Started By
Message
re: The talk about A&M's offense if we had lost
Posted on 11/12/12 at 12:52 am to sharkfhin
Posted on 11/12/12 at 12:52 am to sharkfhin
quote:
with the type of offense they did and surprised teams
Maybe the first 3 or 4 games this year, but not by the time they played Bama. Saban's just a little bitch who thought he could roll aTm and got raped.
0
Posted on 11/12/12 at 12:53 am to Roger Klarvin
quote:
Our defense is better than Auburn's was
You don't have a Fairley to start with.
Your secondary is chasing on every deep pass. If you don't put numbers in the box, you lose the point of attack.
Auburn's defense wasn't stellar, but it was experienced and had some NFL talent.
You're getting carried away. The 24 hour rule is about to come crashing down on you soon.
Posted on 11/12/12 at 12:54 am to Projectpat
quote:
Agreed.
quote:
That's the difference in our programs right there.
You guys are on your way it seems. All this shite about "getting a D" is fricking ridiculous. aTm has a damn D. They brought out the fricking lumber against Bama. Those boys can hit.
Posted on 11/12/12 at 12:54 am to wahoocs
Our defense has a higher ranking against the run, total defense and scoring defense. Moore is every bit as good as Fairley and we have two draft picks at linebacker. Yeah, our seondary isnt great. The comment was that our defense isnt good enough to win the SEC, which is just factually incorrect.
Posted on 11/12/12 at 12:55 am to wahoocs
ill take an offense that continues to put pressure on the opposing defense vice running it up the middle, playing for field goals and trying to close it off with defense.
Posted on 11/12/12 at 12:56 am to juff
quote:
I've already conceded the fact that you belong in the SEC, but if you want to "belong" with the Big 6 you need to win a NC.
I assume you're talking about the Big 6, whom were all founding members of the SEC and have all won multiple conference championships and at least one national title. Teams that have joined via conference expansion don't have a part in that history, so they'll never join the real Big 6, for they're far behind everyone else's accomplishments in the past 80 years of the SEC's existence.
Now, the current, relevant Big 6 is Georgia, Florida, South Carolina, LSU, Texas A&M, and Alabama. Auburn hasn't been a powerhouse/perennial title contender in how long? Tennessee has been irrelevant how long?
Posted on 11/12/12 at 1:01 am to Madara
quote:
Auburn hasn't been a powerhouse/perennial title contender in how long? Tennessee has been irrelevant how long?
Holy shite. What the frick are you on? Auburn won the fricking NC 2 years ago! Tenn won it 11 or 12 years ago. I'm not saying they'd be in the Big 6. They NEVER will.
And USCjr will NEVER compete for a NC. Get over it. And did you have to google the Big 6? Bc you don't know what the frick you're talking about.
Posted on 11/12/12 at 1:01 am to ready4something
quote:
ill take an offense that continues to put pressure on the opposing defense vice running it up the middle, playing for field goals and trying to close it off with defense.
Well, it doesn't have to be either/or, but if it was, you'd play for less championships than I would.
Even if A&M had the talent on D, they lack the depth to run the type of offense they have. And even if they get the breaks to win in spite of that, it's not going to last throughout an SEC schedule.
I would say time will tell, but I'll give Sumlin more credit than that, and say he has a change in philosophy sooner, rather than later.
Posted on 11/12/12 at 1:02 am to Madara
quote:
Now, the current, relevant Big 6
Create a fricking thread and get the opinion of the Rant. There is not "current, relevant". GTFO
Posted on 11/12/12 at 1:19 am to The Boat
quote:
Florida shut it down. LSU shut it down.
The Florida game was our first in new schemes, with new coaches, with a fish qb under center making his first college start, and with two fish WRs making their first starts as well. Good for Florida for beating us, but our offense was probably about 30-40% installed at that point. If we played them next Saturday, we'd score 30+.
The LSU game is a much better argument. Yea we made a lot of mistakes, some of which weren't really forced (int after the ball hit our guy in the chest, our gawd awful kicker...), but there's no doubt that wide open spread offenses are riskier than the conservative schemes LSU & Bama run. When you're in a close game, 1 or 2 bad mistakes can be the difference. There's no doubt that Sumlin's system gives the "mistake advantage" to the other team. Does that mean we'll always lose? No. We executed very well against Bama and even though our offense takes more risks, they were the ones that made the big mistakes. But there's no arguing that we do take more risks. On the other hand, a wide open system is capable of generating more big plays and more points so it has advantages too.
