- 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: So, our offense was great except for the turnovers and penalties..
Posted on 9/8/10 at 9:57 pm to Dodd
Posted on 9/8/10 at 9:57 pm to Dodd
I don't think you can extrapolate much from the turnovers or the puny production.
We still don't have a scheme that looks well thought out or has an identity. We still don't get the ball into our best playmakers hands.
Plus, it doesn't take much to improve on 112ths ranked offense.
How much would it have been if we played their first team?
We still don't have a scheme that looks well thought out or has an identity. We still don't get the ball into our best playmakers hands.
Plus, it doesn't take much to improve on 112ths ranked offense.
How much would it have been if we played their first team?
2
Posted on 9/8/10 at 10:02 pm to JohnnyU
quote:
We still don't get the ball into our best playmakers hands.
Plus, it doesn't take much to improve on 112ths ranked offense.
How much would it have been if we played their first team?
:kige:
No way man, being ranked 86th in total offense after week 1 against 2nd and 3rd string defense is nothing to worry about.
Posted on 9/8/10 at 10:05 pm to Raz
how much confindence do you have that JJ could lead this offense down by 6, 80 yrds with 3 mins to go to beat fla, or bama, or au, or ark, or tenn or west va ???
seriously.
I dont have the first damn bit.
And wont until he shows me otherwise.
seriously.
I dont have the first damn bit.
And wont until he shows me otherwise.
This post was edited on 9/8/10 at 10:06 pm
Posted on 9/8/10 at 10:07 pm to Tiger Stadium 11
quote:
Message
Posted by Tiger Stadium 11
Ill give the offense 3 turnovers if they are able to get close to 400 yards of offense a game
Thats crazy
Posted on 9/8/10 at 10:09 pm to bmy
quote:
It was good
Oh yeah, 313 yards of offense, 11 first downs and 23 points was a great night of offense against a defense full of 2nd & 3rd stringers
Minus the 2 long TD's by Shepard & Randle LSU had 89 yards of offense in the 1st half.
Posted on 9/8/10 at 10:13 pm to Raz
quote:
So, our offense was great except for the turnovers and penalties..
Yep, and last season we were undefeated expect you know for the games we lost.
Posted on 9/8/10 at 10:18 pm to Jason
So, if the UNC starters don't play, then they become completely incapable of fielding a team? Nice.
Posted on 9/8/10 at 10:21 pm to Big Data
quote:
So, if the UNC starters don't play, then they become completely incapable of fielding a team? Nice.
That's not what I said. You obviously must feel like the offensive production was for your liking and that's fine, I on the other hand looking at all the facts and looking at who was on the field know that LSU should have had a field day on offense against UNC in this particular game. LSU could have easily had 40+ points points of offense in the 1st half against the UNC team they were playing against Sat night.
Posted on 9/8/10 at 10:25 pm to Raz
quote:
Total: 14 touches for our bigtime players on offense out of 57 offensive plays. That's not even 25%. Ridley gets 19 rushes and 2 catches and you can't get Shepard the ball more than 7 times?
Those guys are all receivers . Are you suggesting that we should have thrown the ball 40 times in that game ?
Posted on 9/8/10 at 10:28 pm to Big Data
quote:
, if the UNC starters don't play, then they become completely incapable of fielding a team?
Funny, huh.
Like LSU is the 1st team ever to not run over a short handed team.
Posted on 9/8/10 at 10:38 pm to Lonnie4LSU
quote:
Like LSU is the 1st team ever to not run over a short handed team
No it's just LSU does quiet often each year.
Posted on 9/8/10 at 10:44 pm to Big Data
quote:
So, if the UNC starters don't play, then they become completely incapable of fielding a team? Nice.
Strawman, you lose.
Posted on 9/8/10 at 10:47 pm to tigersruledude
quote:
The lack of yards is a stupid argument because when you take the short fields we got from our returns you will never have a ton of yards. Add in turnovers with short fields...forget it.
