deepellumfrog wrote:The best part will be- right when the game goes final, the Peruna Handlers release the pigs, who fly off into the sunset.
It's possible for a team with lesser talent and smaller players to win as long as there is a strong game plan that can be executed. Look at what the toads did against Wisconsin in their super bowl. I love how the toads said they don't want to play down to lesser talent, but that argument has two sides of the coin as well. There are at least 30 teams with much better talent than they have (as evidenced by recent and historical (4-year period) recruiting rankings), but not all of them are coached as well. I give credit to fatterson for having a system in place that has produced results and now given them better players, but don't be hypocritical.
Our reality is our coach (or coaches) doesn't seem to game plan for every game. We can beat teams with our scheme. If this offense runs like it should, we can beat the A&Ms of the college football world in our field.
well, he's right. is it likely? no.
is it possible? yep, and that's why I go to the games.
deepellumfrog wrote:The best part will be- right when the game goes final, the Peruna Handlers release the pigs, who fly off into the sunset.
It's possible for a team with lesser talent and smaller players to win as long as there is a strong game plan that can be executed. Look at what the toads did against Wisconsin in their super bowl. I love how the toads said they don't want to play down to lesser talent, but that argument has two sides of the coin as well. There are at least 30 teams with much better talent than they have (as evidenced by recent and historical (4-year period) recruiting rankings), but not all of them are coached as well. I give credit to fatterson for having a system in place that has produced results and now given them better players, but don't be hypocritical.
Our reality is our coach (or coaches) doesn't seem to game plan for every game. We can beat teams with our scheme. If this offense runs like it should, we can beat the A&Ms of the college football world in our field.
well, he's right. is it likely? no.
is it possible? yep, and that's why I go to the games.
I'm not debating that. If someone were to force me to place a bet, it would be hard to bet on us winning. My point is that A&M is ripe for the taking if we game plan accordingly. I personally don't have the confidence that JJ will prepare this team enough to help offset the talent disparity. My other point was to state that tcu has been winning, and they have less talent than probably at least 30 teams, but they win because they are coached up right. I think this is a testament, but unfortunately, I just don't see that same fire in our coach.
Mustangs_Maroons wrote:It's possible for a team with lesser talent and smaller players to win...
Clearly our wideouts are smaller than theirs. But our OL is bigger, averaging three pounds more per starter, Zach Line is bigger than Christine Michael, and Garrett Gilbert is bigger than than Manziel.
Regarding talent, yes they're probably more talented overall, especially on the line. But who do you like better, Gilbert or Manziel? Who do you like better at RB? Who on the Aggies would you take over Darius?
The Baylor loss gives the players some perspective of what they're facing. If they play well and don't make mistakes, the Aggies can be beaten. Also remember, last year, we played them pretty well at the Cult Center except for two really bad first passes by our QB. If GG can hit a quick opener early on, the Aggies will be in shock. One thing also, Mason has faced Sumlin's offense before and knows how to game plan for it. Its going to be an interesting game. I'd love to gig the Aggies.
Mustangs_Maroons wrote:It's possible for a team with lesser talent and smaller players to win...
Clearly our wideouts are smaller than theirs. But our OL is bigger, averaging three pounds more per starter, Zach Line is bigger than Christine Michael, and Garrett Gilbert is bigger than than Manziel.
Regarding talent, yes they're probably more talented overall, especially on the line. But who do you like better, or Manziel? Who do you like better at RB? Who on the Aggies would you take over Darius?
I'd like to see the speed numbers of your OL vs A$M.
deepellumfrog wrote:The best part will be- right when the game goes final, the Peruna Handlers release the pigs, who fly off into the sunset.
It's possible for a team with lesser talent and smaller players to win as long as there is a strong game plan that can be executed. Look at what the toads did against Wisconsin in their super bowl. I love how the toads said they don't want to play down to lesser talent, but that argument has two sides of the coin as well. There are at least 30 teams with much better talent than they have (as evidenced by recent and historical (4-year period) recruiting rankings), but not all of them are coached as well. I give credit to fatterson for having a system in place that has produced results and now given them better players, but don't be hypocritical.
Our reality is our coach (or coaches) doesn't seem to game plan for every game. We can beat teams with our scheme. If this offense runs like it should, we can beat the A&Ms of the college football world in our field.
I would go so far as to say TCU is hardly the only team that doesn't 'want to play down to lesser talent'. I also don't exactly put a lot of stock in recruiting rankings. Look at the top 25 4 to 5 years after the recruiting rankings. There is not as much synchronization as you would think.
I think you have the talent to have a chance, but you are going to have to play twice as well as you did on offense vs. SFA, as well as not let A$M skill players get behind your D. Tall order.
East. Mason has faced Houston 4 times. Zero wins. Points uh has scored - 37,45,38,44 - for an average of 41. I love Mason but I'm not sure his familiarity with KS's offense counts for much. The hurry-up uh runs has just made us look unprepared and certainly slow (attributable in large part to at least 3 defenders looking to the sidelines for a D call when uh was snapping the ball).
deepellumfrog wrote:The best part will be- right when the game goes final, the Peruna Handlers release the pigs, who fly off into the sunset.
It's possible for a team with lesser talent and smaller players to win as long as there is a strong game plan that can be executed. Look at what the toads did against Wisconsin in their super bowl. I love how the toads said they don't want to play down to lesser talent, but that argument has two sides of the coin as well. There are at least 30 teams with much better talent than they have (as evidenced by recent and historical (4-year period) recruiting rankings), but not all of them are coached as well. I give credit to fatterson for having a system in place that has produced results and now given them better players, but don't be hypocritical.
Our reality is our coach (or coaches) doesn't seem to game plan for every game. We can beat teams with our scheme. If this offense runs like it should, we can beat the A&Ms of the college football world in our field.
I would go so far as to say TCU is hardly the only team that doesn't 'want to play down to lesser talent'. I also don't exactly put a lot of stock in recruiting rankings. Look at the top 25 4 to 5 years after the recruiting rankings. There is not as much synchronization as you would think.
I think you have the talent to have a chance, but you are going to have to play twice as well as you did on offense vs. SFA, as well as not let A$M skill players get behind your D. Tall order.
A lot of people don't put stock in rankings when it doesn't suit them. You seem reasonable, and the truth is that you would take every 4-star, 5-star player you could get if you could. You're confusing correlation with causality. What teams do with the talent they have afterwards is impacted by many factors. The lack of synchronization you claim is simply due to various factors that impact their performance on the field, such as level of competition and coaches. Playing in the SEC year in and year out is very difficult to go undefeated and go to one of the top 4 bowl games. Sure Bama and LSU are able to, but the talent across the board with teams like Georgia, Tennessee, South Carolina, Clemson, Auburn, etc, is ridiculously strong. So how do you control for all these factors? Look at the teams that have more players in the NFL - where individual talent is evaluated - not performance by a team. By this measure, tcu is clearly not in the top 30. Fatterson has a good defensive scheme and he makes players better. Kudos to him, and that is why he has done more with less but don't delude yourself into thinking your talent level is top 25 caliber, but that's ok because he makes up for it in other ways. I just don't get the let's not play down to "lesser talent" argument which is clearly a knock on some losses, which in reality is exactly what you hope for the the top teams with better recruits end up doing to you - playing down to lesser talent.
Baylor fan here, coming in peace. Just wanted to express my sincere wish for SMU to blow the agtards out of your stadium this Saturday. Believe me, my 2nd favorite college team this coming weekend will be the Mustangs. Best of luck!
