Greg

[mildone]

The difference between this thread, and pretty much all the post-game threads the past couple years, is so vast, and such a positive sign, that it dwarfs any difference in opinion being voiced here about today’s game.

It’s nice that we can complain about the first half coaching because the second half coaching had improved enough to draw a contrast at all.

 

[GoodOl'Rutgers]

I ask because this is modern football. These are the same plays every modern O runs.

did you not undserstand the point of singling out a 3rd or 4th and VERY LONG?

On such a play.. there is no reason for the defense to honor a handoff play-fake.

It has nothing to do with not liking a type of play because I an old. Just to suggest that and forget about it being 3rd or 4th and VERY LONG shows that you are looking for an excuse using a preconceived notion.

You cannot respond with any facts or reason.. don't even understand the objection.. so you search for a reason to reject the opinion.

Hopefully you can see that that is what you just did.

I would imagine that you do this often in all phases of your life. You should consider that.

 

[jtung230]

Or screen passes to slow the rush.

They got home with 4 and it was right up the middle. Screens are difficult to setup against that and not really effective.

 

[GoodOl'Rutgers]

This is genuinely the DUMBEST thing I've read on this board in a loooong time and my god is that saying something. "Winning barely matters to recruits"... that's why Alabama, Ohio State, Clemson and LSU lead the team recruiting rankings every year right? Good lord

it is a bit confusing but he is saying kids want to START. They'd rather START on a team with some hope than sit on a winning team.

That's not dumb. I don't buy that as a reason to play Vedral.. but that's a fair point. It's not like we're talking 5-stars here anyway.. and he's not saying a winning team that can almost guarantee a starting spot wouldn't be prefereable. He is just saying that if it looks like a QB can transfer in and start we might get a good one.

 

[RUSK97]

Than start rooting for Penn State if you want easy answers. My god some of you are clueless. And a bunch of crybabies.

And some of us need a sense of humor.

 

[76Scarlet]

Happy that we are playing better this year but said it before.......say it again........no matter how much talent we have at QB and the skill positions........we don’t get good until both OL and DL get good.......end of story.

 

[vkj91]

did you not undserstand the point of singling out a 3rd or 4th and VERY LONG?

On such a play.. there is no reason for the defense to honor a handoff play-fake.

It has nothing to do with not liking a type of play because I an old. Just to suggest that and forget about it being 3rd or 4th and VERY LONG shows that you are looking for an excuse using a preconceived notion.

You cannot respond with any facts or reason.. don't even understand the objection.. so you search for a reason to reject the opinion.

Hopefully you can see that that is what you just did.

I would imagine that you do this often in all phases of your life. You should consider that.

Or could it be that you are just rambling? Like you said, it was 3rd and very long, whether you believe it or not, the play fake freezes the LBers. Even if it doesn’t, who cares? You need to give the receivers time to get down field Anyway. Honestly, your post makes no sense. Did they consider the wind? Lol. Why wasn’t Art put in? Because he’s 3rd string. If you recall, the last time Art came off the field against Purdue, the OC was screaming at him. Probably because he can’t read a D for his life.

 

[willisneverrana43]

Happy that we are playing better this year but said it before.......say it again........no matter how much talent we have at QB and the skill positions........we don’t get good until both OL and DL get good.......end of story.

Sure. And, oh, by the way, we need to upgrade at the QB and skill positions too.

 

[NorthernKnight]

I’m sorry guys but it was very obvious that we could not run up the middle, or to the sidelines, against them. We did absolutely nothing in the first half to adjust to that. Nothing whatsoever. And we didn’t adjust on defense until the last series or two of the first half.

Adjust how?

Our receivers couldn’t get off the press coverage. There wasn’t time for downfield plays to develop and the wind was definitely a factor with a relatively weak armed QB.

I though about this all night. Just how do we adjust?

bringing in Sitkowski is a recipe for disaster. PSU is going to jump the bubble screens and Sit has very little escapability from the rush. Our line can’t give him time to run.

Bring in Langan? We already showed we can’t run against their base D. How is he going to make a difference?

This was a day for Tight Ends. Quick slants and pick plays. Notice how PSU used their TE.

it’s really killing us not having effective TEs.

Now, all that being said, we played a much better and tougher game in the second half. We won the second half 7-6. We made good adjustments and had much better discipline in our pursuit angles on D. We got torched a few times because we went for broke and packed the box and sent everyone.

