northwestern and Oregon state

[CU44SE]

You didn't start a thread titled "Sick of the Excuses" where you were ragging on SU fans for excusing the loss to NC St. because of injuries? I must have you confused with another Clev04 then, my mistake. The other Clev04 and you post the same stuff over and over again so I guess it's an easy mistake to make.

So people do notice me on this board . Your right, I did write a post about excuses. This post is in regards to the talent excuse that has been used, not injury. I'm sick of them, we are who we are and currently we arnt a very good team. No longer a big fan of Marrone, but I was when he was here. He wasn't a great recruiter and I didn't always agree with his in game calls but he coached his players up and I always had good feelings going into games that we would be prepared to attack that team and have a chance to win. The same cannot be said for my belief in this coaching staff or Shafer. I love Shafer as a person, but I do not like his coaching. The team is very undisciplined and we get blown out against every team that is top 25 material. It gets very tiring watching the same things happen and then the same people come up with different excuses. In the begining of the year it was talent, then play calling, now injuries. Always something new, so I'm sorry if it bothers you that I bring attention to these poor excuses. I wish the best and I hope I am wrong about Shafer but I do not think we get to the next level with him and I'm scared this may become Grob 2.0. I just can't do that all over again.

 

[TheCusian]

So people do notice me on this board . Your right, I did write a post about excuses. This post is in regards to the talent excuse that has been used, not injury. I'm sick of them, we are who we are and currently we arnt a very good team. No longer a big fan of Marrone, but I was when he was here. He wasn't a great recruiter and I didn't always agree with his in game calls but he coached his players up and I always had good feelings going into games that we would be prepared to attack that team and have a chance to win. The same cannot be said for my belief in this coaching staff or Shafer. I love Shafer as a person, but I do not like his coaching. The team is very undisciplined and we get blown out against every team that is top 25 material. It gets very tiring watching the same things happen and then the same people come up with different excuses. In the begining of the year it was talent, then play calling, now injuries. Always something new, so I'm sorry if it bothers you that I bring attention to these poor excuses. I wish the best and I hope I am wrong about Shafer but I do not think we get to the next level with him and I'm scared this may become Grob 2.0. I just can't do that all over again.

We've done this dance before - but what exactly about the Duke loss screamed "blowout?"

 

[CU44SE]

We've done this dance before - but what exactly about the Duke loss screamed "blowout?"

I don't think that one was a blowout. But I do believe Duke may be the most overrated/over ranked team in the country. Granted they are 8-2 and we would all die for 8-2 right now but look at there schedule. Their best win is Georgia Tech, which is looking better this week after their Clemson win (thanks to cole Stoudt). But look at this schedule and I'm sure plenty of teams would be 8-2 and ranked.

 

[Crusty]

So people do notice me on this board . Your right, I did write a post about excuses. This post is in regards to the talent excuse that has been used, not injury. I'm sick of them, we are who we are and currently we arnt a very good team. No longer a big fan of Marrone, but I was when he was here. He wasn't a great recruiter and I didn't always agree with his in game calls but he coached his players up and I always had good feelings going into games that we would be prepared to attack that team and have a chance to win. The same cannot be said for my belief in this coaching staff or Shafer. I love Shafer as a person, but I do not like his coaching. The team is very undisciplined and we get blown out against every team that is top 25 material. It gets very tiring watching the same things happen and then the same people come up with different excuses. In the begining of the year it was talent, then play calling, now injuries. Always something new, so I'm sorry if it bothers you that I bring attention to these poor excuses. I wish the best and I hope I am wrong about Shafer but I do not think we get to the next level with him and I'm scared this may become Grob 2.0. I just can't do that all over again.

So, according to you, a coach should be able to take a team with average talent, 21 injuries on its 2 deep, no D-1 QB, a very tough schedule and do what? Win 8 games? Win 9 games? Do any facts matter to you at all?
BTW, who cares if you agree with a coach's play calls? Are you a coach?

