Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
4 minutes ago, Rockethorn1978 said:

From the 1 I would call qb sneak, run off tackle. Or maybe we should start expecting our coach to have plays the get into the end zone from the 1 and earn his paycheck.

like other teams trying to go up the middle on us at the goal line, we weren't going up the middle on OSU it was never going to fucking happen, fucking ever

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
Just now, hookem48 said:

like other teams trying to go up the middle on us at the goal line, we weren't going up the middle on OSU it was never going to fucking happen, fucking ever

Did you watch the game? Ohio state scored from the 3 running right between the tackle and guard to take a 21-14 lead. Literally before we drove the field and fell apart. 

Posted
he also saved a touchdown early by tackling Wingo with his pinky, maybe he's pretty good.

He was a Thorpe finalist wasn’t he? I remember them mentioning how good he as in run support.
Posted
6 hours ago, Hank_Hill said:

You almost exclusively post dumb shit, and this is the tops. Get fucked you dumb cunt.

Your whole schtick on this site is calling other posts and posters dumb in various ways.  It's tiresome.  Ignore list addition.

  • Hook 'Em 7
  • Like 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Hondo said:

Don't be a douchebag, especially when someone's trying to be polite.  

Allow someone to criticize another for questioning the sobriety of anyone and I won't be a douche bag you fucking nitwit.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
4 hours ago, Goredho said:

The offense had first and goal from the one yard line to tie the game with about a minute left.  We managed to turn that into a 14 point loss. All year, we found stupefying ways to keep lesser teams around for closer-than-necessary wins.  Its not surprising that our season ultimately ended by finding a stupefying way to lose to a team of roughly equal talent and ability.  Sark is our guy and I appreciate the much he has done right, but the dude has got some shit to figure out on offense.

I'm disappointed in the outcome. 

OSU played good enough to win, and good enough to lose. They won. Their defense playmakers played well. Their explosive downfield passing game was well defended by Texas. The executed one QB run play really well, and that was probably the difference.

Texas also played good enough to win, and good enough to lose. We lost. QE had a great run at a critical point, but it wasn't be design. 

Overall, we played better than we have most of the year, against the best and most balanced team we faced.

We had to play a clean game to win, for a lot of reasons. One big reason is our roster is but a shell of what it started with in 2 key places.

We lost RB1 & RB2 before the season started, the bigger guys to run between the tackles. We were going to have to deal with that all year long, and put more on the passing game.

We started the year 6 deep at WR. Of the 6, we were down to 2 who were at 100%. That is a big negative for a position group that is expected to be the strength. 

Bond - hurt and less than 100%

Moore - less than 100%

Cook - flaked out and gone.

Wingo - 100% good to go

Golden - injured last night, limited his snaps

Bolden - 100% good to go

We were down to guys who didn't start the beginning of the season. I was wondering if we were going to see Parker Livingston or Aaron Butler last night.  Not a good feeling going against a good defense.

Our playcalling has been suspect all year, and last night was no different.

I'll leave it at that for now.

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, hookem48 said:

like other teams trying to go up the middle on us at the goal line, we weren't going up the middle on OSU it was never going to fucking happen, fucking ever

And shocker, aggy fans bitched about the play calling and said it was too predictable 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

fucking amazing how we've laughed all year at teams trying our defense up the middle  and you idiots think we were going up the middle on OSU when their dline is even better. lol

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
Just now, A’Dam Psycho said:

And shocker, aggy fans bitched about the play calling and said it was too predictable 

oh this place would be melting down about the play calls no matter what if we didn't score, maybe we should have just kept throwing and getting interference calls until the end of time.

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted
4 minutes ago, ClubWhatever said:

Your whole schtick on this site is calling other posts and posters dumb in various ways.  It's tiresome.  Ignore list addition.

Agree. Never says anything of substance. Just acts like he’s smarter than everyone else making fun of posts and that’s it. 