It’s amazing to me that despite the fact that we got manhandled severely in the first half on both sides of the line, five to six plays really determined this game.

the two 4th and 1s that will get second guessed a lot. But in reality I’m going for those both times if I am the coaches. All season long we’ve made those with Langan running the ball. This offense needs rythym to get going and clicking. Your D is beat up. Fogg, CJ & White are out. You have to get rolling and keep PSU off the field.

Vedral’s fumble when he had a huge cut lane to the left he didn’t see.

Melton’a drop (although the TD was miraculous and unlikely so that sort of balances out)

Take your pick from 4-5 other offensive plays (face shielding in the end zone, poorly delivered swing pass, late in Washington square out...).

I hated this loss. On the other hand we fought our asses off in the second half and showed the grittiness I’m looking for.

this wasn’t New Hampshire or anything like it. This was Mano on Mano in bad weather and we didn’t have the players to play smash mouth football or the speed to razzle dazzle.

the 2006-2007 teams or the 2012-14 teams win this game. We will get back there to lines, depth and speed that will
Compete.

We are going to beat PSU at our field in 2 years.

 

[JRZEER]

The only helpful adjustment he could have made was in-game recruitment of bigger, stronger players on both lines.

I thought he did a great job on his second half defensive adjustments. Moving The safeties around helped shut down their run game. Biggest problem IMO is lack of offensive identity. When you have 2 or 3 QB’s usually means you don’t have one.

 

[RUbacker]

Adjust how?

Our receivers couldn’t get off the press coverage. There wasn’t time for downfield plays to develop and the wind was definitely a factor with a relatively weak armed QB.

I though about this all night. Just how do we adjust?

bringing in Sitkowski is a recipe for disaster. PSU is going to jump the bubble screens and Sit has very little escapability from the rush. Our line can’t give him time to run.

Bring in Langan? We already showed we can’t run against their base D. How is he going to make a difference?

This was a day for Tight Ends. Quick slants and pick plays. Notice how PSU used their TE.

it’s really killing us not having effective TEs.

Now, all that being said, we played a much better and tougher game in the second half. We won the second half 7-6. We made good adjustments and had much better discipline in our pursuit angles on D. We got torched a few times because we went for broke and packed the box and sent everyone.

It’s amazing to me that despite the fact that we got manhandled severely in the first half on both sides of the line, five to six plays really determined this game.

the two 4th and 1s that will get second guessed a lot. But in reality I’m going for those both times if I am the coaches. All season long we’ve made those with Langan running the ball. This offense needs rythym to get going and clicking. Your D is beat up. Fogg, CJ & White are out. You have to get rolling and keep PSU off the field.

Vedral’s fumble when he had a huge cut lane to the left he didn’t see.

Melton’a drop (although the TD was miraculous and unlikely so that sort of balances out)

Take your pick from 4-5 other offensive plays (face shielding in the end zone, poorly delivered swing pass, late in Washington square out...).

I hated this loss. On the other hand we fought our asses off in the second half and showed the grittiness I’m looking for.

this wasn’t New Hampshire or anything like it. This was Mano on Mano in bad weather and we didn’t have the players to play smash mouth football or the speed to razzle dazzle.

I’ve been saying for awhile our TEs are missing in action and they could be such weapons.

 

[rutgersal]

I’ve been saying for awhile our TEs are missing in action and they could be such weapons.

At least a couple of times, the tight end was wide open, but the QB simply did not see him.

 

[newell138]

Man! Horomone prescriptions will go up to control the emotions in this thread. We played well above expectations in every game this year

Or PSU finally played to theirs. People forget this team was ranked #8 preseason

 

[bethlehemfan]

Or PSU finally played to theirs. People forget this team was ranked #8 preseason

I was worried about this game. I watch all of penn states games. They bullied Michigan on the line of scrimmage. I mean bullied them. I was very concerned we weren’t going to be able to move the ball and would be forced to throw under pressure. Was made even worse with the weather. It was a bad matchup with these weather conditions and where we are as a program.

 

[wheezer]

my only complaint was going for it on our own 45 in the first half on the first drive. just punt.

Disagree. It became obvious we were going to have a tough time going 80 yards on a sustained drive, anytime in the game...... we had success against Purdue going for it, so we just needed a bit of that in this game......

I would trust Langan and one of our backs to get a yard around midfield. It just did not work out this game

If we punted both times we could be on the board here complaining we did not take advantage of our only two chances around midfield, being too conservative

In other words, you can't win the argument either way

 

[wheezer]

Art was throwing in warmups, alternating with Vedral.

