Put aside which camp you are on regarding Daniel Jones. This is the way I am thinking about his situation right now:
1) Giants are most likely going to draft in the 12-20 range. I base this on their schedule this year being easier than last and it seems like we have a competent HC.
2) With that draft range, we are out of the picture for any of the elite QB's in the draft. (I do not consider Levis an elite QB in next years draft).
3) Free Agency does not have many QB's to choose from next year. The best, by far, is Lamar. I have a hard time believing the Ravens will let him go without some sort of tag.
Now the Ravens have let star players go in the past (Ed Reed) so this is not out of the ordinary, but none of these star Ravens players have ever been the QB of the team.
4) Why would any FA come to us unless this OL improves? As well, who is he throwing to? We have no one to advertise a QB to.
My most likely scenario is that Jones will sign a 2-3 year contract, but he will have his suitors as well.
The main concern for me is that all the above are true, the Giants try to sign him and he signs elsewhere. At the end of the day, a team might look at him and say that he has not had a good OL, WR or steady coaching in his 4 years here, he can make the throws so why not chance a signing.
I want to ask all of you, if you do not want Jones, how do you look to address the QB position? Is my take wrong?
Thank you! That’s the only true answer for this bulletin board right now. I refuse to think in moronic absolutes about the decision of Jones. We need to let this play out and see what Shoen and Daboll decide.
👍
Appreciate the support. I am not bothered by those three posters but thanks. Still waiting on GD's point about asking me how long I played.
If a place makes bad food, that anyone objectively looking at the food would say was bad are you a hater if you don't want to eat there? Are people like, they were dealing with horrible kitchen equipment in there! The food handling staff is well below average but I bet everyone would love the food if they were gone! No because this is bullshit. You aren't a hater if data supporting your reasoning exists you are just a regular person that isn't super interested in experiencing sub par stuff.
Now hey, anyone is free to eat bad food and call it good. But when you start insisting that other people say the food is better than it has proven to be because of extenuating circumstances well that's really just an annoyance.
If you look in the other direction, that's where you get a very logical DJFC label. If people are asking you to ignore data because of these constantly extenuating circumstances that is like definitionally being a fan of something or overly optimistic.
Quote:
I like Lines of Scrimmage (LOS). I think they are a good contributor to the forum.
👍
Appreciate the support. I am not bothered by those three posters but thanks. Still waiting on GD's point about asking me how long I played.
You're the one who started accusing those who have proven themselves to be extremely knowledgable of not having played enough football to have any insight (and of course your own football experience is probably at or even slightly below the median on this board where several posters played college ball).
And my response to that is that no gives a fuck about your PAL glory years. It certainly didn't improve your football knowledge, if that's what you're trying to suggest.
Quote:
We’ve seen Jackson, Herbert, Hurts, Burrow and possibly even Tua now succeed in year 2 if not in year 1.
Lamar hasn’t had a healthy running back in years, they traded his top WR, and his all pro LT is hurt and he’s having an Aaron Judge type “fuck you pay me” year.
Yes, other QB's are getting it done, some with better teams some because they are flat out superior players.
But this is more of the same. Jones isn't Lamar or Hurts and he he isn't gifted at one specific thing nor does he play with a great cast. Everyone knows that. Why do we have thread after thread saying the same things everyone knows?
I don't think we can move forward with Jones beyond 2022 but i'm not closing the book on a franchise tag / smaller extension. I don't see any scenario where he's given some massive new contract here save for a monumental improvement in performance - so what's all the back and forth about?
Because we still have people coming on here and arguing that there is still absolutely no way to evaluate Jones, and the Giants should probably just re-sign him for 2-3 years because once there are better players, he may be a really good QB.
It is really hard to ignore those comments and focus on only on rational posts.
I would say the BUCS.
Tampa will need a QB after this year. He may not win them a Superbowl but he would get them into the playoffs.
I actually hope Jones to a good team. No sense staying here and getting the crap beat out of him.
Drafting Jones was like putting a roof on a house with no walls or foundation and then complaining it's drafty, wet and muddy.
Quote:
In comment 15837755 ChrisRick said:
Quote:
I like Lines of Scrimmage (LOS). I think they are a good contributor to the forum.
👍
Appreciate the support. I am not bothered by those three posters but thanks. Still waiting on GD's point about asking me how long I played.
You're the one who started accusing those who have proven themselves to be extremely knowledgable of not having played enough football to have any insight (and of course your own football experience is probably at or even slightly below the median on this board where several posters played college ball).
