Sunday Thoughts: Kansas State Datapoints, Neuheisel’s Words & "Bounce Back" Memories
by Nestor on Sep 5, 2010 12:05 PM PDT
in Football
Email
PrintSo let's do this. I have tried to read through most of the comments and posts from yesterday here. Lot of repetitive stuff but haven't read a post that put all the numbers in one place. Here is an attempt to aggregate all the datapoints from yesterday's game. I will divide them up in 2 buckets. Most of these statlines were compiled from the official site:
Positive Statlines
- Piled up 193 net yards rushing (208 total) averaging 5.2 yds per attempt. Big ups to the UCLA OL and Coach Bob Palcic.
- JetSki rushed for 60 yards in 13 carries averaging 4.6 yds per attempt. Malcolm Jones IMO looked like the best RB out there getting 20 yards in his only 3 attempt. I sure hope he has lot more than 3 attempts next week. Derrick Coleman had 29 yards in 5 carries averaging 5.8 yds per attempt.
- Our two safeties - Tony Dye (15) and Rahim Moore (7) - were 2 of the top 4 tacklers. Akeem Ayers (11) and Sean Westgate (7) were the other 2, while Nate Chandler was the only member of defensive front 4 in the top 5 with 8 tackles including 1 sack. Not a bad debut for Nate.
- Kai Forbath was perfect (what else is new) going 3 for 3 with 2 FGs over 40, while Jeff Locke got the job done with booming punts averaging 45.7 yard per attempt
- Per UCLA's official site 5 true freshmen participated yesterday: Anthony Barr, Malcolm Jones, Cassius Marsh, Jordan James and Jordan Zumwalt (hmm don't remember James and Zumwalt in the game).
Negative Statlines
- Prince's line is just ugly: complete only 9 of his 26 attempts for 120 passing yards. Threw for 1 and rank for 1, while throwing 2 picks.
- Gave up a staggering 313 net yards rushing (350 total ... YIKES) averaging 5.8 yds per attempt. Not quiet in the Edgerrin James category but yeah we all had those nightmares.
- Kansas State converted 8 of their 16 3rd downs while UCLA was only 3 of 13.
- KSU's time of possession advantage over UCLA: 35:56 to 24:04. This number was pretty ugly and had a role IMO in getting the defense tired down the stretch.
- Committed 8 penalties for 55 costly yards which included an inexcusable one on 4th and goal situation in first quarter when a good defensive stop was thwarted for having too many guys on the field. The extra guy was lined up around our secondary (IIRC). So he didn't make any difference in the stop. It was simply an inexcusable mistake by the coaches.
- Before I left the house (with around 4.55 left in the game) I had counted at least 7 drops from our wide receivers including from seasoned "veterans" such as Taylor Embree, Nelson Rosario and Morrell Presley (not a freshman any more Morrell). No excuses for those guys at this point.
- I put Tony Dye's team leading 15 tackles in the "positive" category. I think arguably it can also be seen as a negative because it underscores the point just how frequently the Wildcats were getting into the second level of our defense.
- I am putting this in the negative category but some like DCBruins will probably disagree. As bluebland noted we punted from on 4th and 3 from the 40 and 4th and 5 from the 36. I was very mixed about it. Part of me wanted to go for it and was upset the coaches weren't being aggressive. If Kai was totally healthy we'd probably attempt the 53 yarder. Still on the other hand the field position decision was understandable considering our defense was having ... well issue.
Now let's get into some broader issues after the jump.
There are two kind of losses. There are those beatings like we took in the hands of BYU couple of years ago which just make you totally numb. Those losses just set you back to total reality and putting the program in place. Then there are those losses like the one yesterday that has you replaying number of moments over and over and over in your head all day Sunday and kind of drives us crazy.
