- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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 12/31/13 at 4:33 pm to jrodLSUke
I edited the op to please you damn grammar nazi's
Posted on 12/31/13 at 5:59 pm to MetTiger
quote:
Then again, didn't A&M sign a ton of WR's last year? And will get Inenacho this year most likely? There are depth chart issues there. Plus, I don't see Sumlin there much longer - maybe even this year (NFL).
I'm curious how many did LSU sign? Y'all have half the starting wide receiver slots we do, so that's another thing to keep in consideration. If what someone said earlier was true, LSU has 3 guys currently committed and they took 5 WRs last year. A&M took 6 last year and has two committed. So Speedy would be looking at the same number of people on the depth chart competing for half the spots on the field.
Then again, I think the depth chart is a non-issue to a talent like him.
Posted on 12/31/13 at 6:02 pm to MetTiger
quote:
Two 1000 yard receivers in a high octane OFFENSE (not just one player) is far more a decision maker.
Also, Sumlin's offense at U of H produced a season where THREE not just two players all went for over 80 catches AND 1,000 yards. He has also produced a season where three WRs had 1700, 1200, and 900 yards.
It would be disingenuous to say that LSU has any argument system-wise. They ran they ball 61% of the time last year. They don't utilize WRs the same. That's just something you can't really argue.
Posted on 12/31/13 at 6:06 pm to TeLeFaWx
LSU took 4 WR last year.
and I do agree, depth chart is not a concern for Speedy.
ETA: please stop arguing about X% passing vs Y% runs. We've seen the lack of running game hurt TAMU's overall offense just like we've seen the lack of a passing game hurt LSU's run game in the past.
and I do agree, depth chart is not a concern for Speedy.
ETA: please stop arguing about X% passing vs Y% runs. We've seen the lack of running game hurt TAMU's overall offense just like we've seen the lack of a passing game hurt LSU's run game in the past.
This post was edited on 12/31/13 at 6:08 pm
Posted on 12/31/13 at 6:07 pm to TeLeFaWx
quote:
It would be disingenuous to say that LSU has any argument system-wise. They ran they ball 61% of the time last year. They don't utilize WRs the same. That's just something you can't really argue.
Two 1000 yard Wrs....get over it
Posted on 12/31/13 at 6:10 pm to Joe Mantegna
quote:
Two 1000 yard Wrs....get over it
Correct. LSU has two really good receivers this year that were very productive.
Posted on 12/31/13 at 6:11 pm to Joe Mantegna
TAMU may have the style argument. Heck its an exciting offense to watch.
However LSU has the following....
Proximity to home (family can see him in person, etc)
Friends either currently on or shortly joining the roster
Frank Wilson
Winning culture (sec titles, a national title not too long ago, typically in the hunt, etc)
A well respected former nfl oc (which will help from a draft standpoint)
Familiarity
Mamas blessing
LSU women!
However LSU has the following....
Proximity to home (family can see him in person, etc)
Friends either currently on or shortly joining the roster
Frank Wilson
Winning culture (sec titles, a national title not too long ago, typically in the hunt, etc)
A well respected former nfl oc (which will help from a draft standpoint)
Familiarity
Mamas blessing
LSU women!
This post was edited on 12/31/13 at 6:14 pm
Posted on 12/31/13 at 6:13 pm to I20goon
quote:
ETA: please stop arguing about X% passing vs Y% runs. We've seen the lack of running game hurt TAMU's overall offense just like we've seen the lack of a passing game hurt LSU's run game in the past.
A&M had a lack of a running game? What percent of the time did A&M run it?
Posted on 12/31/13 at 6:13 pm to Pear
Nah, it's still duke.
Posted on 12/31/13 at 6:13 pm to beardedzeus
how about the women of LSU versus TAMU...not even close 
Posted on 12/31/13 at 6:15 pm to beardedzeus
quote:
TAMU may have the style argument. Heck its an exciting offense to watch.
Of course they do.
quote:
However LSU has the following....
Agreed that LSU has a lot going for it, and it would be quite a coup to get Speedy, I still don't think it happens because of his mother... but there are legitimate reasons for him to want to go play in a wide open offense that utilizes the WR position better than LSU.
Posted on 12/31/13 at 6:16 pm to LSUGoo
Lol good call
Bottom line is nobody can argue that tamu has been a fun program the past two yrs w JFF. It has to be appealing if ur lookin for a place to accumulate stats.
However, if we are looking at this logically, LSU has more in the positive side of the ledger for speedy than tamu does. And the reverse would possibly hold true if we were talking about a texas recruit w tamu ties
Bottom line is nobody can argue that tamu has been a fun program the past two yrs w JFF. It has to be appealing if ur lookin for a place to accumulate stats.
However, if we are looking at this logically, LSU has more in the positive side of the ledger for speedy than tamu does. And the reverse would possibly hold true if we were talking about a texas recruit w tamu ties
This post was edited on 12/31/13 at 6:17 pm
Posted on 12/31/13 at 6:24 pm to TeLeFaWx
49.1% of the time. Both you and all of us here know that includes scambles on pass plays.
Take JFF's 133 rushes (2247 yds) out... let's take 98 out and assume 3 plays a game were planned runs...
then 38%.
Take JFF's 133 rushes (2247 yds) out... let's take 98 out and assume 3 plays a game were planned runs...
then 38%.
Posted on 12/31/13 at 6:35 pm to beardedzeus
The TAMU guys here are saying that TAMU is more attractive to Speedy because:
- Sumlin
- HUNH
- more passes/plays
- more distribution of the ball
- more yardage
except for the first one, which is debatable vs. Cam Cam (yet to be determined), are all true.
The reasoning is that is the ONLY thing to consider. Their offense is their linchpin, and they will argue about it all day.
In their minds it makes it an automatic that a Speedy will choose them... and the implication being that LSU is doing something illegal if we get them or that Speedy is stupid for choosing LSU.
ETA: still waiting for the first "swamp kittens" or "LA trash" comment from them that is spewed over on the rant non-stop.
- Sumlin
- HUNH
- more passes/plays
- more distribution of the ball
- more yardage
except for the first one, which is debatable vs. Cam Cam (yet to be determined), are all true.
The reasoning is that is the ONLY thing to consider. Their offense is their linchpin, and they will argue about it all day.
In their minds it makes it an automatic that a Speedy will choose them... and the implication being that LSU is doing something illegal if we get them or that Speedy is stupid for choosing LSU.
ETA: still waiting for the first "swamp kittens" or "LA trash" comment from them that is spewed over on the rant non-stop.
This post was edited on 12/31/13 at 6:38 pm
Posted on 12/31/13 at 6:40 pm to TeLeFaWx
quote:
It would be disingenuous to say that LSU has any argument system-wise.
Pro-style scheme with pro-style route tree and pro-style option routes.
Posted on 12/31/13 at 6:54 pm to RATeamWannabe
fricking Hamm is hilarious. His "intel".
Posted on 12/31/13 at 6:57 pm to deuce985
See my sig
Posted on 12/31/13 at 6:58 pm to GeauxAggie972
Posted on 12/31/13 at 7:00 pm to RATeamWannabe
You said I could have it jerk
Page 2 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News