- 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
re: Coach O Is Crushing It
Posted on 2/22/19 at 3:59 pm to SammyTiger
Posted on 2/22/19 at 3:59 pm to SammyTiger
quote:
35 players with 10 or more O/D snaps.
Who said anything about limiting it to 10 or more. Every snap counts. Every player has a key assignment on every play.
And that is a dead link
This post was edited on 2/22/19 at 4:00 pm
2
Posted on 2/22/19 at 4:00 pm to Buckeye Jeaux
Well Dabo is 2-2 vs Saban not 2-1 like you’ve incorrectly stated. I know you added that “all the marbles” tag in order to change the reality but Dabo’s second loss was a playoff game too so he was in an “all the marbles” tourney situation as well. I wouldn’t put one ahead of the other currently but Dabo is def as good right now.
This post was edited on 2/22/19 at 4:03 pm
Posted on 2/22/19 at 4:01 pm to Buckeye Jeaux
I thinkni Fixed the link, and I originally said it.
Sorry but a guy who got 8 snaps isn’t going to make or break a game.
He’s not the guy who is responsible for beating Alabama 44-16.
Hell at the end there wer all sorts of players getting junk time snaps.
Will Swinney got snaps.
Is he responsible?
Their backup QBs? The other seniors the put in the game to get snaps in a championship win?
Sorry but a guy who got 8 snaps isn’t going to make or break a game.
He’s not the guy who is responsible for beating Alabama 44-16.
Hell at the end there wer all sorts of players getting junk time snaps.
Will Swinney got snaps.
Is he responsible?
Their backup QBs? The other seniors the put in the game to get snaps in a championship win?
This post was edited on 2/22/19 at 4:03 pm
Posted on 2/22/19 at 4:03 pm to SammyTiger
quote:A guy who plays 8 snaps is going to get targeted - whether on D or O. A team's no stronger than its weakest link.
Sorry but a guy who got 8 snaps isn’t going to make or break a game.
He’s not the guy who is responsible for beating Alabama 44-16.
Posted on 2/22/19 at 4:03 pm to Buckeye Jeaux
How do you target a backup WR? Not cover him?
What does it matter if you you’re running clock up 44-16.
Like I said Their backup QB played and didn’t even throw the ball.
A lot of those guys got plays just to get in the game.
35 players played 95% of that game.
Alabama isn't gonna field a comeback in the other 5%
What does it matter if you you’re running clock up 44-16.
Like I said Their backup QB played and didn’t even throw the ball.
A lot of those guys got plays just to get in the game.
35 players played 95% of that game.
Alabama isn't gonna field a comeback in the other 5%
This post was edited on 2/22/19 at 4:06 pm
Posted on 2/22/19 at 4:07 pm to Buckeye Jeaux
“A team's no stronger than its weakest link.”
A meaningless cliche that has no evidence of truth of measure of proof.
A meaningless cliche that has no evidence of truth of measure of proof.
Posted on 2/22/19 at 4:08 pm to Madking
Yeah if your weekeat like is involved in 1% of plays your still looking pretty fricking good.
shite if there are offensive plays that literally just use WRs as spacing and/decoys.
There are offenses that will just have WRs on the opposite side of the field jog, so their DBs stay farther away from the deep ball on the other side of the field.
shite if there are offensive plays that literally just use WRs as spacing and/decoys.
There are offenses that will just have WRs on the opposite side of the field jog, so their DBs stay farther away from the deep ball on the other side of the field.
This post was edited on 2/22/19 at 4:10 pm
Posted on 2/22/19 at 4:10 pm to SammyTiger
The theory behind the statement would be that your best player doesn’t determine your success your worst player does. So the phrase can even be interpreted as the opposite of the truth.
This post was edited on 2/22/19 at 4:11 pm
Posted on 2/22/19 at 4:14 pm to SammyTiger
Nice try at maintaining an absurd (and dishonest) position, but no sane person on earth believes the talent level at Clemson is even close to the talent level at Bama.
Find something substantial to discuss. This argument was a complete loser for you before it began. You're blowing smoke up your own arse.
Find something substantial to discuss. This argument was a complete loser for you before it began. You're blowing smoke up your own arse.
This post was edited on 2/22/19 at 4:15 pm
Posted on 2/22/19 at 4:15 pm to SammyTiger
For example the 2006 LSU basketball team didn’t go further than the 1989-90 team because David Fleshman was better than Lanear Burns. That’s just completely false.
Posted on 2/22/19 at 4:16 pm to Madking
quote:Tell that to Burrow as he got pummeled off the left edge time after time.
The theory behind the statement would be that your best player doesn’t determine your success your worst player does. So the phrase can even be interpreted as the opposite of the truth.
Posted on 2/22/19 at 4:16 pm to Buckeye Jeaux
quote:
This argument was a complete loser for you before it began. You're blowing smoke up your own arse.
You mean like claiming that 2 wins makes one coach better than the other one ever was?
Posted on 2/22/19 at 4:17 pm to Buckeye Jeaux
They’re better at key positions and in their starting 22-26 player that’s the point. And that fact also destroys that ridiculous “you’re only as good as your weakest link comment.”
Posted on 2/22/19 at 4:18 pm to Buckeye Jeaux
So our 11th guy is the lowest link on a 98 man roster now? Dude the ability to do simple math would help you a lot.
Posted on 2/22/19 at 4:19 pm to Madking
quote:
They’re better at key positions and in their starting 22-26 player that’s the point. And that fact also destroys that ridiculous “you’re only as good as your weakest link comment.”
I repeat: Tell that to Burrow as he got pummeled off the left edge time after time.
Posted on 2/22/19 at 4:20 pm to TigerLunatik
quote:
Do you believe that Dan Mullen is for sure a better coach than Orgeron? Or do you think he's gotten the best of him with less talent the last 2 years and we need more of a sample size to make a definitive statement?
Good point Lunatik. If we're gonna go with Jeaux's way of thinking, Mullen is absolutely a better coach than o.
And for the record, I've always believed Mullen was the better coach anyway.
Posted on 2/22/19 at 4:20 pm to Madking
quote:
A meaningless cliche that has no evidence of truth of measure of proof.
Not if you have good coaching staff that can exploit it.
Posted on 2/22/19 at 4:22 pm to Madking
quote:Not what I said - I said the weak link on the field will always get targeted (or otherwise exploited)
So our 11th guy is the lowest link on a 98 man roster now? Dude the ability to do simple math would help you a lot.
This post was edited on 2/22/19 at 4:23 pm
Posted on 2/22/19 at 4:22 pm to Buckeye Jeaux
quote:
I said the weak link will always get targeted (or otherwise exploited)
No doubt.
Posted on 2/22/19 at 4:25 pm to Buckeye Jeaux
Irrelevant.
Because we didn’t have a great starting 22, and they were injured.
Clemson has a better OL than us and they were mostly healthy.
Completely healthy in the NCG. Which is the only time Clemson’s talent against Bama matters
Because we didn’t have a great starting 22, and they were injured.
Clemson has a better OL than us and they were mostly healthy.
Completely healthy in the NCG. Which is the only time Clemson’s talent against Bama matters
This post was edited on 2/22/19 at 4:32 pm
Page 157 of 166
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News