I am sure, I am not the only one who is wondering what if Pressley and Embree didn't drop those passes. What if the coaches didn't screw up on 4th and goal. What if Chuck Bullough cooked up a defensive scheme and mindset that made sure we were the attackers in first drives on both halves. I was thinking of the comments Neuheisel made during "UCLA Media Day" on August 9th. From the official site (emphasis added throughout):
[I] mentioned that to our football team because it bears mentioning that we just can't beat ourselves on either side of the ball. We just can't turn it over. We looked back, just bringing up one game, the Oregon game, and there we are giving up a kickoff return and an interception return in a game that is see-sawing back and forth and then we are out of the game. Those are the kind of things that as a football team, we can't afford. So we can't beat ourselves. And we are going to talk openly about turnover margin and making sure that we are as fundamentally sound as we can be. It is a challenge to our coaches to make sure that everybody understands that and that we get that kind of play from all positions and all factions of our team."
Uhm, I guess those words can essentially serve as paragraphs for post game reflection on yesterday's excruciating loss. The problem is they were included in some form or another during post game reflections on losses against Stanford, Oregon, Cal, Oregon State and Southern Cal from last season. That is the reason there is so much frustration in our post game threads. That is totally understandable (even though as many have mentioned some of the reactions went way overboard).
There is really nothing to add to what CRN mentioned on August 9th. We sure hope and expect he is going to get those words and mindset through his team by next weekend and put forth a team that will show a dramatic improvement in those areas against a Pac-10 opponent.
So more from CRN from that day on August 9th (hey we remember these things):
"I believe that we are going to be a faster team than we were a year ago. I think we recruited well in terms of speed. I think guys like Randall Carroll and Josh Smith are going to have an influence with respect to our speed. Damien Thigpen, Sheldon Price and all those other kids that are track-type guys also have a year of experience under their belt, so I think their speed will start to show up on the field.
Well we saw what Josh Smith could do but where was Randall Carroll? I appreciate what Taylor Embree brings to the program. He is a great kid who has earned a scholarship in this program through working his tail off and setting example at practice day in and day out. I saw in firsthand the kind effort Embree brings to Spaulding on a daily basis (unlike hoops when none of us have any idea WTH Ragovic ever did during hoops practices). Yet despite Embree's contributions to this program, I do think coaches need to explore options in injecting more speed into our offense and special teams.
If Embree is supposed to be the guy with "sure hands" it is time for him to show it at a more consistent level. This is his third season in the program. He needs to step up and make those money catches helping out a QB desperately looking to get back in rhythm. Yesterday wasn't the first time Embree dropped passes. He did last season and he also has had difficulty getting separation from DBs.
The responsibility lies here on WR coach Reggie Moore, whose unit needs to take a big step forward from last 2 seasons number wise. 1 game does not make a season. However, we are going to watch the production numbers of our WRs very closely and if there are not tangible improvement by the end of the season, we fully expect CRN to address the issue decisively. As Norm Chow reminded us this week through Gandhi:
"As Gandhi said, `Consistency is the refuge of fools."'
Well speaking of Coach Chow, loved our overall offensive scheme yesterday. Not his fault that Morrell Pressley caught BPD virus instead of catching the ball. If Pressley caught those passes to start the game, who knows Prince's timing could have been different. The effectiveness of the revolver formation was clear in the way our repatched OL was pushing around the KSU defensive line. Now to be clear, the KSU's defensive line had its own issues and was repatched like ours. Yet it was pretty impressive for an OL, which only had something like 31+ combined starts last season. Hats off to them and Coach Bob Palcic for being ready and stepping up.
So in terms of Kevin Prince, don't really have much to add to all the points that has been made. I do believe the calls for starting Richard Brehaut or giving him time is extremely premature to say the least. It was clear Prince's timing was off. Kevin Prince switched his from "14" to number "4" this season following graduation of Terrance Austin to honor his favorite QB Brett Favre. But not everyone can be Mr. Wrangler by missing 90 percent training camp, and then get chauffeured in via Leer Jet, picking right where he left off. I do think Prince gave us a better chance to win than Brehaut with our line. If not for those dropped passes, it would have been a different game. Woulda, coulda, should ... I know ... not fun.
As for the defense, there is not much else to add about Chuck Bullough. He should certainly be on the clock this season. Yesterday wasn't a total disaster. When I had to leave from watching the game last night there was about 4:40 left in 4th. The score was 17-16 in favor of the Cats. The performance of the D wasn't a total disaster at this point but at the same time wasn't inspiring. Watching our guys, at times was fun but also at other was maddening as it was clear Akeem Ayers was blowing assignments and we were not getting any kind of containment whatsoever.
