Jump to content

🐯LSU 2021 Thread🐯


Stoney

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, LOL said:

Dude...  I don't know what to tell you. I'm not even an Aggie fan, and even I can see that A&M was an average QB away from getting to the CCG this season.

They don't need a "generational" QB, they just need a guy who can 1.) occasionally pick up a first down with his legs and 2.) not make terrible decisions passing downfield. 

97th. Calzada’s 56.1% completion percentage ranked 97th out of 112 QBs. There were 96 QBs better and only 15 worse than him. 28 QBs threw more INTs than his 9. 

  • Wow 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, DB2point0 said:

Can’t argue with any of that.  That being said, I don’t think a tannehill or ehlinger type boosts the Aggies into the next level.  When I say generational type, I’m talking a once every 20 year type player.

So by your definition of a generational player, who is your 1 Qb over the last 20 years that fits that mold? And how did the other 19 championship teams win without generational QBs? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Stoney said:

I’ve never understood that aspect of Mond’s game under Jimbo. Right off the bat Jimbo said the reason why Mond got the nod over Starkel was his ability with his legs. Then you never really saw Mond used in that way. It was weird.

Jimbo IMO handcuffed mond because he didn’t want to see a situation like this year. He doesn’t want his QB getting hurt. Sadly Jimbo coaches QBs like they are NFL guys. Sometimes if all you have is the QB run to change the game, you can’t play it safe and just stay healthy for next week if you have title plans. There is no automatic bids for dropping 3-4 games but winning your division. Sometimes you have to risk the QBs health if you want to win a college title. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, DB2point0 said:

Lots of teams need that.  The Aggies need one that can take the stress off a their defense.  

2021 Texas A&M Defense rankings  (mmm Rankins)

3rd- 15.9ppg

20th- 328.6ypg

19th- 192.7 passing ypg 

42nd- 135.9 rushing ypg

Defense gave up 21.4ppg in SEC competition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, WETSU said:

So by your definition of a generational player, who is your 1 Qb over the last 20 years that fits that mold? And how did the other 19 championship teams win without generational QBs? 

I didn’t say there was just one overall.  Your program can have one really great one at the same time others do.
 

colt, Sam Bradford, Tebow….. all at the Heisman presentation together.  
 

VY and Leinhart played against each other.  There’s been several elite qbs in the last 20 years.  
 

teams that dominate for stretches may not have great/generational type players lined up, but they recruit well enough all over to out do everybody every year for stretches…..Bama/Clemson the last 7-8 years are examples.  Kelly Bryant, AJ McCarron, Mac Jones were all good qb’s but we’re surrounded with talent that was better than everybody on their schedule.  aTm isn’t there yet offensively.  That’s why I say, if they are to win it all in the next 3-4 years, which was the claim, they’ll need a generational type qb to get it done.  Their offensive talent is behind their defensive talent as of now

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, DB2point0 said:

I didn’t say there was just one overall.  Your program can have one really great one at the same time others do.
 

colt, Sam Bradford, Tebow….. all at the Heisman presentation together.  
 

VY and Leinhart played against each other.  There’s been several elite qbs in the last 20 years.  
 

teams that dominate for stretches may not have great/generational type players lined up, but they recruit well enough all over to out do everybody every year for stretches…..Bama/Clemson the last 7-8 years are examples.  Kelly Bryant, AJ McCarron, Mac Jones were all good qb’s but we’re surrounded with talent that was better than everybody on their schedule.  aTm isn’t there yet offensively.  That’s why I say, if they are to win it all in the next 3-4 years, which was the claim, they’ll need a generational type qb to get it done.  Their offensive talent is behind their defensive talent as of now

A&M has plenty of talent at the skill positions to win a title with a good QB. I, along with other fan bases apparently, disagree with you on this regarding A&M and their talent level. 
 

This years team did NOT need a Johnny. They could have won 11-12 games with simply something in between Mond and Tannehill. A second-thrid round QB that can move the chains and put up a couple of tds a game wins at least 3 of those 4 losses. It has nothing to do with needing a elite QB. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, WETSU said:

A&M has plenty of talent at the skill positions to win a title with a good QB. I, along with other fan bases apparently, disagree with you on this regarding A&M and their talent level. 
 

This years team did NOT need a Johnny. They could have won 11-12 games with simply something in between Mond and Tannehill. A second-thrid round QB that can move the chains and put up a couple of tds a game wins at least 3 of those 4 losses. It has nothing to do with needing a elite QB. 

Care to make a bet, if either of us are around for 4 years? I’m saying the Aggies won’t win a National title in the next 4 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/8/2021 at 11:45 AM, LOL said:

Jimbo would be insane to leave A&M now. He's totally in position to compete for and possibly win a natty in the next few seasons. 