Surprised that we didn’t see Art.

Maybe Richie can ask Greg about it post game?

this was the perfect game for Art to throw at least three picks and/or sacked ten times

start with the assumption that the defense is up his nose
one second after dropping back

 

[rutgersal]

this was the perfect game for Art to throw at least three picks and/or sacked ten times

start with the assumption that the defense is up his nose
one second after dropping back

speculative. Art is a better qb than he was in 2018.

 

[wheezer]

totally. It’s time to let these gimmicks go. Also CHOP. I can see using it this year as a kind of nostalgic one-off, but keeping it into 2021 in the Big-Freaking-10 would just be hokey. Also It clearly doesn’t work....

every head coach tries to instill a "never give up" attitude
in a team..... it is important to have that with each and every player on the team, for a few reasons..... you don't want to lose the team on the field during a game, or in the locker room afterwards

RU has had games, an Indiana away game, and a Maryland away game, where we were down like 25 points near halftime... and we won.

the "chop" is just a symbol of the "don't give up" attitude...there is nothing wrong with it, if it keeps focus on the task ahead, and as one player does it, it hopefully rallies the men around him

 

[fg7321]

Flood team lost to PSU by 3 points with Schiano's team. If Nova had a decent day we win that game.

Give Greg 2 more years and we win this game.

 

[RU#1fan]

Man! Horomone prescriptions will go up to control the emotions in this thread. We played well above expectations in every game this year and some are willing to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Hang tight. It was one fall flat on our face game. Meaning, we didnt play above expectations. We aren't achampionship team to expect this type of consistency. Yet

one fall flat game ?
What about against a bad Illinois Team ?

 

[willisneverrana43]

I thought he did a great job on his second half defensive adjustments. Moving The safeties around helped shut down their run game. Biggest problem IMO is lack of offensive identity. When you have 2 or 3 QB’s usually means you don’t have one.

It helped our D that PSU tried to throw a bit more coming out of the half, for some inexplicable reason. Smith and/or Schiano did make some good adjustments, though PSU started gashing us with the run again in the 4th quarter.

On offense, we have 1 QB, not 3. It's Vedral. You know that, right? Langan comes in for a short yardage pacakge. You saw Art because Langan was hurt. Did you have some other idea other than replacing the injured QB with another QB? And, in the second half of the Purdue game, once it became clear that Purdue couldn't stop the run, you saw Gleeson adjust smartly and use the Langan package much more, thereby bashing the Purdue D. Was that a bad move? It won the game. Your 2 to 3 QB point isn't well taken. It's not even a thing, much less the problem. It's the talent.

And the offense very clearly has an identity. Haven't you seen it? It's been there all year. Every week we see how Gleeson's offense moves quickly between plays, uses RPO, uses misdirection to take advantage of a defense's lack of discipline and stop them from cheating, and tries to make the D defend the whole field by throwing passes wide in the backfield and downfield, as well as over the middle and deep. It has done this despite the various deficiencies with each of our QBs, and it has made RU the most improved offense in the country. There's a crystal clear identity to this offense. And that doesn't go away just because the offense didn't perform well against a more talented team against which it does not match up well. It just highlights that RU has to continue to improve its roster. Gleeson isn't the problem. He's quite obviously part of the solution.

I can't wait to see how the O and the D perform as the staff continues to makeover the roster.

 

[Eagleton96]

O and D line were supposed to be the weaknesses of this team in the preseason. Greg has been a wizard so far hiding our weaknesses. It takes a couple of years to build a line from scratch.

 

[RUB1GTime]

Listen, I get that we don’t have the talent that Penn state has, but Greg’s inability, or stubbornness, to change his game plan on either side of the ball during the first half is stunning. I just don’t get it. You would think he would’ve learned by now.

 

[JRZEER]

It helped our D that PSU tried to throw a bit more coming out of the half, for some inexplicable reason. Smith and/or Schiano did make some good adjustments, though PSU started gashing us with the run again in the 4th quarter.

On offense, we have 1 QB, not 3. It's Vedral. You know that, right? Langan comes in for a short yardage pacakge. You saw Art because Langan was hurt. Did you have some other idea other than replacing the injured QB with another QB? And, in the second half of the Purdue game, once it became clear that Purdue couldn't stop the run, you saw Gleeson adjust smartly and use the Langan package much more, thereby bashing the Purdue D. Was that a bad move? It won the game. Your 2 to 3 QB point isn't well taken. It's not even a thing, much less the problem. It's the talent.

