Poor officiating in those two instances no matter what others say. Of course that was not the reason we lost just got out butts beat up front.
It's almost Game time Tar Heels!!
- Thread starter mahncpa1
- Start date
Heck, if we didn't fumble into the end zone and then got a stop on their next possession (yeah, I know) that would be a 14 point turnaround. All that and a dollar will get you a cheap cup of coffee, of course.
up front, on the perimeter, behind center, in the press box.
just an ass whipping.
just an ass whipping.
lemme also say, and not trying to pile on, but fedora saying "he had no idea that they would run that much wildcat" speaks to my issue with him and his philosophy...they had no passer, what did he/they expect?...second, what does that say about your philosophy??
baylor runs tempo but still game plans for opponents and for themselves...fedora just thinks that his stuff will beat your stuff, period...that kinda thinking works a lot of times, but when it doesn't, you better be able to get some stops.
baylor runs tempo but still game plans for opponents and for themselves...fedora just thinks that his stuff will beat your stuff, period...that kinda thinking works a lot of times, but when it doesn't, you better be able to get some stops.
Congratulations to Baylor. Game Ball to their O-Line. Our defense was totally overwhelmed by those big guys.
they were one dimensional and we couldn't come close to stopping them. All the games that they scored 60 in were the result of big passing yards. I don't care how big their O-line is , we were just an embarrassment tonight. I watched them struggle against a bad Texas team.
All I know is if Baylor is just that good on the O line Oklahoma will bear the shit out of Clemson because they handled Baylor
As much as they seemed to move the ball at will, I'm not sure it would've been much worse.
I would have like to have seen UNC put as many guy's in the box and made Baylor throw it. In all honesty Baylor took advantage of what we all knew was our greatest weakness, stopping the run. Right now we do not have enough beef or depth up front to be where we need to be. Hopefully recruiting can change that.
Three plays that stood out to me are the targeting call against Hollins. Not saying it was a bad call because the hit was up high, but it was really because of the height difference between the two players. There was nothing dirty about that play. TJ's fumble at the goal line was a dagger. I hate it for him and the team. Finally, I did not understand punting the ball with 9 minutes to go.
All in all a great year. This game shows us where we have the greatest areas to improve.
WHERE in the world does Baylor get all that speed? I think our speed is pretty good, but they made us look slow on both sides of the ball.
Three plays that stood out to me are the targeting call against Hollins. Not saying it was a bad call because the hit was up high, but it was really because of the height difference between the two players. There was nothing dirty about that play. TJ's fumble at the goal line was a dagger. I hate it for him and the team. Finally, I did not understand punting the ball with 9 minutes to go.
All in all a great year. This game shows us where we have the greatest areas to improve.
WHERE in the world does Baylor get all that speed? I think our speed is pretty good, but they made us look slow on both sides of the ball.
We can compete talent wise at the skill positions. But their OL dominated our DL. They said "we're gonna run the ball, now stop us", much like Switzer's OU teams used to do. And we couldn't stop them. Much like we couldn't prevent CU from running the ball down our throat. That's talent disparity exemplified. The game is won in the trenches.
DL is our Achilles heel right now. Hopefully we will get a recruiting boost from our success this year.
DL is our Achilles heel right now. Hopefully we will get a recruiting boost from our success this year.
Exactly. It really revealed a glaring aspect of our defense that we lack. We get a defense to match our offense and we're as good as Clemson. and, we're getting it.
Actually, they were the result of tremendous offensive balance. Baylor averaged 358 rushing yards and 361 passing yards per game in those 5 wins. Characterizing the Bears as a running team or a passing team is inaccurate since they do both very, very well.
Nope...but they didn't have three weeks to game plan for TX, either. Kind of an apples and oranges comparison.
apples to oranges ..really?. I call it football game to football game. one excuse is good as another.
As if every football game relates to every other football game. Which leads to nonsense like:
Boston College beat Northern Illinois
Northern Illinois beat Toledo
Toledo beat Arkansas
Arkansas beat Okla. St.
Okla. St. beat TCU
TCU beat Baylor
and since Baylor beat UNC...that means BC is better than UNC?
Baylor AVERAGED 600 yards a game. They didn't need to run the ball for 600 yards in a game prior to the late season because they had QB's who could throw the ball. I'm not sure why you have a problem with this realization. Could Baylor have run for 600 yards against Lamar, or SMU, or Rice, or Kansas? What do you think?
Football games relating to each other have nothing to do with the fact that we couldn't stop a team that had no one who could throw the ball down field , from running through and around us. They didn't even need the threat of a passing game. Do you equate our defense with Lamar , SMU , Rice and Kansas?
You need to go back to the original question:
did baylor gain 600 rushing yards on anybody else this season?
And the response you seem to find so troubling:
Didn't need to...they had a passing offense until the TX game.
Do YOU claim our defense is inferior to those of the schools in question? COULD Baylor have run for 600+ yards against those schools if they needed to? If your answer is "probably" then YOU AGREE WITH MY RESPONSE. But they didn't run for 600+ yards against those teams because they "[D]idn't need to...they had a passing offense until the TX game."
I hope this clears things up for you.
It doesn't make a freak what they could have done against those other teams. The only point is they ran through and around us like we weren't even there and without having to set it up with a passing game or a threat of a passing game. Hell we would have been better off if they had their starting QB , cause maybe they wouldn't have found out how easy we were to run against on every play. The only game that needs to be compared is Texas and they lost that game.
Does that clear it up for you? For the record the question was sarcasm , which obviously escaped you.
For the record, the response was a simple statement of fact. No idea at all why it got your panties all knotted up.
Similar threads
