That was what I was referring to when I said turn the page.Sure, if THAT is your reason for not wanting to make a bowl game then that's fine. That's just not what you were saying earlier.
That was what I was referring to when I said turn the page.Sure, if THAT is your reason for not wanting to make a bowl game then that's fine. That's just not what you were saying earlier.
Yeah, and use the cocktail schticks!Sure, if THAT is your reason for not wanting to make a bowl game then that's fine. That's just not what you were saying earlier.
Yes. Because kids want to go winning programs. They want to get the spotlight games.Does it?
Explain Texas then. And why TCU rankings haven’t dropped off over the past 4 years.Yes. Because kids want to go winning programs. They want to get the spotlight games.
I wouldn’t mind saving Ellison’s eligibility as well. Our season sucks whether we beat TT and Western Virginia (lol on beating OU) and I don’t really care about another cheeze-it bowl. Certainly not enough to ruin a year of eligibility for a promising DL prospect.
Because Texas is a program that gets the spot light and will make changes when they are not winning. TCU was ranked two years ago and in a conf championship. Then we dropped some spots after last season. And Texas is also the State's flagship. Yet it has had ups and downs in recruiting.Explain Texas then. And why TCU rankings haven’t dropped off over the past 4 years.
I’ll hang up and listen.
(I know your answers. I’m just trying to prove that your original statement was an exaggeration which was my point).
Anybody who does not want this team to go to a bowl is nuts. That extra practice time is a huge value. We have rcvrs who break off routes too early, too late, run wrong routes, etc., and linemen no gelling. We need the time. Especially since we will, once again for the 5 year straight, be a "young team".
One ranked year fixes everything in your estimation?Because Texas is a program that gets the spot light and will make changes when they are not winning. TCU was ranked two years ago and in a conf championship. Then we dropped some spots after last season. And Texas is also the State's flagship. Yet it has had ups and downs in recruiting.
That's what we did with Pro Wells last year and because of it, it looks like we will have a productive player for two more years instead of one. Seems more important than him getting minutes against Baylor and the CheeZe-It bowl but maybe that is more important to you. If a DE is the difference in beating tech and West Virginia, we suck even worse than I thought.Did I just read this? You would rather take an L to Texas Tech (and drop to 3-5 against them since joining the B12) so we can save a year of eligibility for Colt Ellison (No offense, Colt)?? We're not even talking about a QB here...
That's what we did with Pro Wells last year and because of it, it looks like we will have a productive player for two more years instead of one. Seems more important than him getting minutes against Baylor and the CheeZe-It bowl but maybe that is more important to you. If a DE is the difference in beating tech and West Virginia, we suck even worse than I thought.
Again, I don't really care if we end the season with 5 wins or 6 wins. The worse it is, the more likely we see change.big difference in deciding not playing pro wells when the frog passing game was a trainwreck to begin will and sitting colt when the frogs may not have more than 2 healthy defensive ends
Again, I don't really care if we end the season with 5 wins or 6 wins. The worse it is, the more likely we see change.
Why are you arguing just to argue. I don't give a [ Finebaum ] about the rest of the season. A worse record increases the likelihood that changes are made. Disagree?so by throwing the towel in on the defensive side of the ball you hope to see changes on the offensive side of the ball?
Why are you arguing just to argue. I don't give a [ Cumbie’s red zone playcalling ] about the rest of the season. A worse record increases the likelihood that changes are made. Disagree?
The logic is that if we finish 4-8, changes will be made. Not the worst case scenario in my mind. And would rather have Colt Ellison eligible for an extra full season (perhaps even one that matters) than the last three games of the year in a season in which, no matter how we finish, is an extreme disappointment. I get that we only have one DE. What I would like to avoid is only having one DE three years from now when it might matter since Joe Brady will be calling plays for us by then, all thanks to the fact that we went 4-8 instead of 6-6.not arguing to argue, but trying to understand the logic.
The logic is that if we finish 4-8, changes will be made. Not the worst case scenario in my mind. And would rather have Colt Ellison eligible for an extra full season (perhaps even one that matters) than the last three games of the year in a season in which, no matter how we finish, is an extreme disappointment. I get that we only have one DE. What I would like to avoid is only having one DE three years from now when it might matter since Joe Brady will be calling plays for us by then, all thanks to the fact that we went 4-8 instead of 6-6.
Theoretically we've had the last 3 classes to deal with shortages at LB and DE, yet here we are.the frogs also would have 3 recruiting classes to deal with any shortage at defensive end so let colt play and i wouldn't hold my breath on joe brady coming to tcu in the off season
Theoretically we've had the last 3 classes to deal with shortages at LB and DE, yet here we are.