Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 96

Thread: This won't be popular, but....

  1. #41
    TheDynastyIsDead TUSK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    In your head.
    Posts
    13,251
    vCash
    1010619
    Quote Originally Posted by Todd4State View Post
    I don't agree that Auburn is a finesse running team. They are a very physical team and they do a lot of things with their running game, which makes it hard to defend on both fronts.

    this guy gets it.
    "It is not courage to resist TUSK; It is courage to accept TUSK."

    No.


    Easy there buddy. Tusk is...well Tusk is Tusk. Tireddawg 12.20.17

  2. #42
    Senior Member Jack Lambert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    misippi
    Posts
    13,657
    vCash
    2238615444
    Ole Miss does not have the offense to beat Auburn. Bottom line.

  3. #43
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    3,828
    vCash
    13200
    Quote Originally Posted by Covercorner2 View Post
    Right. All I'm saying is LSU was the perfect mismatch for Ole Miss. They are a power running, pro style offense, with elite defensive backs. While we are probably the most physical team in college football, we have a completely different offensive scheme and we lack elite defensive backs. Auburn also has a completely different offensive scheme and lacks elite defensive backs. We are better than all three teams, but sometimes it's more about matchups and where the game is played than who is the better overall team...
    We may not have elite DBs, but the weakness is getting beat deep, not tackling (cleveland's whiff at kentucky notwithstanding). Bro wallace can't throw it deep, and if he tries, we'll have a bunch of ints because he floats it like a weak armed QB tends to do. Treadwell and co. are a good batch of WRs, but if we tackle like we have all but a handful of plays this season, they won't be going crazy passing the ball.

  4. #44
    Senior Member msstate7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    75,533
    vCash
    20439
    Quote Originally Posted by CadaverDawg View Post
    So did they smashmouth us? I thought our D was great against Smashmouth teams, but Auburn ran it on us. So either they aren't "smashmouth", or we don't shut down smashmouth teams and we should be more concerned with Arkansas.
    They ran it on us bc they're good. They're damn good at running the ball. Their oline made holes against us and CAP drug some of our guys for extra yards. They also make you respect the pass bc they have 2 HR hitters on the outside.

    Their zone read is lethal. They can smash up the middle (cap) or beat you with speed (Marshall) to the outside.

    OM swarms to the ball and that's not a good thing against auburn bc the ball isn't going where you think half the time

  5. #45
    Senior Member engie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    8,518
    vCash
    13700
    Quote Originally Posted by CadaverDawg View Post
    Marshall IS their offense, and their is no smashmouth element to Marshall....so how can they be a smashmouth team?
    This is as full retard as you've gone on something in awhile.

    They are just as good with the actually smashmouth backup QB. Or haven't you gotten that memo? Since when does the QB have to be a "smashmouth runner" to have a "smashmouth offense"? Jennings and LSU missed that memo. Auburn throws a bunch of pre-snap trickeration -- then they run right over your asses.

  6. #46
    Minister of Propaganda JDog13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    1,393
    vCash
    299023
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Lambert View Post
    Ole Miss does not have the offense to beat Auburn. Bottom line.
    Yeah. Auburn may not have the top ranked defense, but will it be good enough to hold Bo dirt's low power O in check? I think so.

  7. #47
    Super Moderator CadaverDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    33,778
    vCash
    3012900
    Quote Originally Posted by msstate7 View Post
    They ran it on us bc they're good. They're damn good at running the ball. Their oline made holes against us and CAP drug some of our guys for extra yards. They also make you respect the pass bc they have 2 HR hitters on the outside.

    Their zone read is lethal. They can smash up the middle (cap) or beat you with speed (Marshall) to the outside.

    OM swarms to the ball and that's not a good thing against auburn bc the ball isn't going where you think half the time
    I agree, but 17 carries and 100 yards rushing for Marshall go against the Smashmouth criteria in my opinion. But that's not my overall point. The point I'm making is that Auburn runs a totally different type of run game than LSU...and drawing comparables between the two doesn't make sense to me. Doesn't mean Auburn can't still win running it on OM, but it's just a totally different type of run game IMO. Oh well, I hope you guys are all right.

  8. #48
    TheDynastyIsDead TUSK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    In your head.
    Posts
    13,251
    vCash
    1010619
    Quote Originally Posted by engie View Post
    Say what?

