We never fought back against Clemson.

[chief2791]

I will say. From the opening kick tonight Shane was some kind of pissed off. Now that doesn’t fix the issue. But he sure didn’t have the Brad Scott staring into the abyss.

I noticed that as well. I can't help but think that Satterfield was getting an earful. I expect there will be changes on the offensive side of the ball.

 

[kidrobinski]

As if we didn't have enough evidence you were just here to troll.

That's a first. I feel honored in a way.

The title of the thread is "We Never Fought Back against Clemson."

If you think putting Noland in down 20 late and calling the same friggin plays except for the trick play with Quan is "fighting back", well then, I guess I have to "troll."

 

[uscwatson21]

That's a first. I feel honored in a way.

The title of the thread is "We Never Fought Back against Clemson."

If you think putting Noland in down 20 late and calling the same friggin plays except for the trick play with Quan is "fighting back", well then, I guess I have to "troll."

Yeah putting Noland in the Vanderbilt game was an example of waving the white flag.

 

[will110]

Good point about Dabo.

And then when he found coordinators who were good he kept them around. To me that's what's been the key up there, continuity.

 

[kidrobinski]

Yeah putting Noland in the Vanderbilt game was an example of waving the white flag.

Wow.

Mm-k.

 

[alaskagamecock]

Nah, we disagree there. Put in Gauthier, see what he’s got, but put in Noland down 20 against Clemson late in the game, and then run the same plays you’ve been running with a qb that’s repeatedly demonstrated an empty gun?? It would have been more chance of profit to stick in some new wide receivers that were actually willing to go get a ball, instead of sticking Noland in and trying to run a halfback pass from Quan. Wutevs folks; carry on.

Yet Noland running the same plays ended up with better stats and a higher QB rating?