CougarCorner

Re: We Are Who We Thought We Were (or NOT)

2009-10-26T23:16:28-06:00

You've done nothing so far to warrant any concern, but please be aware that having the word "wolf" in your name is going to cause you to be under closer watch here.
If this is wolfie - first smartass comment you make, you're gonna be gone. Just pre-warning you.

If you're not wolfie, thank God that you aren't.

I was the Wolf long before AirHead came along - and I have no qualms about paying for a hot dog if I'm hungry.

Statistics: Posted by DarkWolf — Mon Oct 26, 2009 11:16 pm

Re: We Are Who We Thought We Were (or NOT)

2009-10-26T18:23:48-06:00

I just don't think you can catch up on a 21-0 deficit by running the ball all day. Pass on 2nd and 2? Bad call, no doubt.

I actually had this discussion with someone at my house while watchng the game, I felt we abandoned the run too early and he said that we would not be able to overcome that big of a deficit by running the ball. Ultimately I stated, well, in hindsight, abandoning the run didn't work, why not stay with it? Stated another way, you cannot say that you can't overcome a 21 point deficit by sticking to the run, when abandoning the run ovbiously didn't help at either. That's the reason we have 4 quarters, we only needed to outscore them once per quarter in the econd half, and we could have done that with the run (and even officiating)

Statistics: Posted by ABYUFAN — Mon Oct 26, 2009 6:23 pm

Re: We Are Who We Thought We Were (or NOT)

2009-10-26T16:11:16-06:00

I wonder what it would be like to have a D-line that is as disruptive as TCUin 2008 and 2009 and Utah is 2008? I can not remember the last time BYU did. Anyone remember? Travis Hall years?

Statistics: Posted by Lawboy — Mon Oct 26, 2009 4:11 pm

Re: We Are Who We Thought We Were (or NOT)

2009-10-26T10:12:49-06:00

For me the biggest part of the problem is that we aren't who many thought we were. Beating OK was one of the best wins in a long time, until we realized that OK isn't as good as we hoped. Plus, we had all offseason to plan for that game, and we did things they weren't expecting.

I see two issues with this team that I was very worried about all offseason:

1. We don't have speed. Well, McKay does, but it doesn't help when he is on the bench. We will always struggle against faster teams, as any team will but we struggle to recruit speed. That could change with this next class, but not sure.

2. The coaches show continually that they don't know how to get a team ready for the big games. Every now and then they do, but it is the rare exception. OK being that rare exception this year. The Utah game will be closer than we want it to be, or should be, because we won't be as "up" for the game as Utah will.

For me the biggest issue, is that TCU is just that much better than us. They completely shut us down. What I could see from the North Endzone is that we hardly had anyone open. Ever. It was the best defense I have seen in LES in years. Not sure the last time I saw a D that good.

Statistics: Posted by northerncougar — Mon Oct 26, 2009 10:12 am

Re: We Are Who We Thought We Were (or NOT)

2009-10-26T10:00:08-06:00

The fluke interception caused by a ball popped 10 yards upward by the player's hands was a momentum-changer, too. How often does that even happen?

Statistics: Posted by Sammich — Mon Oct 26, 2009 10:00 am

Re: We Are Who We Thought We Were (or NOT)

2009-10-25T23:42:10-06:00

1st and 15... if you're averaging 6 yards per carry, why not?
1st and 20? How many of those did we encounter?
1st and 25... didn't see one of those.

3rd and 8? Now on THAT one, heck no.

We had a lot of "False Sets", where we snapped the ball before fully setting, and a few False Starts. A few holds, a few blocks in the back (I think).

The main drive-killers came, admittedly, on throws:
-Chambers 15-yard PI away from the ball.
-Max's "fumbled lateral" that gave us 2nd and 19. Which was total BS.
-Plus, what, 5 sacks?

The problem is, you CAN'T run the ball on 2nd and 19. I mean, you CAN, but it doesn't seem very smart. That's when you need your TEs the most. Or McKay Jacobsen...

Statistics: Posted by Mars — Sun Oct 25, 2009 11:42 pm

Re: We Are Who We Thought We Were (or NOT)

2009-10-25T23:24:50-06:00

It's an impossibility that Anae could have had any logical "reasons" to put a halt to the running game last night.
How about all of the ugly penalties we kept committing all game- Do you run on 1st and 15? 1st and 20? 1st and 25?

1st and 15... if you're averaging 6 yards per carry, why not?
1st and 20? How many of those did we encounter?
1st and 25... didn't see one of those.

3rd and 8? Now on THAT one, heck no.

Statistics: Posted by Italics — Sun Oct 25, 2009 11:24 pm

Re: We Are Who We Thought We Were (or NOT)

2009-10-25T23:23:36-06:00

I'm still confident that on Nov. 22 we're second fiddle, not third. Haven't seen enough from SNOT to think otherwise.

You've done nothing so far to warrant any concern, but please be aware that having the word "wolf" in your name is going to cause you to be under closer watch here.
If this is wolfie - first smartass comment you make, you're gonna be gone. Just pre-warning you.

If you're not wolfie, thank God that you aren't.

Statistics: Posted by Italics — Sun Oct 25, 2009 11:23 pm

Re: We Are Who We Thought We Were (or NOT)

2009-10-25T22:50:49-06:00

I'm still confident that on Nov. 22 we're second fiddle, not third. Haven't seen enough from SNOT to think otherwise.

Statistics: Posted by DarkWolf — Sun Oct 25, 2009 10:50 pm

Re: We Are Who We Thought We Were (or NOT)

2009-10-25T22:49:48-06:00

It's an impossibility that Anae could have had any logical "reasons" to put a halt to the running game last night.

How about all of the ugly penalties we kept committing all game- Do you run on 1st and 15? 1st and 20? 1st and 25?

Statistics: Posted by Mars — Sun Oct 25, 2009 10:49 pm