(11-19-2015 10:49 AM)Afflicted Wrote:  

(11-19-2015 10:14 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(11-19-2015 10:04 AM)WRCisforgotten79 Wrote:  One other thing: I'm really tired of this "we're so young" excuse. Sure, the defense is bad (again), but we've come to expect that. It's the offense that has disappointed, and at the critical positions (offensive line and quarterback), the Owls are not that young. The O-line has 2 fifth-year seniors, 2 redshirt sophomores, and 1 redshirt freshman. The QB is a fifth-year senior. Three of the six are on campus for their fifth year, two are on campus for their junior year (academically) and the other is a sophomore (academically).

All their repeated excuses are baseless, and have been proven to be so; yet Afflicted and Rick continue to repeat them over and over again as if that's going to make them true. We're NOT that young vis-à-vis other teams....we're NOT undersized and under-talented vis-à-vis our CUSA conference mates...and our injury situation is NOT that much worse (if at all) vs. other teams (see UTEP playing us with 13 starters out, and yet beating us handily). The excuses are old, stale and largely inaccurate. Anything but placing the blame on the coaching staff.

waltgreenburg, we've played 31 freshmen and true freshmen on both sides of the ball this season. If that's not "young," I don't know what is. It's a fact that we are young, small, and inexperienced. We are the second youngest team in FBS. Fact. You've got to stop posting stuff like this. I don't see how we even beat FAU and Army, but we did.

A sad comment on the state of this program.

(11-19-2015 10:56 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(11-19-2015 10:49 AM)Afflicted Wrote:  

(11-19-2015 10:14 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(11-19-2015 10:04 AM)WRCisforgotten79 Wrote:  One other thing: I'm really tired of this "we're so young" excuse. Sure, the defense is bad (again), but we've come to expect that. It's the offense that has disappointed, and at the critical positions (offensive line and quarterback), the Owls are not that young. The O-line has 2 fifth-year seniors, 2 redshirt sophomores, and 1 redshirt freshman. The QB is a fifth-year senior. Three of the six are on campus for their fifth year, two are on campus for their junior year (academically) and the other is a sophomore (academically).

All their repeated excuses are baseless, and have been proven to be so; yet Afflicted and Rick continue to repeat them over and over again as if that's going to make them true. We're NOT that young vis-à-vis other teams....we're NOT undersized and under-talented vis-à-vis our CUSA conference mates...and our injury situation is NOT that much worse (if at all) vs. other teams (see UTEP playing us with 13 starters out, and yet beating us handily). The excuses are old, stale and largely inaccurate. Anything but placing the blame on the coaching staff.

waltgreenburg, we've played 31 freshmen and true freshmen on both sides of the ball this season. If that's not "young," I don't know what is. It's a fact that we are young, small, and inexperienced. We are the second youngest team in FBS. Fact. You've got to stop posting stuff like this. I don't see how we even beat FAU and Army, but we did.

Ok, now you're definitely trolling.

(11-19-2015 10:24 AM)Antarius Wrote:  

(11-19-2015 10:15 AM)Rick Gerlach Wrote:  Given the number of freshmen who have played, we are young by any measure. If we cycle a la Neely, that should pay off somewhere down the line, and we've seen it happen recently (2008, 2013)

2008 and 2013 are not payoffs. 2008 and 2013 were like climbing to base station A and claiming to have finished the ascent of Everest.

For a program that is dying with few young alums and no interest whatsoever, we need the highest high to be far far better than 2013.

Amen, Amen, Amen to that. Well stated as to the wide chasm of differences of expectations of where the level is Rice needs to climb up to. I'm thinking about the poster who said the problem is more than just Bailiff himself, it is with the true aspirations for the program, and the differences among us on what we think they should be.

I think Bailiff can repeat his performances like this year's ad infinitum. I don't want that scenario. I just think Rice deserves much, much more. That is why I have thought for some time now that it is expedient to make a change to try to get up there.