Posted
18 minutes ago, A’Dam Psycho said:

Listen, I really don’t want to think you’re this dense but you’re knocking on the door. If Downs thinks it’s a run up the middle and crashes down, then that’s a TD. He read the play. Yes it’s ok to give the other team credit. You guys are acting like nobody has ever ran a toss sweep before on the goal line. They made a great defensive play. We lost. Move on

Who was supposed to block him?

Posted
1 hour ago, David Dennison said:

I keep seeing bring in Arch. I also keep seeing Arch had his helmet taken from him and was unavailable.

Which is it?

Arch was like, fuck the coaches, I am going in. Then Sark got a call from Thatguy, which led him to instruct the training staff to take Arch's helmet off so he can't go in.

  • Haha 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted

Sark wants to be able to run power but we don’t have the guys at RB this year to run it. Put Baxter or J Brooks at RB we probably run the table. 
 

Really tough to throw from the 1. 
 

It sucks but we have to settle for being the second best team in the country. Lost to an absolutely loaded OSU team that was nuclear coming into it. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
12 minutes ago, hookem48 said:

like other teams trying to go up the middle on us at the goal line, we weren't going up the middle on OSU it was never going to fucking happen, fucking ever

I know something else that wasn’t ever going to happen…

Posted
3 minutes ago, hookem48 said:

oh this place would be melting down about the play calls no matter what if we didn't score, maybe we should have just kept throwing and getting interference calls until the end of time.

Why did we hire sark? Didn’t we hire him to get us into the end zone? Yea fans bitch when you don’t score and win the big game. Not sure what the problem is here. He fucking makes 7 million a season to win games. Sorry you’re a pussy.

I remember when Michael Jordan was failing in the playoffs early in his career because teams played bully ball and beat the fuck out of him. His response wasn’t “well I tried guy what else do you want me to do”, he fucking worked his ass off and transformed his body and mentally prepared for the punishment and got over the hump and the rest is history. Sark is paid to figure it out. And his paid to be at a school that criticizes when he fails. Are we better than we were? Fuck yes and I’m glad he’s out coach but he deserves the criticism for last night. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Posted

To the two people defending that playcall, please just count the fucking players on the play side of the ball and tell me how we were supposed to score on that play. It is that fucking simple. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
40 minutes ago, satyanash said:

Not even close. The playcall is terrible when you have a safety at the LoS just waiting to blow the RB up. We literally had no one to account for Downs, we ran the play like we were at midfield and Downs was 10 yards deep.

 

It’s interesting looking at this POV, even with the mismatched numbers 5 defenders on 4 blockers, that play probably scores if it doesn’t play out so wide.  If the RB takes a straight line down along Banks left shoulder and folles him in I think it works.  But as executed it looks more like one of Ewers lollipop passes that takes to long to get there. 

Posted
Just sucks because, going into the season, I was thinking this offense is going to average 45+ points a game.  It's going to be like prime Lincoln Riley OU of a few years back.  If the defense can just be average, we're going places.  If you'd told me how good the defense was going to perform, I would have been thinking all-time great team.  Bleh.

We lost RB1 before the season and then QB1 was hurt most of the season.
  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
Just now, hobbes2702 said:

To the two people defending that playcall, please just count the fucking players on the play side of the ball and tell me how we were supposed to score on that play. It is that fucking simple. 

I'm not defending the play call if you're including me, I'm telling you we weren't going up the middle.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
22 minutes ago, hookem48 said:

what would you have called?

Run it down their throat 4 times and live with the fact that if they stop you it’s because they were stronger and tougher in the trenches than you. Instead of getting stopped because you tripped over your own dick

Posted
1 minute ago, hobbes2702 said:

To the two people defending that playcall, please just count the fucking players on the play side of the ball and tell me how we were supposed to score on that play. It is that fucking simple. 

Yep

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Posted

Honestly, I get his thinking on going wide....I just didn't like the actual play call.