What was even more maddening to see us package in a vanilla base defense on second and long and then promptly give up chunks of yardage to a mediocre QB with brand new receivers to make the situation more manageable for the Wildcats. When a guy ends up leading with "playing not to lose" mindset, seems like time and again he ends up losing.
Perhaps Bullough has a legitimate excuse as he was breaking in number of new guys including Marsh, Keenan Graham, Nate Chandler, Patrick Larimore (who IMO had a solid game), and few others who are not used to this much playing time. However, he needs to make adjustments fast and put together more aggressive game plan. What we saw yesterday is not good enough, if there are not improvements through rest of the season.
As we leave, we need to start thinking about the huge game coming up on Saturday. I have always believed this is the game that has the potential to set the tone for this season. I actually feel optimistic heading into this game unlike how I felt yesterday.
peggysue69 brought up the memories of the Washington State game on the road in 1998 (that was Bob Toledo's second season). That was one of those crushing bitter losses against Ryan Leaf's Cougars when we had chances to win with a junior Cade McNown. That loss was also followed by another heartbreaking and bitter loss against Payton Manning's Volunteers. Of course we then went on to bust out magical 66-3 and never looked aback.
I thought about those games as well but to me yesterday kind of reminded me of the heartbreaking back to back season opening losses against Cal and Nebraska in 1993. I was at both of those games and wanted to pull my hair out after having a great time all day at the Rose Bowl (OK the Nebraska game was a hot and sunny 12:30 start).
Following those losses in 1993 we ended up beating Stanford on the road and went on to the Rose Bowl. Now I certainly don't think this team is even close to the caliber of those teams. However, I do think there is a shot the team can refocus and bounce back and put together a productive season along the expectation line we have discussed all off season (click on the tag "2010 UCLA football expectations" to catch up on our previous discussions).
Let's hope the coaches and players now have a sense of what they need to do to correct their mistakes and bounce back against Stanford (once again).
GO BRUINS.
56 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Quite Honestly,
I believe the KState fans would follow Coach Snyder and their team into the very gates of hell.
Love My Bruins
And
It was LOUD! For a small stadium, it was very loud.
Everyone was really nice except some students, which happens at a lot of places. They have the students behind the visitors bench, which we have a rule against in the Pac-10. It was a really fun trip outside of the L! :( Let’s hope we can bounce back in our first home game and get a victory against the Cardinal!
GO BRUINS!!!
"The entire world that bleeds blue and gold ... they have been dying for this." - Coach Rick Neuheisel
The Snyder Stadium is listed with capacity of 50,000
UCLA drew 51,059, which is a credit to the Bruins.
The record was 53,811 (Nebraska, 2000).
thanks, N
breaking down the numbers is a good way of grounding things a bit after we all have been getting overheated.
I have one question for those who were there, or were watching at home and could keep track (I couldn’t in the bar I was in): can someone give a breakdown of who we saw in the OL rotation, and any thoughts on how different combinations looked? It looks above like none of the big-but-raw frosh in the 2-deep saw action.
One point about the 4th-and-short punts
When your defense has issues, it makes it even MORE necessary to score more points. It’s only when you have a great defense that 20 yards of field position might mean something (though even then I’d disagree with punting).
The excuse for ultra-conservatism the last two years was that our O-line could not be depended on to get a push for those few yards. Clearly that wasn’t the case yesterday. And don’t forget, the one time we did go for it on 4th-down was an easy success.
not sure your conclusion is true
To get the ball back, you need to make three consecutive good plays on Defense. If your defense is dominant, you don’t mind giving it up in a short field on a failed 4th down conversion, because you are confident in forcing a 3-and-out before they get into scoring position. I think your point would be more true against a quick strike offense, where the extra 20-30 yards might be one pass play; but against a primarily rushing team, giving yourself some extra chances at making a stop seems helpful.
In other words “When your defense has issues, it makes it even MORE dangerous to give up a short field”; i.e. the issues with defense cut both ways on the decision to go for it on 4th down.
