Started By
Message

re: Gary Danielson says Eason wasn't the issue....

Posted on 8/25/17 at 10:28 am to
Posted by deeprig9
Unincorporated Ozora, Georgia
Member since Sep 2012
63919 posts
Posted on 8/25/17 at 10:28 am to
Peter Buck just got served!


Oooh Son!
Posted by meansonny
ATL
Member since Sep 2012
25572 posts
Posted on 8/25/17 at 10:35 am to
quote:


So what happened the last 3rd of the season when averaged over 200 ypg rushing?


The only good rushing defense that we faced was Auburn (top 25). We net 135 yards on 43 attempts with 0 touchdowns.

You are trying too hard.

Our tailbacks scored 15 rushing touchdowns for the entire season. That sucks for a team built around the running game.

It was bad.
Posted by RD Dawg
Atlanta
Member since Sep 2012
27297 posts
Posted on 8/25/17 at 11:21 am to
quote:

The only good rushing defense that we faced was Auburn (top 25). We net 135 yards on 43 attempts with 0 touchdowns.


We had over 180 yrds LOS rushing vs AU and they were a better rushing defense than UF who we had 45 LOS yards against.

Thats not improvement???

GT,TCU and AU were ALL superior rushing defenses than UNC,Mizzou,Ole Miss and Nichols State. Ole Miss
and Mizzou were perhaps 2 of the worst rushing defenses in P5.Both finished in the 100's

Not trying to hard at all just an objective observer who uses actual facts to back up my arguments.
This post was edited on 8/25/17 at 12:03 pm
Posted by wizatlanta
Cumming, GA
Member since Jan 2014
335 posts
Posted on 8/25/17 at 11:31 am to
Throwing when the defense expects you to throw and running when they expect you to run falls on the OC. Little use of tight ends and RB on short routes, again on the OC. Missing receivers badly falls on Eason. All three gotta improve or it's going to be a long year.
Posted by Peter Buck
Member since Sep 2012
12415 posts
Posted on 8/25/17 at 11:39 am to
I'm sure I have more college snaps and NFL camp experience than most posters here, but that only gives me certain insight really... there are clearly people who understand football who post here... who hold or claim no pedigree other than their words. It's pretty clear who they are. I may not always agree with them and I may not always be correct.... but, just know, you are not one of those people. So, when I say men are talking about football, please respect that... thanks.
Posted by FooManChoo
Member since Dec 2012
41648 posts
Posted on 8/25/17 at 12:36 pm to
Is there a reason why you always portray yourself as a football snob? I'm legitimately curious why you need to show your arse so much. You obviously have a lot of football knowledge. Perhaps others here would be more receptive to it if you weren't so condescending.
Posted by SneakyWaff1es
Member since Nov 2012
3940 posts
Posted on 8/25/17 at 4:23 pm to
He's only like that with one guy. That guy isn't receptive to shite.
Posted by Buddy2012
Georgia
Member since Sep 2012
2861 posts
Posted on 8/25/17 at 4:29 pm to
Too bad we went from 2010 thru 2015 without recruiting a decent QB and had to start a true fresman
Posted by djsdawg
Member since Apr 2015
32824 posts
Posted on 8/25/17 at 4:30 pm to
Not sure what good your experience serves when you can't even see how often Catalina was burned off the left side in one on one situations. If anything, your ol experience has removed most of your ability to be critically objective of their poor play. For some reason, others are afraid to call you out for it, even though most on this very board do not agree with your take on it. Same goes for Much brighter football minds such as Kirby, Gary, sec head coaches, and the NFL draft board for every team.
Posted by RD Dawg
Atlanta
Member since Sep 2012
27297 posts
Posted on 8/25/17 at 4:32 pm to
quote:

He's only like that with one guy. That guy isn't receptive to shite.


Correct and the guy is petulant little douchebag who never admits or takes ownership of his idiocy
Posted by fibonaccisquared
The mystical waters of the Hooch
Member since Dec 2011
16898 posts
Posted on 8/25/17 at 4:34 pm to
quote:

He's only like that with one guy. That guy isn't receptive to shite.


I'd disagree, though I will say PB has toned it back quite a bit with pretty much everyone other than that one guy. Hell, we actually agreed on something not too far back.

PB. At the very least, I think we know you want the program to succeed, whether you agree with the current direction or not. I'm still not so sure about wd.
Posted by Peter Buck
Member since Sep 2012
12415 posts
Posted on 8/25/17 at 4:40 pm to
It would have been nice for him to have had a year to adjust. He has all the physical tools and a great arm. He moves pretty well for a guy his size too. He just needs to learn to read and see the field better. That's not easy. He didn't have the luxury of walking into an offense where most of the other players had experience running it... new coaches and staff made it even more difficult..
He could have made better decisions and he definitely could have gotten more help from everyone around him...

