That was the best offensively called game since Kiff was here. I can only remember one really bad call (3rd down screen). I'm not too tore up because Jancek made chicken salad out of chickenshit last year. These guys aren't the best gameday coaches, but the weakest link from last year is coaching QBs at Tampa.
Run your 240 lb wrecking ball until the defense is gassed, then run your speedster. It was a well called game and it seemed, at times, that throwing the ball wasn't really necessary
Thomas was on the 2nd level on pretty much every run over 5 yards. He made the block that sprung Hurd on his first td run
I had no idea BG was the team that gave up 644 rushing yards to Wisconsin. How bad can your rush defense be?
Ha I said North, physically as in height weight speed, could be the best in the sec. He's a physical freak.
Mayfield looks like a prototypical weak armed dink and dunk qb. Pressure makes him very anxious and his arm isn't strong at all
I argued that the stats didn't tell any part of the story. North had a noodle armed QB and a dumbass OC, as opposed to Cooper with a good QB and a great coordinator
I don't remember who said what, but it seems silly to even put him in the same conversation as Amari Cooper at this point. Well, North still has a dumbass OC, but it doesn't take much intelligence to realize that it's important to get the ball to your best player. And now he has a decent QB, so this argument is going to begin to struggle if he doesn't start getting more targets. Anybody remember what thread that was in? Probably need to start cooking up some crow.
We rushed for 400 yards on a shitty defense. Not hard to call a good game when you are usually getting 6 yards per carry.
I'm watching on the DVR right now, and I agree with all of this so far. Also, Moseley has been getting beaten so far, but he's been close enough to make a play on anything but a perfect throw. Abernathy and Foreman were both beaten worse in the first quarter.
This is the exact same argument people used when it was said we should be starting Dobbs. Exact. You're not making a logical argument, you're just restating the situation as being a conclusive fact in itself. Worley is starting over Dobbs? "Well he must be better." North isn't getting many targets? "Well if he doesn't get targets, he must not be good."