Obviously you have to factor in the yards to go on 4th down, how many yards you can realistically gain on the punt, how good your special teams are, how many go-to plays you have for short yardage situations, etc. Clearly the coaches don’t have a policy of always punting on 4th and short, as they sometimes go for it; but a lot of the reactions seem to suggest we should always go for it on 4th and short.
Maybe not being factored in to your analysis is that they didn’t want Kai kicking from more than 40 – in which case, going for it on 4th down on the 40 may not even get you close to scoring points if you are successful. In which case, you are taking a high risk play with little guarantee that it will get you anywhere.
SInce I am named as the "Defender of Punts"
First, I think Locke is a very good punter. Most College teams do not have a punter as good Locke. He was awesome yesterday.
Second British makes a good point. It is highly debatable and the flip side: “against a primarily rushing team, giving yourself some extra chances at making a stop seems helpful.” Great point.
Third let’s review what actually happen:
Punt Number 1, 4th and 7 at the KS 36. Score is 7-0 KSU. Time is 3:16 left in first Q. This is an obvious passing down. At this point in the game Prince is 3-6 for 9 yards with one sack. In other words, in 6 attempts, we barely have enough yards to make the first down. Our longest play this early in the game is for 6 yards. Our offense is far from doing well. This drive is after the D forced a fumble.
Conclusion: 36 is a short field. However, the odds don’t look real good of the team making 7 yards on a play this early in the game that has yet to make that many on any play and is “off”. The morale for the defense if we fail on 4th after a turnover is an issue as well. I think this is a close call but certianly a defensible decision.
Second 4th down punt in KSU territory. 4th and three at KSU 42 score 13-17. The offense has been able to move the ball, especially on the ground. Two First Downs this drive already. Prince has hit 2-3 passes on drive for 11 yards. Flip, KSU, scored a FG on their last possession BUT, and this is big, KSU’s first string QB is in the locker room. Locke comes through big time with a perfect 39 yard punt to KSU 3.
Conclusion. This time the offense was moving the ball. There is a decent chance for success at 3 yards. However, I love taking a back up QB inside his 5. I think this is a great chance to not only make a stop but maybe even make something bad happen to KSU. After the punt KSU, does make a first down but then punts the ball with UCLA getting the ball back at the 44 (net loss of 2 yards.)
Again this is a tough call but the backup QB sways it in my mind.
Let me add if Locke was not such a good punter, my mind would change. But I think 4th down decisions can’t be always go or always don’t. They must be made in the context of the game.
Couple things
Firstly, there has been quite a stink on bruins nation since the game about how negative everyone is being. I agree people are being way too down on the program. However i would like to point out that it might be a little overly negative to slip in the unjustified and unsubstantiated Ragovic comment. Just saying…
Secondly, there was the mention of how Embree should have made spectacular catches. True we would want a guy to do that for our program but to say Embree is Larry Fitzgerald is ridiculous. Especially when it was the rustiness of Prince that was the main problem (due to a lack of practices with his receivers resulting in poor timing with them) and to say that Embree was a negative because he didn’t make ridiculously amazing catches that were way behind him is strange to me. I still have a lot of faith in Embree and can’t wait to see what he does for our team this year.
Thirdly, I can’t wait to see what our bruins can do this year. This team showed that with minor improvements (tackling, penalties, improved timing on offense) they can really do some things that we will be proud of as bruin fans!
Go Bruins!
He also
missed easy catches. No excuse for those.
Biggest Game of the Season is Next Week
I understand that some of the regular contributors are put-off by fan reaction after yesterday’s defeat, but it is to be expected. This is year three in the Coach Neu era and many fans, including myself, are desperate to point to tangible signs of improvement. If the Stanford game yields yet another missed opportunity, this season could quickly spin out of control with the high-quality opponents remaining in the schedule.
I have grown tired of the inability to settle on a main running back over the previous three seasons. We should have ample talent now that a difference maker should be able to rise to the top. My question is whether the coaching staff is allowing that to happen with several RBs getting multiple touches. Finally, Prince going 9 for 25 is simply unacceptable. Citing rustiness should not be an excuse. If “rustiness” was going to lead to that completion percentage, then Brehaut shoud’ve started.