Next year it will be 10 years and we'll be discussing why we lost to Baylor, Stanford and Army (on the road this time) and hopefully barely got by Prairie View. The CUSA slate looks to be tougher next season with the home/away opponents reversed and a real question at QB position since Bailiff seems disinclined to do much development of our backups with the way this season has gone.

By the time Bailiff leads the team down the ramp of the new EZF for the start of the 2017 season, there won't be any fans left, as a few more will have passed away and there are no signs his brand of football is bringing in any new ones. I just don't see how we can continue to pretend we are building a program if next to no one wants to spend money buying tickets to come out and watch Bailiff's football team play its games. Unless they clone Rick and Afflicted, who really will fill the continuously emptying seats?

(11-19-2015 11:04 AM)GoodOwl Wrote:  Unless they clone ... Afflicted

(11-19-2015 11:04 AM)GoodOwl Wrote:  

(11-19-2015 10:24 AM)Antarius Wrote:  

(11-19-2015 10:15 AM)Rick Gerlach Wrote:  Given the number of freshmen who have played, we are young by any measure. If we cycle a la Neely, that should pay off somewhere down the line, and we've seen it happen recently (2008, 2013)

2008 and 2013 are not payoffs. 2008 and 2013 were like climbing to base station A and claiming to have finished the ascent of Everest.

For a program that is dying with few young alums and no interest whatsoever, we need the highest high to be far far better than 2013.

Amen, Amen, Amen to that. Well stated as to the wide chasm of differences of expectations of where the level is Rice needs to climb up to. I'm thinking about the poster who said the problem is more than just Bailiff himself, it is with the true aspirations for the program, and the differences among us on what we think they should be.

I think Bailiff can repeat his performances like this year's ad infinitum. I don't want that scenario. I just think Rice deserves much, much more. That is why I have thought for some time now that it is expedient to make a change to try to get up there.

Next year it will be 10 years and we'll be discussing why we lost to Baylor, Stanford and Army (on the road this time) and hopefully barely got by Prairie View. The CUSA slate looks to be tougher next season with the home/away opponents reversed and a real question at QB position since Bailiff seems disinclined to do much development of our backups with the way this season has gone.

By the time Bailiff leads the team down the ramp of the new EZF for the start of the 2017 season, there won't be any fans left, as a few more will have passed away and there are no signs his brand of football is bringing in any new ones. I just don't see how we can continue to pretend we are building a program if next to no one wants to spend money buying tickets to come out and watch Bailiff's football team play its games. Unless they clone Rick and Afflicted, who really will fill the continuously emptying seats?

As far as attendance is concerned, this season is no anomaly. We never do well at the gate. To say so would be inaccurate.

(11-19-2015 11:11 AM)Orange County Owl Wrote:  

(11-19-2015 11:04 AM)GoodOwl Wrote:  Unless they clone ... Afflicted

It's so good to be back. I missed you the most, buddy!

What if Thomas Edison had tried 10,000 times but always with the same filament? Would that have made his light bulb successful?

Edison tried over 10,000 different substances in making the filament of an incandescent light bulb until he found one material that lasted long enough to make the light bulb cheap enough to sell and make money off of. That's not to say that he didn't find other filament substances that worked, but there were other criteria besides that needed to be met, such as being cheap enough and available enough to be used in mass production of light bulbs.

He also had to find a substance that would not burn up too soon. Who is going to buy light bulbs that burn up everyday?

Finally, Edison tested a bamboo filament that lasted for hundreds of hours.

With this idea I'm not suggesting that Bailiff has been a complete failure or that he has not done some good. However, it is clear after 9 seasons going on 10 years that Bailiff does not fit all the requirements Rice needs at this time.

Failure is not final. Winners will not quit, and quitters will not win. It is better to fail in a course that will succeed than to succeed in a course that will fail. I believe if we keep Bailiff as coach, Rice will fail in JK's stated goals, and we will continue to slide towards irrelevance.

