- 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
re: Problems at Left Guard?
Posted on 8/12/19 at 11:09 am to RogerTheShrubber
Posted on 8/12/19 at 11:09 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
Can you explain these sacks? Who got beat?
The offensive line.
quote:
Who "touched" the QB?
The defense.
I've already explained that I don't care who got beat. LSU had a revolving door of offensive linemen play last year and it did not work very well. Now, LSU has question marks with at least two positions on the line, and that revolving door is still spinning.
Does it matter if the best offensive linemen or the eighth best got beat? There's a pretty good chance that both of them will see time if the line continues to struggle.
I tell you what Roger, you keep your head in the sand and pretend that everything is pie in the sky. I'll continue to over analyze things and be more concerned than most.
Like I said before, I'll never understand why it bothers so many of you that people have differing opinions.
2
Posted on 8/12/19 at 11:12 am to RB10
quote:
I've already explained that I don't care who got beat.
*context*
It's ok to have different opinions but you absolutely melted early in this thread when presented with "differing opinions".
This post was edited on 8/12/19 at 11:14 am
Posted on 8/12/19 at 11:13 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
*context*
t-14th in sacks allowed.
I've also explained that this is the only context I need. It's also the only tangible evidence we have regarding what we are getting with the offensive line.
You piggybacking on thunderbird is cute though.
quote:
melted
There it is. Providing an opinion you don't like isn't melting Roger.
This post was edited on 8/12/19 at 11:16 am
Posted on 8/12/19 at 11:16 am to RB10
quote:
I've also explained that this is the only context I need.
Then why did you add the scrimmage as evidence?
It's the only context you want to accept, you categorically deny anything that threatens this very narrow view.
Posted on 8/12/19 at 11:18 am to RB10
Not sure why anyone WOULDN’T be at least moderately concerned about the OL.
This post was edited on 8/12/19 at 11:19 am
Posted on 8/12/19 at 11:19 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
Then why did you add the scrimmage as evidence?
Is the most recent data point not relevant?
quote:
It's the only context you want to accept, you categorically deny anything that threatens this very narrow view.
5 sacks is evidence. It's circumstantial and can be ignored if you want, but I choose not to. They are more experienced so they will be better is not evidence, it's an opinion.
Fact is, there is nothing that proves the offensive line will be better, so I've got no reason to change my opinion.
This post was edited on 8/12/19 at 11:20 am
Posted on 8/12/19 at 11:19 am to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
Not sure why anyone WOULDN’T be concerned about the OL.
Im pretty sure everyone has said they have concerns.
Posted on 8/12/19 at 11:21 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
Im pretty sure everyone has said they have concerns.
So I'm being attacked for taking the latest data point and NOT letting it change my opinion?
Makes sense.
Posted on 8/12/19 at 11:22 am to RB10
quote:
I'm sorry, but depth on the offensive line when we don't even know who the 5 starters will be isn't important?
You literally just said it doesnt matter who gave up the sacks. Doesn't matter if it was a 3rd team walk on or 1st team definite starter.
Think about that. Then understand why you're not being taken seriously on that.
This post was edited on 8/12/19 at 11:23 am
Posted on 8/12/19 at 11:23 am to thunderbird1100
quote:
You literally just said it doesnt matter who gave up the sacks. Doesn't matter if it was a 3rd team walk on or 1st team definite starter.
Thin kabout that.
We don't even know who the "starters" will be for 2 or 3 positions. The guy you're calling 3rd string could be a starter in 3 weeks. Would that make this scrimmage more or less relevant?
That's the only thing that needs to be thought about.
This post was edited on 8/12/19 at 11:25 am
Posted on 8/12/19 at 11:24 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
Can you explain these sacks? Who got beat?
No he cant, but he can tell you our 1st team OL still sucks based on a vague statistic.
Posted on 8/12/19 at 11:26 am to 2003tigerfan
quote:
Coach has said several times that they’re the most improved group
Doesn't mean theyre top 10 material
Posted on 8/12/19 at 11:26 am to thunderbird1100
quote:
No he cant, but he can tell you our 1st team OL still sucks based on a vague statistic.
Can you show me that my opinion is wrong with actual evidence? If not, why does it matter to you what my opinion is?
This post was edited on 8/12/19 at 11:27 am
Posted on 8/12/19 at 11:26 am to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
Not sure why anyone WOULDN’T be at least moderately concerned about the OL.
I think any sane fan is worried. However, saying the OL sucks because "they gave up 5 sacks" in a scrimmage this past weekend without even knowing who gave up the sacks, and actually saying "it doesn't matter" in response, is pretty dumb.
Posted on 8/12/19 at 11:27 am to RB10
quote:
So I'm being attacked for taking the latest data point
Wrong.
You're being attacked for being wildly inconsistent in this thread and discounting major values that indicate a probability of more production
You're stuck on last years production and some ridiculous crap about a scrimmage you know nothing about, most are just concerned about the degree of improvement and adaptation.
Posted on 8/12/19 at 11:28 am to RB10
quote:
5 sacks is evidence
Of what?
*context*
Posted on 8/12/19 at 11:28 am to thunderbird1100
quote:
However, saying the OL sucks because "they gave up 5 sacks" in a scrimmage this past weekend without even knowing who gave up the sacks, and actually saying "it doesn't matter" in response, is pretty dumb.
Do you have any evidence that this is incorrect? If not, it's not really that dumb, is it?
Posted on 8/12/19 at 11:28 am to RB10
quote:
We don't even know who the "starters" will be for 2 or 3 positions. The guy you're calling 3rd string could be a starter in 3 weeks. Would that make this scrimmage more or less relevant?
If you truly cant admit a 3rd team walk on giving up a sack is not noteworthy vs. a guy like Charles, Lewis or Cushenberry who are DEFINITIVE starters...then, well, I dont know what to tell you. Other than you're clearly just being an idiot.
Posted on 8/12/19 at 11:28 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
Of what?
That the offensive line can't protect the quarterback.
Posted on 8/12/19 at 11:28 am to RB10
quote:
Can you show me that my opinion is wrong with actual evidence? If not, why does it matter to you what my opinion is?
I never said you were right or wrong, I said drawing a conclusion our OL still sucks based on a scrimmage with LIMITED information is completely dumb, which it is.
Page 7 of 11
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News