Jump to content

Bobby_Batronic

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    2457
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Bobby_Batronic

  1. 15 minutes ago, BrazilHorn said:

    Spencer Sanders will run for 200 yds on the Texas D. 
    This game is going to be ugly when Horns play Ok State. Jeez. 

    Probably. Our best bet is that 1.  QE stunts on them and 2. Sanders offers to lose the game personally as he seems to do  about 4 or 5 times a year. 

  2. NC State isn’t a top 10 team, and what one does against a Mike Leach Jekyll and Hyde team doesn’t matter. 
     

    That’s a bad tech team that will get curb stomped several times this season. 
     

    We are not a good team in our current iteration, but that could start to change when Ewers gets back. We are a very high delta team given our youth key spots and lack of depth or ability at others. 

    • Hook 'Em 1
  3. 18 minutes ago, HornOnTheBayou said:

    I think they schedule them around bye weeks. At least that's what I assume. I've never cared enough to actually check. 

    This is what I assumed. Previous game was on the Saturday a week before and then they have 10 days off before the next one. 

  4. 1 hour ago, ATXhorn17 said:

    Curious to see how Quinn fares on the road in a hostile environment… Tech will bring the house and try to force errant “WTF” freshman decisions. 

    Please, please, please vacate your secondary against UT’s receivers. I beg you to leave Worthy, Whitt, Ro or Bijan singled up against your second, third, and fourth best DB’s. Please do this. Quinn Ewers dealing into single coverage is pretty low on my list of worries for this offense. Him needing to throw deep outs to the far hash behind his back is kinda what that mulleted MF’er does. 

    I’d be more worried about a competent defense playing drop 8 against him and having a talented back 7 that can quickly crash down to make their light front right. Which probably isn’t TTU. 

  5. 11 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

    As a warship (really all ships) lover, I have always found the "inverted bow" of late-19th-early-20th century warships to be kind of ugly.  Also the "tumblehome" where the ship is narrower at the main deck than at the waterline.

    HMS_Dreadnought_1906_H61017%20(1)_0.jpg

    HMS Dreadnought.  Yuck.

    1280px-USS_Indianapolis_(CA-35)_underway

    USS Indianapolis.  😍😍

    1024px-Future_USS_Zumwalt's_first_underwU

    USS Zumwalt.  Yuck again.  The more things change, the more they stay the same.  Apparently, an inverted bow combined with a below-the-waterline bulb is the superior form, hydrodynamically.

    I thought the Zumwalt had issues with following seas. Seems like I read that somewhere. It might be a more attractive ship if the low observable requirements and design phase didn’t make it look like a foreshortened traffic cone.

    I’ve wondered if “looks right, flies right” applies to ships at sea as the Indy certainly looks a lot more right, but the tumblehome hull does seem to be better suited to handling higher sea states. I’ve seen a move towards that with offshore service vessels, some smaller freighters and a cruise ship or two.

    • Hook 'Em 1
  6. 45 minutes ago, 40acredropout said:

    On Horn they were just talking about how on 5-6 plays they had Andre out there as a tight end with the five starting lineman in the game.  

    Is this Sark thinking of ways to neutralize Bama edge rush?

    Sark throwing shit out there to make Bama waste time game planning it?

    A yikes indictment on our TE depth?  

    That’s a strong RPO look, and hard to ignore. Karic isn’t going to catch any passes so does Bama dare stay in smaller personnel and risk getting run over, relatively speaking, or do they upsize and risk matching a LB or S up on one of our skill players. 

    Bama runs it too. They run a fair amount of the stuff Sark left behind, it’s just BOB runs the etch a sketch version of Sark’s offense and has filthy enough talent to get away with it.

    • Hook 'Em 1
  7. 31 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

    I don't care if it's PK or GP, nor do I care that it was ULM -- the tackling angles and basic technique were better.  That doesn't mean we're gonna hold 'bama to 30, nor is it automatically the end of the world if we don't.

    Bama’s a nice “where are we at game.”  I fully expect them to beat us by 21. Lees if they’re off and we get hot, and vice versa. 
     