(11-19-2015 10:55 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(11-19-2015 10:49 AM)Afflicted Wrote:  

(11-19-2015 10:14 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(11-19-2015 10:04 AM)WRCisforgotten79 Wrote:  One other thing: I'm really tired of this "we're so young" excuse. Sure, the defense is bad (again), but we've come to expect that. It's the offense that has disappointed, and at the critical positions (offensive line and quarterback), the Owls are not that young. The O-line has 2 fifth-year seniors, 2 redshirt sophomores, and 1 redshirt freshman. The QB is a fifth-year senior. Three of the six are on campus for their fifth year, two are on campus for their junior year (academically) and the other is a sophomore (academically).

All their repeated excuses are baseless, and have been proven to be so; yet Afflicted and Rick continue to repeat them over and over again as if that's going to make them true. We're NOT that young vis-à-vis other teams....we're NOT undersized and under-talented vis-à-vis our CUSA conference mates...and our injury situation is NOT that much worse (if at all) vs. other teams (see UTEP playing us with 13 starters out, and yet beating us handily). The excuses are old, stale and largely inaccurate. Anything but placing the blame on the coaching staff.

waltgreenburg, we've played 31 freshmen and true freshmen on both sides of the ball this season. If that's not "young," I don't know what is. It's a fact that we are young, small, and inexperienced. We are the second youngest team in FBS. Fact. You've got to stop posting stuff like this. I don't see how we even beat FAU and Army, but we did.

We are NOT small vis-à-vis our CUSA mates, this has been proven with evidence on multiple occasions...so why do you keep repeating it? We got manhandled by a lousy UTEP team that was playing without 13 starters (more subs than we were playing). You don't see how we even beat woeful FAU and Army? You're still excited about this season? If you're being sincere with these comments then there is absolutely no sense even attempting to reason with you.

And, BTW, we play more "freshmen" than most other teams primarly because we redshirt true Freshmen at a much, much higher rate than other programs. I'm willing to bet the house we're not anywhere near the youngest team based on the age of our players.

This actually isn't true at all. Antarius posted the comparison of weight/height for WKU, and that has been all that I've seen.

Not arguing whether we are/aren't smaller, but there has only been a very superficial look at our peers.

(11-19-2015 11:13 AM)Afflicted Wrote:  

(11-19-2015 11:11 AM)Orange County Owl Wrote:  

(11-19-2015 11:04 AM)GoodOwl Wrote:  Unless they clone ... Afflicted

It's so good to be back. I missed you the most, buddy!

Welcome back!

(11-19-2015 10:56 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(11-19-2015 10:49 AM)Afflicted Wrote:  

(11-19-2015 10:14 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(11-19-2015 10:04 AM)WRCisforgotten79 Wrote:  One other thing: I'm really tired of this "we're so young" excuse. Sure, the defense is bad (again), but we've come to expect that. It's the offense that has disappointed, and at the critical positions (offensive line and quarterback), the Owls are not that young. The O-line has 2 fifth-year seniors, 2 redshirt sophomores, and 1 redshirt freshman. The QB is a fifth-year senior. Three of the six are on campus for their fifth year, two are on campus for their junior year (academically) and the other is a sophomore (academically).

All their repeated excuses are baseless, and have been proven to be so; yet Afflicted and Rick continue to repeat them over and over again as if that's going to make them true. We're NOT that young vis-à-vis other teams....we're NOT undersized and under-talented vis-à-vis our CUSA conference mates...and our injury situation is NOT that much worse (if at all) vs. other teams (see UTEP playing us with 13 starters out, and yet beating us handily). The excuses are old, stale and largely inaccurate. Anything but placing the blame on the coaching staff.

waltgreenburg, we've played 31 freshmen and true freshmen on both sides of the ball this season. If that's not "young," I don't know what is. It's a fact that we are young, small, and inexperienced. We are the second youngest team in FBS. Fact. You've got to stop posting stuff like this. I don't see how we even beat FAU and Army, but we did.

