PonyFans.com

some of you guys shouldn't go near a football board since you have no idea what you are talking about. try ballet or something else.

sterling went out before the navy game and hasn't been back since. this changed everything we do as some intelligent posters have pointed out.

sterling may be back against marshall. having him back will change the way we are able to play d.

try to understand.

the o is adjusting to the loss of es and shawnbrey.

shouldn't 10 games be enough time to adjust on offense?

do you see anyone out there playing like es or shawnbrey? i don't.

Nacho wrote:do you see anyone out there playing like es or shawnbrey? i don't.

No one has played like ES or SM all season, including in spring and fall camps. They've had enough time to adjust.

Why don't you try opera?

Nacho wrote:do you see anyone out there playing like es or shawnbrey? i don't.

through 10 games

SM 2009: 896 yds rushing for 12 TDs; 216 receiving..1112 total offense
Zach Line 2010: 972 yds rushing for 7 TDs; 106 receiving; 1078 total offense...and Line didnt play most of UTEP or most of the first half of Rice

Difference of about 34 yards total offense. While Line doesnt "play like" McNeal, looks like the O has at least adjusted to his absence

Nacho wrote:do you see anyone out there playing like es or shawnbrey? i don't.

I thought we already established that Zach is playing better than Shawnbrey. And Aldrick is at #6 in the nation in receiving yards and touchdowns.

Our big problem is defensive backfield and lack of kicking depth.

ponyboy wrote:

Nacho wrote:do you see anyone out there playing like es or shawnbrey? i don't.

I thought we already established that Zach is playing better than Shawnbrey. And Aldrick is at #6 in the nation in receiving yards and touchdowns.

Our big problem is defensive backfield and lack of kicking depth.

agreed.

A little better kick coverage would be nice as well.

so everything is just fine and dandy on Offense? Here's a little secret-take out inflated statistics from games against the WORST (No. 120) and NEXT to WORST (No. 119) pass defenses in the country and Padron and our WRs (other than Robinson) are struggling to make plays downfield. (Actually we have faced the 3 worst pass defenses in the NCAA). Teams are forcing our Receivers to the shorter routes and against quality competition they are not making plays downfield.

Fire Wade everything will be better.

Everyone wants to talk about Sterling Moore and how good Aldrick and Zach Line's numbers are, but the bottom line is the defense hasn't given up THAT many points. If the offense was scoring a decent number of points we'd be bowl eligable.

Navy only scored 28.
Houston scored 45 but probably would have been held to 38 or 31 if it hadn't become a rout.
UTEP only scored 28.

Shouldn't we be able to score 28+ points a game in the conference of big offenses and no defenses?

Remember the 2007 Bennett era 45-31 win against UNT? Could we do that today? That same 1-11 year we scored 45 on UTEP, 42 on Rice, 52 on Memphis, and all three were losses. That's a team where the defense is a problem.

We are a team where the offense is the problem.

we are averaging 26.3 ppg
we are giving up 27.1 ppg

that's cutting it pretty close.

in the last four games
our d has given up 29.5 ppg
our o has scored 21.5 ppg

we are scoring significantly less than previously and giving up a little more.

Nacho wrote:in the last four games
our d has given up 29.5 ppg
our o has scored 21.5 ppg

we are scoring significantly less than previously and giving up a little more.

That tends to happen when you lose three of the last four.

that does seem logical on first blush but we were favored in 3 of the last 4.
seems like something is amiss with the o.
if only i could put my finger on it.

Nacho wrote:that does seem logical on first blush but we were favored in 3 of the last 4.
seems like something is amiss with the o.
if only i could put my finger on it.

I've wondered if it has to do with our horrible kick returns and lack of turnovers. Every time we get the ball we have a long field. Long fields equal lots of yards accumulated but less scoring.