Free Trial Ad
Why Subscribe?
  • Player/Prospect News
  • Exclusive Insider Info
  • Members-Only Forums
  • Exclusive Videos
  • Subscribe Now!
InboxChat RoomChat Room (0 fans in chatroom)
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
  Page of 2  Next >

So are we better?

Posted: 8/30/2014 10:21 PM

So are we better? 


I would have to say yes. Very tough opener and the Nick Marshall suspension did nothing but help the team that didn't need any. Preparing for him is challenge enough but preparing for him and another one that passes better is really tough. But I'm not sure we can tie the game before half last year. It may have been over by halftime. 45-21 doesn't seem like much improvement but all things considered the 45 is sadly reminiscent of last year (and the year before and the year before..) but last year under the same conditions we maybe score once, and that would probably be at the end of the game when they have their 3rd string in.
And I'll add I think we would have faired much better opening against LSU or 'bama.
Ok that's all the lemonade I can make out of that.
"There is one proven method for assuring success and eliminating frustration: Lower your expectations."
Reply | Quote

Posted: 8/30/2014 10:31 PM

Re: So are we better? 


I was disappointed with the way our O-line didn't respond to adjustments in the 2nd half.  Auburn decided to dominate the LOS, and we didn't do anything to stop it.  That said, I do think we improved on that side of the ball.

I thought our defense was a little better than last year, but I was disappointed.  Defending against a read-option is assignment football.  We didn't maintain our areas of responsibility.  We are also too weak.  Our tacklers bounced off too many ball carriers.  This side of the ball has been ignored for too long, and we just don't have the physical ability to compete.  At least not yet.
"A hippie is someone who looks like Tarzan, walks like Jane and smells like Cheetah."  --  Ronald Reagan

Last edited 8/30/2014 10:32 PM by MultipleScoreGasms

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/30/2014 10:35 PM

Re: So are we better? 


I think you hit the nail on the head with the half time adjustments.  The opening possessions for both teams after the half sort of set the tone for the game.

In defense of our coaching staff, I do think they had a plan to win and outcoached Gus in the first half.  I don't know how much of the failure to adjust was coaching, the environment, or lack of depth.

MultipleScoreGasms wrote: I was disappointed with the way our O-line didn't respond to adjustments in the 2nd half.  Auburn decided to dominate the LOS, and we didn't do anything to stop it.  That said, I do think we improved on that side of the ball.

I thought our defense was a little better than last year, but I was disappointed.  Defending against a read-option is assignment football.  We didn't maintain our areas of responsibility.  We are also too weak.  Our tacklers bounced off too many ball carriers.  This side of the ball has been ignored for too long, and we just don't have the physical ability to compete.
...her words are best taken with "the usual reservations with which we might sip a patent medicine. Some may like the flavor...but it is not a cure.... Nor would we, ordinarily, place much confidence in the diagnosis of a doctor who supposes that the Hippocratic Oath is a kind of curse."
Reply | Quote

Posted: 8/31/2014 12:07 AM

Re: So are we better? 


I agree with all that but the halftime adjustments by Auburn consisted of bringing in a probable Heisman favorite after the defense was beginning to adjust to the offense without him pretty well. Again, a very hard assignment. Just for the sake of argument I'll subject that if Marshall played the whole game and we only prepared for him our containment on the reads would have been better and possibly we hold them to 35 or so and conceivably lose a two score game, 35-24 or so.
Lots of conjecture in that I know. It is also conceivable that with Marshall in the whole game they wear us out and hang 60. But the improvements I saw today makes me lean toward the former. Either that or I'm still squeezing a little juice out of those lemons yet...
"There is one proven method for assuring success and eliminating frustration: Lower your expectations."
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/31/2014 1:59 AM

Re: So are we better? 


I agree that the Auburn QB was important to the effort in the second half, but the starter had the announcers talking about moving the toker to H-back or running back. I don't know where Auburn is finding this type of QB, but we would do well to find out.

I was thinking more of Auburn's defensive adjustments, but then again, Auburn didn't defend the same play calling in the running game that we ran so successfully in the first half. (Since our staff spent halftime in the elevator, doing exactly the same thing might have been the way to go).

Shouldn't you remain committed to something until the defense proves they can stop it?  We were running traps and counter plays that gave the line time to move somebody and our running backs time to find the hole.