And my response to that is that no gives a fuck about your PAL glory years. It certainly didn't improve your football knowledge, if that's what you're trying to suggest.
Yes it is usually very clear to me posters who had little involvement at the QB position. This does not mean they can't present opinions on the position. It means some are usually wrong and why I call them the QB guru group (your a part of it) and plenty arrogant on top of it. Plenty of other posters offer great takes. They see the position and team football well. You just post DJFC. I never said anything about PAL glory years but okay. I'm sure you are one of those posters with a distinguished athletic career (Not). I'm comfortable with mine.
Do you believe Neal, Glowisnki, and Feliciano are getting beat because of their physical traits or because of traits like play recognition and speed?
The Texans traded up for Watson.
The Bills traded up for Allen.
The Niners traded to for Lance.
The Bears traded up for Fields.
Which teams who are in the market for a QB just sit on their hands and wait? I’d urge a lot here to get comfortable with the fact that the 2024 first round pick could likely be moved to trade up for QB.
And it looks like the Niners and the Bears made mistakes with those picks. It is still early. Fields still has a chance to become a solid QB if the Bears could ever surround him with a decent support cast. But Lance looks like a huge mistake. Of course, Mahomes, Allen, and Watson have proven their worth. I have heard that Macadoo wanted to trade up for Mahomes but the GM nixed it. And I read somewhere that DG would have picked Allen if he had chosen a QB instead of Barkley.
I would say the BUCS.
Tampa will need a QB after this year. He may not win them a Superbowl but he would get them into the playoffs.
I actually hope Jones to a good team. No sense staying here and getting the crap beat out of him.
Drafting Jones was like putting a roof on a house with no walls or foundation and then complaining it's drafty, wet and muddy.
You should just go ahead and become a fan of whatever team signs Jones this offseason. Feels like a win/win for everyone.
Quote:
In comment 15837786 Lines of Scrimmage said:
Quote:
In comment 15837755 ChrisRick said:
Quote:
I like Lines of Scrimmage (LOS). I think they are a good contributor to the forum.
👍
Appreciate the support. I am not bothered by those three posters but thanks. Still waiting on GD's point about asking me how long I played.
You're the one who started accusing those who have proven themselves to be extremely knowledgable of not having played enough football to have any insight (and of course your own football experience is probably at or even slightly below the median on this board where several posters played college ball).
And my response to that is that no gives a fuck about your PAL glory years. It certainly didn't improve your football knowledge, if that's what you're trying to suggest.
Yes it is usually very clear to me posters who had little involvement at the QB position. This does not mean they can't present opinions on the position. It means some are usually wrong and why I call them the QB guru group (your a part of it) and plenty arrogant on top of it. Plenty of other posters offer great takes. They see the position and team football well. You just post DJFC. I never said anything about PAL glory years but okay. I'm sure you are one of those posters with a distinguished athletic career (Not). I'm comfortable with mine.
It's still "you're" not "your" but go ahead and let us know who you think is intelligent enough to proffer insights.
I would say the BUCS.
Tampa will need a QB after this year. He may not win them a Superbowl but he would get them into the playoffs.
I actually hope Jones to a good team. No sense staying here and getting the crap beat out of him.
Drafting Jones was like putting a roof on a house with no walls or foundation and then complaining it's drafty, wet and muddy.
You do realize Jones does not have a single season of great production. What makes you think the Bucs will share your opinion of Jones, when he has never done it. At this juncture Jameis Winston is a far better bet than Jones.
I would say the BUCS.
Tampa will need a QB after this year. He may not win them a Superbowl but he would get them into the playoffs.
I actually hope Jones to a good team. No sense staying here and getting the crap beat out of him.
Drafting Jones was like putting a roof on a house with no walls or foundation and then complaining it's drafty, wet and muddy.
The Bucs aren’t going after Jones to be their starting quarterback. Stop this nonsense
Quote:
Don't try to outthink the game. Everyone knows talent is a big part of the equation. So is being able to physically beat your man across from you. In a game that is set up to compete physically it is important. Physical people get beat by more physical people. Its not coach speak. Its understanding football.
Do you believe Neal, Glowisnki, and Feliciano are getting beat because of their physical traits or because of traits like play recognition and speed?
I think for Glowinski and Feliciano it is more being who they are. Neal is in a total different position and for him I think speed and recognition is a much bigger part of it.
