3 quality WR's committed. Does this silence the Croom critics for now?

[DowntownDawg]

....I should just create one post and save it in Ronny's archive every time one of you goofballs posts this tripe.

We scored defensively against Tulane, Auburn, Gardner Webb, UAB, Alabama, and scored a special teams touchdown against Ole Miss. Against Tulane, we won by 21, so the defensive touchdown only pads the score, using your logic. Against Auburn, we won by 5. If you take away the defensive touchdown, we lose by 2. If you take away the touchdown Auburn got from Pegues' fumbled kickoff (which is as much or more of a rarity than a defensive TD, and more than fair to do since both happened to the same player), we win by 5 again. Against Gardner Webb, we won by 16, just adding to the score. Against UAB, we won by 17, just adding to the score. Against Alabama, if you take away the defensive touchdown, we lose by 2. Of course, it happened in the first half, and who knows how the game turns out in the second half, not to mention that it was the least "flukey" play of any of them since Titus was in JPW's face and all. Against Ole Miss, you can take away the punt return and we lose by 4. Go ahead and take away Marshay Green's punt return from 2006 while you're at it, so that we win that game. Oh, and let's take the blocked punt off the board against South Carolina and we have a very good chance to have a win there. See how ridiculous this slippery slope this is?

You need to stop posting this nonsense. It makes you look foolish every time you do it. You look just like those idiots on Genespage saying "We lost 4 games in 2006 by 3 points or less." You are who your record says you are, and anybody that says otherwise is foolish. Go watch 1999. Take away some crazy plays that year and you can take 3 wins off the board, of course you could argue that you could add a win if Pig's punt return stood in Tuscaloosa

 

[Frances Drebin]

...Just like patdog mentioned above...it's fact. We don't score defensively against Auburn, Alabama, and Ole Miss (a punt return is a special teams score, true, but also considered a defensive score), and we lose those games and we are 4-8. We go full seasons with very few, if any, defensive scores. This past year, the stars aligned, and we put up a lot of scores from the defensive side, and it was the difference in a few games.

My overall point was not to diminish our achievement last year, which you are apparently making it out to be. My point was that it is foolish to expect the types of seasons like we had last year with our offense as it is.

 

[DowntownDawg]

In this paragraph....

...Just like patdog mentioned above...it's fact. We don't score defensively against Auburn, Alabama, and Ole Miss (a punt return is a special teams score, true, but also considered a defensive score), and we lose those games and we are 4-8. We go full seasons with very few, if any, defensive scores. This past year, the stars aligned, and we put up a lot of scores from the defensive side, and it was the difference in a few games.

...you have shown the uncanny ability, exhibited most often by women, to completely ignore an argument that disproves or makes your argument look illogical, and just posted the same idiotic thing. We can do this all day. If you are going to take the touchdown off the board against Auburn, take the fumble off too. We go whole seasons without fumbled kickoffs recovered by other teams, too. And if you are going to take the special teams touchdown off the board against Ole Miss, take SC's special teams touchdown off the board against us. Alabama's return was obviously the biggest, but again, it happened in the first half, and again, the play was made by a Senior All SEC defensive end. If JPW eats it, Bama is out of timeouts and we go into the half down 9-3. He tried to throw it out of the back of the endzone. Had he somehow gotten away and thrown it out of bounds and they kick a field goal, we go in down 9, obviously not an insurmountable game.

You can't logically throw out my arguments without throwing out yours. Both are based on "ifs." And using "ifs" to justify a position is always slipper slope.

For the record, you are right when you say

My point was that it is foolish to expect the types of seasons like we had last year with our offense as it is.

but you are wrong to put it on the defensive scores. We won 8 games last year because 1) we played outstanding defense (not because we scored alot of defensive touchdowns) 2) we didn't kill ourselves with turnovers offensively, obviously after Henig went down (in fact, I will argue that Carroll's streak of no interceptions was much more important to our season than our defense's simultaneous streak of pick sixes), and 3) our special teams went from bad to adequate.