By the way, I know we all have a love affair with the the three headed monster of Arkansas' run game, and keeping a fresh back and utilizing their different styles IS important, but Alex Collins was rated as on of the top running backs in the entire world when he chose the Razorbacks on national TV.  We need to let him get his first, and I think the team will benefit.

At one point in the third quarter, he had 6 carries for 56 yards, with no long plays to inflate that statistic. He runs best when the defense is on it heels.

Use Williams to pound and use Marshall like Felix Jones, with sweeps, reverses, etc.  I do not agree with having only one in the game at any given time
..  They are toooooo gifted.



squirrelhog wrote: I agree with all that but the halftime adjustments by Auburn consisted of bringing in a probable Heisman favorite after the defense was beginning to adjust to the offense without him pretty well. Again, a very hard assignment. Just for the sake of argument I'll subject that if Marshall played the whole game and we only prepared for him our containment on the reads would have been better and possibly we hold them to 35 or so and conceivably lose a two score game, 35-24 or so.
Lots of conjecture in that I know. It is also conceivable that with Marshall in the whole game they wear us out and hang 60. But the improvements I saw today makes me lean toward the former. Either that or I'm still squeezing a little juice out of those lemons yet...
...her words are best taken with "the usual reservations with which we might sip a patent medicine. Some may like the flavor...but it is not a cure.... Nor would we, ordinarily, place much confidence in the diagnosis of a doctor who supposes that the Hippocratic Oath is a kind of curse."
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/31/2014 7:05 AM

Re: So are we better? 


I think Nostra said it correct in another post.
I'll put it in my own words. Arkansas offensively made better improvement physically than LSU and Bama. Defense is a push ref improvement. Arkansas is still lacking in critical areas.


Our secondary is faster, but feeble. LB as a squad might never get there. Running backs have great talent, but we have no supporting cast out of the WR core to help our running game later in the game. That's when you really want the running game (YES WE WANT TO ABLE TO RUN THE WHOLE GAME). Our WR are the worst in several decades." We're in great shape in with the TE's and yes, B. Allen didn't hurt our team. He played solid. PROBLEM, I suspect AB isn't very savvy on audibles or isn't allowed to call them at will and that was the factor in the second half (on the field adjustments). AUBURN brought the horses the second half.

Overall, the ending results of the game finished as I suspected it would. Arkansas went into the licked room happy, Auburn went in at half frustrated and was able to overcome.

* Marshall need to play as a WR.

BHH,
Where I come from, you wear your team colors when supporting your team.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 8/31/2014 7:35 AM

yeah, sorta 


CBB choose to NOT come in and win a few games............

He decided to build bottom up.

In the long run that will pay off in a big way.

Recruiting is much better than anytime I remember.  But they have to grow up, given time to mature in the system. 

You could see we played better.......but we are not there yet.  But we are getting there.................................
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"Don't quit, don't quit, don't quit, if the STARS FALL FROM HEAVEN, DON'T QUIT"

 

 

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/31/2014 7:48 AM

Re: So are we better? 


Checked the score again just to be sure. We didn't win. Therefore no improvement. Do or do not. There is no try.

Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.

Albert Einstein

Reply | Quote

Posted: 8/31/2014 8:39 AM

I know everyone is waiting, so here it is 


QB - a little better than last year. He is making better decisions. I question his arm strength. I don't blame him for the int, but several times yesterday he looked at his receiver and waited until he came out of the break and was covered before he threw, luckily AUB's DB's might be worse than ours.

RB - Collins looks improved, confused as to why we quit giving it to him. Williams seemed a little slow. Seemed like CBB wanted to prove Marshall was the best RB. Think the kids a good player, but Collins is the best and we may have to ride him.

TE - Derby is much better than I expected. HH looked like he may have gotten injured. He came back in and got tossed out of the way (unusual) then on the next play Derby whiffed his block on the int. Not sure if it was by design or not. Him and Henry looked to be injured/tired at the end of the game.

WR - we need some.

OL - I think this was a major issue in the tide turning. 1st half we were killing guys, I don't know what happened, but when AUB's D "stepped" up I noticed Tretola and Jefferson in the game. They weren't in during the first half. I don't want to blame them, but they were the only difference I saw. Jefferson wasn't in that long, but Tretola finished the game. Was there an injury I missed?

