re: That may be a W on the board

quote:

---

With a little more redzone execution

---

One of the things I was referring to.

quote:

---

You suck and probably can't read at a 6th grade level.

---

I definitely can't, got me.

What a little bitch post. It's a huge win on the road in the Sec. It's never going to be perfect.

I think you are looking for the OM Spirit. Freeze kicks that field goal and we coast to 11 win w/ AU having no chance. Also, late third down call could have sealed the game, and Freeze decides to throw to Liggins?

quote:

---

But why was Liggins in that play to begin with?

---

Only two reasons, he was supposed to run the ball or he was supposed to distract the defense because everyone thinks he's going to run the ball.

quote:

---

What?

We are coming off 230 yards and 156 yards this game on the ground. We had around 400 yards passing. I'm not sure what else one would want from the OC. Only reason the score wasn't more lopsided was because of players errors, drops and penalties.

Teams that win championships just might do those things, but this team is in great position to get to the SECCG without it.

Weak against the run? Based on what?

---

Yes, I understand that. However, would you be willing to concede that we did so against the worst defense in the league?

I mean, a win is a win. But, that doesn't mean a team shouldn't improve as a season moves along. Wouldn't you agree? I thought perhaps we'd see improvement in the ground game, and doing so against Auburn might not be the best indicator.

Now, if we put up those numbers against LSU, I will be very happy and impressed. I suppose what I'm getting at is that in Year Four, I expected us to do be more effective overall on the ground. But I understand the line issues, though some of that has to fall on the shoulders of the coaching staff.

I am sorry! I did not see the same game you saw. What I saw was a fresh bunch of enthusiastic Rebels kick butt in Auburn.
No one plays mistake free football.
We won...we did what we had to do to win on the road.
You get an extra hour of sleep tonight. Use it wisely.

We won by 8. I'd have taken a 1 pont win. That's all I got.

quote:

---

The fact that Ole Miss fans are here Wanting to cry and be critical of the Rebs and the coaching when we are 7-2 is hilarious. Listen I know we can do better, but why is the idea of supporting our team so unrealistic?

---

I expect us to be undefeated. When a coach gets up and talks about winning championships, I take him at his word. I believe he's telling the truth and that I should cater my own expectations based on his promises.

What you're suggesting is to simply disregard his word and assume he's a liar, so that when a team under-performs, I can simply revert to the same "Gosh, we're just Ole Miss" ideology that has made us irrelevant in college football for over five decades.

I do support the team. But that doesn't mean I can't be critical of the coaching staff, for lack of coaching; poor schemes; poor play-calling; or failing to recruit the players necessary to run the schemes effectively. Your argument is nothing but a straw-man. Insinuating that anyone who is critical, doesn't support the team or is somehow not a real fan. That argument is easy to dismantle and is, quite frankly, utter nonsense.

If we can do better, we should do better, and it's up to the staff to ensure that we do. That's what he gets paid for, after all.

It's funny, if you don't believe that Ole Miss can compete with the top-tier programs, because of resources, funding, and fan support -- then you're a pessimist and don't support the team. On the other hand, if you're an optimist and you believe the coach's word and expect him to make good on the promises of championships, and are critical when he fails, then you're not a real fan.

So, which is it?