And the offense very clear has an identity. Haven't you seen it? It's been there all year. Every week we see how Gleeson's offense moves quickly between plays, uses RPO, uses misdirection to take advantage of a defense's lack of discipline and stop them from cheating, and tries to make the D defend the whole field by throwing passes wide in the backfield and downfield, as well as over the middle and deep. It has done this despite the various deficiencies with each of our QBs, and it has made RU the most improved offense in the country. There's a crystal clear identity to this offense. And that doesn't go away just because the offense didn't perform well against a more talented team against which it does not match up well. It just highlights that RU has to continue to improve its roster. Gleeson isn't the problem. He's quite obviously part of the solution.

I can't wait to see how the O and the D perform as the staff continues to makeover the roster.

Like I said, when you have two QB’s, you don’t have one. When you have to platoon guys for short yardage or whatever the reason, you don’t have a power 5 QB under center.

 

[willisneverrana43]

Like I said, when you have two QB’s, you don’t have one. When you have to platoon guys for short yardage or whatever the reason, you don’t have a power 5 QB under center.

OK, so now you're down to 2, not 2 or 3. That's progress of a kind.

As to your new point, which is that we don't have a power 5 QB, setting aside whether that's right, you're now agreeing with me that the problem is personnel, not the offense.

Thanks for clarifying.

 

[JRZEER]

OK, so now you're down to 2, not 2 or 3. That's progress of a kind.

As to your new point, which is that we don't have a power 5 QB, setting aside whether that's right, you're now agreeing with me that the problem is personnel, not the offense.

Thanks for clarifying.

IMO the offensive identity is run sweep, a pass behind the LOS or QB rpo with a QB who’s not a threat to throw. They beat UM with the QB run, they aren’t fooling anyone with a pulse with that play any longer. PSU took that away yesterday and what were they left with? Almost no offense yards for 3/4’s of the game. Rutgers should be living and dying by the quick hitter and short yardage run game. They have some very good athletes at RB and WR. Spread the offense out. All I needed to see yesterday was 3rd and 22 and a play action pass to know the OC is drowning right now. And they defense got gashed in the 4th quarter? They gave up six points second half. Defense did enough to win yesterday, offensive biggest contribution was the punter. Almost 300 yards punting.

 

[Plum Street]

It helped our D that PSU tried to throw a bit more coming out of the half, for some inexplicable reason. Smith and/or Schiano did make some good adjustments, though PSU started gashing us with the run again in the 4th quarter.

On offense, we have 1 QB, not 3. It's Vedral. You know that, right? Langan comes in for a short yardage pacakge. You saw Art because Langan was hurt. Did you have some other idea other than replacing the injured QB with another QB? And, in the second half of the Purdue game, once it became clear that Purdue couldn't stop the run, you saw Gleeson adjust smartly and use the Langan package much more, thereby bashing the Purdue D. Was that a bad move? It won the game. Your 2 to 3 QB point isn't well taken. It's not even a thing, much less the problem. It's the talent.

And the offense very clear has an identity. Haven't you seen it? It's been there all year. Every week we see how Gleeson's offense moves quickly between plays, uses RPO, uses misdirection to take advantage of a defense's lack of discipline and stop them from cheating, and tries to make the D defend the whole field by throwing passes wide in the backfield and downfield, as well as over the middle and deep. It has done this despite the various deficiencies with each of our QBs, and it has made RU the most improved offense in the country. There's a crystal clear identity to this offense. And that doesn't go away just because the offense didn't perform well against a more talented team against which it does not match up well. It just highlights that RU has to continue to improve its roster. Gleeson isn't the problem. He's quite obviously part of the solution.

I can't wait to see how the O and the D perform as the staff continues to makeover the roster.

Very good analysis

 

[willisneverrana43]

IMO the offensive identity is run sweep, a pass behind the LOS or QB rpo with a QB who’s not a threat to throw. They beat UM with the QB run, they aren’t fooling anyone with a pulse with that play any longer. PSU took that away yesterday and what were they left with? Almost no offense yards for 3/4’s of the game. Rutgers should be living and dying by the quick hitter and short yardage run game. They have some very good athletes at RB and WR. Spread the offense out. All I needed to see yesterday was 3rd and 22 and a play action pass to know the OC is drowning right now. And they defense got gashed in the 4th quarter? They gave up six points second half. Defense did enough to win yesterday, offensive biggest contribution was the punter. Almost 300 yards punting.