Constructive critcism is fine
However, repetitive negative takes adding nothing to the conservation is not “expected.” We have made pretty clear we won’t tolerate repetitive takes offering no substance and new takes. We are also perfectly willing to let go off people for offering moronic takes and take that to message boards. Hope that point is clear. Don’t care much for flamers who didn’t build this place.
by Nestor on Sep 5, 2010 1:30 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Multiple RB rotations
are practically the hallmark of a Norm Chow offense. You’ll probably just need to get used to that. Remember, there were people complaining at ‘SC that Chow couldn’t settle on using either Lendale White or Reggie Bush. This is just how Chow runs the offense. We’re probably not going to have ‘a guy’ at the running back position – it’s never been Chow’s MO.
I don’t have a problem not having ‘a guy’, provided that we’re putting the most athletic people on the field. I’m hoping (given what we saw out of JetSki yesterday and his ability to finally hold on to the ball), that we use Franklin and Malcolm Jones more often than we use Derrick Coleman.
and the hallmark of NFL teams... and of any college team that has enough depth to do it...
Some teams go with different backs for different situations (1st down vs 3rd down); some teams have one back to absorb punishment and one to dance round defenders; some teams go with a clear #1 with a younger #2 getting touches; etc.
Even when we had uber-talent M(J-)D in our backfield, he wasn’t always in on short yardage situations when we still had Manuel White Jr as our big back.
In fairness, Coleman looked really good. Banged away at the few tough runs he did have, so I’m not sure I’d take him out of the rotation at all.
And, good point on Jetski not fumbling. He looked great.
I was high on him
after the spring game, but he looked a step slower out there on Saturday.
37 carries total
I doubt any of the RBs could have carried that load solo
Seriously
Whats with all the Coleman hate? He averaged 5.8 ypc! Was he MJD reincarnate, no, but I’ll take 5.8 any day of the week. It’s crazy that anyone could have anything bad to say about our running game yesterday. That was definitely not the problem yesterday. Our O-line and our running backs were the best thing of the day.
formerly Westwood78
+1
All of our running backs our capable of doing damage. I’m really happy to see that Neuheisel doesn’t have a love affair with one back, like Peter Carroll did with McKnight.
Formerly ucla13_usc9
by Josh Schlichter on Sep 5, 2010 3:37 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
What I don't get
is that I see Coleman, our slower more physical back going around the corner more often than speedy Franklin. Designed?
+1
yesterday I ripped on Coleman for being slow, but the 5.8 ypc plus the point made above about him running the corner gives me new perspective. Why was he used on an outside run when he has been established as a north-south runner, especially when we have other faster backs? Just nit-picking I guess, but i thought Malcolm Jones was a nice combination of size, power, quickness and balance and I look forward to him playing more this season.
I didn't have a problem with the offensive gameplan at all
In fact, it was probably one of the better gameplans pulled together. The double reverse was a perfect call, and it was good to see Josh Smith get opportunities to get his hands on the ball. I thought the implementation of the pistol was basically flawless; I can’t remember anything to complain about when we were running in those formations.
Now….we looked pretty terrible out of the base offense. A lot of that is timing and rhythym, but some part of me thinks if we just ran the pistol the whole game we would have been much better off. Prince only started to get the timing down in the base offense towards the end of the game, leading obviously to the thought that he wasn’t fully prepared for the game, given his limited practice time. Hopefully that’s not an issue this week. If it is, hell – given how successful we were in the pistol, I’m completely in favor of just running that if it leads to results. At this point with the offense, I’d be willing to give anything a shot.
On defense, I actually thought the big problem was with our linebackers more than anything else. The defensive line and secondary were playing relatively well (note that I place Ayers in the ‘defensive line’ category, since he was much better playing in the joker formation as a standing lineman than as a linebacker). However, our linebackers did not play good assignment football, as you pointed out. I think that was most of the problem.
I think the defense got tired as well (we’ve been using that refrain for several years now, though). I hope Bullogh gives some more thought to using the joker formation more frequently, although I’m not sure how effective it would be in running situations. But the base defense we played against the run yesterday just didn’t work. We need to adjust.
