I'm done

BRStang · Post by **BRStang** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 6:57 pm

There's not a more pathetic team in the NCAA, and there hasn't been for 15 years. And those that have slightest ability to change it don't care...not the players, not the coaches, not the administration and not the students. Why should I care anymore?

To think I left an LSU-MS State gamewatching party to come home to catch this miserable stinkfest. Everyone looked at me like I had cancer or something when I told them why I was leaving. Just pathetic.

hunters · Post by **hunters** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 7:04 pm

I wouldnt blame you. I am pizzed.

Dement-ed · Post by **Dement-ed** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 7:17 pm

Not so fast, to quote my friend Corso ..... on paper, Marshall was much better. We hung in there. Losing sucks, but i was afraid of a blowout.

Come back strong against UAB!

SouthernMustang · Post by **SouthernMustang** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 7:21 pm

Dement-ed wrote:Not so fast, to quote my friend Corso ..... on paper, Marshall was much better. We hung in there. Losing sucks, but i was afraid of a blowout.

Come back strong against UAB!

Our players aren't as bad ... if Bennett would put the right ones on the field. AHEM PHILLIPS...

Blowing a 10 point lead is bad. I thought Bennett was the guy, at the beginning of the season. I was scared the TCU loss was a fluke, but thought I'd give us to the Tulane game to see if that's the case. Clearly, it was. Yah, we got up for them and played them tough -- we beat them. But all that Bennett's shown is he can do that about once or twice per season, 3 times if we're lucky, 0 if we're not.

It's hard to convince yourself that it's worth putting in your own personal effort to support this program when the administration and coaches certainly don't do their part. I'm not a bandwagoner, but sometimes you have to wonder if it's better to jump off the bandwagon early rather than stay on it and crash over the side of a ledge.

Ponymon · Post by **Ponymon** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 8:25 pm

Has the offense averaged more than 200 total yards with Romo as the starting quarterback the last 3 weeks? I don't know if the decision to stay with Romo as the starter is Burn's or Bennett's, but it sure AIN'T working! Romo seems to be much better coming in late in the game. Obviously, he can't handle being the starting quarterback. Its time to play Phillips or one of the freshman Quarterbacks! If they fail, than we can bring in Romo late in the game for some long runs.

Greenwich Pony · Post by **Greenwich Pony** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 8:34 pm

I'd lay off Romo, the kid can only do so much behind this line and with a bevy or recievers who think they are playing soccer (i.e. not touching the ball with thier hands)... If we had one or two guys who could actually catch a football thrown at them, we'd have won today and probably would be 3-2 at this point, if not better. I'm very disappointed, but that has been the difference all year- a couple of catches and a couple of drives are longer and the D stays off the field, a few more points on the board, the running game opens up because defenses have to cover more than our running game, and we're in a whole new world. And it's agonizing to watch- but we are a lot closer to good football than we have been in years.

that's great raplh · Post by **that's great raplh** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 8:38 pm

we need balance - 3 and out kills the defense

Ponymon · Post by **Ponymon** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 8:45 pm

Greenwich Pony wrote:If we had one or two guys who could actually catch a football thrown at them, we'd have won today and probably would be 3-2 at this point, if not better.

Greenwich Pony, That's the problem, even when he had time, Romo's passes were never close to the receiver. He has had a year and a half to get coordinated with SOMEBODY, ANYBODY, and he hasn't. Yes the offensive line is pathetic, but without some execution from the quarterback slot when the opportunity arises, we won't have a snowball's chance to move the ball. Romo's passing touch is nearly nonexistent and that is getting real old, real fast! And I ask you, since Romo is a lefty, why does he always seem to run to the right when he throws? Do you really think this is the proper technique for a lefty to use for consistently completing passes downfield?

Nacho · Post by **Nacho** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 9:04 pm

In response to the first post I will continue to go to the home games, but never road games--one can see losing in person only so many times a season. I am serious.

I guess I like seeing a slow-motion train wreck. I go and drink a bottle of water. I clap whenever we do anything good at all. Sometimes I even get excited. After the inevitable loss I am bummed but I recover. That's the life of an SMU football fan. You have to come to terms with losing. I know some people can't mentally or physically take it. I understand that and I don't condem it. Not everyone can sit through this kind of torture year after year. I think I am at a point wher it bothers me but doesn't kill me. I expect a loss. It didn't surprise me that we lost even when we got up by 10. Years of watching SMU football since 1989 has taught me that if I am going to do this then I have to attain some kind of peace of mind regradless of what the final score is and it is usually bad.

So in essence if you can't take it anymore I don't blame you. I think it may in fact be a sign of an emotionally healthy person.

LakeHighlandsPony · Post by **LakeHighlandsPony** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 9:06 pm

Romo is doing OK. Rusty Burns is the problem!

Mare · Post by **Mare** » Sun Oct 02, 2005 12:51 am

The problem is the FANS! Marshall has not lost 2 at home since they moved to this field because the fans keep showing up and cheering and won't allow it. They were 1-2 on their way to 1-3 but the fans kept cheering. That's a home field advantage. We need some of that support. Our boys played good tonight! We lost in OT

Charleston Pony · Post by **Charleston Pony** » Sun Oct 02, 2005 7:05 am

you are correct, Mare about home field advantage. Marshall enjoys great fan support. Itr does make a difference in games like this. Anyone remember the TCU game just a few weeks back? SMU is not likely to see that atmosphere again this year at Ford. That's sad, but a fact.

Ponymon · Post by **Ponymon** » Sun Oct 02, 2005 8:26 am

LakeHighlandsPony wrote:Romo is doing OK. Rusty Burns is the problem!

Romo is fine for a running office. However, Burns offense requires that the quarterback be able to see the field and hit the open receiver. Yes, the receivers have had bricks for hands. The solution is either to change the offense for Romo or bring in a quarterback that can consistently throw catchable balls. Whether they catch the ball is another matter. I still can't believe our playmakers like Henderson, Kennedy, and even Martin have such few touches in the game. USC would have lost the game yesterday if they had used Bush as much as we do our potential playmakers!

PonyFan · Post by **PonyFan** » Sun Oct 02, 2005 11:16 am

Kennedy and Chase have by far the best hands on the team. How many times was the ball thrown to them yesterday?
To be fair, Romo and Eckert had a little more time to throw yesterday than they did against Tulane, but need even more. They're still not getting enough time. Given more time to make their reads, I'd like to think they'd be able to find #89 and #82 more often.