I don't see a game on our schedule that is unwinnable. Alabama/LSU/Oklahoma just names - not the great teams of the past. We are always equal to or better than Kentucky/Missouri - Beamer/team just allergic to their colors I guess. Clemson not the same since everybody can buy players and they aren't the only payday in town. I'll concede loss to Georgia.
Garnet Colored Glasses
- Thread starter RevRuss
- Start date
Oklahoma was 1-2 against ranked teams, and got their QB poached, i agree they're winnable if we're good. LSU lost the whole reason they won 10 games, but with the talent they bring in can turn it on for a given season, unknown commodity, being at home, if they aren't great we might have a shot. Bama still has the second best roster in the conference, DeBoer seems to have gotten buy-in, he had a track record of exceeding his teams' overall talent, and it's in their house. If we beat Bama, and I don't think we do, we'll be top 4 leaving that game, and Sellers will be in the Heisman running. We'd also need a receiver well on the way to 1000 yards, a couple breaking 500, and a 1000 yard RB too.
The over the top enthusiasm is hitting late this year. Glad to see it hasn't disappeared completely.
We're not losing to Georgia this year. I'll take a wager on that one.
I'll agree with you to a point. If we can run the ball consistently and our defense has greatly improved, we can stay close with any team on any given day.
If our defense has greatly improved, and if we can run consistently. (That means our OL and RB's will ha e greatly improved.)
We then just need our rs FR qb to play like rattler while our wr's greatly improve.
When you list it all out, it seems more daunting.
Umm, we were 0-4 against ranked teams, and we've lost our starting QB from last year as well.
How is this supposed to be a comparison in our favor ?
We might as well hit it now. It's the only time we get to be so. May the bubble never bust!
hic!
Because OL is more important than QB. A good QB only matters with art least decent OL play. As individual players Baugh, Henry (small sample, but won the two dozen reps he was healthy for), Lee, and Tree are good OL, check the PFF scores. Moore is decent, but it sounds like he was getting pushed and will be out. Baugh didn't give up a single sack, and he sounds like he got beat out. Tree, who is good, was up and down, but finished strong. Tree also may have been beaten out, which is huge, because he is an LT we can win with. I've said for years a good OL and average QB will beat a great QB behind a horrendous OL. And their QB threw 3 INTs against a bad defense in the bowl.
You'll also notice I said is we're good. I don't know how far along we can expect receivers and Sellers to be, though both are loaded with talent. I bet you didn't know we have the fastest WR room in the SEC, even without Harbor, before you replied.
If we had average OL play, we would've probably been a 7 or 8 win team, and that went out the window when Nichols got hurt, because the only other guy with the traits needed for LT was a true freshman. That's before accounting for how we flipped the RB, and DE rooms. Neither does that account for the emergence of Collier, Bam, and Kilgore late last season. Or adding all the depth WR did to a DT room that was already one of the best in the SEC, with two DTs considered top 20 draft prospects at their position. Or adding a Butkus watch list LB to start alongside a 1st team All-SEC Debo Williams. Seriously, do you realize that we were top half of the SEC in most positions, but none of it showed out because we had the worst OL and EDGE play, both of which are completely flipped.
And the key point is that they are about to play a harder schedule than they've played in years and that schedule has covered for them, so they have been far from a juggernaut.
IF everything falls into place for us and IF some of our opponents are not as good as predicted, I could see us winning 7-8 games. But that means Sellers needs to be as good as he is hoped to be, Sanders has to return to 2022 form, our OL has to be as good as we were told they would have been last year if not for injuries, Harbor has to live up to his freak potential, another reliable WR has to emerge, the DL has to improve dramatically over last year.
That's just A LOT that has to come together in one year. If we were only a piece or two away, that's one thing, but it's basically the entire thing. The ONE part of our team that worked last year, Rattler to Legette, is gone.
I just can't see all those pieces falling into place. I can see a couple of them working in our favor, but not all of them.
That's just A LOT that has to come together in one year. If we were only a piece or two away, that's one thing, but it's basically the entire thing. The ONE part of our team that worked last year, Rattler to Legette, is gone.
I just can't see all those pieces falling into place. I can see a couple of them working in our favor, but not all of them.
Just look up a couple posts.
We're "top half" in the SEC in most positions.
But i agree with you. It's unreasonable to assume that every question mark will be a homerun on our part, and a failure on our opponents' part.
If all this is true, why was the comment that OU was 1-2 against ranked opponents and lost their qb?
Using that criteria, we are worse off than them. If you wanted to discuss OL, why not discuss OU's depth and changes compared to ours?
So, as I said, a good OL with an average QB is better than a great QB with a lousy OL. Average QBs don't throw 3 interceptions against Arizona. 1/3rd of Arizona's interceptions were from Arnold.
They are replacing 3 starters, we return all our best OL except for 1, and if they were more experienced and on the field at the same time, the PFF scores dictate we would've had a better than average OL.
