Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I agree with most of the above. I think the whole season hinges on our getting off to a good start (2-1 going to Rice), and if we could somehow pull off that game, i could see us building momentum and having a pretty decent season. Of course I have always been partial to green Koolaid.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, southsideguy said:

3 wins i say

 

I can see three at well.  Nothing between three and six would surprise me.  I'll be as disappointed at less than three, though, as I would be surprised at more than six.  This version of the C-USA just isn't that tough. 

If we can't plug out at least two C-USA wins, we're in a deeper hole than any coach can dig us out of.  I also think the program is cooked if we tank 2016,  It just is.  We are already far behind in recruiting talent, and we do not exist in a bubble.  Everyone is recruiting, not just us.  We simply can't afford a season with less than three wins. 

As much as I like Coach Littrell, he doesn't have the personality to outsell a zero, one, or two wins season with our history being what it is.  He's starting off behind the eight ball.  And, although that's not his fault, it is what he signed up for!  Nobody goes into this thing blind.

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i hope they prove me wrong and win a bunch more games, we are not in a super conference so anything can happen.  The bowl year everything went right for us on the field but last year what could go wrong went wrong.  So hopefully will have some luck this year. 

Edited by southsideguy
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, southsideguy said:

i hope they prove me wrong and win a bunch more games, we are not in a super conference so anything can happen.  The bowl year everything went right for us on the field but last year what could go wrong went wrong.  So hopefully will have some luck this year.

Hopefully our special teams turn out special and help us pull off a close game or two.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, MeanGreenMailbox said:

Army at West Point.  You know what you are getting with Army - option running from a smallish team.  They went 2-10 last year, defeating only Eastern Michigan and FCS Bucknell, and the Bucknell score was 21-14.  This is a test of the new defensive coaches, for sure:  how disciplined is the run defense.  Army had only one player with double digit receptions last year, 16.  Where Army is loaded is defense where they return nine starters.  I give us 60/40 odds here.

I agree with a lot of what you say, with the exception of this one.  Army is big, physical and will pound us.  I think 60/40 is overly optimistic.  Maybe 40/60.  We will really need some big plays to keep this one close. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Harry said:

I agree with a lot of what you say, with the exception of this one.  Army is big, physical and will pound us.  I think 60/40 is overly optimistic.  Maybe 40/60.  We will really need some big plays to keep this one close. 

Army is physical, yes, but big, NO! They have 2 kids that are 300 pounds or more, and their biggest DL player is a whopping 272. I think we can match their physicality, just maybe not their scheme.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Harry said:

I agree with a lot of what you say, with the exception of this one.  Army is big, physical and will pound us.  I think 60/40 is overly optimistic.  Maybe 40/60.  We will really need some big plays to keep this one close. 

They are not big, Harry. They may be physical, but only because of the type of player they are pretty much forced to recruit as well as the style of play they play. Army is not a good team and has not been a good team for some time now. 

 

I agree with the prognosticator. I think 3-9 is a possibility. But I also think 6-6 is a possibility. We will have new personnel in a new, better suited scheme. I will start to genuinely get surprised if we get to 7 or 8 wins.  

Edited by Ben Gooding
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, MeanGreen13 said:

Army is physical, yes, but big, NO! They have 2 kids that are 300 pounds or more, and their biggest DL player is a whopping 272. I think we can match their physicality, just maybe not their scheme.

I was not going over their roster but just from my memory on us playing them from before.  You are probably right, it is more the system they employ and it just seems like they beat you to death with their running game.  We had some very disappointing losses against them in the Dodge years as I recall.  They did struggle the last few years so it may be a more winnable game than when we played them before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting post. One point on Army. They return a lot of players, and if you look at their results, they lost most games by single digits. Losses by 2, 5, 3, 6, 41, 7, 17, 3, 10, 4. They only were blown out in one by Duke. They lost by 7 at Rice. They got much better as the year went on. That game will be one of the toughest on the road this year.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, MeanGreenHoops said:

Interesting post. One point on Army. They return a lot of players, and if you look at their results, they lost most games by single digits. Losses by 2, 5, 3, 6, 41, 7, 17, 3, 10, 4. They only were blown out in one by Duke. They lost by 7 at Rice. They got much better as the year went on. That game will be one of the toughest on the road this year.

Very true, but they weren't playing a bunch of World beaters or anything. 