We also need to win next week in the worst way.
uhg...
I just thought we’d be further along at this point. Watching the likes of oregon st in a hard fought loss yesterday just showed how far the program still has to go. Here’s to a giant leap in defensive stops and athletic, game changing offensive plays in the coming weeks.
Stanford is obviously huge this week but I just hope we don’t get totally embarrassed in Austin… Go Bruins.
Tinman
I doubt we get 'embarrassed' in Austin
Texas is breaking in a new quarterback and hardly looked impressive against Rice. I’m not saying we should win the game, but I’m sure we’ll be competitive.
I’m more worried about conference games than out-of-conference games this year, though. I could care less if we lose all our non-conference games so long as we finish 6-3 or better in conference.
I'd take that in a heartbeat right now
6-3 in conference would be awesome a great result in a Pac-10 that seems to have no awesome teams but a lot of potentially good teams.
RE: punting in the "maroon zone"
IMO it’s never good to punt from the 20-40 but especially when your own d is getting hammered by time of possession.
Frosh looked good in all, I just hope Bullough sends more run blitzes bc our front-7 looked good until they got gassed in the 3rd. Without the lucky bad-snap fumble recovery by Ayers, we only had 1 “forced” TO and we need way more TOs and negative plays
Overall
IMO the team looked promising. 2 many dropped balls and would have like to see some early run plays instead. Either way Josh Smith showed he’s a stud, should go to him more. Thought the line did well & gave KP plenty of time most of the game. I’m encouraged the team will rebound now that they’ve gotten their feet wet. GO BRUINS!!!!
by AllIHadz240s on Sep 5, 2010 2:23 PM PDT via mobile reply actions
Ryan Taylor
I still think we need to give props to Ryan Taylor who stepped in at C and had no bad snaps. I know the absence of a negative is not necessarily a positive, but this was an area of concern after the scrimmage, and Taylor, by virtue of the fact that we’re not talking about snaps today, came up to speed quickly.
Go Bruins!
agreed
and as above, if anyone has any notes on the O-Line personnel I’d love to hear them. Was Taylor at C for every snap? Were we rotating the OL when we were switching between sets? etc.
Florida
Brantley is going to miss an hour of practice this week working on snaps. Something that a lot of people take for granted.
Formerly ucla13_usc9
by Josh Schlichter on Sep 5, 2010 3:31 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
I don't think I can pin yesterday's loss on the defense
I actually gave the defensive unit, as a whole, a slightly above average grade. I do realize I’m probably in the minority and that this position is a difficult one to defend, given the fact we gave up over 300 yards of rushing (5.8 average/carry) and allowed them to convert half of their 3rd downs. But KSt. had 7 points at halftime, and 17 with about 3 minutes and change left in the game. That should get you a ‘W’ the majority of the time, provided that your offense is effective (which ours wasn’t, of course). That’s not to say that I’m satisfied with our defense’s performance, and I believe that there is plenty of room for improvement, but if our offense was more effective at sustaining drives and putting the ball in the endzone, that game was ours.
"I don't forget very much" Rick Neuheisel, 11/28/09
Re 4th down plays
A few of those Plays were going to the north (left to right on the TV) those who were there can attest to the fact that there was a misleadingly strong wind opposing that direction. Bill Snyder pointed out in his post game comments that he couldn’t call pass plays going that direction, and Jeff locke had one of his worst kicks of his career going that direction, so IMO, it is reasonable to say that it would be really risky to go for it on a 4th and 5-6, because of that reason alone.
Formerly ucla13_usc9
by Josh Schlichter on Sep 5, 2010 3:29 PM PDT via mobile reply actions
Good point
definitely noticed the wind on tv just from the kickoffs. Every kickoff that went from the right to the left was way out the back of the endzone, not true when going the other way.
It sure made
KSU’s Kicker look like a beast
Formerly ucla13_usc9
by Josh Schlichter on Sep 5, 2010 5:42 PM PDT up reply actions
Seriously
I was thinking “Yay, I finally get to see Josh Smith return a live kick! Oh wait. Ok. Next kick then!” I think I must have went through that line of thinking like 5 times, lol.