 

[TheCusian]

I don't think that one was a blowout. But I do believe Duke may be the most overrated/over ranked team in the country. Granted they are 8-2 and we would all die for 8-2 right now but look at there schedule. Their best win is Georgia Tech, which is looking better this week after their Clemson win (thanks to cole Stoudt). But look at this schedule and I'm sure plenty of teams would be 8-2 and ranked.

I agree. But I think the only games we were close to being blown out were ND and FSU. And if you compare the results from last season and this one - none match at all. I know you disagree - but wanted to be on record .

 

[CU44SE]

I agree. But I think the only games we were close to being blown out were ND and FSU. And if you compare the results from last season and this one - none match at all. I know you disagree - but wanted to be on record .

Lousiville? Do you not think that was a blow out?

 

[CU44SE]

So, according to you, a coach should be able to take a team with average talent, 21 injuries on its 2 deep, no D-1 QB, a very tough schedule and do what? Win 8 games? Win 9 games? Do any facts matter to you at all?
BTW, who cares if you agree with a coach's play calls? Are you a coach?

The injuries are more recent though. They do not explain the begining of the year which I believe set the tone for the whole year. Everything through the Louisville game was a complete disaster.

 

[CU44SE]

I agree. But I think the only games we were close to being blown out were ND and FSU. And if you compare the results from last season and this one - none match at all. I know you disagree - but wanted to be on record .

And I know you disagree, but the Maryland game was also a blow out that people refuse to acknowledge because we were able to move the ball. Maryland is not a very good team this year and without that garbage td with 40 seconds left we lose 34-13. That's unacceptable.

 

[SWC75]

must have much more talent then Notre Dame and Arizona St. respectively. The only explanation why they were able to win this weekend!

Facilities.

 

[TheCusian]

Lousiville? Do you not think that was a blow out?

Not even close. There was a period in the 3rd where they couldn't move the ball at all. We were within 7-10 points for most of the game. That's by definition not a blow out.

They tacked on a garbage TD in the 4th.

 

[TheCusian]

And I know you disagree, but the Maryland game was also a blow out that people refuse to acknowledge because we were able to move the ball. Maryland is not a very good team this year and without that garbage td with 40 seconds left we lose 34-13. That's unacceptable.

Depends on your definition of blowout. FSU, GTech, and Clemson games were blowouts last year.

We shut down MD's offense after the big screen play in the 2nd. We put up close to 600 yds of offense. That's not a blow out.

 

[longislandcuse]

i'm not over looking anything. transitive property doesn't work. you're cherry picking an upset to prove a point that doesn't work.

We beat Central Michigan who beat Northern Illinois who beat Northwestern who beat Notre Dame.

We beat Central Michigan who beat Purdue who beat Illinois who beat Minnesota who beat Northwestern who beat Notre Dame

How about we have a complete inability to upset anyone. So much so, that people on this board get excited when we "keep it close". Even that is a relative term since people think we "kept it close" against ND. (No, we didn't)

 

[longislandcuse]

Lousiville? Do you not think that was a blow out?

Louisville wasn't a blow out but it was perhaps the worst offensive performance i've seen all year watching CFB. Also, L'Ville isn't even ranked in the top 25 right now. If that's the game we're hanging our hats on then I don't know what to say. Wow, we kept it close against an unranked team, awesome.

 

[TheCusian]

How about we have a complete inability to upset anyone. So much so, that people on this board get excited when we "keep it close". Even that is a relative term since people think we "kept it close" against ND. (No, we didn't)

It's all relative.

Year 1: "yeah we made a bowl - but when we lost it was a blowout."
Year 2: "we can't win close games and we should fire Shafer."

 

[CU44SE]

It's all relative.

Year 1: "yeah we made a bowl - but when we lost it was a blowout."
Year 2: "we can't win close games and we should fire Shafer."

