0
- 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
Posted on 9/13/26 at 9:20 am to Tdubs7
At his presser Lane said, "we are feeling like this (bad) about the game, and we won by 31 points. We've got a good standard going"
Posted on 9/13/26 at 9:21 am to Tdubs7
I’ll be honest,
I think this whole game was experimenting. The plays were slower getting in. The tempo was down.
I think they probably got caught looking ahead a bit and still demolished a lesser opponent as they should have. And, as always, La Tech plays LSU like it’s their Super Bowl, because it is.
I think this whole game was experimenting. The plays were slower getting in. The tempo was down.
I think they probably got caught looking ahead a bit and still demolished a lesser opponent as they should have. And, as always, La Tech plays LSU like it’s their Super Bowl, because it is.
Posted on 9/13/26 at 9:22 am to Yeti_Chaser
quote:
It's just a lack of chemistry with the WRs, lack of pre-snap plan, and an urgency to improvise before things break down.
Chemistry with WRs isn't a thing. I'm not sure why you keep brining that up.
Lack of a pre-snap plan also isn't the issue.
I do agree that he pulls it down too quickly, a lot like Daniels in year 1.
The problem last night was the OL. It was a disaster.
Posted on 9/13/26 at 9:25 am to Septiger
quote:
Is Leavitt good enough to beat an elite defense with his passing when the run game isn’t working?
We play 3 really good defenses, IMO (A&M, Bama, and Texas). All 3 are at home. Based on Kiffin's history, I see no reason not to believe Leavitt and this offense will improve. Can they score on us?
Posted on 9/13/26 at 9:26 am to moneyg
quote:
Chemistry with WRs isn't a thing.
Posted on 9/13/26 at 9:27 am to Tdubs7
These small teams always put everything they have against the big giant. Bringing their best game. Tip my hat to Tech.
Posted on 9/13/26 at 9:32 am to Tdubs7
Offense was pretty vanilla in the first half. It looked like we wanted to establish an inside run game and see if our interior OL could impose their will on Tech’s front 7. We couldn’t do it which is disappointing and then Sam gets frustrated and throws some bad balls.
2nd half we opened things up with stretch and outside zone. Hopefully the OL plays better against a better opponent next week.
2nd half we opened things up with stretch and outside zone. Hopefully the OL plays better against a better opponent next week.
Posted on 9/13/26 at 10:01 am to Tigahs24Seven
quote:
How about the fact that the WR group cant catch....
I didn't see a lot of drops. I saw a lot of not running the ball well.
Posted on 9/13/26 at 10:04 am to Tdubs7
quote:Definitely more psyched than Oregon, Oklahoma, & Ohio State.
should be psyched about how last night went
Posted on 9/13/26 at 10:24 am to Trip Savage
quote:
I think the running game is going to demolish Ole Piss
Why?
Posted on 9/13/26 at 10:46 am to moneyg
quote:
Chemistry with WRs isn't a thing. I'm not sure why you keep brining that up.
I'd love to hear this explanation
This post was edited on 9/13/26 at 10:46 am
Posted on 9/13/26 at 11:26 am to Trip Savage
Statistically we blew them out, but we sabotaged ourselves with turnovers and penalties. It happens, but we obviously need to clean all that up.
Posted on 9/13/26 at 11:31 am to Yeti_Chaser
quote:
I'd love to hear this explanation
We aren’t seeing the QB and WRs reading things differently causing problems.
We aren’t seeing Leavitt hesitate because he doesn’t trust the WRs.
What we are seeing is a QB who is leaving the pocket too often (some his fault, some the OL fault) and a QB who when he does deliver from the pocket is very inaccurate downfield.
It’s not “chemistry”.
There are real tangible issues at play.
Posted on 9/13/26 at 11:34 am to Septiger
Nope
Posted on 9/13/26 at 11:40 am to Tdubs7
Hopey changey
Posted on 9/13/26 at 11:42 am to Tdubs7
The LSU teams except for 2018 and 2019. Would have given up 300 to 400 yards to Clemson and La Tech. Probably win both with much different scores and expectations for this week
Posted on 9/13/26 at 11:45 am to Tdubs7
I think everybody is just worried after the Kelly era.
Posted on 9/13/26 at 1:12 pm to moneyg
I'd consider timing to be both chemistry and a tangible issue. There is an obvious lack of timing with the WRs. There are underthrown deep balls. There are passes thrown at receivers who aren't looking for the ball. There are receivers not moving back to the QB when he breaks the pocket. Call it chemistry or call it whatever you want. It's a very real thing and it's something that typically gets better with time
Posted on 9/13/26 at 1:18 pm to Yeti_Chaser
quote:
I'd consider timing to be both chemistry and a tangible issue. There is an obvious lack of timing with the WRs.
No there isn’t. We are seeing a QB not letting things go on time. He’s waiting to see it or he’s being hurried and throwing it (pick 6).
quote:
There are underthrown deep balls. There are passes thrown at receivers who aren't looking for the ball. There are receivers not moving back to the QB when he breaks the pocket. Call it chemistry or call it whatever you want. It's a very real thing and it's something that typically gets better with time
It will get better if the QB is developed to be a better pocket QB.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News