Their 2015 schedule consisted of Fordham (which they lost to), UCONN, Wake Forest, E. Michigan, Penn State (good loss if there ever was one - 20-14), Bucknell (won 21-14), Rice, Air Force, Tulane, Rutgers, and Navy. 

Credit to Army and its fans, they typically hold steady in attendance regardless of opponent or results. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, not trying to blow holes in your sunshine as it's fun to read and hope, but a lot of the reasons why you say we should hang with these teams are down to they lost this many people on offense and 1/2 their offense yada yada.

But the same could be said for us. We basically lost 4-5 on the O-Line with the 1 changing positions. Starting QB, best WR plus Kidsey, We lost 3 (ish) starters on defense.

Of course we know a lot about those guys and figure our losses aren't that big of deal but I'm sure the LA. Tech guys would say well they've got better players to fill in the holes than we do, and a reasonable person would probably agree.

Again, not trying to be negative, because I think you're prediction is less crazy than it might seam, but as I pointed out with Army, just the record and who they lost points you make isn't enough to convince me.

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, MeanGreenHoops said:

Also, not trying to blow holes in your sunshine as it's fun to read and hope, but a lot of the reasons why you say we should hang with these teams are down to they lost this many people on offense and 1/2 their offense yada yada.

But the same could be said for us. We basically lost 4-5 on the O-Line with the 1 changing positions. Starting QB, best WR plus Kidsey, We lost 3 (ish) starters on defense.

Of course we know a lot about those guys and figure our losses aren't that big of deal but I'm sure the LA. Tech guys would say well they've got better players to fill in the holes than we do, and a reasonable person would probably agree.

Again, not trying to be negative, because I think you're prediction is less crazy than it might seam, but as I pointed out with Army, just the record and who they lost points you make isn't enough to convince me.

My only hope for optimism is that we're replacing a cattywampus offense with a proven system.   The results should be there offensively.

We're also bringing in a new DC in Ekeler, although his defenses were beat like a drum while at Indiana... including by our old cattywampus offense... but he can't be any worse than Cosh.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, MeanGreenTexan said:

My only hope for optimism is that we're replacing a cattywampus offense with a proven system.   The results should be there offensively.

We're also bringing in a new DC in Ekeler, although his defenses were beat like a drum while at Indiana... including by our old cattywampus offense... but he can't be any worse than Cosh.

I also think the defensive philosophy will help in containing CUSA offenses and what they try to do. 3-3 stack or 4-2-5 is much more preferred in this league than a 4-3 soft base. Also, there will be 5+ new faces on D getting meaningful reps that are big, physical guys.  

Of course the offense will be 180. We are literally going to be doing the exact opposite of what we have been doing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Ben Gooding said:

Very true, but they weren't playing a bunch of World beaters or anything. 

Their 2015 schedule consisted of Fordham (which they lost to), UCONN, Wake Forest, E. Michigan, Penn State (good loss if there ever was one - 20-14), Bucknell (won 21-14), Rice, Air Force, Tulane, Rutgers, and Navy. 

Credit to Army and its fans, they typically hold steady in attendance regardless of opponent or results. 

They hold steady in attendance because the Cadets attend the games, since it is one of the few times during the year they get to wear non-military dress clothing along with it being a requirement, I believe for them as well. I know this because I went up to West Point 2 years ago for the Army, to talk to the cadets. Also, where West Point is, they get a lot of the people in the community to come to games as well. 

The defense I think should be better, and the offense should get better with Morris being able to throw the ball instead of teams packing the box non-stop with our QB's that barely could complete a pass..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, MeanGreenHoops said:

Also, not trying to blow holes in your sunshine as it's fun to read and hope, but a lot of the reasons why you say we should hang with these teams are down to they lost this many people on offense and 1/2 their offense yada yada.

But the same could be said for us. We basically lost 4-5 on the O-Line with the 1 changing positions. Starting QB, best WR plus Kidsey, We lost 3 (ish) starters on defense.

Of course we know a lot about those guys and figure our losses aren't that big of deal but I'm sure the LA. Tech guys would say well they've got better players to fill in the holes than we do, and a reasonable person would probably agree.

Again, not trying to be negative, because I think you're prediction is less crazy than it might seam, but as I pointed out with Army, just the record and who they lost points you make isn't enough to convince me.