LSU possessions, with non-scoring drives of 4 plays or less in bold:
1st possession: Take over at UNC 35, get 8 yards on 3 plays, miss a FG
2nd possession: Take over at UNC 30, go 30 yards on 8 plays, touchdown
3rd possession: Take over at LSU 47, get 2 yards on 3 plays, punt
4th possession: Take over at LSU 42, get 19 yards on 6 plays, punt
5th possesssion: Take over at 50, get 50 yards on 1 play, touchdown
6th possession: Take over at LSU 37, get 17 yards on 3 plays, fumble
7th possession: Take over at LSU 49, get 51 yards on 1 play, touchdown
8th possession: Take over at LSU 33, get 18 yards on 4 plays, interception
9th possession: Take over at UNC 49, get 33 yards on 3 plays, fumble
10th possession: Take over at LSU 46, get 8 yards on 3 plays, punt
11th possession: Take over at LSU 40, get 1 yard on 3 plays, punt
12th possession: Take over at LSU 31, get 22 yards on 12 plays, punt
13th possession: Take over at LSU 27, get 3 yards on 4 plays, punt
14th possession: Take over at UNC 39, get 21 yards on 3 plays, fumble
It wasn't the short field keeping us from gaining yards. It was the short drives. Nine out of 14 possessions went four plays or less and did not result in a score. Two of the other five went more than 4 plays, but gained 22 yards or less and did not result in scores. We had three scoring drives of 30, 50 and 51 yards.
This post was edited on 9/8/10 at 10:49 pm
Posted on 9/8/10 at 10:48 pm to TexTiga
quote:
Those guys are all receivers . Are you suggesting that we should have thrown the ball 40 times in that game ?
Nope. Why do you have to exaggerate things to make your point?
A balanced, 50/50 run/pass split would have probably had more success than the 36run/21pass split that we ran. We don't feature our playmakers, that's the point.
Posted on 9/8/10 at 10:50 pm to Jason
quote:
Like LSU is the 1st team ever to not run over a short handed team
No it's just LSU does quiet often each year
Oh....ok.
Posted on 9/8/10 at 10:53 pm to Raz
quote:
quote:
So, if the UNC starters don't play, then they become completely incapable of fielding a team? Nice.
Strawman, you lose.
"Strawman" -Exactly the word I was thinking of when I read his post - the classic exaggerated statement to make a point that never works because it is not relevant to the point being debated.
Posted on 9/8/10 at 10:55 pm to Lonnie4LSU
quote:
Funny, huh.
Like LSU is the 1st team ever to not run over a short handed team.
Again, strawman. Nobody's saying we suck because we didn't run over them. We're saying we sucked because we played like absolute shite against a team that was short handed that we *should* have run over.
If our offense came out and drove on NC, got first downs, had some issues with fumbles/penalties, but was able to control the game and score some points... even if they didn't DOMINATE NC, we wouldn't be so upset. But the fact is they couldn't do anything outside of a couple of big plays by RR and RS.
Posted on 9/8/10 at 10:56 pm to JohnnyU
quote:
it doesn't take much to improve on 112ths ranked offense.
What a fricking pesimistic, pathetic comment. You were probably one of the people complaining about our 112th ranked offense last year (and rightly so) but damn man...don't fricking start bitching when they show improvement! I guess you expected us to go from 112 straight to the top 10 right? Be reasonable man. The important fact is that it is improving. As long as that keeps happening, I'm happy.
I just want JJ to stop panicking when his primary receiver is covered and move to the next read. If he does that and we eliminate turnovers, we'll be a-ight.
Posted on 9/8/10 at 10:56 pm to Jason
quote:
Minus the 2 long TD's by Shepard & Randle LSU had 89 yards of offense in the 1st half.
Minus the herpes on your d***, a stripper would consider giving you a handjob.
Come on...do you hear yourself? You can't take two offensive plays that turned into the ultimate desired result to try and make a negative point about the offense. The execution on those two plays was basically perfect.
I agree that the offense should have put up more points. Yet, I can't point to anything that was really bad about the offense other than the turnovers. After watching parts of the game again, Ridley got cheated out of a great TD run. The announcers didn't see a hold and I definitely didn't think it was a hold. It was actually a great block.
The turnover by Ridley inside the red zone was obviously bad. We should have scored more right there. Shep should have had more touches in the 2nd half and we should have tried to attack them through the air more than we did. That's coaching though. So my complaints are more with the coaching choices.
Posted on 9/8/10 at 11:03 pm to GeauxTigers0107
quote:quote:
it doesn't take much to improve on 112ths ranked offense.
What a fricking pesimistic, pathetic comment. You were probably one of the people complaining about our 112th ranked offense last year (and rightly so) but damn man...don't fricking start bitching when they show improvement! I guess you expected us to go from 112 straight to the top 10 right? Be reasonable man. The important fact is that it is improving. As long as that keeps happening, I'm happy.
Well, I think the extent of the improvement is going to determine whether one will be happy or not. I don't think you'd be happy if we finish this season as the 111th ranked offense, and finished next season as the 110th ranked offense.
I think most people agree that there was some improvement (i.e. JJ stepped up in the pocket and threw the ball to a WR that one play, that's 1 more than he did last season; Shep got to touch the ball 7 times which is more than last year's average). But, overall the offense still looked anemic, even on possessions that weren't ended on fumbles or penalties.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News