(11-04-2017 10:07 PM)ETSUfan1 Wrote:  

(11-04-2017 09:17 PM)brock20 Wrote:  

(11-04-2017 08:43 PM)ETSUfan1 Wrote:  Sandusky will probably be QB #2.

You have no clue who will be backup next year. You are just trolling because several ppl on here are questioning why weiger hasn’t got a shot.

Not sure why you are so fired up, but I say that because I have heard that from multiple people.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The one guy who said it on this board doesn’t count as multiple people.

I live a life outside this message board. Sorry you seem so butthurt.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(11-05-2017 06:24 AM)ETSUfan1 Wrote:  I live a life outside this message board. Sorry you seem so butthurt.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Congrats on living outside the board. Do you troll people and use sophomoric terms like “butt hurt” there too?

Ok this is boring now. Explain to me why the guy who is second in passing in the Socon, and a guy that’s probably gonna be either first or second team all league in the preseason next year should be benched.
Honestly figured the lure of playing at UT would have kept a lot of these guys around.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(11-05-2017 10:47 AM)ETSUfan1 Wrote:  Ok this is boring now. Explain to me why the guy who is second in passing in the Socon, and a guy that’s probably gonna be either first or second team all league in the preseason next year should be benched.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I never said he should be benched. I don’t think anyone has said that. Herink has made a big jump this year but I still don’t see the dynamic talent we need back there to challenge the elite teams. Considering the other pro style offense teams in the league stink this year I would hope we are always near the top of passing no matter who is behind center.

There has been opportunities to put Wieger in and see if there is anything there. Why we left Herink in when we were getting throttled by JMU and Western is beyond me. What if he got hurt? There was nothing to gain (except his stats) by leaving him in. There were also games that we should have blowed teams out and didn’t because of the conservative play calling. Limestone, VMI and Robert Morris should have been bench clearing games. Instead we are in somewhat nip and tuck games with them.

I have no dog in this race, I know none of these playes, but if your sources are correct, the optics of having a 2 time all state qb and arguably one of the top 5 high school players in the tri cities in the past 10 years not even get a shot looks pretty bad.

Any reports on Marion Watson (Punter)?

He left game on saturday with apparent chest injury.

Coach Torbush said during his presser today that he has some bruising but should be fine to go Saturday.

(11-04-2017 06:41 PM)bucfan81 Wrote:  Bucs took care of business and got a good win today. I thought we left a couple of touchdowns on the field but defense played great. Good win.

I know I'm belaboring the point, but I don't think we 'took care of business' very well. We ran the ball 50 times, probably 40-45 of those into the line. And only gained 132 yds. I think Torbush at some point (maybe before the game started) just decided that he needed a win, and that he thought that could be accomplished the *safest* way with that game plan. Maybe just by wearing down their D-line, I don't know. In that sense, it worked, and ETSU won the game. But it didn't remotely come close to maximizing the talent we have on offense. I'm not usually one to second-guess this coach, and I don't know how much he, vs. the OC was responsible. Likely they were both on board, or at least the OC had to implement what he was told to accomplish.

But the point is.....we're not going to beat the top teams in the SoCon with that strategy, and I agree with others who have suggested spreading it out more. And running on first down *virtually* every time? Does anyone know how many times we *didn't* run it on first down?

My theory is that Torbush thought we/he needed the 'W' worse than we needed the "development" of players and development of a repertoire of dependable plays. And this method was just the safest way to get there. If we hadn't gotten the interception TD, maybe it's a different story, but likely not. It was the most boring example of "safe" football I've seen since Paul Hamilton, methinks.

If one defines "taking care of business" as just merely winning the game, then ok, we did. I'd rather define it as "winning the right way" (gag). What I mean, though, is winning with just a bit of style points; just a bit of flair; just a bit of allowing some of our offense to show what capabilities they have. On the other hand........maybe he was "hiding" stuff from Samford's scouts. Show them the most boring, predictable stuff you've got, so that they can't prepare as well for the expanded playbook. One could hope..............

I simply think that we saw how small their D-Line was and decided to run heavily. Unfortunately, we still can't dominate in the running game against such a small D-Line. But yes, perhaps we are baiting Samford into overplaying the run this week so we can pass it around- which I fear is the only way we can stay in the game this week.

No defensive coordinator should ever overplay our run game.