Speaking of the OL, has anyone heard anything about Kirby maybe getting back on the horse? He originally said he was taking a leave of absence, and if he returned ready to go in 2 months, I would feel much better about the core of our OL. I certainly sympathize with him, but his return could possibly move our major OL concerns to the tackle positions.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, foutsrouts said:

Speaking of the OL, has anyone heard anything about Kirby maybe getting back on the horse? He originally said he was taking a leave of absence, and if he returned ready to go in 2 months, I would feel much better about the core of our OL. I certainly sympathize with him, but his return could possibly move our major OL concerns to the tackle positions.

Would love to see it happen but given the fact they took our best lineman (Rice) to replace him it looks doubtful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NT should be substantially better than last year.  How, that translates to wins and loses is impossible to predict.  The schedule is not that tough and I think NT will do much better than the awful prognostications by most of the medium.  

NT's talent level was lacking last year, but it was not as bad as the record.  Emotions play an enormous part in college football, last years team was at an emotional zero.  A new regime and some early success could make this team much better than expected.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MeanGreenHoops said:

Also, not trying to blow holes in your sunshine as it's fun to read and hope, but a lot of the reasons why you say we should hang with these teams are down to they lost this many people on offense and 1/2 their offense yada yada.

But the same could be said for us. We basically lost 4-5 on the O-Line with the 1 changing positions. Starting QB, best WR plus Kidsey, We lost 3 (ish) starters on defense.

Of course we know a lot about those guys and figure our losses aren't that big of deal but I'm sure the LA. Tech guys would say well they've got better players to fill in the holes than we do, and a reasonable person would probably agree.

Again, not trying to be negative, because I think you're prediction is less crazy than it might seam, but as I pointed out with Army, just the record and who they lost points you make isn't enough to convince me.

I totally agree.  But, we're not the only ones with losses.  And, I guess my overarching point is, we're not in a conference where teams who lose a bunch of players just reload. 

When you start looking at the returning starters for each schools, we really aren't in as bad a shape as some.  I think our two main advantages are possibly having a P5 talent at QB, and having a fresh start with a new coaching staff.

As far as admitting that we have a talent gap, I would say moreso than that, the 2015 team just plain quit.  Unless something goes very wrong - and, it can - I don't see players quitting on a brand new coach.  Even in 2011, the players pushed to 5 wins under McCarney after years of one, two, and three win seasons. 

Littrell & Co, in theory, having more energy and relating better to the players because they are younger (again, just a theory at this point that people seem to buy/hope), I expect the players will respond. 

The X factor to me is the health of Morris.  Unlike others, I really don't think we have another legitimate FBS-talent QB, even G5 FBS, on the roster. Sorry, Shanbour folks. 

If Shanbour really had it, I think he'd have shown it by now.  At some point, you are what you are.  He hasn't been that Baker Mayfield-type of "hey, can't believe they overlooked this guy!"  That's needle-in-the-haystack proposition at best anyway. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, MeanGreenMailbox said:

I totally agree.  But, we're not the only ones with losses.  And, I guess my overarching point is, we're not in a conference where teams who lose a bunch of players just reload. 

When you start looking at the returning starters for each schools, we really aren't in as bad a shape as some.  I think our two main advantages are possibly having a P5 talent at QB, and having a fresh start with a new coaching staff.

As far as admitting that we have a talent gap, I would say moreso than that, the 2015 team just plain quit.  Unless something goes very wrong - and, it can - I don't see players quitting on a brand new coach.  Even in 2011, the players pushed to 5 wins under McCarney after years of one, two, and three win seasons. 

Littrell & Co, in theory, having more energy and relating better to the players because they are younger (again, just a theory at this point that people seem to buy/hope), I expect the players will respond. 

The X factor to me is the health of Morris.  Unlike others, I really don't think we have another legitimate FBS-talent QB, even G5 FBS, on the roster. Sorry, Shanbour folks. 

If Shanbour really had it, I think he'd have shown it by now.  At some point, you are what you are.  He hasn't been that Baker Mayfield-type of "hey, can't believe they overlooked this guy!"  That's needle-in-the-haystack proposition at best anyway. 

 

Agree with a lot of your points. Is there any position group on the field that will not be better than last year? Maybe OL because of the new alignment ? Just give me above average C-USA QB play and I could easily see 5 wins, but also just as important to me is be COMPETITIVE in every game! GMG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Please review our full Privacy Policy before using our site.