DL- we are worse. What I was concerned about before the game happened. Last year, Smith took double teams. This allowed both Philon and Flowers to be 1 on 1. This year both guys were doubled and no one else could beat their 1 on 1 match ups. Luckily we got a few DL studs coming in.

LB - Ellis is a stud.

DB's - I believe they may have actually got worse.

As CBB said in his presser we had a good half and a bad half. Hopefully we can play more of the good half.


---------------------------------------------
--- squirrelhog wrote:

I would have to say yes. Very tough opener and the Nick Marshall suspension did nothing but help the team that didn't need any. Preparing for him is challenge enough but preparing for him and another one that passes better is really tough. But I'm not sure we can tie the game before half last year. It may have been over by halftime. 45-21 doesn't seem like much improvement but all things considered the 45 is sadly reminiscent of last year (and the year before and the year before..) but last year under the same conditions we maybe score once, and that would probably be at the end of the game when they have their 3rd string in.
And I'll add I think we would have faired much better opening against LSU or 'bama.
Ok that's all the lemonade I can make out of that.

---------------------------------------------

Last edited 8/31/2014 8:42 AM by bakedog19741

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/31/2014 8:57 AM

Re: So are we better? 


I haven't seen anybody mention this yet, but some of our assistant coaches were trapped in an elevator at halftime and unable to get to the locker room.  They communicated by cell phone. 

That being said, I still think this is a 6-6 team.  7 with a minor bowl 'W'.  I didn't have aubie on the 'W' side of the ledger to achieve that.  I did, however, have aTm.  I may have to rethink that.






"The Bigger They Are The Harder We Call"
Reply | Quote

Posted: 8/31/2014 9:02 AM

Re: So are we better? 


I'm not sure the elevator was that big of a deal. JMO

aTm looked like the best team in college football so far this weekend. I have to wonder, however how much of it was their improvement, and how much was USCe getting significantly worse. I had AUB and aTm as wins. After watching TT and LSWhoo, I think we have a shot.


---------------------------------------------
--- LongtimeHogfan wrote:

I haven't seen anybody mention this yet, but some of our assistant coaches were trapped in an elevator at halftime and unable to get to the locker room.  They communicated by cell phone. 

That being said, I still think this is a 6-6 team.  7 with a minor bowl 'W'.  I didn't have aubie on the 'W' side of the ledger to achieve that.  I did, however, have aTm.  I may have to rethink that.

---------------------------------------------
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/31/2014 9:13 AM

Re: So are we better? 


Yeah, it probably doesn't really matter having your position coach/coordinator standing there telling you to your face what he want you to do this time while drawing on a whiteboard.  I'm sure nothing ever gets lost in translation over the phone.

I wonder too, is aTm that much better (doubt) or is SC really missing Clowney/Shaw/and company that much?  I am thinking the latter...

bakedog19741 wrote: I'm not sure the elevator was that big of a deal. JMO

aTm looked like the best team in college football so far this weekend. I have to wonder, however how much of it was their improvement, and how much was USCe getting significantly worse. I had AUB and aTm as wins. After watching TT and LSWhoo, I think we have a shot.


---------------------------------------------
--- LongtimeHogfan wrote:

I haven't seen anybody mention this yet, but some of our assistant coaches were trapped in an elevator at halftime and unable to get to the locker room.  They communicated by cell phone. 

That being said, I still think this is a 6-6 team.  7 with a minor bowl 'W'.  I didn't have aubie on the 'W' side of the ledger to achieve that.  I did, however, have aTm.  I may have to rethink that.

---------------------------------------------
Keep a light on some patrols are still out! - RIP over50hog
Reply | Quote

Posted: 8/31/2014 9:18 AM

Re: So are we better? 


I saw Smith and Shannon on the sideline. I bet Chaney was there to. I'm sure those assts on the phone to the OC and DC wasn't that big of an issue. They were communicating with them the entire 1st half over headsets. I'm sure the players got the right message, unless you're saying I'm right (which you probably are) and our coaching staff isn't that good and needs to get replaced;)


---------------------------------------------
--- HawgnDos wrote:

Yeah, it probably doesn't really matter having your position coach/coordinator standing there telling you to your face what he want you to do this time while drawing on a whiteboard.  I'm sure nothing ever gets lost in translation over the phone.

