Stallion wrote:No problem whatsoever with that call. We left the ball on the 1 yard line. It was THE Goal of the entire season to be able to make the extra yard that makes the difference between winning and losing. Frankly, I think it would have been an insult to the Team's Season Goal not to go for it. And I gurantee you every single one of the people who blame Bennett for every single loss would have been crying about that too.
Going for it was the correct thing to do. Running the same play 4 times was not.
Yes that is true they lose on everything but a TD. It was a no-win situation becuase our elementary play calling would not allow us to achieve a TD. POOR PLAY CALLING. Rusty must have still been thinking about his TV debut on Pony Up with PB.
Someone is riled up. Dont tell me you know that. Read my comments during the game and make educated comments about my position on the game, sir.
Many things would have been different had we scored the 3pts. In addition to not having had the "wind taken out of our sails" by getting stopped on the 1, we would have had much more time to regroup and get focused. On the road, the stoppage for tv, kickoff, and change of possession would have helped. The crowd would calm down, the coaches would get everyone on the same page, and the pressure would have been on the D to stop the TD. We were playing to stop them from getting to FG range and they burned us deep...
Your theory is complete BULSHIT. You are claiming Tulsa could not have gone 70-75 yards when they just DAMN proved they could go 99 in a minute. That's an unbelievable excuse-but that's what guys like you are about excuses.
Stallion wrote:Your theory is complete [deleted]. You are claiming Tulsa could not have gone 70-75 yards when they just DAMN proved they could go 99 in a minute. That's an unbelievable excuse-but that's what guys like you are about excuses.
Please dont put words in my mouth. Please refrain from cursing on this board. Please stop posting.
i feel like if we got the FG, then the plays Tulsa called wouldn';t have happened. The sequence of that 99 yard TD drive wouldn't have happened. Could they have still scored? you bet, but we'll never know.
What are you talking about? You have been ranting all afternoon, calling people morons and idiots, and you have the facts wrong.
Tulsa did not need a touchdown to win because we were up only 2. Had we kicked the field goal on 4th down, THEN tulsa would have needed a touchdown and the ENTIRE complexion of the last 90 seconds would have changed. Thanks for the insight though.
I think it's particularly funny that the two of you are in an argument.
Stallion, I can't believe you let this newbie get you into a [deleted] contest about this. After you watch the General try to goad him into a shouting match, you think this guy is worth it? Man, you definitely need a nap. Out past the buoys again.
And firephil, you have zero room to discuss credibility. You have your opinion, and you have no trouble expressing it. Why in the world do you care what Stallion thinks? He is predictable; you had to see it coming, even if you are the board equivalent of an adolescent. Please. And you use General tactics to reply to him. What a tool.
As for weighing in on Bennett, I wouldn't have a clue...couldn't listen to the game. I will say that it is a shame. Three coaches who, in their own circumstances, would all have been happy to bring SMU back. You can be happy he has failed; that's your own call. I, for one, wish he had done it, regardless of whether I think he is a good or bad coach. He gave it a shot, and it came up short. Tough loss. I hope that the new coach can get it done, and it doesn't take anything from Bennett if he does. And if HE doesn't, guess what, that'll be five coaches. At some point, somebody has to look over at the president's office, and maybe the board of trustees. It'll be about time.
"Moderation in all things, and especially in Absoluts [vodka]." The Benediction, Doc Breeden, circa 1992
