• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Fire Lobo!

I am really good at PS3*. Can I be OC? PM if interested, Mr. Wellman. I get really good recruits and win by about 70 points a game, eventually. If needed, I can call defensive plays. Put a corner at linebacker and blitz all day long, baby. We will be awesome.

Also, I will be watching a lot of football today, and I watched a lot yesterday. So I am ready now.

* - I meant Xbox. I dominated NCAA '07. Also, I recently got a PS3 and NCAA '13 just in preparation for being named OC.
 
We don't have the speed to try and go around the outside on teams like FSU or use bubble screens.
 
Bubble screens were hugely effective in our upset of them last year.

So yesterday, we couldn't run inside or ouside, we couldn't take advantage of their pursuit with bubble screens, and we weren't effective dropping back or rolling out. What plays do you think Lobo should have called?
 
Last years team is not the same as this years with regards to either team. I would have run up the middle more hoping for a big break. I also would have at least threatened to go deep.

FSU showed no respect for the deep threat and had 8 in the box.

I never expected to win this game, but we played scared and conservative. When you are down thirty points, just try anything.
 
We ran up the middle several times. Every time we did it, everybody here complained that Lobo was an idiot.

I don't see how we played scared and conservative when we threw the ball much more than we ran it.

Basically, if it doesn't work, then Lobo is an idiot.
 
Yup, I was glad to see us trying to throw the ball. Outside of a couple of plays we weren't running the ball well against them either. But let's blame Lobo...
 
At this point I'm completely over this debate because we are going to have Lobo as long as we have Grobe, that much is clear by now. And the benefits of Grobe easily outweigh the negatives of Lobo IMO. But the debate has pretty much devolved into:

Our offense plays well (see UNC):

Lobo supporters say look at how well Lobo did. Decent chance Keeper starts a thread about Lobo with a subject "Lobo" and a cryptic trolling message in the post.

Lobo haters admit Lobo called a decent game.

Our offense plays bad (Liberty, FSU):

Lobo supporters say blaming Lobo is overly simplistic, usually because the offensive line is bad. It almost seems as if there is literally nothing else in the world he could have done. Also many references will be made to how many bowl games we've been to under Grobe for some reason.

Lobo haters rage.
 
Fuck Your Couch said:
At this point I'm completely over this debate because we are going to have Lobo as long as we have Grobe, that much is clear by now. And the benefits of Grobe easily outweigh the negatives of Lobo IMO. But the debate has pretty much devolved into:

Our offense plays well (see UNC):

Lobo supporters say look at how well Lobo did. Decent chance Keeper starts a thread about Lobo with a subject "Lobo" and a cryptic trolling message in the post.

Lobo haters admit Lobo called a decent game.

Our offense plays bad (Liberty, FSU):

Lobo supporters say blaming Lobo is overly simplistic, usually because the offensive line is bad. It almost seems as if there is literally nothing else in the world he could have done. Also many references will be made to how many bowl games we've been to under Grobe for some reason.

Lobo haters rage.
Click to expand...

Infinite rep.
 
More like this:

If we beat a team that we were 1 to 2 TDs underdog and the offense scores in the upper 20s to low 30s, then Lobo gets muted praise (or at least gets praise for his playcalling during the segment of the game we were scoring in) from the same people who called him an idiot in the game thread.

If we lose, or look unimpressive beating a team we were favored to beat, then Lobo is an idiot and the primary reason we lost or didn't win by more.
 
Last edited:
I agree that a lot of this board declares victory on their position often after a single game, single half, or even a single series. Looking at the long term trends each side has something to hang their hat on: our unprecedented success vs. year after year of below average offensive rankings outpaced by a higher ranked defense that also does well at racking up turnovers.
 
He is also coaching within a philosophy of conservative playcalling for field position that Grobe feels has given us the best chance to be successful.

Can't argue with the overall result.

And I agree that the shotgun 4th and 1 runs perplex me, but Grobe obviously signs off on it.
 
ChrisL68 said:
He is also coaching within a philosophy of conservative playcalling for field position that Grobe feels has given us the best chance to be successful.

Can't argue with the overall result.

And I agree that the shotgun 4th and 1 runs perplex me, but Grobe obviously signs off on it.
Click to expand...

This.
 
Stringer Bell: That's good. That's like a 40-degree day. Ain't nobody got nothing to say about a 40-degree day. Fifty. Bring a smile to your face. Sixty, shit, niggas is damn near barbecuing on that motherfucker. Go down to 20, niggas get their bitch on. Get their blood complaining. But forty? Nobody give a fuck about 40. Nobody remember 40, and y'all niggas is giving me way too many 40-degree days! What the fuck?

So, on the whole, is 40 degree day?
 
ChrisL68 said:
He is also coaching within a philosophy of conservative playcalling for field position that Grobe feels has given us the best chance to be successful.

Can't argue with the overall result.

And I agree that the shotgun 4th and 1 runs perplex me, but Grobe obviously signs off on it.
Click to expand...

But also this. I think Grobe's philosophy keeps us close and probably gives us a chance of being more competitive over time. The results certainly speak. But there are some basic things that I would like to see. I was very encouraged when Grobe said after UNC that they noticed Tanner didn't have a lot of time to throw so they worked in some quick throws and got him in a rhythm. They adjusted. Many times we don't seem to adjust, or we just keep running the same awful play (shotgun runs) over and over. This is frustrating. Even if "nothing is gonna work" against a talented D like FSU, it would be nice to try.

You know, maybe find a different way to come up short on 3rd and 1. :shrug:
 
Turd Ferguson said:
Many times we don't seem to adjust, or we just keep running the same awful play (shotgun runs) over and over. This is frustrating. Even if "nothing is gonna work" against a talented D like FSU, it would be nice to try.
Click to expand...

Yep.
 
ChrisL68 said:
If we lose, or look unimpressive beating a team we were favored to beat, then Lobo is an idiot and the primary reason we lost or didn't win by more.
Click to expand...

Not sure anybody but you and your fellow Lobo-lovers would call Lobo the primary reason for losing at FSU.

It's a straw man.

Lobo didn't help us and his playcalling sucked, but there are plenty of other reasons that we lost that game as badly as we did that could be considered primary: OLine, defense, special teams, dropping passes, etc.
 
Well, saying the playcalling sucked when because we ran or passed too much at times is silly when neither was even close to being effective.

At some point, you want to make sure you have your starting QB for the rest of the season too, and going back to pass every down in a game you are getting blown out and dominated on the line is a sure way to have your QB injured.
 
Last edited:
ChrisL68 said:
Well, saying the playcalling sucked when because we ran or passed too much at times is silly when neither was even close to being effective.

At some point, you want to make sure you have your starting QB for the rest of the season too, and going back to pass every down in a game you are getting blown out and dominated on the line is a sure way to have your QB injured.
Click to expand...

Agree completely, but he sucked when we weren't getting blown out, too. Blowout commenced in the second quarter.

But that said, we should just shut Tanner down for the season if a deficient O-Line is going to surely result in our QB getting injured and awful playcalling. They may get better, but they're not going to be able to protect him from most of our schedule.
 
We were very aggressive with our playcalling early. What game were you watching?

I think the decision making was totally reasonable about when we started playing to just get out of dodge.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top