Ok, now you're definitely trolling.

So is Walt. It's like Star Wars except that instead of The Force and light sabers they are armed with hyperbole and histrionics.

(11-19-2015 11:21 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(11-19-2015 10:55 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(11-19-2015 10:49 AM)Afflicted Wrote:  

(11-19-2015 10:14 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(11-19-2015 10:04 AM)WRCisforgotten79 Wrote:  One other thing: I'm really tired of this "we're so young" excuse. Sure, the defense is bad (again), but we've come to expect that. It's the offense that has disappointed, and at the critical positions (offensive line and quarterback), the Owls are not that young. The O-line has 2 fifth-year seniors, 2 redshirt sophomores, and 1 redshirt freshman. The QB is a fifth-year senior. Three of the six are on campus for their fifth year, two are on campus for their junior year (academically) and the other is a sophomore (academically).

All their repeated excuses are baseless, and have been proven to be so; yet Afflicted and Rick continue to repeat them over and over again as if that's going to make them true. We're NOT that young vis-à-vis other teams....we're NOT undersized and under-talented vis-à-vis our CUSA conference mates...and our injury situation is NOT that much worse (if at all) vs. other teams (see UTEP playing us with 13 starters out, and yet beating us handily). The excuses are old, stale and largely inaccurate. Anything but placing the blame on the coaching staff.

waltgreenburg, we've played 31 freshmen and true freshmen on both sides of the ball this season. If that's not "young," I don't know what is. It's a fact that we are young, small, and inexperienced. We are the second youngest team in FBS. Fact. You've got to stop posting stuff like this. I don't see how we even beat FAU and Army, but we did.

We are NOT small vis-à-vis our CUSA mates, this has been proven with evidence on multiple occasions...so why do you keep repeating it? We got manhandled by a lousy UTEP team that was playing without 13 starters (more subs than we were playing). You don't see how we even beat woeful FAU and Army? You're still excited about this season? If you're being sincere with these comments then there is absolutely no sense even attempting to reason with you.

And, BTW, we play more "freshmen" than most other teams primarly because we redshirt true Freshmen at a much, much higher rate than other programs. I'm willing to bet the house we're not anywhere near the youngest team based on the age of our players.

This actually isn't true at all. Antarius posted the comparison of weight/height for WKU, and that has been all that I've seen.

Not arguing whether we are/aren't smaller, but there has only been a very superficial look at our peers.

That's the nature of internet discussions. People can make absurd claims like "Rice is undersized!" or "9/11 was a government conspiracy!" and those who know better find it too wearisome to do the point-by-point refutation. Then those who want to be deceived take that to mean that the person making the crazy claim is right, and instead of asking him to prove it they round on the rational people and demand proof of a negative.

(11-19-2015 11:35 AM)Rick Gerlach Wrote:  

(11-19-2015 10:56 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  Ok, now you're definitely trolling.

So is Walt. It's like Star Wars except that instead of The Force and light sabers they are armed with hyperbole and histrionics.

(11-19-2015 11:36 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(11-19-2015 11:21 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(11-19-2015 10:55 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(11-19-2015 10:49 AM)Afflicted Wrote:  

(11-19-2015 10:14 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  All their repeated excuses are baseless, and have been proven to be so; yet Afflicted and Rick continue to repeat them over and over again as if that's going to make them true. We're NOT that young vis-à-vis other teams....we're NOT undersized and under-talented vis-à-vis our CUSA conference mates...and our injury situation is NOT that much worse (if at all) vs. other teams (see UTEP playing us with 13 starters out, and yet beating us handily). The excuses are old, stale and largely inaccurate. Anything but placing the blame on the coaching staff.

waltgreenburg, we've played 31 freshmen and true freshmen on both sides of the ball this season. If that's not "young," I don't know what is. It's a fact that we are young, small, and inexperienced. We are the second youngest team in FBS. Fact. You've got to stop posting stuff like this. I don't see how we even beat FAU and Army, but we did.