Why is this important? Because, as you say, the likelihood of 5 defensive touchdowns plus a special teams score happening again is small. The likelihood of playing outstanding, winning defense is much greater. Teams consistently play good defense all the time. We did it for a stretch in the late 90's.

 

[Frances Drebin]

You argue like a freaking liberal. My comments about defensive scores are my comments about defensive scores and are not open for modification to include other factors or events. Had you said, "if they get the fumble call right at Auburn, we would've won by a bigger margin," I would agree with you because that would be correct. My overall point was that we scored a lot on the defensive side, those scores helped us win ballgames where we were outmatched and outgained statistically, and we can't count on that to win games...we must improve offensively. In no way am I demeaning our efforts or cheapening our wins because of how we won. I'm saying that we aren't always going to be as fortunate as we were last year.

And you apparently agree with my overall point which leaves me wondering why you are so intent on humping my leg over this.

 

[mstateglfr]

<span class="post-title">My opinion.......we've won without them.....</span>so why complain? I know we haven't had much of an offense but it is improving every year, plus we won last year. We moved the ball. We showed glimpses of putting together a passing offense, see Arkansas game. And we will win again this year, and the offense will be better.

I think we've recruited some solid WR talent. Oneal Wilder, Terrance Davis (I think will be a big surprise) and Shane McCardell could all be possibly good receivers.

Now, we're getting the talent to take us to the next level. I really like recruiting the athletes playing QB to play receiver, like T. Davis and M. Phillips.

</p>our offense is still below 100th in the country. that hasnt changed since he has been here. we are still the bottom feeders of the SEC in terms of offense.
we havent won due to our offense, THATS WHY PEOPLE SHOULD COMPLAIN.

also, we havent won without them. take a damn look at our record under Croom.
we struggle to move the ball. we struggle to score on offense. we have no passing game, again, check the numbers...they are horrible.

 

[Goat Holder]

I'm saying that we aren't always going to be as fortunate as we were last year.

Why won't we? Jackie seemed to win consistently this way. You don't think the defense will be even MORE opportunistic this year? ****, if we get some offense, we might be make a run to, gulp, the SEC West.

and we can't count on that (defense) to win games

Why not? Because of the spread fad? Because a high flying offense looks cool?

 

[dawgstudent]

[No message]

 

[Roy Munson.sixpack]

damn, we all have our days of being just that, but you are a grade A F'n *****

 

[DowntownDawg]

...because you don't hear what anybody else says. Listen carefully, it is just as ridiculous to isolate one rare part of football as it is to isolate another. So not opening that up for modification is the same thing that the sheep were doing at the end of 2006. It is just as true that we beat Ole Miss on a punt return in 2007 as it is that we lost to them in 2006. What you are referring to as fact is simply not fact. If so, then we are 4 plays different from 7-5 in 2006.

We can't expect 5 pick sixes and a game winning punt return every year. It's flukey. We can reasonably expect/hope for great defense that wins games more than once in a lifetime. We can expect/hope for continued improved special teams play. The most critical element of our success last year was lights out defense, not defensive touchdowns. If we can continue to get lights out defense, we can continue to expect/hope to win.

My chief argument with you is that you act like the pick sixes were the chief reason we won the games. They weren't. They were a factor. Against Alabama, it was a huge factor, but it wasn't the ballgame. And if you say it is, I can easily point to other things that happened in those games that were just as rare, or the fact that they didn't even figure in the final margin of victory.

 

[Frances Drebin]

Why won't we? Jackie seemed to win consistently this way. You don't think the defense will be even MORE opportunistic this year? ****, if we get some offense, we might be make a run to, gulp, the SEC West.

Yeah, Jackie seemed to win consistently this way, except when he didn't.

and we can't count on that (defense) to win games

Why not? Because of the spread fad? Because a high flying offense looks cool?

I didn't say we can't count on defense to win games. That's something you've invented in your mind. I said we can't count on scoring defensive touchdowns to win games.

