TheYoungHorn

Are you a moron? our ooc is leaps and bounds better than Tenn. a push? they aren’t even in the same league, literally. they played fcs and one of the 5 worst teams in FBS. UTEP is one of the 15 worst. its literally the equivalent of three FCS games, literal throw aways on the schedule. UM was on the road against a top 25, power five defense. CSU,A team who might very well play the top ranked G5 team in a CCG game and two other respectable, competitive G5 schools.

Sack rate is not really different. First half = 5.65% of all drop backs (I don't have scrambles for positive gains here, so sack rate would be a bit lower) vs. Second half = 5.33% of all drop backs. In addition some of the variance (in yards per attempt) might/would be from the more conservative calls when we are already up big in the first half of the year's second half games.

So when students/fans rush the field, hemming in 100-plus high-T individuals from a visiting team that just lost (perhaps at the last second) with thousands of stupid, intoxicated maniacs running around we fine the school, if and only if they tear down the goal posts? But using common sense, we know that is a far more dangerous situation for everyone involved that students throwing water bottles onto the field in protest. Look, Kirby should be happy they got the call right, and said we still beat the crap out of them, on their home field--because else wise everyone would be talking about how the game-changing pick was wiped away and Texas was going to come back and win, or whatever.

Nah. Keep it. If they both beat ND, and run the table in the AAC, you have a conference title at one of their home fields (which will be insane) as a playoff game play-in. Then you follow it up the next week at half and half, in a grudge match. I want this so bad for 2024. I want to see Army or Navy being able to play three meaningful games in December this year.

Yeah, it wasn't a hard read. It's the short side of the field too, so it isn't like he was covering a lot of ground to squeeze that down there either. Lastly, the ball had no zip, if you are going to hit that pass it has to be right in the numbers with enough zip to squeeze it in, even if it's just man.

Yeah, it's odd that we consistently ran the same post based concepts and didn't address to open grass/the sticks on third down all night. The in/deep drag was consistently open but it is 15+ upfield, a hard throw, near impossible when you can't step up into the pocket.

If you can't hit the post out of the tight bunch, you are just bringing extra guys into the box to stop the run and put more people closer to rushing the passer.

Bunching in and going to 12 personnel against that squad was malpractice. Just like it was against Alabama last year. Seeing Juan Davis lead iso blocks into a nice crease against their linebackers is hilarious.

Saban's point still stands. There were more Alabama fans in the stands by a significant margin. It actually wasn't a comment about the quality of team.

The specific play call, and the pass itself were both trash. Is that a good enough answer? Not sure you would find anyone to defend either one of those. And yet, neither of those has anything to do with you getting upset about numerous people calling out your reasoning/evidence. I think everyone is in agreement that in this game, in that specific situation, we were fine with taking the points that were already on the board.

I read your post, which is why I quoted his response and wrote mine. Your main point was a frustration with Sark taking points off the board, and in an attempt to further justify your point that it was idiotic you listed some evidence---some of which was clearly not true, and not just in a high school english class way of dissecting your chosen adjectives. Instead of just saying it was a weird game where we had already cost ourselves sure points, and wanted to make it a two score game, which would be a completely reasonable point, and wouldn't have elicited a single response from anyone. Imagine telling Sark who was watching Arch's best game to date, "Hey, you shouldn't go for it here because Arch won't be able to deliver."

there is nothing to elaborate, it's made up garbage. Arch was near perfect in actually throwing the ball, he had a handful of plays in the first half where he was a second too late on decisions--to either check down, tuck and run or throw it away--and maybe another 2-3 throws where it looked like he forced it into the wrong read, but other than that, he was nails. Yeah, he is a little slow in picking up clear extra edge defenders, but again RB blitz pickup is beyond awful, on a PA-pass if you have a free rusher you have to adjust your angle to pickup if that is your assignment. Look, there were also a couple plays Arch should have checked out of, but not sure where he is in that freedom--plus one was for sure in the 4th when Sark was probably insistent to stay in run calls--even if we should have switched to a different run.

Hell, go back to letting the band play "All I do is win" for a few rounds if we are really trying to kill time to let them do post game on field interviews.

The new "tradition" of playing "I Like Texas" which used to be the Rangers win song after the game and before the Eyes has to stop. I get that they are trying to vamp to give Sark/Players who are getting TV interviewed time to complete the TV piece before they run over to sing with the team, but listening to 3 minutes of Pat Green singing while the whole team stands in the corner staring at the band is awful. If you have to play a song, which I don't think you need to do to vamp, we never used to do this, then play something that will at least keep the post win energy going. It's crazy to watch our team and student section just stand around staring at the band.

BOOM! Chicken wings for errrrrrrrrbody