I had concerns with this offensive staff to start. Buffalo did little to show me they have the OL thing figured out. Hoping long term the same trend does not apply here. If you are really interested look at Buffalo's difference in offense before and after Diggs. Both Allen and Diggs hide a lot of warts that got exposed against the Chiefs.
They got the ball 9 times and scored 5 TDs
Quote:
In comment 15837786 Lines of Scrimmage said:
Quote:
In comment 15837755 ChrisRick said:
Quote:
I like Lines of Scrimmage (LOS). I think they are a good contributor to the forum.
👍
Appreciate the support. I am not bothered by those three posters but thanks. Still waiting on GD's point about asking me how long I played.
You're the one who started accusing those who have proven themselves to be extremely knowledgable of not having played enough football to have any insight (and of course your own football experience is probably at or even slightly below the median on this board where several posters played college ball).
And my response to that is that no gives a fuck about your PAL glory years. It certainly didn't improve your football knowledge, if that's what you're trying to suggest.
Yes it is usually very clear to me posters who had little involvement at the QB position. This does not mean they can't present opinions on the position. It means some are usually wrong and why I call them the QB guru group (your a part of it) and plenty arrogant on top of it. Plenty of other posters offer great takes. They see the position and team football well. You just post DJFC. I never said anything about PAL glory years but okay. I'm sure you are one of those posters with a distinguished athletic career (Not). I'm comfortable with mine.
Haha...we're the arrogant ones, huh?
They got the ball 9 times and scored 5 TDs
Lot of the damage was done when Mathieu got hurt. Chiefs were close to putting that game away until that 4th down call by Reid. They also lost a corner and had Baker in for the 4th QTR.
If you look closely at Buffalo you will see they could not run the ball between the tackles all year.
Just pointing out a observation that plenty of the analysts have pointed about as well. Bills were soft on both interiors. They actually addressed it on the D side but thus far on O they have the same issue this year.
Quote:
In comment 15837777 Lines of Scrimmage said:
Quote:
Don't try to outthink the game. Everyone knows talent is a big part of the equation. So is being able to physically beat your man across from you. In a game that is set up to compete physically it is important. Physical people get beat by more physical people. Its not coach speak. Its understanding football.
Do you believe Neal, Glowisnki, and Feliciano are getting beat because of their physical traits or because of traits like play recognition and speed?
I think for Glowinski and Feliciano it is more being who they are. Neal is in a total different position and for him I think speed and recognition is a much bigger part of it.
OK so for Neal it's not his physicality, but speed and recognition.
What is it about who they are with Feliciano and Glowinski that's made them ineffective this year?
I don't see why you are so amped up at me since I am subscribing to what you constantly preach.
Every game I watch, I shake my head at the teams/coaches that don't run the ball at least 30 times and those that don't do it as much as possible in first half regardless of the results. And it's because you said it is a sure-fire path to- football success. Just like Vanderbilt had less carries than Alabama the other day...sure enough Vandy lost.
This is genius-type stuff...
Quote:
In comment 15837833 christian said:
Quote:
In comment 15837777 Lines of Scrimmage said:
Quote:
Don't try to outthink the game. Everyone knows talent is a big part of the equation. So is being able to physically beat your man across from you. In a game that is set up to compete physically it is important. Physical people get beat by more physical people. Its not coach speak. Its understanding football.
Do you believe Neal, Glowisnki, and Feliciano are getting beat because of their physical traits or because of traits like play recognition and speed?
I think for Glowinski and Feliciano it is more being who they are. Neal is in a total different position and for him I think speed and recognition is a much bigger part of it.
OK so for Neal it's not his physicality, but speed and recognition.
What is it about who they are with Feliciano and Glowinski that's made them ineffective this year?
Maybe they're trying to outthink the game too?
I have said that being able to run consistently puts teams in more manageable down/distance and makes PA more successful. It helps your WR's get open and simplifies reads for your QB. End of story.
30 rushes is a barometer that a lot of coaches have used for decades. It means you have balance and applies to what I said above. Yet for some reason you take this 30 number and like taking shots. Reality is when you hit that number and it is from consistent runs your team has a significantly higher probability of winning. If you take the time to research that instead of your approach you take then maybe you will the value in it but that does not seem your style. That would mean god forbid you may be wrong.
There absolutely is truth to that statement.
Quote:
How the great passing teams run more because they are winning at the end. This was nothing what I was saying nor is there truth to your statement.
There absolutely is truth to that statement.
Back this one up please. I'd like to see it and understand the circumstances around it.