We are NOT small vis-à-vis our CUSA mates, this has been proven with evidence on multiple occasions...so why do you keep repeating it? We got manhandled by a lousy UTEP team that was playing without 13 starters (more subs than we were playing). You don't see how we even beat woeful FAU and Army? You're still excited about this season? If you're being sincere with these comments then there is absolutely no sense even attempting to reason with you.

And, BTW, we play more "freshmen" than most other teams primarly because we redshirt true Freshmen at a much, much higher rate than other programs. I'm willing to bet the house we're not anywhere near the youngest team based on the age of our players.

This actually isn't true at all. Antarius posted the comparison of weight/height for WKU, and that has been all that I've seen.

Not arguing whether we are/aren't smaller, but there has only been a very superficial look at our peers.

That's the nature of internet discussions. People can make absurd claims like "Rice is undersized!" or "9/11 was a government conspiracy!" and those who know better find it too wearisome to do the point-by-point refutation. Then those who want to be deceived take that to mean that the person making the crazy claim is right, and instead of asking him to prove it they round on the rational people and demand proof of a negative.

People on the internet can also feign offense when people equate mere football to 9/11...

(11-19-2015 11:36 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(11-19-2015 11:21 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(11-19-2015 10:55 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(11-19-2015 10:49 AM)Afflicted Wrote:  

(11-19-2015 10:14 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  All their repeated excuses are baseless, and have been proven to be so; yet Afflicted and Rick continue to repeat them over and over again as if that's going to make them true. We're NOT that young vis-à-vis other teams....we're NOT undersized and under-talented vis-à-vis our CUSA conference mates...and our injury situation is NOT that much worse (if at all) vs. other teams (see UTEP playing us with 13 starters out, and yet beating us handily). The excuses are old, stale and largely inaccurate. Anything but placing the blame on the coaching staff.

waltgreenburg, we've played 31 freshmen and true freshmen on both sides of the ball this season. If that's not "young," I don't know what is. It's a fact that we are young, small, and inexperienced. We are the second youngest team in FBS. Fact. You've got to stop posting stuff like this. I don't see how we even beat FAU and Army, but we did.

We are NOT small vis-à-vis our CUSA mates, this has been proven with evidence on multiple occasions...so why do you keep repeating it? We got manhandled by a lousy UTEP team that was playing without 13 starters (more subs than we were playing). You don't see how we even beat woeful FAU and Army? You're still excited about this season? If you're being sincere with these comments then there is absolutely no sense even attempting to reason with you.

And, BTW, we play more "freshmen" than most other teams primarly because we redshirt true Freshmen at a much, much higher rate than other programs. I'm willing to bet the house we're not anywhere near the youngest team based on the age of our players.

This actually isn't true at all. Antarius posted the comparison of weight/height for WKU, and that has been all that I've seen.

Not arguing whether we are/aren't smaller, but there has only been a very superficial look at our peers.

That's the nature of internet discussions. People can make absurd claims like "Rice is undersized!" or "9/11 was a government conspiracy!" and those who know better find it too wearisome to do the point-by-point refutation. Then those who want to be deceived take that to mean that the person making the crazy claim is right, and instead of asking him to prove it they round on the rational people and demand proof of a negative.

Well, it is pretty easy to refute/support the Rice is undersized claim, so I don't know if this holds that much weight.

That's why I've generally stayed out of that debate - too much effort to actually pull the numbers for that analysis.

But that's why I've waded, full force, into claims like Walt's "Rice hasn't beat anyone outside of the bottom quartile in four years," because that absurd claim was easy to dismiss (full disclosure - he was right for 2014 and 2015).

(11-19-2015 11:50 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Well, it is pretty easy to refute/support the Rice is undersized claim, so I don't know if this holds that much weight.

