Couldn't recruit off campus though.Saban would use him only in one those advisor roles. He is not helping the program which NEEDS a CB coach who actually can coach. Bly can talk, not coach.
Couldn't recruit off campus though.Saban would use him only in one those advisor roles. He is not helping the program which NEEDS a CB coach who actually can coach. Bly can talk, not coach.
Yup.He's right. We brought in Warren for the sole purpose of helping DBs. Dre is learning. He's a recruiter. You have to have them. We've lost Brewster, Gillespie, Billy High. Chizik isn't a recruiter. You need kind of good blend.
Ending the season with four straight losses is going to make nine wins feel like five or six wins.
Probably. Even though Clemson got beat at home today. Although, I think that was more of a fluke than some sort of a trajectory. I didn't watch the whole game. I also don't think North Carolina it's going to win that game. I don't even know if it'll be close. Dabo is not going to allow them to lose two in a row and one of them being the ACC championship game.On the flip side, if they pull off a miracle against Clemson it's going to feel like winning a national championship.
Probably. Even though Clemson got beat at home today. Although, I think that was more of a fluke than some sort of a trajectory. I didn't watch the whole game. I also don't think North Carolina it's going to win that game. I don't even know if it'll be close. Dabo is not going to allow them to lose two in a row and one of them being the ACC championship game.
And whoever they play in their crappy bowl is going to be mostly insignificant, even though a win would be nice. I don't expect them to win that game either. And if it's like every other game it's going to be a nail biter right down to the last second.
The UNC team seems pretty demoralized and they lack the coaching staff to rejuvenate them.if they could somehow win the next two I think it could be enough to convince some high level transfers to come in for a year or two. If it goes the other way then we might be lucky to keep our superstar QB next year.
to an extent, yeah…losing to gatech was in my sight because they clinched the week before in a crazy game that they probably shouldn’t have won, much like duke & uva.I think the fan base would have been happy with nine wins if they didn't come in the order that they came. Winning so many in a row got a lot of fans hopes up, which is never a good thing with North Carolina. As I said in another post, if UNC hadn't blown the Georgia tech game, this rivalry game wouldn't have hurt so bad.
The state game was really, really close. I mean, you can pick it all apart (both sides), but it came down to a missed FG (and one missed earlier would have won it). The rivalry in football is strong and always really close.to an extent, yeah…losing to gatech was in my sight because they clinched the week before in a crazy game that they probably shouldn’t have won, much like duke & uva.
to me, the state game was a clean slate because they lost the “trap” game…it’s a different expectation, a different task…the motivation is completely different and should’ve been an emphasis instead these garbage uniform tweets.
again, the vision of them planting a flag on the field should have been on loop in the locker room and in the meetings…it’s happened enough in the last 15 years so the footage is out there…felt like fedora got that at least.
The current blend is not good because every position group of players on D lacks fundamentals and underachieves. Clearly the blend that Doreen has at Moo for D position coaches works better because the Moo D is better every year with lower recruit star rankings.He's right. We brought in Warren for the sole purpose of helping DBs. Dre is learning. He's a recruiter. You have to have them. We've lost Brewster, Gillespie, Billy High. Chizik isn't a recruiter. You need kind of good blend.
State filled some positions at about the same time Mack started back at UNC. They replaced a good OL coach (Dwayne Ledford) with John Garrison and he's turned out to be a good hire. We hired a guy (Stacy Searels) that had never coached in an air raid offense. We know how that turned out. Tony Gibson is in his fourth year there as DC. We overhauled our entire defense basically two years into a rebuild. You see the difference there?The current blend is not good because every position group of players on D lacks fundamentals and underachieves. Clearly the blend that Doreen has at Moo for D position coaches works better because the Moo D is better every year with lower recruit star rankings.
I should have taken your bet. $1500 would have been nice.Yup.
And I should’ve taken that bet on a better record than 6-6.I should have taken your bet. $1500 would have been nice.
We probably started out a little heavy on recruiters. Thought we could just win on talent and athleticism. But I'm not sure how you really develop anyone with how we've gone about things. Wouldn't blame a single guy on defense for wanting to hit the portal. And Chizik's scheme is, well, not great. I looked back at our 2015 stats. They're about how I remembered. Didn't give up many big plays. Defensive efficiency was bad. Top 10 offense. Weak schedule. We averaged about the same number of sacks this year as we did back then. About half as many as last season. The excuse then was we didn't have the personnel on our DL. Plain vanilla D. Not sure to what extent replacing a bunch of position coaches is going to change that if you still have the same defensive philosophy. But I could be wrong 🤷♂️The current blend is not good because every position group of players on D lacks fundamentals and underachieves. Clearly the blend that Doreen has at Moo for D position coaches works better because the Moo D is better every year with lower recruit star rankings.
I don't recall ever offering a bet for that prediction.And I should’ve taken that bet on a better record than 6-6.