The execution was worse than the call. 

Banks never had a chance and in turn Wisner never had a chance.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Helobious said:

Run it down their throat 4 times and live with the fact that if they stop you it’s because they were stronger and tougher in the trenches than you. Instead of getting stopped because you tripped over your own dick

ok, and Surly wouldn't be melting down about the play calls. lol

Posted
4 minutes ago, Treefidy said:

It’s interesting looking at this POV, even with the mismatched numbers 5 defenders on 4 blockers, that play probably scores if it doesn’t play out so wide.  If the RB takes a straight line down along Banks left shoulder and folles him in I think it works.  But as executed it looks more like one of Ewers lollipop passes that takes to long to get there. 

We looking at the same play? Even without downs being free nothing was there

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
17 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

Allow someone to criticize another for questioning the sobriety of anyone and I won't be a douche bag you fucking nitwit.

It looks like you're dead set on it, so don't let me stand in your way.  Carry on.

Posted
2 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

To the two people defending that playcall, please just count the fucking players on the play side of the ball and tell me how we were supposed to score on that play. It is that fucking simple. 

My guy

The play is designed to take advantage of the safety hesitating or crashing down because they think it’s a run. Caleb Downs read the play immediately and he’s one of the fastest safeties in football and made a great play. Two defenders were blocked and the pulling guard was on his way to block the other defender. The safety was never gonna be blocked

Posted
Just now, hookem48 said:

you'd hope Ewers would call a timeout there but it didn't happen.

Sure. The play will be picked apart to death and once again we'll play the what if game. It was just a bad call and Sark has got to get some help with goalline and red zone play calling. Maybe Arch is the key because his skill set is so much better.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
3 minutes ago, Kel Varnsen said:

I would have done something unexpected like run play-action on 1st down with a bootleg for Quinn to either find Helm, tuck it a run, or throw it through the back of the end zone. Then if that didn't work, pound it the next 3.

That’s my complaint.

 

 

that and Quinn not being able to hit wide open WRs.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
2 hours ago, A’Dam Psycho said:

Against blOU in 23 he ran it up the middle 4 times and then tried a quick out to worthy. People bitched that he wasn’t “creative enough” and was too predictable. Now yall are bitching that he didn’t run up the gut 4 times. The play call was fine, the blocking and execution was dogshit

Actually, funny enough, I bitched about a really stupid second down toss call that set the rest of the series back.

Posted

If you’re goal there is to get outside than why pitch it 9 yards behind the line of scrimmage. I love Wisner but he was not getting the edge all night long. I think you need to insert Blue, have him line up to the left of Ewers and do a simple quick toss. He’s going to at least get to the LOS. A run to the outside shouldn’t have been called even with Sarks explanation of what they saw on film. I think rushing for 59 yards during the game throws out whatever advantage you found scouting earlier in the week.  

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Posted
6 minutes ago, Hondo said:

It looks like you're dead set on it, so don't let me stand in your way.  Carry on.

Your troll attempts are amusing. BO&W says Sark's sobriety is his problem.  I take issue with that notion. You defend him saying he wasn't. I clearly illustrate he was via his post. You claim you were trying to be polite.

Here we are a day later and you're still on about it calling me names and arguing and otherwise providing zero input on the thread topic. 

Okay hondo doesn't get much trollier than that.

Posted
9 hours ago, RockyMountainHighHorn said:

We wouldn’t have sark if he still battled his alcoholism so be very thankful for it. Fucking shitting on someone’s recovery. Not cool at all 

That dumbfuck you're responding to should take a few months' break from this place. What a piece of shit.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted

We weren't going to score running it into the middle. We weren't going to score running it wide. We weren't going to score throwing it from the 1.

We should have taken 4 delay of game penalties and ran the wheel route to Blue 4 times in a row. CALL THE FOURS!!!