That's why I've generally stayed out of that debate - too much effort to actually pull the numbers for that analysis.

But that's why I've waded, full force, into claims like Walt's "Rice hasn't beat anyone outside of the bottom quartile in four years," because that absurd claim was easy to dismiss (full disclosure - he was right for 2014 and 2015).

I see what you did there ....

(11-18-2015 04:47 PM)Afflicted Wrote:  

(11-18-2015 04:40 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(11-18-2015 04:37 PM)Afflicted Wrote:  

(11-18-2015 03:34 PM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  What I know is that this year is horrendous, the program is spiraling, and I see nothing in the coaching or upcoming talent to cause me to share your optimism that next year will be better.

You really don't see all that young and undersized talent out there? Seriously? All those small freshmen and sophomores are only going to get bigger and better. Not to mention, all our injured players will be returning next year. What's going on right now bodes well for the future of the program, and I think you know that. Those of you who want Bailiff fired better hope that it happens after this season. If not, he'll be here for, at least, three more years.

Do I need to post the heights and weights by position again?

You can post whatever you want, but the reason we don't get pressure on the quarterback is because the opposing teams' have bigger and stronger players than ours right now. You see Antarius, freshmen tend to be smaller than upperclassmen and a lot more raw in talent. They need experience. That, and injuries, are why we're struggling this year. But please, post whatever.

(11-19-2015 10:49 AM)Afflicted Wrote:  

(11-19-2015 10:14 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(11-19-2015 10:04 AM)WRCisforgotten79 Wrote:  One other thing: I'm really tired of this "we're so young" excuse. Sure, the defense is bad (again), but we've come to expect that. It's the offense that has disappointed, and at the critical positions (offensive line and quarterback), the Owls are not that young. The O-line has 2 fifth-year seniors, 2 redshirt sophomores, and 1 redshirt freshman. The QB is a fifth-year senior. Three of the six are on campus for their fifth year, two are on campus for their junior year (academically) and the other is a sophomore (academically).

All their repeated excuses are baseless, and have been proven to be so; yet Afflicted and Rick continue to repeat them over and over again as if that's going to make them true. We're NOT that young vis-à-vis other teams....we're NOT undersized and under-talented vis-à-vis our CUSA conference mates...and our injury situation is NOT that much worse (if at all) vs. other teams (see UTEP playing us with 13 starters out, and yet beating us handily). The excuses are old, stale and largely inaccurate. Anything but placing the blame on the coaching staff.

waltgreenburg, we've played 31 freshmen and true freshmen on both sides of the ball this season. If that's not "young," I don't know what is. It's a fact that we are young, small, and inexperienced. We are the second youngest team in FBS. Fact. You've got to stop posting stuff like this. I don't see how we even beat FAU and Army, but we did.

TCU is playing 30 freshmen, they're 9-1. Toledo is playing with a team made up of freshmen and sophomores, their record 9-1. UTEP played third stringers as starters and beat us. What's so difficult to understand. It's bad coaching on our part. Stop allowing your feelings and emotions about a person get in the way of accepting facts.

With regards to how you don't see how we beat FAU and Army, you're basically saying that you saw a 3 or 4 game winning season. That means you're disconnected from the same coach you defend. He predicted a CUSA conference championship. Our QB spoke of a 10-2 season. I bought into it and thought 9-3 with a CUSA conference appearance. We are now sweating to beat two 2-8 that are currently ranked lower than us.

"To increase your effectiveness, make your emotions subordinate to your commitments."

(11-19-2015 10:55 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(11-19-2015 10:49 AM)Afflicted Wrote:  

(11-19-2015 10:14 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(11-19-2015 10:04 AM)WRCisforgotten79 Wrote:  One other thing: I'm really tired of this "we're so young" excuse. Sure, the defense is bad (again), but we've come to expect that. It's the offense that has disappointed, and at the critical positions (offensive line and quarterback), the Owls are not that young. The O-line has 2 fifth-year seniors, 2 redshirt sophomores, and 1 redshirt freshman. The QB is a fifth-year senior. Three of the six are on campus for their fifth year, two are on campus for their junior year (academically) and the other is a sophomore (academically).

