Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

College Football Week 8


Shocker
 Share

Recommended Posts

Just now, LinvilleGorge said:

4th and 12. Just take the 3 and you have 3 timeouts. That was fuging baffling.

Calling a timeout on 3rd and 1 was fugging idiotic as well. The defense hadn’t stopped the run all game so Mack essentially wasted a time out there and then wasted another timeout after UVA converted the first down.

But yeah kick the field goal and then go win the game with another one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Xtreme said:

My Gamecocks are 2-5 and my Panthers are 0-6. Why must I suffer?

Dude, the Panthers have apparently infected all the Carolina college teams. Clemson has literally been blowing games left and right with red zone, heck goal line turnovers turning into opponent points. App State lost a game on a blocked FG to put the game away. UNC losing to a 1-5 Virginia?

Clemson just tried to fumble away another scoring opportunity. SMH. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, TLGPanthersFan said:

One thing I hate about college football. One loss, usually, and that is it. Don't care about the ACC Championship. Don't care about making a bowl. Losing to a 1-5 team is pathetic. UNC deserved to lose.

My biggest complaint about college ball. If you lose 2 games you have NO shot at the title. NONE. As soon as you do ... why bother even playing the rest of the way? Some teams have NO shot after one loss! If that comes at the start of the season ... just shut it down lol. NO ONE cares about Bowl Games either. Not even the players. Cool, we get to go to Albuquerque and play Kansas St! And neat, you can still win a conference title with a loss or two lol. But those aren't even a real thing anymore.

But, I think they're expanding the Playoffs at some point? Needs to happen ASAP.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Sure it does, maybe not every position and not every draft.  You have to admit the hit rate goes down the further in the draft you get.  Would you more readily find a generational talent at the #2 pick or #19 pick?  High picks are considered "busts" if they doesn't pan out, whereas guys drafted later don't have that level of scrutiny upon them.  Different expectation levels.  If Styles does indeed go #2, I already listed the rarefied air that he would be in.  Maybe he doesn't set the League on fire, but my gut feeling is he does.  Again, you don't take an off-ball LB #2 if he is just a 'really good' player.
    • To illustrate my point, I watched (and commented on the Huddle) that Rozeboom would often wait a full second (or close to it) before taking his first step.  I assume that he probably had issues with false steps, a faulty practice that can take an ILB out of the gap completely.  Watch Luke and you see a step with the snap, and rarely was it a false step.  Rozeboom may have had 100 tackles (speculating) but initial contact was 2-3 yards on the defensive side of the ball.  Luke's 100 tackles were made 1-2 yards from the LOS.  Over the course of a year, Luke was much more productive (more fumbles, fewer long gainers, more OL penalties, fewer first downs, etc) that Rozeboom, but on the stat sheet, they both had 100 tackles.  In fact, Rozeboom's inefficiency kept him on the field more (more first downs, fewer OL penalties, turnovers, and punts) so he should have MORE tackles.   I would like to see stats that break down those things.   For example again, Josh Norman was slow--4.68 or so at CB.  However, his anticipation speed was incredible.  He made as many plays as a 4.4 CB.  I had one coach (college--later became the head coach at WCU) tell me that slower players have to use their brains more to still be around.  Elite athletes can just get by on their physical superiority.  He added, "Rarely does a football player run full speed.  Most of the time, they are not, so the 40 time is misleading stat.  Smart players overcome shortcomings--when the elite athlete becomes average (slows with age, advances in level of competition) they struggle against smarter (football IQ) competition.  
    • Obviously tongue in cheek hyperbole. But we do not need a first round RB to compete for a championship. We need intelligent roster building. That to me is the complete opposite of intelligent roster building because it is a prime resource at a devalued plug and play position when we have needs across the defense.
×
×
  • Create New...