Anyway, we've got a lot of great OL talent on campus, a stellar qb who's improving by leaps and bounds every game (seriously, he looked thoroughly mediocre when we played a way below average SMU defense and now he just finished shredding Bama), and our WR recruiting is off the charts. I think we're gonna put enough stud athletes on the field for our offensive system to continue to work
Posted on 11/12/12 at 1:29 am to Ash'sProstheticHand
quote:
I think we're gonna put enough stud athletes on the field for our offensive system to continue to work
If Manziel stays healthy with the yardage he'll need on the ground, I agree.
Still doesn't win you a championship.
And I agree with everything else you stated previous to this.
The risks are not worth the rewards, when your defense hangs in the balance. Ball control, with your QB having less risk to injury, and solid defense, with depth to keep it fresh, are the answer.
Posted on 11/12/12 at 1:33 am to wahoocs
quote:
Still doesn't win you a championship.
So let me get this straight...
Auburn, just two years ago, dominated the SEC and won a national title with a great QB, an average defense and what we now know is a suck arse coach.
Now, A&M has a QB who is a better passer and has the potential to be the most dominant offensive player the SEC has ever seen, a better defense and what appears to be a very solid coaching staff and we won't ever compete for a title?
Explain this to me. Explain how we can't win at the highest level. We are on pace for a top-10 recruiting class and have a ton of players returning. Manziel may be here three more years. You're telling me that we will NEVER play for a title?
Posted on 11/12/12 at 4:13 am to Ash'sProstheticHand
quote:
The Florida game was our first in new schemes, with new coaches, with a fish qb under center making his first college start, and with two fish WRs making their first starts as well. Good for Florida for beating us, but our offense was probably about 30-40% installed at that point. If we played them next Saturday, we'd score 30+. The LSU game is a much better argument. Yea we made a lot of mistakes, some of which weren't really forced (int after the ball hit our guy in the chest, our gawd awful kicker...), but there's no doubt that wide open spread offenses are riskier than the conservative schemes LSU & Bama run. When you're in a close game, 1 or 2 bad mistakes can be the difference. There's no doubt that Sumlin's system gives the "mistake advantage" to the other team. Does that mean we'll always lose? No. We executed very well against Bama and even though our offense takes more risks, they were the ones that made the big mistakes. But there's no arguing that we do take more risks. On the other hand, a wide open system is capable of generating more big plays and more points so it has advantages too. Anyway, we've got a lot of great OL talent on campus, a stellar qb who's improving by leaps and bounds every game (seriously, he looked thoroughly mediocre when we played a way below average SMU defense and now he just finished shredding Bama), and our WR recruiting is off the charts. I think we're gonna put enough stud athletes on the field for our offensive system to continue to work
You keep saying that but remember we just came off a shitty game vs Bowling Green and were blindsided by your offense. With that said I wouldnt be surprised if you beat us if we played again especially with the way our inept offense has looked. But 30+ get the frick outta here. maybe 17-20.
This post was edited on 11/12/12 at 4:14 am
Posted on 11/12/12 at 5:36 am to FiveFiveNineGator
Why does no one give damontre credit. Dude is 6'4, sack leader, top 5 draft pick according to some, and runs down receivers from behind.
Also if we had a half way decent kicker (33 yard field goal) we'd have 13-24 instead of 9 and an extra point on the previous pat.
Also missed a chip shot and a pat vs. lsu.
Also if we had a half way decent kicker (33 yard field goal) we'd have 13-24 instead of 9 and an extra point on the previous pat.
Also missed a chip shot and a pat vs. lsu.
Posted on 11/12/12 at 6:04 am to wahoocs
quote:
Bama won 24-9 after the first quarter.
As an Aggie, I have learned that any argument that is made on 3 quarters of play is completely invalid.
Posted on 11/12/12 at 6:13 am to Roger Klarvin
quote:
Now, A&M has a QB who is a better passer and has the potential to be the most dominant offensive player the SEC has ever seen, a better defense and what appears to be a very solid coaching staff and we won't ever compete for a title?
They had a very experienced offensive line, a dominant player on the defensive line, and an X Factor that was consistent all season. They didn't have to deal with playing a top 10 team for their first game of the season, but don't sell Cam short.
You just want unprecedented praise. Why? Let the play on the field speak for itself. You whine way too much.
Page 4 of 4
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News