Jason Staples has documented that the one glaring difference between Moo's D this year and ours is that all Moo players tackle well and stay at home - meaning they are in position, not roaming wild, and that they take th ball carrier down at the first opportunity. Missed tackles always lead to giving up more yards. Players not staying in their lanes always allows big plays.We probably started out a little heavy on recruiters. Thought we could just win on talent and athleticism. But I'm not sure how you really develop anyone with how we've gone about things. Wouldn't blame a single guy on defense for wanting to hit the portal. And Chizik's scheme is, well, not great. I looked back at our 2015 stats. They're about how I remembered. Didn't give up many big plays. Defensive efficiency was bad. Top 10 offense. Weak schedule. We averaged about the same number of sacks this year as we did back then. About half as many as last lesson. Plain vanilla D. Not sure to what extent replacing a bunch of position coaches is going to change that without a change in overall defensive philosophy. But I could be wrong 🤷♂️
He tries to frame things falsely to make it seem that those who discern the many, and growing, problems with Mack 2.0 exaggerate outrageously. None of us thought that against this very weak schedule Mack would be 6-6.I don't recall ever offering a bet for that prediction.
I thought they'd be 6-6, for sure. I didn't know Drake Maye would be as good as he was so soon. And, as I said, losing the last 4 games will make 9 wins... against weak opponents... seem pretty lackluster and anticlimactic.He tries to frame things falsely to make it seem that those who discern the many, and growing, problems with Mack 2.0 exaggerate outrageously. None of us thought that against this very weak schedule Mack would be 6-6.
I do think that with this talent, against this schedule, this team easily could have been 12-0 and should have been no worse than a robust 11-1, by which I mean we pounded lesser foes and played ND very tough.
I’m saying I should’ve put a wager down. We’ll see what happens on Saturday night. Clemson has a lot of issues of their own.I don't recall ever offering a bet for that prediction.
And...
Ending the season with four straight losses is going to make nine wins feel like five or six wins.
Lol, he literally said we would finish 6-6 in another thread. I don’t blame the reasoning seeing how we finished last year. Gattis doing work against Pitt tonight.He tries to frame things falsely to make it seem that those who discern the many, and growing, problems with Mack 2.0 exaggerate outrageously. None of us thought that against this very weak schedule Mack would be 6-6.
I do think that with this talent, against this schedule, this team easily could have been 12-0 and should have been no worse than a robust 11-1, by which I mean we pounded lesser foes and played ND very tough.
It's pretty difficult to "put a wager down" when I never offered. You actually offered a $1500 wager that you would have lost.I’m saying I should’ve put a wager down. We’ll see what happens on Saturday night. Clemson has a lot of issues of their own.
Again, I’m saying I should’ve made a bet with you on the 6-6 you predicted as I predicted 9. Yes, I did offer the $1,500 as I had faith in the offense and the kicking game at the time.It's pretty difficult to "put a wager down" when I never offered. You actually offered a $1500 wager that you would have lost.
I agree that we've relied too heavily on recruiting. But who is it that you're wanting to replace? We just hired Warren. If there's one group where we've seen some potential, it's at LB. That's Thig. And he's not a bad recruiter. So, I'm guessing Cross. But, again, this is his first year coaching the entire front. And Chizik's defenses, even when he was here last time, we weren't physical up front, and we didn't get after the QB. We had TWICE as many sacks last year. Now, the same people that were clamoring for Chizik and this vanilla D are complaining about not getting enough penetration at the LOS and TFLs lol!! You might be right, though, if we can find an upgrade. I'm just saying Chizik is not the guy. The timing of that move was DUMB. The transition to his scheme has SUCKED. It's a big reason why we are where we are right now.Jason Staples has documented that the one glaring difference between Moo's D this year and ours is that all Moo players tackle well and stay at home - meaning they are in position, not roaming wild, and that they take th ball carrier down at the first opportunity. Missed tackles always lead to giving up more yards. Players not staying in their lanes always allows big plays.
Position coaches are supposed to teach those things. Mack does not think such things matter much because Mack's faith is in outrecruiting people to win. Mack is out recruiting Moo and GT, and look at what just happened.
UNC might try and offer Dick Crum a new contract. Or, maybe the ghost of Bill Dooley!I agree that we've relied too heavily on recruiting. But who is it that you're wanting to replace? We just hired Warren. If there's one group where we've seen some potential, it's at LB. That's Thig. And he's not a bad recruiter. So, I'm guessing Cross. But, again, this is his first year coaching the entire front. And Chizik's defenses, even when he was here last time, we weren't physical up front, and we didn't get after the QB. You might be right, though, if we can find an upgrade. I'm just saying Chizik is not the guy. The timing of that move was DUMB. The transition to his scheme has SUCKED. It's a big reason why we are where we are right now.
what else is there???Who is ready for another 1 score, last possession...
Don't argue. Disregard my drunk-posting and admit that you think we have a chance vs Clem.what else is there???