By making better reads, he will be able to take pressure off the Oline. That will also help the running game. The whole offense could blossom actually. Let's hope that's the case.
Posted by deeprig9
Unincorporated Ozora, Georgia
Member since Sep 2012
63919 posts
Posted on 8/25/17 at 4:44 pm to
Alot of what peter posts isn't necessarily high level football IQ, its high school stuff. That's not to say peter doesn't have fb iq, that's to say that people calling him a fb snob for posting basic shite are basically basic bitches.
Posted by djsdawg
Member since Apr 2015
32824 posts
Posted on 8/25/17 at 4:53 pm to
quote:

He's only like that with one guy. That guy isn't receptive to shite.


That's simply because I hurt his feelings earlier in the year. I could tell Peter the blue sky is blue, and he would still respond with retarded things like "adults are trying to talk". Now that idea must be what you are talking about when bringing up a person not being receptive.
Posted by Barstools
Atlanta
Member since Jan 2016
9412 posts
Posted on 8/25/17 at 4:53 pm to
Nice, blame Richt!
Posted by djsdawg
Member since Apr 2015
32824 posts
Posted on 8/25/17 at 4:56 pm to
quote:

Alot of what peter posts isn't necessarily high level football IQ, its high school stuff. That's not to say peter doesn't have fb iq, that's to say that people calling him a fb snob for posting basic shite are basically basic bitche


Maybe you missed it, but I am calling him out for missing basic shite for one reason or another.
This post was edited on 8/25/17 at 5:07 pm
Posted by deeprig9
Unincorporated Ozora, Georgia
Member since Sep 2012
63919 posts
Posted on 8/25/17 at 5:11 pm to
That's a you problem.
Posted by meansonny
ATL
Member since Sep 2012
25572 posts
Posted on 8/25/17 at 5:14 pm to
quote:


We had over 180 yrds LOS rushing vs AU and they were a better rushing defense than UF who we had 45 LOS yards against.

Thats not improvement???


Zero rushing touchdowns in both UF and AU games. That is not improvement. Are you saying that we lost 40 yards on Auburns 2 sacks? Or do you ignore negative yardage plays to make yourself feel better?

Regardless. Running on first down when the defense will give it to you does not mean we are doing a good job when we get stuffed for a loss on 3rd downs and goallines. Running when the defense is keying on you means you are doing a good job (measured by first down conversions and rushing touchdowns... it's the points that matter most. No one has won a game because of 180 yards rushing from the line of scrimmage).

quote:

GT,TCU and AU were ALL superior rushing defenses

Hahahahahahahahahaha
Posted by RD Dawg
Atlanta
Member since Sep 2012
27297 posts
Posted on 8/25/17 at 5:30 pm to
quote:

Zero rushing touchdowns in both UF and AU games. That is not improvement. Are you saying that we lost 40 yards on Auburns 2 sacks? Or do you ignore negative yardage plays to make yourself feel better?



We're talking rushing offense you stupid frick.IF you can remember we had a snap that went over the QB's head in which we lost over 20 yards.

We're talking RUSHING yards and improvement over the course of the season not red zone offense which is a different argument.

Once again I have given you stats and numbers to prove my point.Do you not think there wasn't an improvement after UF? If you answer no you have absolutely no clue in ragards to any type of football discussion
Posted by meansonny
ATL
Member since Sep 2012
25572 posts
Posted on 8/25/17 at 5:44 pm to
No.

And the most important rushing Stat is rushing TDs.

Isaiah Crowell rushed for over 5 ypc as a true freshman. But our running game sucked (I think he had 4 rushing TDs ) and our record reflected it.

JJ Green and Brendan Douglas were consisently able to run down field into the red zone as true freshmen. But we kept getting stoned in the goalline. We sucked and our record reflected it.

If you have pride in yards with no points, good for you. Go buy a trophy with those yards.
The best teams are looking at points. The best teams are putting those points on the board on the ground game.

We can agree to disagree. Your appreciation for mediocrity is disheartening. But good for you, I guess. Fuxk first down runs. They don't mean jack shite if you don't convert and don't put points on the board. Conversion and points aren't scheme. They are talent and execution. We didn't have it.
first pageprev pagePage 3 of 5Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow SECRant for SEC Football News
Follow us on Twitter and Facebook to get the latest updates on SEC Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitter