IronMan70 3,277 Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 Even if it was only 1 play, there has to be 'some' kind of response to an upper classman playing like that, for the obvious reasons. A response, sure. A punishment of some sort, most likely. The demand for a benching just seemed to me too much a personal desire to see proof positive that some form of 'proper' punishment was meted. I trust CWM to discipline his players and get the D working. How he does it is up to him. Yes, I agree. I'm not advocating anything specific, just that there has to be some kind of response. Boom will know what sort of response to make and it could be something we never even know about. He isn't the type to overlook it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tigerbrotha12 2,362 Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 I'm not being negative or funny serious question. What are people expecting from tj Davis? I don't get why they keep talking about him depth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AU-24 3,102 Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 Fire boom. Hire turner gill. Is that you Charles Barkley? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tombigbeetiger 223 Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 Anyone hear about Lane Kiffin? Any news? is he toast? there is talk, but I think it is about the playcalling rather than anything else....I don't know anything specific other than saban and kiffen had a riff before season started...about what?....no clue Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mustache eagle 2,406 Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 I'm thrilled to finally hear a DC call out our problems bluntly. We have all suspected these problems, but everyone has just given implication or coach speak. I have to wonder about the kinds of players we were recruiting on Defense all these years. Recruiting just for talent has it's problems. Were we not also looking at how coachable these players are and who has the heart to actually play the game and the desire to be physical? My impression with our D for a long-time has been laziness at its core. It's like they expect to just get by, no one seems to have the fire lit under them to be physical and stop plays. i watched the michigan state D play earlier this year ... those guys play with passion ... fun to watch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AuCivilEng1 11,012 Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 I'm not saying that anyone should buy into these rumors about Lame, but if you read twitter right now, Lame probably wishes he was Jeremy Johnson. Lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chimesAU 89 Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 I'm thrilled to finally hear a DC call out our problems bluntly. We have all suspected these problems, but everyone has just given implication or coach speak. I have to wonder about the kinds of players we were recruiting on Defense all these years. Recruiting just for talent has it's problems. Were we not also looking at how coachable these players are and who has the heart to actually play the game and the desire to be physical? My impression with our D for a long-time has been laziness at its core. It's like they expect to just get by, no one seems to have the fire lit under them to be physical and stop plays. i watched the michigan state D play earlier this year ... those guys play with passion ... fun to watch. Good defenses are a lot of fun to watch. Imo, every team in every sport should start with defense and go from there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUbooger 0 Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 I'm not saying that anyone should buy into these rumors about Lame, but if you read twitter right now, Lame probably wishes he was Jeremy Johnson. Lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mustache eagle 2,406 Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 Any team that plays with passion is fun to watch. I tell my kids to do their things with their best effort and attitude. That advise is never wrong, no matter the level. You can always look yourself in the mirror after. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cole256 17,084 Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 Yeah let's sit Ford down and lose....that'll teach him a lesson We did lose. He was on the field. So let's do it again! Clearly if me wasn't on the field we would have won.... I would commend the use of that tactic with anyone but me! You know that has nothing to do with it. He was on the field. His level of effort was affected by the score. The threat of losing is not going to deter anyone from taking action that will make Rudy have to think about what that means. Make no mistake, I do not wish to "punish" him. I want him to learn something about competing on a team. But you used the same tactic in your comment you quoted... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kd4au 1,145 Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 I don't think Ford should be benched,but he should not start the game.Let him sit and think about whether or not he wants give all out effort or not for a series. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yeaauburn 21 Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 Like Muschamp said, every time you dog a play you take NFL $$$ out of your pocket... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icanthearyou 4,463 Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 Yeah let's sit Ford down and lose....that'll teach him a lesson We did lose. He was on the field. So let's do it again! Clearly if me wasn't on the field we would have won.... I would commend the use of that tactic with anyone but me! You know that has nothing to do with it. He was on the field. His level of effort was affected by the score. The threat of losing is not going to deter anyone from taking action that will make Rudy have to think about what that means. Make no mistake, I do not wish to "punish" him. I want him to learn something about competing on a team. But you used the same tactic in your comment you quoted... Not at all. You equated Rudy sitting and, losing. I merely pointed out the fact that we lost WITH him on the field. So, that really wasn't a logical threat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
auburntiger1987 759 Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 I'm not trying to start an argument i'm just telling facts. i dont see scoring in the area of 28-31 points that big of a stretch. especially if we can do it while turning the ball over so many times. For the UL game: 3 interceptions with one being in field goal range, 1 we were going to punt and 1 on first down that killed a drive. So two legit opportunities to drive and score points. For the Jax State game: 2 int's on 2nd down and a fumble while driving in Jax state territory. 3 opportunities to score. For LSU: a fumble and int to stall drives. thats 7 chances to put up points. We dont screw that up and cash in when we can and there you have it. Fournette has 160 yards and 3 tds against them. One being 26 yards and another for 18. What limited LSU from pulling away is the lack of qb. If we can have any threat of a passing game, we can get the W. I'd like to see what SW has. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
auskip07 930 Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 Like Muschamp said, every time you dog a play you take NFL $$$ out of your pocket... Unless you were not good enough for the NFL in the first place Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cole256 17,084 Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 Yeah let's sit Ford down and lose....that'll teach him a lesson We did lose. He was on the field. So let's do it again! Clearly if me wasn't on the field we would have won.... I would commend the use of that tactic with anyone but me! You know that has nothing to do with it. He was on the field. His level of effort was affected by the score. The threat of losing is not going to deter anyone from taking action that will make Rudy have to think about what that means. Make no mistake, I do not wish to "punish" him. I want him to learn something about competing on a team. But you used the same tactic in your comment you quoted... Not at all. You equated Rudy sitting and, losing. I merely pointed out the fact that we lost WITH him on the field. So, that really wasn't a logical threat. But you saying us losing therefore it doesn't matter isn't logical either. We lost with Adams as well....think sitting him wouldn't matter? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icanthearyou 4,463 Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 Yeah let's sit Ford down and lose....that'll teach him a lesson We did lose. He was on the field. So let's do it again! Clearly if me wasn't on the field we would have won.... I would commend the use of that tactic with anyone but me! You know that has nothing to do with it. He was on the field. His level of effort was affected by the score. The threat of losing is not going to deter anyone from taking action that will make Rudy have to think about what that means. Make no mistake, I do not wish to "punish" him. I want him to learn something about competing on a team. But you used the same tactic in your comment you quoted... Not at all. You equated Rudy sitting and, losing. I merely pointed out the fact that we lost WITH him on the field. So, that really wasn't a logical threat. But you saying us losing therefore it doesn't matter isn't logical either. We lost with Adams as well....think sitting him wouldn't matter? Come on Cole. This is foolish. We aren't talking about anyone but Rudy. No one but you implied that, without Rudy we lose. I never implied that, without Rudy we win. It was a bad post. We have all had some. Except for me, of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amsterjam 107 Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 In my opinion Frost is the one who needs to be benched. The guy clearly hates contact and hasn't put a helmet on anyone in 4 years. Yes he's made a couple of plays by dragging people down from behind but when is the last time he actually HIT someone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cole256 17,084 Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 Yeah let's sit Ford down and lose....that'll teach him a lesson We did lose. He was on the field. So let's do it again! Clearly if me wasn't on the field we would have won.... I would commend the use of that tactic with anyone but me! You know that has nothing to do with it. He was on the field. His level of effort was affected by the score. The threat of losing is not going to deter anyone from taking action that will make Rudy have to think about what that means. Make no mistake, I do not wish to "punish" him. I want him to learn something about competing on a team. But you used the same tactic in your comment you quoted... Not at all. You equated Rudy sitting and, losing. I merely pointed out the fact that we lost WITH him on the field. So, that really wasn't a logical threat. But you saying us losing therefore it doesn't matter isn't logical either. We lost with Adams as well....think sitting him wouldn't matter? Come on Cole. This is foolish. We aren't talking about anyone but Rudy. No one but you implied that, without Rudy we lose. I never implied that, without Rudy we win. It was a bad post. We have all had some. Except for me, of course. No my logic includes the fact that going into the season our third safety would be our starting corner and our back up corner would be Rudy. What's behind him makes him more important and the fact that he makes calls as well. So yeah I think him not playing would be a HUGE dent in the defense. Now if you think saying yes but we lost with him was an explosive point that crushed all logic more power to you lol. And I know who we were talking about but I used another player to show the logic you used had a big hole....But yeah we're talking about Ford Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tombigbeetiger 223 Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 In my opinion Frost is the one who needs to be benched. The guy clearly hates contact and hasn't put a helmet on anyone in 4 years. Yes he's made a couple of plays by dragging people down from behind but when is the last time he actually HIT on someone? BINGO!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FoundationEagle 637 Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 In my opinion Frost is the one who needs to be benched. The guy clearly hates contact and hasn't put a helmet on anyone in 4 years. Yes he's made a couple of plays by dragging people down from behind but when is the last time he actually HIT on someone? I hope he is not hitting ON people during the game. That would be awkward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icanthearyou 4,463 Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 Yeah let's sit Ford down and lose....that'll teach him a lesson We did lose. He was on the field. So let's do it again! Clearly if me wasn't on the field we would have won.... I would commend the use of that tactic with anyone but me! You know that has nothing to do with it. He was on the field. His level of effort was affected by the score. The threat of losing is not going to deter anyone from taking action that will make Rudy have to think about what that means. Make no mistake, I do not wish to "punish" him. I want him to learn something about competing on a team. But you used the same tactic in your comment you quoted... Not at all. You equated Rudy sitting and, losing. I merely pointed out the fact that we lost WITH him on the field. So, that really wasn't a logical threat. But you saying us losing therefore it doesn't matter isn't logical either. We lost with Adams as well....think sitting him wouldn't matter? Come on Cole. This is foolish. We aren't talking about anyone but Rudy. No one but you implied that, without Rudy we lose. I never implied that, without Rudy we win. It was a bad post. We have all had some. Except for me, of course. No my logic includes the fact that going into the season our third safety would be our starting corner and our back up corner would be Rudy. What's behind him makes him more important and the fact that he makes calls as well. So yeah I think him not playing would be a HUGE dent in the defense. Now if you think saying yes but we lost with him was an explosive point that crushed all logic more power to you lol. And I know who we were talking about but I used another player to show the logic you used had a big hole....But yeah we're talking about Ford Okay. You win. If Rudy doesn't play, we lose. We must play Rudy, even if he only kind of feels like playing some of the time. His talent earns him the right to dog a few plays here and there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chimesAU 89 Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 In my opinion Frost is the one who needs to be benched. The guy clearly hates contact and hasn't put a helmet on anyone in 4 years. Yes he's made a couple of plays by dragging people down from behind but when is the last time he actually HIT on someone? BINGO!!!! I don't have enough tubs of ice cream left to get me through another player being benched. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike4AU 1,739 Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 Chimes, I have to ask what is your new avatar about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McLoofus 35,182 Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 Chimes, I have to ask what is your new avatar about? His name is Sean White. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.