All this signals, really, is that you're reacting to losing to a much more talented team and blind to everything else that has happened this year. Is it really true that you only see runs, RPO and passes behind the line of scrimage? Then you're not looking because there's an awful lot more. There are passes downfield, passes deep down the middle, out patterns, attempted screens, bunched wide receivers, and more. It's a varied, inventive and effective offense. Your reactions are due to downfield receivers not getting open enough, a QB without the arm to always get it to them in tight spots, an OL that can't always block long enough, limited talent at TE, limited talent at WR (except, I guess, for you who believes that we suddently have very good WRs). The problems are that the personnel cannot carry off all that you want them to against more talented teams.

But all this is pointless conversation. You're staring at the most statiscally improved offense in college football and have big problems with it. That viewpiont borders on absurd.

 

[JRZEER]

All this signals, really, is that you're reacting to losing to a much more talented team and blind to everything else that has happened this year. Is it really true that you only see runs, RPO and passes behind the line of scrimage? Then you're not looking because there's an awful lot more. There are passes downfield, passes deep down the middle, out patterns, attempted screens, bunched wide receivers, and more. It's a varied, inventive and effective offense. Your reactions are due to downfield receivers not getting open enough, a QB without the arm to always get it to them in tight spots, an OL that can't always block long enough, limited talent at TE, limited talent at WR (except, I guess, for you who believes that we suddently have very good WRs). The problems are that the personnel cannot carry off all that you want them to against more talented teams.

But all this is pointless conversation. You're staring at the most statiscally improved offense in college football and have big problems with it. That viewpiont borders on absurd.

Oh it’s improved, how couldn’t it have? I agree they are way better numbers being put up. I’m not impressed with garbage time stats and stats vs teams with out a pulse either. RU could have and should have been able to compete for 4 quarters yesterday with the talent that was on both sidelines. That was PSU’s worst team probably in 60 years. Defense made adjustments and only gave up 23 points. 7 points isn’t beating anyone in America especially in the toughest conference in the country. just my opinion that the offense isn’t geared to its strengths. Have a great week brother.

 

[willisneverrana43]

Nice work minimizing most improved to improved, dismissing it as inevitable, and abandonig discussion of the offense's overall performance to continue to rail against yesterday's game. In case you didn't know, for the last 3 years against both non-conference and B1G opponents, RU averaged 262-272 yards and 15 points per game. Stagnant and bad. This year against only B1G opponents, RU is averaging 346 yards and 27.4 point per game and has been in just about every game.

We get it. Yesterday wasn't fun to watch. We can all agree on that. Have a nice week and use the time to try to gain perspective.

 

[JRZEER]

Nice work minimizing most improved to improved, dismissing it as inevitable, and abandonig discussion of the offense's overall performance to continue to rail against yesterday's game. In case you didn't know, for the last 3 years against both non-conference and B1G opponents, RU averaged 262-272 yards and 15 points per game. Stagnant and bad. This year against only B1G opponents, RU is averaging 346 yards and 27.4 point per game and has been in just about every game.

We get it. Yesterday wasn't fun to watch. We can all agree on that. Have a nice week and use the time to try to gain perspective.

Ok thanks for the life advice.

 

[NickKnight 1]

Oh it’s improved, how couldn’t it have? I agree they are way better numbers being put up. I’m not impressed with garbage time stats and stats vs teams with out a pulse either. RU could have and should have been able to compete for 4 quarters yesterday with the talent that was on both sidelines. That was PSU’s worst team probably in 60 years. Defense made adjustments and only gave up 23 points. 7 points isn’t beating anyone in America especially in the toughest conference in the country. just my opinion that the offense isn’t geared to its strengths. Have a great week brother.

I would not over emphasize the
improvement over last year's team, any one can improve over that mess.

 

[fg7321]

It helped our D that PSU tried to throw a bit more coming out of the half, for some inexplicable reason. Smith and/or Schiano did make some good adjustments, though PSU started gashing us with the run again in the 4th quarter.

On offense, we have 1 QB, not 3. It's Vedral. You know that, right? Langan comes in for a short yardage pacakge. You saw Art because Langan was hurt. Did you have some other idea other than replacing the injured QB with another QB? And, in the second half of the Purdue game, once it became clear that Purdue couldn't stop the run, you saw Gleeson adjust smartly and use the Langan package much more, thereby bashing the Purdue D. Was that a bad move? It won the game. Your 2 to 3 QB point isn't well taken. It's not even a thing, much less the problem. It's the talent.