Good news and bad news
The good news is that we looked better than last year, so there is progress I thought. Now the bad news is that we just lost to the seventh or eighth best team in the Big XII. My former roommate is in the doctoral program at Austin and he tells me that Texas, Oklahoma, Texas Tech, Nebraska, Texas A&M, Missouri and Oklahoma State would all rank higher than KSU.
Our QB did not look like a Division 1 QB. Prince either has to improve drastically or something different has to happen. I thought the defense did alright because KSU does have a decent offense but they have an atrocious defense that we could not exploit.
I couldn't see downfield most plays
but every single time we aired one out, it looked like we had their defense beat. Maybe the wind was the reason we didn’t see more long balls?
The wind could have been a factor
but also Prince threw two interceptions and this I also could be a reason why the play calling became more conservative as far as the long balls were concerned.
For 99% of the game
he only had one, and that was at the end of the half when he was trying to force a play because time was running out. I don’t think interceptions were the reason.
Your room-mate
How closely does he follow all those programs? Does he have data based information that shows KSU is worse than Texas A&M? Here are some scores for you:
KSU 62 Texas A&M 14
KSU lost to Oklahoma by a score of 30-42 in Norman and by a score of 3-17 in Lincoln. That was all last year.
Those are not numbers that portray the picture of KSU being a below average team that should be an easy Q for UCLA.
So is your room-mate some football expert whose opinion really matters?
I write all this because the evidence you offer is precisely the kind of mediocre rationalizing we don’t want to see on BN. Thanks.
Another note for you
Nothing wrong with offering datapoints to support your assertions. However, if you do it by taking cheap shots at us and then flat out lie asserting we are celebrating “moral victories” you will be gone. We will not give you another warning.
Three words, and I am sick of them...
Gutty Little Bruins
Huntley announcement is scheduled at 10:30 am pst.
This according to Brandon Huffman (twitter).
Go Bruins!
Account Settings
How do I delete my BruinsNation accout? If you could help me out Nes i would looove it. Thanks!
Go Bruins!
Question
What is the difference between having your account deleted and just not coming back here? The answer is none…unless you’re attention whoring, trying to generate a big shit about your departure because you know no one here cares if you leave or not. We have the misfortune here on BN of having to deal with attention whores more frequently than we’d like, and you fit the profile perfectly, including the reposting your now deleted AW post in another thread.
LOL
No kidding. The righteous demands of “delete my account” is sillier then GBCW posts/comments. I mean no one is going to notice if someone who is only here to post occasional posts stops coming.
So it wouldn't be a big deal?
I really didn’t mean to repost, but I thought this post was overlooked. And the point is that one extra membership adds to the overall BN membership numbers and I am not ok supporting this blogsite. Im not trying to make a fuss, you can easily delete all these comments just like you have all my other ones.
Go Bruins
I didn't know there was a competition!
Damn, and I’ve been reading other blogs! Had I only known. Geez, aren’t we all trying to learn and share about our Bruins. And yes, we do feel more comfortable at different sites. But really.
Go Bruins!
Or
We could ban you and then you’d still be a part of the membership numbers, “supporting” the site, whatever the hell that means, and you wouldn’t be able to participate. It is time to set our evil plan in motion.
/SARC
Face it, you are trying to make a fuss. If you never come back, this isn’t an issue. The solution is simpler than you think. There’s the door. See ya.
good posts it
I thought for sure james would reshirt givin our rb depth. It seems like having a four rb rotaion is pretty big but given are injury woes not really stressing it. I hope he sees carries and is not a burned redshirt for a handful of carries. Malcolm Jones looks real good out there even though it was 3 carries I would like to see him get colmen carries I think he can be a force already. I agree that Dyes tackles is a negative a safety shouldn’t lead you in tackles. Our run defense wasn’t good but I think their running offense was great. Also I saw people were upset with westgate I thought he did ok not spectacular but still solid. Last note pressley needs to step up because if he pulls that again barr will be their waiting to take his spot. Morrell is a playmaker and its time he shows it or atleast flashes during the game and not just practice.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Bruins Nation
Related FanShots on Bruins Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
