Printable View
I'm not saying you're wrong, but from what I can gather - he's still taking some online classes through MSU. I was told that coaches believe he's going to come back.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cooterpoot
I hope Gabe the best, regardless of his decision
80% not coming back. Things can change, but that's where it's at right now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Westdawg
I feel like most of the kids that go home and come back do it fairly quickly. They realize they made a mistake and want to come back once they have had time to cool off. This kid has been gone for a couple of weeks and still isn’t back. It will be a pleasant surprise if he changes course but I’m like you and not expecting it. Our DB coach has caught the brunt of the wrath of the fans but the OL coach better hit on these projects. That is the most important part of our offense and we were not good up front last year.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cooterpoot
The OL wasn't bad. It was the Qb play that took so long to settle and get rid of the ball along with decision making.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarius
Um what? The OL was terrible. They got better as the season went on, but they were consistently getting beat by 3 down DL. If there are only 3 rushing, then you should be able to double team two of them. Not making excuses for KJ and Will bc they needed to get the ball out quicker but when 3 players whoop 5, it's hard to do that.Quote:
Originally Posted by bulldawg28
If a kid can't take the off season workouts he won't make it during summer and fall camp. He won't be back. It hurts us this cycle cause we can't replace that ship until December
The linemen's play got better the moment the Qbs did. Ironic huh?Quote:
Originally Posted by KOdawg1
I guess it's just a coincidence that the lineman got better because they swapped them around and did different combos until they found the 5 that worked together best.Quote:
Originally Posted by bulldawg28
Playing the best 5 will always make a difference.Quote:
Originally Posted by Interpolation_Dawg_EX
They absolutely go hand in hand. I don't deny that. But to say "the OL wasn't bad" is just incorrect.Quote:
Originally Posted by bulldawg28
OL play was bad all year long. Especially Center and RT.Quote:
Originally Posted by bulldawg28
NopeQuote:
Originally Posted by Cooterpoot
Are you blind?Quote:
Originally Posted by bulldawg28
You can say it to yourself all you want. Won't change the fact OL got whipped all year. And we didn't sign a single OL to come in and help much either.Quote:
Originally Posted by bulldawg28
The OL played well against Georgia, LSU, and Missouri. They played pretty poorly every other game, but the second half of the year was markedly better than the first. It was still bad, just not as horrible. The Auburn game looked a lot like the shitty part of the year. We gave up a ton of sacks against Tulsa as well.
OL didn't play well vs LSU. KJ got killed that game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarius
You don’t throw for 623 yards with bad OL play, bud. He got the shit blitzed out of him so yea he got hit.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoopsDawg
So if the OL indeed played "well" against LSU, how do you explain them then going to shit for most of the rest of the season? It makes no sense that personnel new and poorly suited to this offense would have a good opening game against an aggressive, blitzing front, then regress dramatically when faced with only blocking three down linemen.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarius
No, the OL was pretty bad game 1. Didn't matter given LSU's stubbornly persistent 0 man coverage and KJ's willingness to sling it combined with more than a little luck. That set of circumstances then obviously changed.
The same reason our receivers played well game 1 and sucked ass for most of the year after that. You don’t have to protect very long in this offense when the defense is playing man and blitzing a lot like LSU was. They made it extremely easy. To say the OL didn’t play well in game one is untrue to put it nicely.Quote:
Originally Posted by thf24
That's fair, except not having to "protect very long" doesn't mean they played well. LSU's foolish choice of scheme and poor execution allowed our OL to be effective in hindsight without playing well. If you go back and watch just the OL you'll see the same fundamental issues (getting torched around the edge, 1-2 OL never touching anyone on many plays, etc.) that plagued us for most of the season. Go back and find that game thread and you'll see numerous mentions of how worrisome the OL was despite the crazy offensive performance. Those problems just didn't manifest in the result yet given the way LSU chose to cover and the fact they hadn't been exposed on film.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarius
We gave up 3.09 sacks/game. Vs LSU we gave up 5.
LSU was just bad. They were lit up several times last year. It wasn't just MSU.Quote:
Originally Posted by thf24
The OL didn’t play for the obvious and main reason because the system was entirely different..
Let’s see how they are with a season and a spring under their belts..
and a QB and RBs who all aren’t true freshman...
tried to rep this ... I have believed all along that while sometimes maybe the play was bad that doesn't mean the talent was bad ... and as a left side offensive tackle I can say with certainty that run blocking was always easier. The problem is all it takes is for one guy to miss a zone block or get beat and then the entire line takes the blameQuote:
Originally Posted by Ari Gold
And we lacked guys with quick feet to pass protect. It's not simply the new system. That's why we just signed so many. We might be about to sign another Juco.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ari Gold
Now do how many yards/game we averaged vs how many yards we had against LSU. Then do how many ppg we averaged vs how many points we scored vs LSU.Quote:
Originally Posted by msstate7
Leach tries to sign 5 OL every year.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cooterpoot
Who is the transfer we're about to get from D II?
Possibly 3 jucos tells you what you need to know. They got extra time, but we need guys to play. That OL was trash. Center got killled all year and so did RT. LT had struggles all year too. The two G were the best of the bunch and they gone. I will say, we were young at the trouble spots, and Cross will be good. Have my doubts about C and RT.Quote:
Originally Posted by msbulldog
I think Dolla can handle a G spot. Not sold on anybody on our roster to handle RT.
DB depth.Quote:
Originally Posted by bulldawg28
Is he a 1 year guy?Quote:
Originally Posted by Cooterpoot
YesQuote:
Originally Posted by bulldawg28
NSF my friend, we just lost him to South Carolina. Anyone want to guess on who the next DB will be that turns our offer down? We've got quite the list going at the moment.Quote:
Originally Posted by bulldawg28
It's going to be very hard to convince transfers with 1-2 years of eligibility left to come here and play behind Forbes and Emerson. Granted, all we need is one, but it's a tough sell.Quote:
Originally Posted by maroonmania
^^This^^Quote:
Originally Posted by KOdawg1
Yea, if you are determined to have a starting CB spot. But we start 5 DBs, not a lot of folk do that. And we really have no SEC caliber corners behind those 2 guys. Even within games you need more than 2 SEC quality CBs. We are an injury to one of those guys away from being in a bad way. And we also have available spots at 3 Safety positions if we can get someone that can come in ready to play. I mean we have bodies at safety but no real difference makers.Quote:
Originally Posted by KOdawg1
Exactly. Probably not a better place for a DB prospect in the entire SEC. Maybe Vandy...Quote:
Originally Posted by maroonmania
What a mess. Worst HS DB class I can remember. If we miss out on the big 22 targets, our defense is going to become OM like in the future. Big year for our coaches to prove they can recruit at the necessary level. Lose battles again and it could be bad.
This kid can play.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hambone