I wonder too, is aTm that much better (doubt) or is SC really missing Clowney/Shaw/and company that much?  I am thinking the latter...

bakedog19741 wrote: I'm not sure the elevator was that big of a deal. JMO

aTm looked like the best team in college football so far this weekend. I have to wonder, however how much of it was their improvement, and how much was USCe getting significantly worse. I had AUB and aTm as wins. After watching TT and LSWhoo, I think we have a shot.


---------------------------------------------
--- LongtimeHogfan wrote:

I haven't seen anybody mention this yet, but some of our assistant coaches were trapped in an elevator at halftime and unable to get to the locker room.  They communicated by cell phone. 

That being said, I still think this is a 6-6 team.  7 with a minor bowl 'W'.  I didn't have aubie on the 'W' side of the ledger to achieve that.  I did, however, have aTm.  I may have to rethink that.

---------------------------------------------


---------------------------------------------
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/31/2014 9:31 AM

Re: So are we better? 


I saw a great deal of improvement in this team over last years version.  However, what I do not see is depth, and that will take some time.  The good thing is that it appears we are building well.  The freshmen and sophomores that are playing are doing pretty well.
Yesterday's game was a good one to start the season with.  A Top 10 opponent that was a NC recently, to play them even for the first half was a good thing.  It doesn't count on the scoreboard but is certainly better than being behind all the way through.

Things I liked:

The rotation of Williams, Collins, and Marshall. Seemed to keep each in long enough to get some flow of the game but out enough to keep fresh.
The O-line play in the first half.  Those guys were beast.  Not sure what happened in the second half.  Whatever Gus's DC said to them worked.
The pass plays called.  Demetrius Wilson and Cody Hollister looked good.

Things I didn't like:

The dropped passes. If you are going to be called a WR then you have to catch that thing when it hits your hands....every time!
The lack of passes to Hollister.
The O-line play in the second half.  Enuff said...
We are clearly missing Zach Hocker in a big way.  Only if your kicker is injured should you punt from their 36 and 34 yard lines.
Keep a light on some patrols are still out! - RIP over50hog
Reply | Quote

Posted: 8/31/2014 9:33 AM

Re: So are we better? 


I agree with the kicker statement and I'm confused wasnt Hedlund kicking 50+ in High School?


---------------------------------------------
--- HawgnDos wrote:

I saw a great deal of improvement in this team over last years version.  However, what I do not see is depth, and that will take some time.  The good thing is that it appears we are building well.  The freshmen and sophomores that are playing are doing pretty well.
Yesterday's game was a good one to start the season with.  A Top 10 opponent that was a NC recently, to play them even for the first half was a good thing.  It doesn't count on the scoreboard but is certainly better than being behind all the way through.

Things I liked:

The rotation of Williams, Collins, and Marshall. Seemed to keep each in long enough to get some flow of the game but out enough to keep fresh.
The O-line play in the first half.  Those guys were beast.  Not sure what happened in the second half.  Whatever Gus's DC said to them worked.
The pass plays called.  Demetrius Wilson and Cody Hollister looked good.

Things I didn't like:

The dropped passes. If you are going to be called a WR then you have to catch that thing when it hits your hands....every time!
The lack of passes to Hollister.
The O-line play in the second half.  Enuff said...
We are clearly missing Zach Hocker in a big way.  Only if your kicker is injured should you punt from their 36 and 34 yard lines.

---------------------------------------------
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/31/2014 9:39 AM

Re: So are we better? 


Oh, I'll be sure to tell you when/if that happens.  But back on point, we all know that the coaches in the box are important as the "eyes in the sky".  They have a much better view of what happened on each play and therefore can better critique who/what/where assignments next time.  Obviously it is easier to show that via picture or diagram than over a cell phone.  "Tell Bubba he's supposed to be over there about 3 feet to the left...no his other left..."  cool

bakedog19741 wrote: I saw Smith and Shannon on the sideline. I bet Chaney was there to. I'm sure those assts on the phone to the OC and DC wasn't that big of an issue. They were communicating with them the entire 1st half over headsets. I'm sure the players got the right message, unless you're saying I'm right (which you probably are) and our coaching staff isn't that good and needs to get replaced;)


---------------------------------------------
--- HawgnDos wrote:

Yeah, it probably doesn't really matter having your position coach/coordinator standing there telling you to your face what he want you to do this time while drawing on a whiteboard.  I'm sure nothing ever gets lost in translation over the phone.