And the offense very clearly has an identity. Haven't you seen it? It's been there all year. Every week we see how Gleeson's offense moves quickly between plays, uses RPO, uses misdirection to take advantage of a defense's lack of discipline and stop them from cheating, and tries to make the D defend the whole field by throwing passes wide in the backfield and downfield, as well as over the middle and deep. It has done this despite the various deficiencies with each of our QBs, and it has made RU the most improved offense in the country. There's a crystal clear identity to this offense. And that doesn't go away just because the offense didn't perform well against a more talented team against which it does not match up well. It just highlights that RU has to continue to improve its roster. Gleeson isn't the problem. He's quite obviously part of the solution.

I can't wait to see how the O and the D perform as the staff continues to makeover the roster.

^^^^^THIS 1000 TIMES THIS!!!!

 

[willisneverrana43]

Ok thanks for the life advice.

To be fair, it was a football discussion. But if you can use what you've learned here to fix other aspects of your life, even better.

 

[Knightmoves]

It helped our D that PSU tried to throw a bit more coming out of the half, for some inexplicable reason. Smith and/or Schiano did make some good adjustments, though PSU started gashing us with the run again in the 4th quarter.

On offense, we have 1 QB, not 3. It's Vedral. You know that, right? Langan comes in for a short yardage pacakge. You saw Art because Langan was hurt. Did you have some other idea other than replacing the injured QB with another QB? And, in the second half of the Purdue game, once it became clear that Purdue couldn't stop the run, you saw Gleeson adjust smartly and use the Langan package much more, thereby bashing the Purdue D. Was that a bad move? It won the game. Your 2 to 3 QB point isn't well taken. It's not even a thing, much less the problem. It's the talent.

And the offense very clearly has an identity. Haven't you seen it? It's been there all year. Every week we see how Gleeson's offense moves quickly between plays, uses RPO, uses misdirection to take advantage of a defense's lack of discipline and stop them from cheating, and tries to make the D defend the whole field by throwing passes wide in the backfield and downfield, as well as over the middle and deep. It has done this despite the various deficiencies with each of our QBs, and it has made RU the most improved offense in the country. There's a crystal clear identity to this offense. And that doesn't go away just because the offense didn't perform well against a more talented team against which it does not match up well. It just highlights that RU has to continue to improve its roster. Gleeson isn't the problem. He's quite obviously part of the solution.

I can't wait to see how the O and the D perform as the staff continues to makeover the roster.

Great post. Agree 100%. Well done!

 

[Plum Street]

The OP went after greg here . Obviously too many Hoboken beers for that old man. Also questioned the coastal Carolina gameday decision, which turned out to be one of the best games of the past decade. My god man ! Same poster that loved ash and called him a “closer”. Has to be one of the more moronic segments on this board .
Are you Nuts has been dismissed !

 

[brookdale-soda]

one fall flat game ?
What about against a bad Illinois Team ?

What was the score of last years Illinois game vs this year? The fact that we had a chance to win against Illinois was all coaching. Despite the progress hes already demonstrated, Schiano can't flip a switch to make the team play consistently better in every game.

 

[RUB1GTime]

The OP went after greg here . Obviously too many Hoboken beers for that old man. Also questioned the coastal Carolina gameday decision, which turned out to be one of the best games of the past decade. My god man ! Same poster that loved ash and called him a “closer”. Has to be one of the more moronic segments on this board .
Are you Nuts has been dismissed !

Bravo!

 

[AreYouNUTS]

View embedded media

The guy bitching about us playing Syracuse in hoops during prime time NCAA slot is telling me to shut up? Now that’s some comedy gold right there!!

 

[AreYouNUTS]

The OP went after greg here . Obviously too many Hoboken beers for that old man. Also questioned the coastal Carolina gameday decision, which turned out to be one of the best games of the past decade. My god man ! Same poster that loved ash and called him a “closer”. Has to be one of the more moronic segments on this board .
Are you Nuts has been dismissed !

So we’re not allowed to question our head coach now? Good luck with that lol!!

Also, for the 10
-millionth time, I did not call Ashley a “closer.” I simply quoted, I believe it was urban Meyer or some other head coach maybe Barry Alverez, who called him as such.

Nice try!