  • Like 1
  • Haha 5
  • Drool 1
Posted
8 minutes ago, Kel Varnsen said:

I would have done something unexpected like run play-action on 1st down with a bootleg for Quinn to either find Helm, tuck it an run, or throw it through the back of the end zone. Then if that didn't work, pound it the next 3.

If Ewers fakes the pitch and boots it, I think he runs in untouched.  Especially if we have a backside TE pass option that freezes the one defender that was remaining on that side.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 2
Posted

late to this trying to figure out what to run business.  

Assume, a. Arch is out-concussion b. we don't like to take the snap from center, but we can do that and c. QE is healthy enough to execute a run-pass option. 

I would have done the old-fashioned, take the snap from center, run play action, and had QE rollout and do run-pass option.  The key would be the surprise.  Do it on a down they don't expect, I guess 1st down?  looks like I'm agreeing with Kel. Or once you get to third or fourth down show a shotgun look, but rush to the line and do a quick-count QB sneak?

One thing, I am glad I don't get paid to think of the things that would work down there when my team is not having the great night needed at the OL positions. 

The OL had no room for error.  They needed to play out-of-their minds great and it didn't happen. But coaches too, they needed to be great.  Perfection was the order of the day and it nobody was perfect last night, except maybe the secondary guys covering the top two Ohio St. WRs. 

 

 

 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted

Beyond the play calling, our clock management the last 5 minutes was also unforgivable. Down 7 points we needed to score twice to win and should have been possession maxing at that point instead of running into the line on 1st downs to keep the clock moving.

Sark was content to run all the time off and tie the game to go into OT or lose

  • Like 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, cmontexas said:

Beyond the play calling, our clock management the last 5 minutes was also unforgivable. Down 7 points we needed to score twice to win and should have been possession maxing at that point instead of running into the line on 1st downs to keep the clock moving.

Sark was content to run all the time off and tie the game to go into OT or lose

The Golden PI to put the ball on the 2 happened with exactly 4:00 left. The drive started at 6:58.

Your goal is to score the damn touchdown, not maximize possessions. We are on the 2 yard line.

  • Hook 'Em 5
Posted
It wasn’t. The ball was damn near on the right hash. 

Really? I wasn’t paying attention obviously. I was thinking it was in the middle closer to the left hash. It was a dumb ass call either way.
Posted (edited)
34 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

Your troll attempts are amusing. BO&W says Sark's sobriety is his problem.  I take issue with that notion. You defend him saying he wasn't. I clearly illustrate he was via his post. You claim you were trying to be polite.

Here we are a day later and you're still on about it calling me names and arguing and otherwise providing zero input on the thread topic. 

Okay hondo doesn't get much trollier than that.

No, he said "His recovery history from alcoholism is his biggest problem. He’s too lenient and forgiving when it comes to second chances because of how he got his second chance.." and you latched onto that phrasing ("problem"), I'm guessing, because of some emotional reaction.  You've repeated "questioning someone's/Sark's sobriety" multiple times, so that's clearly your anchor.

I said I didn't read/take it that way.  I think your "questioning Sark's sobriety" is a straw man that you've latched onto.  

"The problem with/my biggest problem..." is pretty commonly used phrasing that doesn't actually mean the subject is a problem (in the negative sense).

"The problem with spending the holidays with family is that I eat way too much."  "My biggest problem with the holidays is I spend it with family and eat way too much."  Does that mean that spending time with family is a problem?  Is it a critique of family Thanksgiving/Christmas?  Of course not.

You overcommitted to what I think is a straw man, then you doubled down by acting like a douche, and now you can't gracefully back out of it.  I offered a polite "agree to disagree" and you couldn't even take that; you had to come back with a snarky comment.

You're a lightweight and that's what lightweights do.  

I was polite, you didn't take the olive branch, so now I'm not going to be polite anymore.  I've got a flight to catch, but if you want me to slap you around a little bit more, I've got a few minutes.

Edited by Hondo
Edited for accuracy; I paraphrased
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...