3rd and 5 or more). Hoping this was an aberration, but I'm pretty sure it is just who we are: very, very boring. We ran on 69% of our plays on Sat. And I know "boring" won us 11 games last year. I hope it wins us 13 or 14 this year. But that is who we are.
I'd love to eat my words after next week's game in Miami. e ran on 69% of our plays on Sat.
Calm down you prima donna.....
Calm down you prima donna, if you think he is talking about the defense then you need to lay off the pipe.
You do not think he saw the same game we all saw? I do not know how long the sales pitch "we need WR like you to get downfield" will sell top WR to come play at Florida, when your not attempting to do it. Come play for Florida where you can................................. Block???
The day our “conservative" offense costs us a game, I'll consider joining you guys. However until then I'm confident that the offense we run is that which is in the best interest of generating wins. I really don't think other teams want to play us and it's not just because of our D.
It did... Georgia, Louisville... No explosive plays to take control of the game. I think your right about teams not wanting to play us, but they know if they can stay within arms reach or get a good enough lead, well then it will be hard for Florida to come back.
I really don't think we lost to Louisville or Georgia because we played too conservative on offense.
it didn't cost us UGA game, 6 turnovers cost us that game.
but it was the same offense that won all those other games last year too
If we continue to win Boom will be here for a long time. If we can't get to the top of the heap it will be because he won't budge on passing the ball, or because we don't have the ability/talent to do it correctly. Based on recruiting results we should have the talent. So...
Bama has a supporting cast of players that show up, are the best at what they do and don't say a word. If we end up with those kind of players then his strategy will eventually work- seeing he is part of that coaching lineage and temperament. MHOFWIW!
OMG, you are relentless.. You have got to be paid to do this.
Or maybe you need to stop making unsubstantiated inferences to prove a point. Your interpretation of the Lane's comments has nothing to do with what he actually said and everything to do with what you want him to say so as to criticize the play calling. Now, you may be right. He could have meant everything you said. But he didn't say it and there is no way to get to your interpretation from what he said.
Or how about "come play at Florida where...you are a better deep threat than what we have on campus and could actually get some separation from defensive backs." We've heard the same crap since Zaunbrecher arrived. How will we ever recruit good receivers unless we throw it down the field more? Yet we keep recruiting good receivers and they keep getting to the NFL.
You have a pretty short memory if it is only two years. We heard the same thing since Spurrier left, mostly because none of the subsequent offensive coordinators run multiple vertical schemes that were willing to throw into umbrella coverage. And, for the record, most teams nationally or in the NFL do the same thing as our last six offensive coordinators.
How do you know which play we ran? All you know is which throw was made, which often times is a checkdown because the route we wanted wasn't available. You guys seriously think coaches are stupid if you believe they intentionally call a play short of the sticks, unless they decide to run the ball. That is about the only time that happens.
Well, if they aren't worried about getting beat, then they will not run umbrella coverages and thus give us an opportunity to beat them deep. If they are worried about getting beat, then they will probably run the same sorts of things.
I saw plenty of things that weren't "boring," including a ton of 10+ yard runs by several different backs, the jet to Patton that almost scored, a couple of nice intermediate routes to Burton in the seems of the zone, a variety of plays called for Showers that netted good yardage, some outstanding screens, and plenty of shifts, formations, and personnel groupings. Unfortunately, unless you are throwing vertical routes to wide receivers, it is "boring."
For the life of me, I don't know when that word became the worst epithet in the football lexicon for a offense.