 

22 hours ago, DB2point0 said:

With what QB?  Calzada is his only experienced qb and Aggie fans want him to transfer.  Even with the defense he has, they’ll need a generational type talent at QB and he don’t have it now.  

Just as a reminder so you don’t crawfish.  The original statement is quoted as “next few seasons”.  IMO that’s 3 years, I’m giving you 4.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Stoney said:

I’ve never understood that aspect of Mond’s game under Jimbo. Right off the bat Jimbo said the reason why Mond got the nod over Starkel was his ability with his legs. Then you never really saw Mond used in that way. It was weird.

Did he really say that? Starkel always had better legs than Mond, I thought. Mond wasn't that good of a runner. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, DB2point0 said:

Care to make a bet, if either of us are around for 4 years? I’m saying the Aggies won’t win a National title in the next 4 years.

That’s a ridiculous bet. Winning a national title is very hard. The deck is stacked against you from day one. 130 teams fighting for 1 spot. It’s not like betting team A wins one before team B. Me taking that bet would be like me betting on red 18. Yes it could hit but the odds are in favor of the house. 
 

And nobody is saying A&M will win a title in 4 years. What is being said is they are talented enough to win a title. There’s a very big difference. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, JohnnyFootball said:

Did he really say that? Starkel always had better legs than Mond, I thought. Mond wasn't that good of a runner. 

Starkel was very similar to Calzada. Big arm, risk taker, not a natural runner. Mond is a good runner but not a good scrambler. On designed runs Mond can hit a seam and go. But when the play breaks down Mond was not good at making guys miss or getting big chunks that way. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, WETSU said:

That’s a ridiculous bet. Winning a national title is very hard. The deck is stacked against you from day one. 130 teams fighting for 1 spot. It’s not like betting team A wins one before team B. Me taking that bet would be like me betting on red 18. Yes it could hit but the odds are in favor of the house. 
 

And nobody is saying A&M will win a title in 4 years. What is being said is they are talented enough to win a title. There’s a very big difference. 

Maybe I should offer the bet to @LOLsince they had the nads to say it.  Maybe they have the nads for the bet, since you are already crawfishing

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DB2point0 said:

Maybe I should offer the bet to @LOL since they had the nads to say it.  Maybe they gave the nads for the bet, since you are already crawfishing

You don’t need nads on your end to make that bet…. Because the odds are WAY in your favor to just bet against one team while the other side is betting against 129 teams. I know you’re not the sharpest tool in the shed but surely even you should be able to understand how one sided your proposal is…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, WETSU said:

You don’t need nads on your end to make that bet…. Because the odds are WAY in your favor to just bet against one team while the other side is betting against 129 teams. I know you’re not the sharpest tool in the shed but surely even you should be able to understand how one sided your proposal is…

So no confidence huh?

🐓or 🦂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can eliminate about 110 right off the top.  There’s only room for 5 undefeated conference champs.  If that happens there’s no room for a 1-loss non champ.  I don’t figure all 5 P5 champs will be undefeated so that means a couple teams with a loss can be considered, along with possibly another undefeated G5 champ.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, DB2point0 said:

The Aggies are the ones making the claim.  I’m just offering up a bet.  

For starters an OU fan started that Because even OU fans are capable of recognizing what’s being built in college station. Potential is there but he didn’t guarantee anything.…. Secondly, you’re offering up a bet that’s heavily in your favor. If you want to bet something more equal odds then I’m down. If the bet was something like “A&M wins a national title before Texas” then id take it. But betting on one team against the field is the types of odds that make the house far more money than it loses. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, WETSU said:

For starters an OU fan started that…. Secondly, you’re offering up a bet that’s heavily in your favor. If you want to bet something more equal odds then I’m down. If the bet was something like “A&M wins a national title before Texas” then id take it. But betting on one team against the field is the types of odds that make the house far more money than it loses. 

I argued his statement only for you to back him up and take up the argument.  I understand you don’t believe it will happen.  Just thought I’d make some easy money, just have to wait 4 years to collect

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, DB2point0 said:

I argued his statement only for you to back him up and take up the argument.  I understand you don’t believe it will happen.  Just thought I’d make some easy money, just have to wait 4 years to collect

It’s easy money because of the odds not because of A&M itself… it’s equally as safe to say that Clemson doesn’t win a title in the next 4 years as well…. Really the only team I’d actually place that bet on is Bama…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL! Hell, I'll take this bet, I'll even raise the stakes: 

1.) Texas A&M plays for and wins at least one natty in the next four seasons (beginning in Aug. 2022).

2.) The loser leaves the SDC College Forum and never returns. No posts or reactions. Gone. Forever. 


Deal? 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...