Dude, seriously? I said check their PFF scores. Tree had a 90 in pass blocking against Georgia. He got exposed against Tennessee and corrected from there. Baugh didn't give up a sack. Moore did his job. Henry didn't give up a sack. I think the only one with less than 60 PFF was Tree, and he was a true freshman with an up and down season. Oklahoma played worse DLs, gave up plenty of sacks and is replacing 3 starting OL, and everyone knows th expect struggles while building chemistry when replacing more than two OL starters.
So again, in wanting to discuss the crucial component of the OL quality, your comment was their record against ranked teams and that they are losing their qb.
I just don't think we can assume our OL is going to better than theirs until you do a deposit dive on their OL like you have ours.
Maybe all their replacements are going to be "upper half of the SEC" too. Just like ours.
Except for us. When we replace people, they are automatically better, and chemistry is never a problem.
Did I do that one right?
I'm not assuming they'll be homeruns, I'm looking at the additions and known commodities. I'm looking at what our defense did after going 3-3-5. I'm looking at the players that emerged lost year. I'm saying I don't know what to expect from the lower level transfers we have at receiver and from a RSFr at QB. That's a fair characterization. The truth is just simply that we have far fewer questions than you think. Again, I know you think he's a liar, but Saban said he watched all our games and said we weren't far off. If we weren't top half of the SEC in most groups (top 7 teams, not a tall order) than we would've been very far off.
Who hyped our OL last year? People hoped the signing class, but no one wants or expects freshman to contribute there. As I recall it, we all knew we had no good options outside of Nichols at LT, just didn't know how bad it would be.
I wouldn't say Saban is a liar. He's a telecaster who says nice things about each team in the lead up to season. As I said before, he probably also had nice things to say about Miss St and vandy too.
As for question marks, OL, RB, WR and QB being question marks makes me wonder about the offensive production.
I will take the quality of Oklahoma's personnel over ours across the board.
You are picking statics and then navigating them to fit a narrative, when it was obvious to even the most casual of fan, that our OL is woeful and that is being charitable.
Thank you for the exchange, but I am now going to excuse myself from this discussion.
Our head coach and several posters on here said numerous times we would’ve had a solid OL if not for injuries.
RB is loaded with immediate contributors, and we don't need Sanders for that to be true. Adaway averaged 6 yards per carry for North Texas, that translates week enough. Howell averaged 8 yards at SCSU, again, lower level, but that production will translate well enough to keep the ball moving. Braswell flashed, but didn't know his assignments well enough to see the field lay year, normal for a freshman.
Nevermind the whole OL, what players do you think are questions? Let's go one by one. Baugh didnt give up a sack in the seven games he started, does he regress? Lee had a 69.5 PFF grade, does he regress? Tree was strong abdicate Kentucky and Clemson, does he regress? Henry got rave reviews the whole time he was here, and held off Tree while Thompson was pushing for LT. Henry won every rep he played, but that was only a dozen or so because he got rolled by Fugar, by I see no reason to expect him to be below average. Who are you not sure of as individuals and why?
We just signed a better OL class, two years in a row. That's what we were talking about, right? OL?
Saban was a great coach. As great a coach as he was, he is now starting a new job. When you start a new job, you want to "feel" your way around. You don't want to go around like "Wyatt Earp" cleaning up Dodge City. I would keep that in mind.
Yeah? First off, Beamer hasn't made an excuse like that, all he ever did was say we've been unlucky there. That first injury happened in the Spring. With a 3 year starter at LT. A few analysts said we were screwed because that was the injury we could least afford. I remember after the Spring Game the two conversations happening was excitement for Sellers and dread that we were screwed because we had no one to take the LT. IOL did their job at the start of the season, one of them went to the league, the other two graded well by all analysis. RT got rolled by Fugar. We all knew we were paper thin, and that narrative was proven true. The narrative was that we had a seviceable and thin OL that'll do well enough for last year until the freshmen get a little older to take over this year. The narrative was no longer that we'd be good once no one saw a worthy LT, so again, who said we'd be great after Nichols went down?
He's been doing film study professionally for 50 years. He knows how to see talent. If he says he put the time in with a team, versus just going off of the big games, I'll take his word for it.
I got to the part where we are "loaded" at RB with "immediate contributors" because we grabbed guys from North Texas and SCSU.
We used to talk about SEC speed and power. Now we're confident going into a game with Noth Texas and SCSU speed and power?
I would say this completely sums up the conversations we've been having.
The season can't get here soon enough.
Remind me when the week of the OU game comes around. I'd bet by that point one poster won't be on the free board.
They both average 6+ yards, how much do you think that production drops for being in the SEC?
I can't form an opinion based on past performance and then change it as the season unfolds? Just because you seem incapable of taking on new data doesn't mean I am. And maybe I'm occasionally right. I called us beating Clemson in 2022, and knew we wouldn't in '23 or '21.
Oh I agree he knows talent. And I'm not saying he did not put in the time. As a newbie in a new job, is he trying to be "political" in his comments? I don't know. Just throwing that out.
Probably a LOT, unless you think the AAC and MEAC defenses compare favorably to SEC defenses?
Get unlimited access today.