Quote:
In comment 15837906 Lines of Scrimmage said:
Quote:
How the great passing teams run more because they are winning at the end. This was nothing what I was saying nor is there truth to your statement.
There absolutely is truth to that statement.
Back this one up please. I'd like to see it and understand the circumstances around it.
You'd like to see proof that teams run the ball more frequently when they already have the lead than when they're trailing? Or would you prefer to see proof that they run the ball more when they're protecting a lead than when they're building their lead?
Which evidence will best satisfy your burden of proof?
Glowinski in 29 and is struggling. Feliciano is 30 and came from a OL who couldn't run on the interior and that is coached and managed by those same people.
The technical details are best for Sy but you can read his reviews. I am more comfortable with the QB position.
I have said that being able to run consistently puts teams in more manageable down/distance and makes PA more successful. It helps your WR's get open and simplifies reads for your QB. End of story.
30 rushes is a barometer that a lot of coaches have used for decades. It means you have balance and applies to what I said above. Yet for some reason you take this 30 number and like taking shots. Reality is when you hit that number and it is from consistent runs your team has a significantly higher probability of winning. If you take the time to research that instead of your approach you take then maybe you will the value in it but that does not seem your style. That would mean god forbid you may be wrong.
I wasn't trying to teach you anything. I only remarked that I subscribe far more to the importance of the passing game in achieving success at the NFL level in recent years. And that running is not to be overlooked because of the need for balance (not 50/50 balance) but yardage, scoring and ultimately wins come from the passing game these days.
You got on your pedestal and started preaching 30 carries come hell or high water, and I don't agree. I have no issue in teams getting to 30 carries, or even more, but as contributing factor to hopefully a far more effective offensive attack that allows them to reach that output without just forcing it. But you didn't like the way that ws said either.
But keep this up, we haven't had comic relief like you are displaying here since fmic went into hiding. The site needs more of this...
I would say the BUCS.
Tampa will need a QB after this year. He may not win them a Superbowl but he would get them into the playoffs.
I actually hope Jones to a good team. No sense staying here and getting the crap beat out of him.
Drafting Jones was like putting a roof on a house with no walls or foundation and then complaining it's drafty, wet and muddy.
I've said that a few times on different threads.
Brady is all but gone.
The FA market will be meh.
The College QB class looks to be less than anticipated.
Jones to TB for say 3 @ $15M per makes a lot of sense.
Jones with some talent around him would not be too shabby.
And the Jones haters can kiss my ass too.
You know where I saw this play out about ten years ago? When Nicks got hurt. Shit oline and now no more elite perimeter threat and the team goes to crap. Go figure. But hey, you understand football right so you understand that?
You know where I saw this play out about ten years ago? When Nicks got hurt. Shit oline and now no more elite perimeter threat and the team goes to crap. Go figure. But hey, you understand football right so you understand that?
Haha...you even post like fmic now with your slight pivots and condescending tones. Well done.
I am not denying mentioning the Nick Saban video for you to watch so he could inform you what he has been doing with the passing game to drive Bama's success. Here's the thread so you can re-read what I mentioned above exactly. Btw - count how many times you drive home the 30 carries concept too for kicks...
https://corner.bigblueinteractive.com/index.php?mode=2&thread=624965
Jimmy Googs : 9/1/2022 10:48 am : link
At least your getting closer to an actual point....running the ball and doing it effectively is a guideline. But not some magical 30 carries.
Effective runs, even if only 15+ or so carries could do the job. It creates space in the Defense, some semblance of balance in play calls even if not 50/50, and of course the most important dynamic...the opportunity for play action.
However the goal is to score. And scoring comes out of impact plays and the passing game. Teams pass more and more now and they do it because they know without the impact plays passing provides, they are leaving themselves exposed to not having enough points on the board to win or leaning on their Defense too heavily. If everyone had an all-time Defense then you can risk it, but obviously most don’t. Every new rule inserted in the game over the past decade or so has favored putting more and more emphasis on passing versus rushing to be successful. Not a guarantee but clearly favoring it.
It’s in some of the next few chapters on winning football, once you finish your Football 101 book from 1979...
Glad no one altered the archives on this one so I could re-post it :-)
The technical details are best for Sy but you can read his reviews.
What I'm getting at is you debate the game in repeated and exhausting generalities and catch phrases, you admittedly don't understand the technical details of the game well, and your arrogance about it is silly and misplaced.
You can't quantify why or why not players meet these esoteric thresholds you've heard coaches allude to in press conferences.