I wonder too, is aTm that much better (doubt) or is SC really missing Clowney/Shaw/and company that much?  I am thinking the latter...

bakedog19741 wrote: I'm not sure the elevator was that big of a deal. JMO

aTm looked like the best team in college football so far this weekend. I have to wonder, however how much of it was their improvement, and how much was USCe getting significantly worse. I had AUB and aTm as wins. After watching TT and LSWhoo, I think we have a shot.


---------------------------------------------
--- LongtimeHogfan wrote:

I haven't seen anybody mention this yet, but some of our assistant coaches were trapped in an elevator at halftime and unable to get to the locker room.  They communicated by cell phone. 

That being said, I still think this is a 6-6 team.  7 with a minor bowl 'W'.  I didn't have aubie on the 'W' side of the ledger to achieve that.  I did, however, have aTm.  I may have to rethink that.

---------------------------------------------


---------------------------------------------
Keep a light on some patrols are still out! - RIP over50hog
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/31/2014 9:41 AM

Re: So are we better? 


I don't recall. I will look into it. I seem to remember that he rarely missed and that was one reason why he was the best kicker.
bakedog19741 wrote: I agree with the kicker statement and I'm confused wasnt Hedlund kicking 50+ in High School?


---------------------------------------------
--- HawgnDos wrote:

I saw a great deal of improvement in this team over last years version.  However, what I do not see is depth, and that will take some time.  The good thing is that it appears we are building well.  The freshmen and sophomores that are playing are doing pretty well.
Yesterday's game was a good one to start the season with.  A Top 10 opponent that was a NC recently, to play them even for the first half was a good thing.  It doesn't count on the scoreboard but is certainly better than being behind all the way through.

Things I liked:

The rotation of Williams, Collins, and Marshall. Seemed to keep each in long enough to get some flow of the game but out enough to keep fresh.
The O-line play in the first half.  Those guys were beast.  Not sure what happened in the second half.  Whatever Gus's DC said to them worked.
The pass plays called.  Demetrius Wilson and Cody Hollister looked good.

Things I didn't like:

The dropped passes. If you are going to be called a WR then you have to catch that thing when it hits your hands....every time!
The lack of passes to Hollister.
The O-line play in the second half.  Enuff said...
We are clearly missing Zach Hocker in a big way.  Only if your kicker is injured should you punt from their 36 and 34 yard lines.

---------------------------------------------
Keep a light on some patrols are still out! - RIP over50hog
Reply | Quote

Posted: 8/31/2014 9:43 AM

Re: So are we better? 



I had to look it up, he was 23-28 (23 kicks is a record for HS kickers in a season). 72-74 XP. His longest kick was from 42. So that could explain why he wasn't attempting 50+ yesterday. May not have the leg strength.

---------------------------------------------
--- HawgnDos wrote:

I don't recall. I will look into it. I seem to remember that he rarely missed and that was one reason why he was the best kicker.
bakedog19741 wrote: I agree with the kicker statement and I'm confused wasnt Hedlund kicking 50+ in High School?


---------------------------------------------
--- HawgnDos wrote:

I saw a great deal of improvement in this team over last years version.  However, what I do not see is depth, and that will take some time.  The good thing is that it appears we are building well.  The freshmen and sophomores that are playing are doing pretty well.
Yesterday's game was a good one to start the season with.  A Top 10 opponent that was a NC recently, to play them even for the first half was a good thing.  It doesn't count on the scoreboard but is certainly better than being behind all the way through.

Things I liked:

The rotation of Williams, Collins, and Marshall. Seemed to keep each in long enough to get some flow of the game but out enough to keep fresh.
The O-line play in the first half.  Those guys were beast.  Not sure what happened in the second half.  Whatever Gus's DC said to them worked.
The pass plays called.  Demetrius Wilson and Cody Hollister looked good.

Things I didn't like:

The dropped passes. If you are going to be called a WR then you have to catch that thing when it hits your hands....every time!
The lack of passes to Hollister.
The O-line play in the second half.  Enuff said...
We are clearly missing Zach Hocker in a big way.  Only if your kicker is injured should you punt from their 36 and 34 yard lines.

---------------------------------------------


---------------------------------------------
Reply | Quote

Posted: 8/31/2014 9:45 AM

Re: So are we better? 


