- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 10/29/14 at 7:16 pm to BluegrassBelle
I think the label has belonged to the offense.
Posted on 10/29/14 at 7:18 pm to bisonduck
Really? I think the most common perception of Oregon is that they have a soft defense so when their high-powered offense (which is usually their bread and butter) gets slowed down they're basically fricked because of the lack of defense.
Posted on 10/29/14 at 7:20 pm to bisonduck
nope, definitely belongs to your pussy arse defense.
Posted on 10/29/14 at 7:36 pm to BluegrassBelle
quote:
Really? I think the most common perception of Oregon is that they have a soft defense so when their high-powered offense (which is usually their bread and butter) gets slowed down they're basically fricked because of the lack of defense.
This is a bad perception, imo. Against LSU we held them to less than 300 and our offense gave them a short field all day long (and special teams).
Our offense failed us against Auburn as well. We should have scored more than 14 against Stanford in the 2012 game. I can go on and on.
However, if that is your perception than that is what the thread is about.
This post was edited on 10/29/14 at 7:37 pm
Posted on 10/29/14 at 7:39 pm to bisonduck
quote:
This is a bad perception, imo.
quote:
However, if that is your perception than that is what the thread is about.
I was just commenting on what the general fan's perception is about Oregon. And why you would likely still have that "soft" label. Especially when you yourself even calls your own defense soft.
Posted on 10/29/14 at 7:41 pm to bisonduck
LSU had 2 runners with over 90 yards lol
soft as shite
soft as shite
Posted on 10/29/14 at 7:43 pm to bisonduck
Posted on 10/29/14 at 7:57 pm to TH03
LSU ran for 3.65 yards per carry, which was the second lowest of the season. That was with Kiko suspended.
Giving 2011 LSU a short field all night did not help and that is on the offense.
Giving 2011 LSU a short field all night did not help and that is on the offense.
Posted on 10/29/14 at 7:58 pm to saintsfan22
quote:
If any NFL team stupidly offers him a job he should take it in a heartbeat. It'll be way easier to get another job when he fails there than if he keeps running down Stanford.
I'm nowhere close to Les' biggest fan but it pisses me off when people compare Shaw to Miles.
First of all he coaches like a massive pussy.
Posted on 10/29/14 at 8:01 pm to bisonduck
Yes - beating a 3 loss team gives them all the credibility they need.
Posted on 10/29/14 at 8:02 pm to bisonduck
Michael ford had 96 on 14 carries. that's 6.9 a pop, son. plus 2 TDs.
spencer ware had 99 on 26 and a TD.
that 3.6 comes from taking sacks into play and is disingenuous as hell since it isn't a run play.
look a little deeper than one line on the box score.
spencer ware had 99 on 26 and a TD.
that 3.6 comes from taking sacks into play and is disingenuous as hell since it isn't a run play.
look a little deeper than one line on the box score.
Posted on 10/29/14 at 8:02 pm to bisonduck
quote:
So, how big are our guys on offense?
Idgaf how big they are, y'all get shite on by physical defensive lines. Stop getting shite on by more physical lines and y'all can be considered physical.
Posted on 10/29/14 at 8:09 pm to The Boat
Shaw is one of the worst gameday coaches in CFB history.
His team can totally dominate an opponent and only be up 7-3 in the 4th quarter.
I feel bad for his players, there is no margin for error...
Oregon can stink for 3 quarters and still win...
Stanford has to bring it every down thanks to Shaw's...William F. Buckley play-calling.
His team can totally dominate an opponent and only be up 7-3 in the 4th quarter.
I feel bad for his players, there is no margin for error...
Oregon can stink for 3 quarters and still win...
Stanford has to bring it every down thanks to Shaw's...William F. Buckley play-calling.
Posted on 10/29/14 at 8:14 pm to ReauxlTide222
quote:
Idgaf how big they are, y'all get shite on by physical defensive lines. Stop getting shite on by more physical lines and y'all can be considered physical.
That's what I am saying. MSU's strength is their dline and Stanford their front seven. If we don't get shite on by those two teams, do we at least shed the "soft" label. I am not saying we deserve "physical" as a moniker but at least not to be labeled "soft." Or is there no in between?
Posted on 10/29/14 at 8:16 pm to TH03
quote:
Michael ford had 96 on 14 carries. that's 6.9 a pop, son. plus 2 TDs. spencer ware had 99 on 26 and a TD. that 3.6 comes from taking sacks into play and is disingenuous as hell since it isn't a run play. look a little deeper than one line on the box score.
You are pretty fricking stupid aren't you? Everyone's stats are counted the same. I don't remember an inordinate amount of sacks to make ours look better relative to anyone else you played that year.
Posted on 10/29/14 at 8:16 pm to bisonduck
No. When you give up 40+ to Cal, it becomes difficult to shed that label.
Posted on 10/29/14 at 8:20 pm to bisonduck
Sure, this team might not be soft. I don't think Stanford or MSU are good though. I thought you meant what will y'all have to do for Oregon's football program to lose the soft label. Seeing as it's been pretty soft for years and years, I'd say it'll take a serious change. And I'm not sure beating MSU and Stanford this year will change much.
Posted on 10/29/14 at 8:22 pm to ReauxlTide222
You think MSU is soft?
MSU is tougher than Bama this year and last year...
Especially this year.
This isn't 2011...quit living in the past.
MSU is tougher than Bama this year and last year...
Especially this year.
This isn't 2011...quit living in the past.
Posted on 10/29/14 at 8:24 pm to bisonduck
total rushing yards was 175 for LSU, yet ford had 96 and ware had 99. 99+96=195
LSU actually had 206 yards gained, but 31 lost.
you're looking at one little stat and trying to paint the full picture so you don't look soft, but you're soft.
LSU actually had 206 yards gained, but 31 lost.
you're looking at one little stat and trying to paint the full picture so you don't look soft, but you're soft.
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News