</p>

 

[Goat Holder]

us giving Alabama the ball deep in our own territory near the beginning of the game, ****, the FIRST SERIES, with an opportunity to kill our momentum and make a statement. But we stopped them from capitalizing.

It's not exclusive to us, no matter what a few posters in here say.

 

[Goat Holder]

congrats dumbass. </p>

 

[DowntownDawg]

I didn't say we can't count on defense to win games. That's something you've invented in your mind. I said we can't count on scoring defensive touchdowns to win games.

I know it. It's a good thing we never have.

 

[OEMDawg]

Please do quit, because you obviously can't handle the facts that pat is providing you. NOTHING that he said is incorrect.

Crooms has done nothing to improve the offense in his 4 years. We had 2 good offensive outputs last year, Tulane and Arkansas and that was with 2 different quarterbacks. You can look at the play by play on mstateathletics and see that we didn't move the ball consistently, particularly in the SC, Auburn, West ******, and Kentucky games.

 

[cowbell9]

nm

 

[OEMDawg]

The same guy that threw to him for that good season TWO years ago, was his starting QB for the first part of the season last year and he still didn't do anything. Burks had 1 catch for 45 yards against LSU and 4 catches for 31 yards against Tulane in our 2nd best offensive output of the season.

He finished the season with 33 catches total. Do you blame the QB or do you blame the scheme? In modern college football, you would think that a senior WR coming off 50+ catches and 800 yards the previous year could make a bigger impact no matter who was throwing him the ball. It's not like he had a ton of talent surrounding him seeing as that Jamayel had 33 catches on the year and no other WR finished with 20. HOW MANY more years of pathetic offenses does Crooms have to trot out there before some of you will start holding him accountable for the pathetic output. For Christ's sake, the man was an OFFENSIVE coach in the NFL and we've finished near DEAD LAST IN THE NCAA each and every year he's been here.

 

[hatfieldms]

The same guy that threw to him for that good season TWO years ago, was his starting QB for the first part of the season last year and he still didn't do anything. Burks had 1 catch for 45 yards against LSU and 4 catches for 31 yards against Tulane in our 2nd best offensive output of the season.

He finished the season with 33 catches total. Do you blame the QB or do you blame the scheme? In modern college football, you would think that a senior WR coming off 50+ catches and 800 yards the previous year could make a bigger impact no matter who was throwing him the ball. It's not like he had a ton of talent surrounding him seeing as that Jamayel had 33 catches on the year and no other WR finished with 20. HOW MANY more years of pathetic offenses does Crooms have to trot out there before some of you will start holding him accountable for the pathetic output. For Christ's sake, the man was an OFFENSIVE coach in the NFL and we've finished near DEAD LAST IN THE NCAA each and every year he's been here.

I agree but if we can pull out 8 wins with a bowl again this year does it really matter how we got it?
</p>

 

[OEMDawg]

Nice statistical find. I think we need to be at 315 a game at least next year if we hope to duplicate the success we had last year.

Couldn't we aim a little bit higher? The 100th ranked offense last year averaged 330 yards per game and that was an 11-3 Virginia Tech team.

It's pretty sad that nowadays, we can't even fathom our team averaging 375 yards, which is still a pretty unimpressive output in college football.

 

[ArrowDawg]

......has had more to do with scheme and execution of it, not the overall talent on-hand. I'm with those of you want better talent, especially at those skill positions, but I still don't think that better talent at WR is going to help this staff figure out how to put a dynamic college offense on the field.

 

[prairiedawg]

Last year was a fluke.

My overall point was not to diminish our achievement last year, which you are apparently making it out to be.

 

[Stormrider81]

were complete flukes, like we were the only team in the nation last year to score in these ways. I'll never understand why some of you are so quick to write off last year's success simply because we didn't win every single game solely off the scoring of our offense. Yes, we need to improve offensively, no argument there. I'd rather not have to depend on defensive and special teams scores. However, I'll be happy with just winning in whatever fashion it takes, and I think those kinds of scores are valid and shouldn't be written off as flukes. Statements like "we'd have been 4-8 without those scores" are absolutely ridiculous.