    ULM wasn’t going to challenge our players much, but our defense often looked like a superior defense should against an overmatched opponent. They were in position and stifling most of the time, and we didn’t exactly empty the playbook to do it. 
     

    It passed the eyeball test, which is not something I’ve been able to say much in the last decade for that side of the ball. 

    • Hook 'Em 1
    • Like 1
  8. 1 hour ago, Atticus said:

    The staff has had more time to work together and make changes to try and fix the issues they faced last year. Having GP certainly helps, but we have a defensive staff filled with guys who have had a ton of success at the P5 level. Maybe, just maybe, they figured out a way to make things work. Personnel is improved and defensive mindset has seemingly changed to a more aggressive one. 

    Or maybe the DC who couldn’t coordinate the front and back end last year despite that job duty being in his title got some help from the guy who’s defense he copied in the first place. 
     

    Lack of talent isn’t an excuse to not match up your defense. Your defenders may not get to where they need to be or make the play, but that doesn’t excuse starting them out of position or running coverages ill suited to what the front is trying to do on a given play.

    So Sark invites Patterson on down, revamps our safety play and suggests that we institute tighter coverage.  

    Im sympathetic to PK having a staff forced on him, but the inability to have Lake making things right for his secondary was telling.  
     

    I don’t buy into the “maybe our coaches figured out on their own narrative” when a long time defensive legend shows up to help. I suppose maybe he’s just collecting a check and cutting records, but I doubt it.

     

    • Hook 'Em 2
  9. It’s early, but it’s also telling that the two halves of the defense appear “coordinated” after the addition of a certain analyst in the offseason. 

     

    Brockermeyer aint’ it, but it’s worth remembering that he tore his ACL less than a year ago. I’m sure he’s not 100% either physically or, if that’s right, mentally.

  10. 1 hour ago, FartingMonk said:

    All steam is superheated in order to turn your turbined.  You have to get it to high pressure high temperature but yes.  It is scary.  The 3 casualties we were mainly worried about was fire, flooding, and steam line rupture.  Luckily the pressure transient from a SLR would probably knock you unconscious before you boiled like a lobster

    I was just thinking of all the times I’ve been on a ship tour and they’ve talked about the crew walking around with a broom out in front of them to detect the steam before it killed them. 
     

    I guess that would be a greatly reduced threat with the electric drives they’re putting in the Columbias. Still have to turn the generator with it I suppose, but not much else. 

  11. That super heated steam is scary stuff if there’s a leak. 
     

    I can’t remember which ship, but the British actually pressurized the engine room of one of their warships to get extra power out of the engines. 

    • Hook 'Em 1
  12. 1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

    I think those were where the "mooring" piers were attached.

    1280px-Battleship_Texas_-_exterior_-_DSC

    I was reminded looking at some videos from that Tom Scott guy that BB-35 was of riveted construction.  But I suppose any hull repairs will be welded.  Anyone know their intentions there?

    Also, I find it kind of interesting that the forward "barbettes" were enclosed and guns removed, yet amidships there are still what appear to be 5" guns in barbettes above the main deck.  The pic above really reveals it to have been a dreadnought, as those barbettes were mostly gone from ship designs by the 20s or 30s at the latest.

    Also something super-weird that I never noticed before.  She only has one funnel.  There are six boilers and they all feed into that one funnel.  That's got to be extremely unusual.  Even destroyers usually have two or more funnels.  At launch, she had two.  I understand that one boiler room, with two boilers, was removed during one of her refits relating to the conversion from reciprocating to turbine engines and I suppose they went from saturated to superheated steam and forced draft, as well as oil burners, so maybe that eliminated a need for a second funnel.

    I don’t think they ever refit her with steam turbines. They had plans to, but never followed through. 

  13. 8 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

    The Office Thank You GIF
     

    If there was a drinking game about his videos, his belt and his hairstyle that day would be the top of the list and get you drunk the fastest.

    Yeah. The hair is quite bad. You’re not fooling anyone bruh. 

×
×
  • Create New...