Are you saying our players can't tell right from left? That might be the issue


---------------------------------------------
--- HawgnDos wrote:

Oh, I'll be sure to tell you when/if that happens.  But back on point, we all know that the coaches in the box are important as the "eyes in the sky".  They have a much better view of what happened on each play and therefore can better critique who/what/where assignments next time.  Obviously it is easier to show that via picture or diagram than over a cell phone.  "Tell Bubba he's supposed to be over there about 3 feet to the left...no his other left..."  cool

bakedog19741 wrote: I saw Smith and Shannon on the sideline. I bet Chaney was there to. I'm sure those assts on the phone to the OC and DC wasn't that big of an issue. They were communicating with them the entire 1st half over headsets. I'm sure the players got the right message, unless you're saying I'm right (which you probably are) and our coaching staff isn't that good and needs to get replaced;)


---------------------------------------------
--- HawgnDos wrote:

Yeah, it probably doesn't really matter having your position coach/coordinator standing there telling you to your face what he want you to do this time while drawing on a whiteboard.  I'm sure nothing ever gets lost in translation over the phone.

I wonder too, is aTm that much better (doubt) or is SC really missing Clowney/Shaw/and company that much?  I am thinking the latter...

bakedog19741 wrote: I'm not sure the elevator was that big of a deal. JMO

aTm looked like the best team in college football so far this weekend. I have to wonder, however how much of it was their improvement, and how much was USCe getting significantly worse. I had AUB and aTm as wins. After watching TT and LSWhoo, I think we have a shot.


---------------------------------------------
--- LongtimeHogfan wrote:

I haven't seen anybody mention this yet, but some of our assistant coaches were trapped in an elevator at halftime and unable to get to the locker room.  They communicated by cell phone. 

That being said, I still think this is a 6-6 team.  7 with a minor bowl 'W'.  I didn't have aubie on the 'W' side of the ledger to achieve that.  I did, however, have aTm.  I may have to rethink that.

---------------------------------------------


---------------------------------------------


---------------------------------------------

Last edited 8/31/2014 9:45 AM by bakedog19741

Reply | Quote

Posted: 8/31/2014 10:10 AM

Re: So are we better? 



HawgnDos wrote: Oh, I'll be sure to tell you when/if that happens.  But back on point, we all know that the coaches in the box are important as the "eyes in the sky".  They have a much better view of what happened on each play and therefore can better critique who/what/where assignments next time.  Obviously it is easier to show that via picture or diagram than over a cell phone.  "Tell Bubba he's supposed to be over there about 3 feet to the left...no his other left..."  cool

bakedog19741 wrote: I saw Smith and Shannon on the sideline. I bet Chaney was there to. I'm sure those assts on the phone to the OC and DC wasn't that big of an issue. They were communicating with them the entire 1st half over headsets. I'm sure the players got the right message, unless you're saying I'm right (which you probably are) and our coaching staff isn't that good and needs to get replaced;)


---------------------------------------------
--- HawgnDos wrote:

Yeah, it probably doesn't really matter having your position coach/coordinator standing there telling you to your face what he want you to do this time while drawing on a whiteboard.  I'm sure nothing ever gets lost in translation over the phone.

I wonder too, is aTm that much better (doubt) or is SC really missing Clowney/Shaw/and company that much?  I am thinking the latter...

bakedog19741 wrote: I'm not sure the elevator was that big of a deal. JMO

aTm looked like the best team in college football so far this weekend. I have to wonder, however how much of it was their improvement, and how much was USCe getting significantly worse. I had AUB and aTm as wins. After watching TT and LSWhoo, I think we have a shot.


---------------------------------------------
--- LongtimeHogfan wrote:

I haven't seen anybody mention this yet, but some of our assistant coaches were trapped in an elevator at halftime and unable to get to the locker room.  They communicated by cell phone. 

That being said, I still think this is a 6-6 team.  7 with a minor bowl 'W'.  I didn't have aubie on the 'W' side of the ledger to achieve that.  I did, however, have aTm.  I may have to rethink that.

---------------------------------------------


---------------------------------------------
Pretty sure that they could use their cell phones to draw up plays and text or e-mail them. Little inconvenient but doable. My cell phone will do all sorts of cool things.

The offensive plan was working the first half... why would they need to change it? Seems that they got away from the run pretty dang quick.
Reply | Quote
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
  Page of 2  Next >