Started By
Message
re: OK, so the offense is truly bad
Posted on 9/26/15 at 10:28 pm to Wtodd
Posted on 9/26/15 at 10:28 pm to Wtodd
quote:
Look I'd piss on a spark plug if I thought it'd do any good
Me too brother. But it won't. So let's look at what will get us there next year. That's more likely to be Lock, not Mauk. So play him this year, get him the experience. And no, his decisions are no where near as stupid as Mauk's.
1
Posted on 9/26/15 at 10:28 pm to reedus23
quote:
We're not watching the same games so far then.
Sure we are....I don't give up shite to anyone
Posted on 9/26/15 at 10:28 pm to reedus23
quote:
And no, his decisions are no where near as stupid as Mauk's.
I won't necessarily agree but they haven't cost us a lot
Posted on 9/26/15 at 10:29 pm to Wtodd
quote:
You're right I'm not ready to give up the East right now.
Posted on 9/26/15 at 10:29 pm to reedus23
quote:
This team isn't doing anything this year so play for next year. That means start Lock now.
"we're playing to get to a (6win) bowl game"..
thus spoke Pankel.
gotta keep playing Mauk because he's our "best chance"..
Posted on 9/26/15 at 10:30 pm to Wtodd
In the 3rd qtr. with 32 seconds to go, after a time-out. Mauk and the WR were ON THE WRONG PAGE. MM threw way short. After a frickin' TIME OUT! WTH!!! Can someone please explain to me how or why they can't communicate after a fricking T/O?
Just shxt play. Just terrible crxppy O. Do they know the plays? We know they can't execute the offense. OL is solid shxt, therefore Ricker is shxt. Henson it's your stinkin' O. Pinkel it's your stinkin' team.
Just shxt play. Just terrible crxppy O. Do they know the plays? We know they can't execute the offense. OL is solid shxt, therefore Ricker is shxt. Henson it's your stinkin' O. Pinkel it's your stinkin' team.
This post was edited on 9/27/15 at 8:40 am
Posted on 9/26/15 at 10:31 pm to Jagd Tiger
I would bet there are 4 other QB's on this team that if they played every series except one, they would have gotten more than 10 points.
Posted on 9/26/15 at 10:34 pm to reedus23
I don't disagree that the O looks more fluid with Lock out there...seriously I don't but I don't like the MM flogging because it ain't all on him
Posted on 9/26/15 at 10:37 pm to reedus23
I don't know why you guys frustrate yourselves talking about change. Despite the fact that Ray Charles could see the offense is crisper with Lock, Pinkel will still coddle Mauk and start him this season and probably next also. Ricker will also continue to destroy the OL, Jones will continue to under coach the RB's. We do what we do.
Posted on 9/26/15 at 10:37 pm to mosoblkcougar
quote:
Exactly, what reasons are there to continue with Mauk instead of Lock? I can't think of any. Lock could lose us just as many games as Mauk will, but he is the future and has a much higher ceiling than Mauk, who has hit his. Mauk underthrew receivers all night, Lock had one bad one as well but hit several over the middle that Mauk never has this season. We need a change and have nothing to lose in making it.
So long as the OLine can keep Lock protected, I agree with you.
Posted on 9/26/15 at 10:39 pm to Wtodd
It's not and I think everyone acknowledges that, but at this point...it simply isn't working.
It's time. We lost. To Kentucky. Mauk's record was really the only thing he had going for him, and a lot of those were despite him if we are being honest.
At the very least, give Lock two series in a row and see what happens.
It's time. We lost. To Kentucky. Mauk's record was really the only thing he had going for him, and a lot of those were despite him if we are being honest.
At the very least, give Lock two series in a row and see what happens.
Posted on 9/26/15 at 10:39 pm to Mizz-SEC
Good night fellas...tired of thinking about it
Posted on 9/26/15 at 10:40 pm to Wtodd
quote:
I don't disagree that the O looks more fluid with Lock out there...seriously I don't but I don't like the MM flogging because it ain't all on him
I don't think anyone is saying it's all on him. Everyone is bitching, rightfully so, about the WR's and about the OLine and about Henson and about Ricker too, all rightfully so.
Again, our future is Lock.
Our present is going no where meaningful.
So play for the future, not because Mauk sucks but so you'll be playing meaningful games next year.
Posted on 9/26/15 at 10:40 pm to JesusQuintana
quote:
At the very least, give Lock two series in a row and see what happens.
I think he should be given at least 3/4 drives per game.
Posted on 9/26/15 at 10:42 pm to reedus23
quote:
I would bet there are 4 other QB's on this team that if they played every series except one, they would have gotten more than 10 points.
not against me you wouldn't, but I'm not convinced it's all just Mauk either, but there's no point in rehashing it is there.
"we do what we do"... "we need consistency"
seems to me we have maybe a little too much consistency of doing what we do lately..
quote:
Again, our future is Lock.
agreed, and if playing him a series makes any sense at all then why doesn't playing him a quarter or a half?
playing long enough to get some rhythm and tempo might be a good thing, I almost puked when muskberger made the comment about Mizzou "developing" QB's.. I expect you know why.
This post was edited on 9/26/15 at 10:48 pm
Posted on 9/26/15 at 10:43 pm to Wtodd
quote:Mauk played good at times but he made to many bad throws at key times in the game.
tell me he didn't play really good for 3 quarters?
Posted on 9/26/15 at 10:44 pm to MizBob
For me, it's just not about Mauk at all.
I think everyone agrees that Lock is the future.
I think everyone outside of those with blind faith understand we're not playing in a meaningful bowl this year.
So why not prepare your future now, in the present, regardless of whether Mauk had a good game or bad game.
I think everyone agrees that Lock is the future.
I think everyone outside of those with blind faith understand we're not playing in a meaningful bowl this year.
So why not prepare your future now, in the present, regardless of whether Mauk had a good game or bad game.
Posted on 9/26/15 at 10:50 pm to Jagd Tiger
Look, we are short on offense. Honestly, if Lock hits the TD pass and Moore doesn't drop the other we likely win. Not much margin for error.
It's not an indictment of Pinkel's program. Very few teams don't have any down years. Consider this. Our best returning defender was lost for the year and our best returning offensive player has been a non factor due to injury. It is what it is.
That being said, we lost to Indiana last year and finished pretty well. Pinkel will have them ready to play next week.
It's not an indictment of Pinkel's program. Very few teams don't have any down years. Consider this. Our best returning defender was lost for the year and our best returning offensive player has been a non factor due to injury. It is what it is.
That being said, we lost to Indiana last year and finished pretty well. Pinkel will have them ready to play next week.
Posted on 9/26/15 at 11:23 pm to JesusQuintana
In 2013 TJ Moe was asked to describe the difference between Mauk and Franklin. He articulated that catching the ball was different coming from Mauk, it had a different trajectory as it approached the wideouts.
I think that is part of the problem. He doesn't throw a very catchable ball.
I think that is part of the problem. He doesn't throw a very catchable ball.
Posted on 9/26/15 at 11:43 pm to countrygrammar
Read carefully...ONE RUSHING TOUCHDOWN in FOUR GAMES. ONE! That's SEMO, Ark State, UConn and now UK. ONE TD by rushing.
Frickin' ONE!
Frickin' ONE!
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News