You'd be better off just saying the Giants offensive line hasn't been good for a decade and not try and tie it to a root cause you struggle to even define.
Posters on this site swing and miss and over reach their knowledge from time-to-time. Myself certainly included. But you double-down and bill us for the pleasure.
I'd say when push comes to shove the Emperor Has No Clothes, but that'd be an insult to emperors.
I think you put a big target on yourself, make broad claims, talk down to posters, use language like you're teaching people, and then get your feelings hurt when your spurious view points get shot at.
I think you'd be far more comfortable getting in on the joke with the rest of, that we're all just fans trying to better understand the team and the game. Rather than the joke being on you, that you've got it all figured out. When virtually all of us can see pretty clearly you don't.
Quote:
In comment 15837906 Lines of Scrimmage said:
Quote:
How the great passing teams run more because they are winning at the end. This was nothing what I was saying nor is there truth to your statement.
There absolutely is truth to that statement.
Back this one up please. I'd like to see it and understand the circumstances around it.
Here's your proof, as requested.
To outline the methodology, I chose 10 teams to review, looking at teams that had the most rushing attempts in 2021, as well as those with the most passing attempts. I made sure to include the Chiefs and Bills, since those two teams theoretically represent the greatest representation of what we can logically expect Daboll/Kafka to do. I also made sure to include the Rams, since they went on to win the SB. Here are the 10 teams:
Tennessee Titans
Philadelphia Eagles
Baltimore Ravens
New Orleans Saints
Buffalo Bills
Kansas City Chiefs
Green Bay Packers
Tampa Bay Buccaneers
Los Angeles Chargers
Los Angeles Rams
I then looked at a few different data points (all data sourced from Pro Football Reference):
- Total 2021 rushing attempts
- 2021 rushing attempts with the lead
- 2021 rushing attempts while tied
- 2021 rushing attempts while trailing
- Total offensive plays with under 4 minutes remaining in the game
- Rushing attempts with under 4 minutes remaining with the lead
- Passing attempts with under 4 minutes remaining with the lead
- Rushing attempts with under 4 minutes remaining while tied
- Passing attempts with under 4 minutes remaining while tied
- Rushing attempts with under 4 minutes remaining while trailing
- Passing attempts with under 4 minutes remaining while trailing
Here's what the data reveals (full spreadsheet linked below):
- Our 10 team sample ran the ball a total of 4,693 times in 2021 (average of 27.6 rushing attempts per game)
- 47.9% of rushing attempts (2,249) occur when a team has the lead
- 18.8% of rushing attempts (880) occur when the game is tied
- 33.3% of rushing attempts (1,564) occur when a team is losing
All of the above stats are independent of the game clock. Now looking at the scenarios with under 4 minutes remaining, which shows us how a team behaves late in the game when they're protecting a lead vs. when they're attempting to take the lead:
- When leading with under 4 minutes remaining, teams run the ball 83.3% of the time, vs. 16.7% pass attempts
- When tied with under 4 minutes remaining, teams run the ball 42.7% of the time, vs. 58.3% pass attempts (this is very close to the overall league average ratio for all score/time scenarios)
- When trailing with under 4 minutes remaining, teams run the ball 21.3% of the time, vs. 78.7% pass attempts
- 7.5% of teams' rushing attempts occur with under 4 minutes remaining while protecting a lead
- 2.2% of teams' rushing attempts occur with under 4 minutes remaining while losing (and this number in particular is especially inflated by the Titans, whose run-heavy approach in general introduces some skew to what's already a small sample)
Overall, in 2021, NFL teams ran the ball 42% of the time and passed 58% of the time. That's an important piece of context for the overall numbers.
When they have the lead, the numbers shift to a 50/50 split. When trailing, the numbers go more heavily toward the pass, with a 65/35 split. Only when we look at specific situations, like anytime in the 4th quarter with a lead do we see teams really favor the run (that scenario has a 65/35 ratio in favor of rushing attempts). So that's the big picture of illustrating that teams tend to run with the lead and pass with a deficit. Here's a site that allows you to toggle options and sliders to view run/pass ratios in a variety of game situations.
So we can see that in the current NFL, where the baseline starts off with a ratio that favors the pass, it remains a pass-first league in most scenarios, and only really shows a run-first tendency late in the game with a lead. In virtually all other scenarios, teams are more likely to pass than to run. That's how you can tell that the correlation of rushing attempts to victory is the reverse of your hypothesis. The conclusion is not that teams who run the ball are more likely to win; it is that teams who are winning are more likely to run the ball. That's not semantics - it's an essential distinction.
