• 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!

Your Age?

Mark your Age

  • teens or below

    Votes: 3 1.7%
  • twenties

    Votes: 75 43.6%
  • thirties

    Votes: 36 20.9%
  • forties

    Votes: 28 16.3%
  • fifties

    Votes: 15 8.7%
  • sixties or above

    Votes: 15 8.7%

  • Total voters
    172
My interpretation of the offense versus defense situation is the exact opposite of yours. Defense isn't going to be very good if it speeds so much time on the field during the 2nd half.

We gave up two 80 yards drives. Two 80 yard drives.
 
After ND I felt like it was about 90% on the offense, especially in the second half. I felt like our offensive game plan was awful, and that the defense played well enough to win had offense capitalized on some opportunities.

I'd say that Clemson was about 50-50. Two missed field goals, several stalled drives and not closing out the game was on the offense. OTOH, the defense pretty much ran out of gas at the end, too. It's a toss up. A defensive stop or an offensive drive (or made field goal) would have won the game. Blame both sides.

I think the difference is what you do about it. So we need to recruit bigger, faster, stronger, and deeper on defense. Offensively, however, I think we could be a lot better. Running out of the gun is shit. Only teams that pass first run out of the gun to catch defenses off-guard. We tried to be "run first" against Notre Dame and it was disastrous. Some of the plays we ran that game had zero chance of working and we ran them multiple times. We are so predictable as well. We would be 100% improved if we ran more bootlegs with Tanner run/pass option, and if we would get out of that stupid pistol set.
 
And I could be wrong, but didn't I hear that ND was good against the run? They were certainly good against ours, and with our best RB out of the game, it was insane that we went in with the offensive game plan that we did.
 
A better poll might be to ask who has been in a professional postion with full authority, acountability and responsibility, for example in the business world, government or the military. My guess is that most people responding "yes" would fully understand that everything Lobo does comes under the direction of and with the approval of Jim Grobe. I'm amazed that people don't understand that simple concept.

that's an oft heard but under appreciated point. moreover, if lobo was really was as bad as people make him out to be I think grobe would find a way to shuffle him around or take on some more of his roles himself to improve the play calling. just my .02 don't have anything to back that thought up other than i believe grobe can accurately assess the performance of his underlings and that he has a drive to win.
 
that's an oft heard but under appreciated point. moreover, if lobo was really was as bad as people make him out to be I think grobe would find a way to shuffle him around or take on some more of his roles himself to improve the play calling. just my .02 don't have anything to back that thought up other than i believe grobe can accurately assess the performance of his underlings and that he has a drive to win.

...and he now shares part of the duty with Galloway.
 
What duty does he share with Galloway?
Nevermind. I misunderstood.

"Wake Forest head football coach Jim Grobe today named Lonnie Galloway as wide receivers coach and passing game co-coordinator. Galloway joins the Demon Deacons after serving in the same position at West Virginia."

I'm still not sure what a co-coordinator is...
 
Back
Top