All their repeated excuses are baseless, and have been proven to be so; yet Afflicted and Rick continue to repeat them over and over again as if that's going to make them true. We're NOT that young vis-à-vis other teams....we're NOT undersized and under-talented vis-à-vis our CUSA conference mates...and our injury situation is NOT that much worse (if at all) vs. other teams (see UTEP playing us with 13 starters out, and yet beating us handily). The excuses are old, stale and largely inaccurate. Anything but placing the blame on the coaching staff.

waltgreenburg, we've played 31 freshmen and true freshmen on both sides of the ball this season. If that's not "young," I don't know what is. It's a fact that we are young, small, and inexperienced. We are the second youngest team in FBS. Fact. You've got to stop posting stuff like this. I don't see how we even beat FAU and Army, but we did.

We are NOT small vis-à-vis our CUSA mates, this has been proven with evidence on multiple occasions...so why do you keep repeating it? We got manhandled by a lousy UTEP team that was playing without 13 starters (more subs than we were playing). You don't see how we even beat woeful FAU and Army? You're still excited about this season? If you're being sincere with these comments then there is absolutely no sense even attempting to reason with you.

And, BTW, we play more "freshmen" than most other teams primarly because we redshirt true Freshmen at a much, much higher rate than other programs. I'm willing to bet the house we're not anywhere near the youngest team based on the age of our players.

Okay waltgreenburg. You have it all figured out, as usual.

(11-19-2015 11:01 AM)loki_the_bubba Wrote:  

(11-19-2015 10:49 AM)Afflicted Wrote:  

(11-19-2015 10:14 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  [quote='WRCisforgotten79' pid='12667476' dateline='1447945498']
One other thing: I'm really tired of this "we're so young" excuse. Sure, the defense is bad (again), but we've come to expect that. It's the offense that has disappointed, and at the critical positions (offensive line and quarterback), the Owls are not that young. The O-line has 2 fifth-year seniors, 2 redshirt sophomores, and 1 redshirt freshman. The QB is a fifth-year senior. Three of the six are on campus for their fifth year, two are on campus for their junior year (academically) and the other is a sophomore (academically).

All their repeated excuses are baseless, and have been proven to be so; yet Afflicted and Rick continue to repeat them over and over again as if that's going to make them true. We're NOT that young vis-à-vis other teams....we're NOT undersized and under-talented vis-à-vis our CUSA conference mates...and our injury situation is NOT that much worse (if at all) vs. other teams (see UTEP playing us with 13 starters out, and yet beating us handily). The excuses are old, stale and largely inaccurate. Anything but placing the blame on the coaching staff.

waltgreenburg, we've played 31 freshmen and true freshmen on both sides of the ball this season. If that's not "young," I don't know what is. It's a fact that we are young, small, and inexperienced. We are the second youngest team in FBS. Fact. You've got to stop posting stuff like this. I don't see how we even beat FAU and Army, but we did.

A sad comment on the state of this program.
[/quote

It's not a sad comment at all when you have a bit of perspective and can objectively see what has happened to this team this year. It's no surprise to me that DJ, a fifth year senior, delivered the way he did against FAU and Army. Upperclassmen tend to do things like that, not inexperienced and physically inferior freshmen.

(11-18-2015 04:47 PM)Afflicted Wrote:  You can post whatever you want, but the reason we don't get pressure on the quarterback is because the opposing teams' have bigger and stronger players than ours right now. You see Antarius, freshmen tend to be smaller than upperclassmen and a lot more raw in talent. They need experience. That, and injuries, are why we're struggling this year. But please, post whatever.

So, to clarify, I post facts and you choose to disregard them to further your uneducated opinion. Go back to coogfans.