Time Warner/Road Runner is definately paying for it....Bleeding Orange wrote: 6. Who is the drooling idiot that decided it would be a good idea to use a road runner sounder after first downs? Whoever it is needs to be fired, and then publicly humiliated. I could have halfway understood if Time Warner was paying for it as an advertising gimmick, but I didn't see any TW branding associated with it.
My thoughts...
Re: My thoughts...
- footballguy51
- Peregrine

- Posts: 3025
- Joined: Wed May 23, 2007 5:19 pm
Re: My thoughts...
My thoughts about the game only go until the score was 43-19. We finally left so we could get home, get to bed, and get to work the next morning by 6 a.m.
After the Marshall loss, I said that is that team showed up for this game, it would be 56-14, and I was almost correct. Yes, I realize Boise is an excellent team (I was actually somewhat honored to be watching them play in person), but our team played a fairly incompetent game. Play calling aside, how many times did we have false start penalties, flubbed snaps, fumbles, or dropped passes kill our drive. I remember a play where the entire team moved except for the center, who apparently forgot the cadence. On another play, when we had the fumble, he snapped the ball and nobody moved. Our right guard, #64, was called for false start 2 times in the same drive, and I think at least 3 times in the game. If we would have lost 49-14 and looked like we had basic fundamentals, it wouldn't have been so embarrassing. It almost seemed like our team was scared of Boise, and we had the jitters. We were playing at HOME and WE were scared.
#64 should have been pulled from the game for at least a series and taught how to remember the snap count. That was just pitiful. Boise would have won the game regardless, but we didn't have to look completely incapable of playing football while losing.
After the Marshall loss, I said that is that team showed up for this game, it would be 56-14, and I was almost correct. Yes, I realize Boise is an excellent team (I was actually somewhat honored to be watching them play in person), but our team played a fairly incompetent game. Play calling aside, how many times did we have false start penalties, flubbed snaps, fumbles, or dropped passes kill our drive. I remember a play where the entire team moved except for the center, who apparently forgot the cadence. On another play, when we had the fumble, he snapped the ball and nobody moved. Our right guard, #64, was called for false start 2 times in the same drive, and I think at least 3 times in the game. If we would have lost 49-14 and looked like we had basic fundamentals, it wouldn't have been so embarrassing. It almost seemed like our team was scared of Boise, and we had the jitters. We were playing at HOME and WE were scared.
#64 should have been pulled from the game for at least a series and taught how to remember the snap count. That was just pitiful. Boise would have won the game regardless, but we didn't have to look completely incapable of playing football while losing.
ROLL ALONG!!!
Re: My thoughts...
That's exactly the sentiment I was trying to express in my thoughts. Boise would beat us 99 times out of a 100. I don't doubt that, they are a fantastic football team. But offensively we didn't MAKE their defense stop us the entire freaking game. We flat out killed ourselves with poor decisions, drops, fumbles, and penalties. Like I said, congrats to Boise for taking advantage of our ineptitude, but there was NO excuse for the offense not putting points on the board while it was still actually a game.footballguy51 wrote:My thoughts about the game only go until the score was 43-19. We finally left so we could get home, get to bed, and get to work the next morning by 6 a.m.
After the Marshall loss, I said that is that team showed up for this game, it would be 56-14, and I was almost correct. Yes, I realize Boise is an excellent team (I was actually somewhat honored to be watching them play in person), but our team played a fairly incompetent game. Play calling aside, how many times did we have false start penalties, flubbed snaps, fumbles, or dropped passes kill our drive. I remember a play where the entire team moved except for the center, who apparently forgot the cadence. On another play, when we had the fumble, he snapped the ball and nobody moved. Our right guard, #64, was called for false start 2 times in the same drive, and I think at least 3 times in the game. If we would have lost 49-14 and looked like we had basic fundamentals, it wouldn't have been so embarrassing. It almost seemed like our team was scared of Boise, and we had the jitters. We were playing at HOME and WE were scared.
#64 should have been pulled from the game for at least a series and taught how to remember the snap count. That was just pitiful. Boise would have won the game regardless, but we didn't have to look completely incapable of playing football while losing.
- Peregrinner
- Peregrine

- Posts: 1937
- Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2006 3:35 pm
- Location: Okemos, MI / Bowling Green, OH
- Contact:
Re: My thoughts...
I've been saying it for a while - we haven't gone down field with any sort of consistency since the BC game. I think that game really took a lot of confidence out of Tyler. He doesn't make reads anymore, he just goes to the short route, even when the deep pass is there.
I remember one drive, either just inside or just outside of the red zone, we had just run the ball and I hoped we would go play-action and take a shot at the end zone. The next play was play action, but Tyler threw to the shallow slant and we were stopped for very little gain.
What I don't understand is, we have Geter, who clearly gets some attention from opposing teams, and Bullock, who would get some attention after the first couple runs (put him behind a big FB and just SLAM). Why don't we use more play-action? I guess, to answer my own question, it's because we don't take advantage of it properly when we do use it.
Also, I'd like to see us utilize some sort of fake off of the screen, but I'm not sure we have the blocking to give Tyler the time to do it.
I remember one drive, either just inside or just outside of the red zone, we had just run the ball and I hoped we would go play-action and take a shot at the end zone. The next play was play action, but Tyler threw to the shallow slant and we were stopped for very little gain.
What I don't understand is, we have Geter, who clearly gets some attention from opposing teams, and Bullock, who would get some attention after the first couple runs (put him behind a big FB and just SLAM). Why don't we use more play-action? I guess, to answer my own question, it's because we don't take advantage of it properly when we do use it.
Also, I'd like to see us utilize some sort of fake off of the screen, but I'm not sure we have the blocking to give Tyler the time to do it.
- Terry S.
- Freddie Falcon 2007-2008
- Class of 2009
The 2nd Annual Alzheimer's Memorial Charity Golf Tournament
To benefit the Alzheimer's Association's Greater Michigan Chapter
July 16, 2011
http://alzheimersmemorial.org
- Freddie Falcon 2007-2008
- Class of 2009
The 2nd Annual Alzheimer's Memorial Charity Golf Tournament
To benefit the Alzheimer's Association's Greater Michigan Chapter
July 16, 2011
http://alzheimersmemorial.org