    Auburn is as smash mouth as it gets out of the spread. Are you getting lost in the eye candy and the non-designed Marshall runs? The don't actually have a speed/finesse back in that bunch anymore...
    Your argument is mostly correct... however, their #2 RB (Grant) may be the fastest player in the conference... he was processed by My Dark Lord.
    "It is not courage to resist TUSK; It is courage to accept TUSK."

    No.


    Easy there buddy. Tusk is...well Tusk is Tusk. Tireddawg 12.20.17

  9. #49
    Super Moderator CadaverDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    33,778
    vCash
    3012900
    Quote Originally Posted by engie View Post
    This is as full retard as you've gone on something in awhile.

    They are just as good with the actually smashmouth backup QB. Or haven't you gotten that memo? Since when does the QB have to be a "smashmouth runner" to have a "smashmouth offense"? Jennings and LSU missed that memo. Auburn throws a bunch of pre-snap trickeration -- then they run right over your asses.
    When the finesse QB is a majority of their offense...that's when. And what are you talking about "backup QB"? Talk about full retard. Johnson airs it out....and why would he even be a point of reference in this? You're reaching. Don't go calling people names just because you disagree....just discuss. It makes you seem like you know you're wrong.

  10. #50
    Senior Member msstate7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    75,533
    vCash
    20439
    Quote Originally Posted by CadaverDawg View Post
    I agree, but 17 carries and 100 yards rushing for Marshall go against the Smashmouth criteria in my opinion. But that's not my overall point. The point I'm making is that Auburn runs a totally different type of run game than LSU...and drawing comparables between the two doesn't make sense to me. Doesn't mean Auburn can't still win running it on OM, but it's just a totally different type of run game IMO. Oh well, I hope you guys are all right.
    What about CAP's 16 carries for 71 yards (4.4 avg) to go along with marshall's?

  11. #51
    Senior Member engie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    8,518
    vCash
    13700
    Quote Originally Posted by CadaverDawg View Post
    So did they smashmouth us? I thought our D was great against Smashmouth teams, but Auburn ran it on us. So either they aren't "smashmouth", or we don't shut down smashmouth teams and we should be more concerned with Arkansas.
    Seeing how we held their rush O to the second lowest output of the season and tied the 4th lowest in their 20 games under Malzahn, and 2 of the 3 times they've been held without a rushing TD was against us, I'd say no -- they didn't run on us very well at all. 2 of their 3 or 4 lowest rushing outputs under Malzahn have come against MSU.

    Auburn is smashmouth -- and they are better at it than anyone else in the conference.

  12. #52
    Super Moderator CadaverDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    33,778
    vCash
    3012900
    Quote Originally Posted by msstate7 View Post
    What about CAP's 16 carries for 71 yards (4.4 avg) to go along with marshall's?
    I acknowledged that in the OP, when I said they do run "some downhill". And not all of his runs are downhill either. Again, they may run over OM, but their run game does not mirror LSU in physicality.

  13. #53
    TheDynastyIsDead TUSK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    In your head.
    Posts
    13,251
    vCash
    1010619
    Quote Originally Posted by engie View Post
    Seeing how we held their rush O to the second lowest output of the season and tied the 4th lowest in their 20 games under Malzahn, and 2 of the 3 times they've been held without a rushing TD was against us, I'd say no -- they didn't run on us very well at all. 2 of their 3 or 4 lowest rushing outputs under Malzahn have come against MSU.

    Auburn is smashmouth -- and they are better at it than anyone else in the conference.
    Yes - Auburn is smashmouth

    No - and they are better at it than anyone else in the conference. (but they are in the top 1/3)
    "It is not courage to resist TUSK; It is courage to accept TUSK."

    No.


    Easy there buddy. Tusk is...well Tusk is Tusk. Tireddawg 12.20.17

  14. #54
    Super Moderator CadaverDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    33,778
    vCash
    3012900
    Quote Originally Posted by engie View Post
    Auburn is smashmouth -- and they are better at it than anyone else in the conference.
    No they aren't....they're a great running team, but not "smashmouth". I agree that they're the best running team in the conference.

