Run and Shoot?

by **HB Pony Dad** » Mon Oct 12, 2009 10:28 pm

I hate to actual be serious, however I thought the main purpose, beside elevating the SMU Football program as a whole, was to bring in this "new" offense which could score at will from anywhere on the field.

We obviously have the concept "somewhat" in place, but the "execution" ( pardon the USC play on words) is excruciating (most of the time) to behold!

If for the first time we can actually play the R & S as designed, no matter how long NAVY keeps the ball (without scoring), then the "D" has done its job, and it is all on the ability of our "O" to score, and score often.

We REALLY can beat NAVY if our "O" finally shows up and performs!

Just sayin' BLM! You are the QB and the "Shoot" part of the "O".

This week we are all with you, so please concentrate, check off, and find the open man...

There will be plenty if you just bother to look at the WHOLE field!

by **expony18** » Mon Oct 12, 2009 10:56 pm

offense needs to step it up this week, last weeks weak performance will not cut it. I purposefully used weeks weak

by **HB Pony Dad** » Tue Oct 13, 2009 2:55 pm

With all the Horse_Sh*t around here lately I feel as if I'm the Only True Bo_Levier this week! :mrgreen:

by **ponyte** » Tue Oct 13, 2009 3:06 pm

I agree that this is one game that the offense can win. Put a lot of points on the board and do it early and Navy's ball control offense becomes a liability. And Navy is forced to take chances which plays to the strength of our new and improved defense.

The Offense is really the key to winning this game. And the offense has yet to put together two solid halves of football.

by **Pony!Poni!Pone'!** » Tue Oct 13, 2009 4:12 pm

ponyte wrote:I agree that this is one game that the offense can win. Put a lot of points on the board and do it early and Navy's ball control offense becomes a liability. And Navy is forced to take chances which plays to the strength of our new and improved defense.

The Offense is really the key to winning this game. And the offense has yet to put together two solid halves of football.

a first half not unlike we pulled off at UAB would be very nice.

by **davidpaul123** » Tue Oct 13, 2009 4:22 pm

Pony!Poni!Pone'! wrote:
ponyte wrote:I agree that this is one game that the offense can win. Put a lot of points on the board and do it early and Navy's ball control offense becomes a liability. And Navy is forced to take chances which plays to the strength of our new and improved defense.

The Offense is really the key to winning this game. And the offense has yet to put together two solid halves of football.

a first half not unlike we pulled off at UAB would be very nice.

A full game simliar to the way we played the first half of UAB would be even better

by **ponyte** » Tue Oct 13, 2009 4:24 pm

I would like to combine the first halves of UAB and WSU if possible for a complete game. We do that, and we beat Navy.

by PK » Tue Oct 13, 2009 7:01 pm

ponyte wrote:I would like to combine the first halves of UAB and WSU if possible for a complete game. We do that, and we beat Navy.

It has been frustrating that we have not been able to offensively play a complete game. At some point, and hopefully this weekend, the offense will explode into the scoring machine it should be. When that happens the games will really be fun to watch like portions of last weekend's game was.

by **jtstang** » Tue Oct 13, 2009 7:23 pm

HB Pony Dad wrote:I hate to actual be serious, however I thought the main purpose, beside elevating the SMU Football program as a whole, was to bring in this "new" offense which could score at will from anywhere on the field.

Apparently the other teams have figured out that Will needs to stay on the sidelines.

by **SMU21TCU10** » Tue Oct 13, 2009 7:31 pm

When you run the R&S and your Qb is set to throw under 3000 yards and under 25 TD's for the second year in a row you know something is wrong !

by **CalallenStang** » Tue Oct 13, 2009 7:38 pm

jtstang wrote:
HB Pony Dad wrote:I hate to actual be serious, however I thought the main purpose, beside elevating the SMU Football program as a whole, was to bring in this "new" offense which could score at will from anywhere on the field.

Apparently the other teams have figured out that Will needs to stay on the sidelines.

B

by **SmooBoy** » Tue Oct 13, 2009 7:39 pm

jtstang wrote:
HB Pony Dad wrote:I hate to actual be serious, however I thought the main purpose, beside elevating the SMU Football program as a whole, was to bring in this "new" offense which could score at will from anywhere on the field.

Apparently the other teams have figured out that Will needs to stay on the sidelines.

Maybe the cannon fires at Will. Problem solved.

by **HB Pony Dad** » Wed Oct 14, 2009 12:02 am

My sentiments exactly...

expony18 wrote:Pony UP!

by PK » Wed Oct 14, 2009 12:35 am

I'm no football analyst, but my guess is that Navy hasn't been up against a JJ style R&S up to this point this year, so....IF our offense can execute the scheme the way it is meant to be run...it could then very well be Navy back on their heels rather than us. You did notice the "IF" I hope.

by **expony18** » Wed Oct 14, 2009 12:49 am

SMU21TCU10 wrote:When you run the R&S and your Qb is set to throw under 3000 yards and under 25 TD's for the second year in a row you know something is wrong !

TImmy Chang
1st year 2,758 17/17 (52%)
2nd year Injured 1,100 5/6 (59.3%)
3rd year 4,474 25/22 (55.9%)
4th year 4,199 29/20 (58.7%)
5th Year 4,458 38/13 (59.5%)

Run and Shoot?

Run and Shoot?

Re: Run and Shoot?

Re: Run and Shoot?

Re: Run and Shoot?

Re: Run and Shoot?

Re: Run and Shoot?

Re: Run and Shoot?

Re: Run and Shoot?

Re: Run and Shoot?

Re: Run and Shoot?

Re: Run and Shoot?

Re: Run and Shoot?

Re: Run and Shoot?

Re: Run and Shoot?

Re: Run and Shoot?

Who is online