What's close about an avg margin of defeat of 14.8 pts? Our only single digit loss is NC St and that was there coaches first ACC win.

Clearly we will never agree on what is considered a blowout. I consider a blowout to be a game where you look completely overmatched and lose by roughly 3 scores. Obviously things that occur in that game can change my opinion of this. For example, even though that ND game was 16 points, we won the turnover battle 5-1. You should never lose by that much when you win the turnover battle like that, making me see that game as a blowout. I have never seen a team be +4 and still lose by over two scores. I wish someone could find if this has ever happened before because it's mind boggling to me.

Where as your definition of a blowout is 50-3 or something in that range. I find those downright embarrassing and can't even quantify that type of game. Those type of games are inexcusable unless your playing a dominant team which FSU was, kinda understand Clemson (besides the breakdowns in the secondary), but their was no excuse for GT.

 

[CU44SE]

Louisville wasn't a blow out but it was perhaps the worst offensive performance i've seen all year watching CFB. Also, L'Ville isn't even ranked in the top 25 right now. If that's the game we're hanging our hats on then I don't know what to say. Wow, we kept it close against an unranked team, awesome.

Ummm 22 points isn't a blowout? They were up 19-6 for most of the 3rd quarter and into the 4th before they scored half way through the 4th. And as you said, we couldn't move the ball making the comeback even less likely. Idk what you consider a 22 point loss to a true freshman QB making his 2nd career start and our inept offense but I call that a blowout. And it makes it worse they are unranked, and no we didn't "keep it close" as you said.

 

[longislandcuse]

Ummm 22 points isn't a blowout? They were up 19-6 for most of the 3rd quarter and into the 4th before they scored half way through the 4th. And as you said, we couldn't move the ball making the comeback even less likely. Idk what you consider a 22 point loss to a true freshman QB making his 2nd career start and our inept offense but I call that a blowout. And it makes it worse they are unranked, and no we didn't "keep it close" as you said.

You're right. Honestly, I turned it off towards the end so I think I just erased that last quarter or so from my memory.

 

[CU44SE]

So, according to you, a coach should be able to take a team with average talent, 21 injuries on its 2 deep, no D-1 QB, a very tough schedule and do what? Win 8 games? Win 9 games? Do any facts matter to you at all?
BTW, who cares if you agree with a coach's play calls? Are you a coach?

Come on crusty, your putting words in my mouth. I'm not discussing the injury situation at all. That is why I'm bringing up the beginning of the year when we were still healthy and not bringing up the duke or NC state games. I agree Injuries have killed the season but I'm talking about how we started the season against Louisville, ND, and Maryland games when we were healthy. And please don't be the type of person that dismisses someone because he isn't a coach, thats amateur. People can rightfully question and disagree with coaches. I have watched football all my life and know the X's and O's of the game, doesn't mean I'm always going to be right or wrong but using that argument is ignorant. I come to this board to vent and celebrate with fellow Cuse diehards like myself.

 

[TheCusian]

What's close about an avg margin of defeat of 14.8 pts? Our only single digit loss is NC St and that was there coaches first ACC win. Clearly we will never agree on what is considered a blowout. I consider a blowout to be a game where you look completely overmatched and lose by roughly 3 scores. Obviously things that occur in that game can change my opinion of this. For example, even though that ND game was 16 points, we won the turnover battle 5-1. You should never lose by that much when you win the turnover battle like that, making me see that game as a blowout. I have never seen a team be +4 and still lose by over two scores. I wish someone could find if this has ever happened before because it's mind boggling to me. Where as your definition of a blowout is 50-3 or something in that range. I find those downright embarrassing and can't even quantify that type of game. Those type of games are inexcusable unless your playing a dominant team which FSU was, kinda understand Clemson (besides the breakdowns in the secondary), but their was no excuse for GT.

If you are in the game (down 7-10 points) in the second half - you are in the game. If you force 5 TO's, you're in the game.