Below is the link to the spreadsheet that I put together with the 10 team sample from last season:
Link - ( New Window )
What I still say if you do not have a upper tier QB AND upper tier WR's/skill group with a functional PB OL you better be able to run the ball a lot with success. If you can't the unfavorable down/distance is going to really hamper any offensive efforts. Rushing totals will be based of this.
Can we agree on that?
What I still say if you do not have a upper tier QB AND upper tier WR's/skill group with a functional PB OL you better be able to run the ball a lot with success. If you can't the unfavorable down/distance is going to really hamper any offensive efforts. Rushing totals will be based of this.
Can we agree on that?
I definitely agree with you on that. Basically, you've got to be able to move the ball somehow, or else you're going to punt more often than even Joe Judge would like.
I would add that if you want to win consistently, you need to solve those passing game problems because it's so much more efficient to have a dynamic passing game.
*They had a combined regular season record of 108-62, or a 64% winning percentage
* 8 of the 10 made the playoffs
* 9 of the 10 had winning records, with Ravens having just a horrific 8-9 season
So this combined group clearly seemed to know what they were doing in the NFL last year. And they made it happen mostly through very efficient passing games while still not forgetting the run.
And yet, even as successful as this group was, and knowing how heavily they leaned on the run at the end of games as shown in the data, they still fell short as a group of this magical 30 rushing attempts per game that permeates winning franchises in the NFL.
As the famous baseball announcer Mel Allen used to say, "how about that"...
Playoff football is the best barometer. It exposes weaknesses. Some teams get by in the regular season but unless you get very lucky in your path you better be a overall balanced team.
What I still say if you do not have a upper tier QB AND upper tier WR's/skill group with a functional PB OL you better be able to run the ball a lot with success. If you can't the unfavorable down/distance is going to really hamper any offensive efforts. Rushing totals will be based of this.
Can we agree on that?
Said differently...what I will agree on is that if you can't pass very efficiently in today's NFL, you had better be unbelievably great at running the ball otherwise you're wasting everybody's time.
Like this debate...
Quote:
What I still say if you do not have a upper tier QB AND upper tier WR's/skill group with a functional PB OL you better be able to run the ball a lot with success. If you can't the unfavorable down/distance is going to really hamper any offensive efforts. Rushing totals will be based of this.
Can we agree on that?
Said differently...what I will agree on is that if you can't pass very efficiently in today's NFL, you had better be unbelievably great at running the ball otherwise you're wasting everybody's time.
Like this debate...
Yes and no. If you don't have a upper tier QB and skill group with functional PB ability you better have a stud OL that can run the ball. Otherwise your QB and WR's will be exposed as you are sitting in consistently long 2nd/3rd which will highlight all the deficiencies. This is exactly what my dialogue was about in the Bama/Georgia NCG when the two WR's went down. Bama got exposed.
And still they made it a really tough game until Stetson Bennett of all players went off in the middle of the 4th qtr.
Plan for everything I guess...
Wish I could tell you I valued more of your thoughts. I did several times praise you knowledge in Cap issues (hope your happy) which is where I see value. Not much elsewhere.
And still they made it a really tough game until Stetson Bennett of all players went off in the middle of the 4th qtr.
Plan for everything I guess...
Difficult to plan if you don't have the talent. Then your weaknesses get exposed which is what happened. If Bryce was in more 2nd/3rd and five perhaps they overcome that. 29/30 rushes for 31 yards not happening. Hope you figured that concept out. Its chapter one of the 1979 Almanac.
That hurts. I find a lot of comic value in yours. Seems like a owe you one little guy.
Quote:
loses it's two best WRs late in the season and has to play one of the All-Time Best Defenses in collegiate history without reaching into their practice sqaud for help.
And still they made it a really tough game until Stetson Bennett of all players went off in the middle of the 4th qtr.
Plan for everything I guess...
Difficult to plan if you don't have the talent. Then your weaknesses get exposed which is what happened. If Bryce was in more 2nd/3rd and five perhaps they overcome that. 29/30 rushes for 31 yards not happening. Hope you figured that concept out. Its chapter one of the 1979 Almanac.
If they only recruited or coached better. Bama really is scraping the bottom of the barrel for talent. Send them some of your posts and maybe they will just learn.
This is where you should just say “Uncle”.
But fine if not. :-)