  15. #55
    Senior Member engie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    8,518
    vCash
    13700
    Quote Originally Posted by CadaverDawg View Post
    When the finesse QB is a majority of their offense...that's when. And what are you talking about "backup QB"? Talk about full retard. Johnson airs it out....and why would he even be a point of reference in this? You're reaching. Don't go calling people names just because you disagree....just discuss. It makes you seem like you know you're wrong.
    I'm wrong yet basically everyone here agrees with me?

    This is tantamount to arguing that Bama isn't smashmouth because "Blake Sims is a shifty QB that provides most of their offense"...simply because Auburn doesn't fit your description of what "smashmouth" is in traditional terms. They run over your ass. That = smashmouth. I can't believe this is even a discussion. It's surreal.

    "Finesse?"
    Last edited by engie; 10-28-2014 at 10:20 PM.

  16. #56
    Senior Member mstatefan91's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    5,444
    vCash
    132431
    A&M and TSUN are basically the only two teams in the West that are not smash mouth running teams.

    Regardless, Bo better hope he at least gets two seconds to throw a bubble screen this week cause auburn is gonna blow up that offensive line
    LFC YNWA

  17. #57
    Super Moderator CadaverDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    33,778
    vCash
    3012900
    Quote Originally Posted by engie View Post
    I'm wrong yet basically everyone here agrees with me?

    This is tantamount to arguing that Bama isn't smashmouth because "Blake Sims is a shifty QB that provides most of their offense"...simply because Auburn doesn't fit your description of what "smashmouth" is in traditional terms. They run over your ass. That = smashmouth. I can't believe this is even a discussion. It's surreal.
    Engine gonna Engine. Another "discussion" that Engine can't help but turn in to an "I'm right you're wrong" rant. Even though you can't prove you're right and that's not even what the thread was about.

    Bottom line. Auburn isn't going to run 12 straight times between the tackles, so it will not be a comparable test for OM. Still may work, but AU's run game isn't as smash mouth IMO. If you disagree, great...don't care. You always do.

    Now, do any of you normal posters want to continue a normal discussion that doesn't include calling people "tards" if they disagree with you? I'm all ears if so.
    Last edited by CadaverDawg; 10-28-2014 at 10:25 PM.

  18. #58
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    2,607
    vCash
    20296
    You're right, this was pretty unpopular. If Auburn does what they do and OM does what they do, Auburn wins.

    One thing I'll be watching closely is how they defend Nick Marshall. He's not Dak, but you have to respect his legs and it might give us an indicator of what we'll see later.

  19. #59
    Senior Member Bubb Rubb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    2,203
    vCash
    12610
    I don't understand how this is even being debated.

    Auburn not smashmouth? Hells yeah, they are smashmouth. They are extremely physical. They will dominate both lines of scrimmage.

    Auburn is going to throttle Ole Miss. It will be a laugher. Once again, I don't even understand how it can be debated. Even if the Ole Miss defense plays out of this world, Auburn is going to score some points. Nobody with a lick of sense can surely say that Ole Miss is going to be able to outscore Auburn.

    Believe me now, or believe me later.

    Auburn will be our most impressive win this year, no matter who we play going forward. By the end of the year, that LSU win is going to look damn good too.
    Last edited by Bubb Rubb; 10-28-2014 at 10:28 PM.

  20. #60
    Super Moderator CadaverDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    33,778
    vCash
    3012900
    I'm cool with people disagreeing. Auburn ran more times East/West than they did North/South the last several games. That's not what I would call "smash mouth" or "downhill", which is my point. If others call it smash mouth and downhill that's fine. I still think OM can use their speed more vs Au than they could vs LSU.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Disclaimer: Elitedawgs is a privately owned and operated forum that is managed by alumni of Mississippi State University. This website is in no way affiliated with the Mississippi State University, The Southeastern Conference (SEC) or the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). The views and opinions expressed herein are strictly those of the post author and may not reflect the views of other members of this forum or elitedawgs.com. The interactive nature of the elitedawgs.com forums makes it impossible for elitedawgs.com to assume responsibility for any of the content posted at this site. Ideas, thoughts, suggestion, comments, opinions, advice and observations made by participants at elitedawgs.com are not endorsed by elitedawgs.com
Elitedawgs: A Mississippi State Fan Forum, Mississippi State Football, Mississippi State Basketball, Mississippi State Baseball, Mississippi State Athletics. Mississippi State message board.