If you are down three-4 scores in 4th, it's a blowout.

I had no idea this way of thinking was so radical. Seems like the media, coaches, and players all subscribe to my view - but maybe I'm wrong.

(I do tend to put the ND and FSU games in the semi-blowout range because we looked overmatched vs their offenses.)

 

[CU44SE]

If you are in the game (down 7-10 points) in the second half - you are in the game. If you force 5 TO's, you're in the game.

If you are down three-4 scores in 4th, it's a blowout.

I had no idea this way of thinking was so radical. Seems like the media, coaches, and players all subscribe to my view - but maybe I'm wrong.

(I do tend to put the ND and FSU games in the semi-blowout range because we looked overmatched vs their offenses.)

We were down three scores to lousiville in the fourth and we were down 3 scores to Maryland in the 4th before a garbage td with 44 seconds left in the game. Seems to me those 2 qualify as blowouts for you...

 

[Crusty]

Come on crusty, your putting words in my mouth. I'm not discussing the injury situation at all. That is why I'm bringing up the beginning of the year when we were still healthy and not bringing up the duke or NC state games. I agree Injuries have killed the season but I'm talking about how we started the season against Louisville, ND, and Maryland games when we were healthy. And please don't be the type of person that dismisses someone because he isn't a coach, thats amateur. People can rightfully question and disagree with coaches. I have watched football all my life and know the X's and O's of the game, doesn't mean I'm always going to be right or wrong but using that argument is ignorant. I come to this board to vent and celebrate with fellow Cuse diehards like myself.

I am not putting words in your mouth. You said:

"It gets very tiring watching the same things happen and then the same people come up with different excuses. In the begining of the year it was talent, then play calling, now injuries. Always something new, so I'm sorry if it bothers you that I bring attention to these poor excuses. "
​

Your quote above references the "poor excuses", including injuries. According to your statement everything is a poor excuse.

We were never healthy from the first game forward = not one game. And unless you reference a particular play, then criticizing play calling in general is disingenuous at best. The worst coach on our staff knows more about X's and O's than virtually everyone on this board, including you. Watching football and really knowing X's and O's are two different things. Sitting in front of your tube instead of being in actual game pressure are two different things. If you have not figured that out yet then you are the ignorant one.

 

[TheCusian]

We were down three scores to lousiville in the fourth and we were down 3 scores to Maryland in the 4th before a garbage td with 44 seconds left in the game. Seems to me those 2 qualify as blowouts for you...

Fair enough, I'll eat my words.

Maryland remains a weird game. They were not dominant by any stretch of any definition. They were more explosive on 2 plays and took advantage of a miscommunication on the pick 6. That's the difference in the game.

I wonder if the scores were reversed - if you'd be arguing that we didn't blow them out because we didn't score enough or gave up too many rushing yards.

 

[tep624]

Fair enough, I'll eat my words.

Maryland remains a weird game. They were not dominant by any stretch of any definition. They were more explosive on 2 plays and took advantage of a miscommunication on the pick 6. That's the difference in the game.

I wonder if the scores were reversed - if you'd be arguing that we didn't blow them out because we didn't score enough or gave up too many rushing yards.

If a person watched the Maryland game, which I'm not taking for granted in this thread, they would know that we were down 24-13 and driving inside the MD 15 when the pick 6 happened and caused a minimum 10 point swing. 24-16 / 24-20 isn't a blowout at halftime. We had momentum when that pick 6 happened and it completely changed the fabric of that game.

 

[CanadianSU]

Love how people cherry pick a couple of upsets - whoopdeedoo

This.

 

[Chip]

we are too slow at the key skill positions.. i think people dont realize how much we scheme just to get people into spots. we cant even run the offense we want because we have to scheme everything.. add in the oline injuries and qb play.

Since we're recruiting development projects anyway, why not just recruit a bunch of track guys who have never played football? How hard can it be to teach them to run routes and catch a football?