I mean, with nothing to lose why not air it out and or expand the playbook for Bo and let him fail to succeed?
Anybody think we'll go for broke against South Carolina?
- Thread starter muckdawg24
- Start date
The bigger thing to watch is to see if the players remain motivated. Bad losses, several key injuries, upperclassmen breaking rules and getting kicked off the team. Takes a toll on teammates, particularly young inexperienced ones. If a regression continues then a change will be needed regardless to those that believe one is not needed. Players need to be confident in the leadership and its not uncommon for players in all levels of sports to quit on their coaches when the wheels fall off.
The most dangerous opponents are the ones that have nothing to lose.
That being said, we're still not dangerous.
That being said, we're still not dangerous.
The first thing a team needs in order to win a game is to believe in the fact that they can win said game.
I don't think this team believes that.
I don't think this team believes that.
Given we didn't throw downfield but once or twice against Furman (because I assume our athletes were not as fast as theirs 
), I'd like to see us take some shots. We have absolutely nothing to lose at this point.
), I'd like to see us take some shots. We have absolutely nothing to lose at this point.Doubt it. I don't know why but for some reason I have a bit of optimism. Our strongest asset is our D, and once again I think they keep us in the game if we can do anything on offense. Having other guys step up as leaders in the locker room is a good thing. Maybe...just maybe.
I have to agree. You can see our newfound "swagger" gone with the loss of Holman. It smacks of UCF pre-2012.
I think the first time I experienced UCF swagger in the GoL era was at Ohio State in 2012. We were pushing them around and dictating the game, even if Bortles ended up sealing our loss with a pair of picks in the second half.
We really need to get that swagger back. But it's difficult with so many young kids, so few seniors ... and our leader in Holman out for a few more games at a minimum.
Lack of faith in the offense, even with a very strong defense, is what made 2008 very painful. We still managed to win a few games. And that included a 17-0 shutout of a FCS team.
However, we did get spanked by a lot of teams ... blown out in several cases, even in C-USA. In reality, #17 South Florida was up over 2 TDs on us, but "Beaker" stupidly decided to try to "run up the score." We got 2 turnovers and almost pulled it off. Otherwise USF really beat us well too.
Last edited:
USC has one of the worst pass defenses in the country. We should go up tempo and use playaction as the safety will bite.
Of course Key won't do it and we will see the same 6 plays over again.
Of course Key won't do it and we will see the same 6 plays over again.
I agree. We already use a slow developing run as a standard option, so we definitely need to let Bo or Tyler, whomever runs it better, take a pair of shots downfield in the first quarter on some play action.
And you could be right. But I'll let Key decide that. Furthermore, based on Furman, Bo and Tyler might not be ready for such.
Do remember that South Carolina does play in the SEC. Although they lost to Georgia ... although pretty badly. And Kentucky is no better than Florida, who they also lost to.
We'll see.
You don't need a qb to be throwing bombs to run no huddle. Qb just needs to be able to hit medium to small passes and let wr get yac. Bo can do that. This is also why key is so stupid cause at it's core the no huddle is simple. But key hasn't learned that.
Wait?!
You're blaming Key for not running a no huddle?
What?!
You do realize the last time we were a no huddle offense, correct?
So ... what is your greater point?
That you don't like GoL because he refuses to go no huddle?
Heck, even Coach K didn't run a no huddle with a Freshman.
Definitely not one not groomed to be the starter.
Did you really make this case? Really?
Troll'n perhaps?
And this is why is say you are a ****ing moron.
You do realize that a vast majority of college teams at the FBS and FCS level run a no huddle, right? Let's look at the aac alone That Cincinnati,Houston, Memphis, Tulsa all now run no huddle. The no huddle offense increases a teams chance at possessions through pace. And here is something you should know: teams with shitty olines run it so the qb can get it our quickly. Oh and no huddle is a run first offense. If you don't think a mo huddle would benefit the offense then you are a moron.
Obviously. Because I don't care that we don't run the "no huddle."
That I recognize the "no huddle" can wear out one's own defense if the offense doesn't produce. That I recognize GoL is a defense-oriented, ball-control, old skool coach. That most analysts have stated that UCF's odd-ball, defense-oriented program, compared to all other offensive-focused C-USA teams, is probably why we did so well in C-USA.
Correct. We do not.
Coach K was the last one to run it at UCF.
He would run it limitedly with newer quarterbacks.
By the time they were seniors, he'd let the QBs call the plays themselves.
And I'm surprised there are not more in the AAC.
Yes. It gets you more possessions. It also means that if you fail to execute, your defense is on the field faster too.
Yes, but it has other, potential issues too.
I'm a moron because I fully understand the "no huddle" offense, but am too stupid to want to run it ... right? Which just goes back to what I've been saying all along.
It doesn't matter how many titles GoL wins, and what he does for UCF ... in the past or in the future. Until we have a more "energetic" program, with more offensive-oriented scheming, things like the "no huddle" and other frills, people like yourself will never like him.
You want a Coach K.
But I'm the moron. I'm also the only one who makes grammatical and spelling errors. Etc... You guys are a lesson in total hypocrisy. Especially since our defense-oriented, ball-control approach has netted us several championships against teams in the most offensive-oriented conference.
Go show me the analysts that say ucf's defense approach won them games. Also the era that UCF played in the cusa had some of the slowest paced teams in the country, until Ruffin McNeil, June Jones, and Kevin Sumlin. So that deflates that theory. Oh yes 2 conference titles is doing so well in cusa where UCF had a talent advantage, you do realize that these teams are ok relying on their defense, expect Cal, and typically have an aggrieved defense. In addition run oriented offenses who like to keep possession will implement it to wear down other teams defenses and you know open up the playbook. Once again UCF is built for that. And **** yes I want a energetic coach like a Matt Campbell who has done nothing, but win to come into this program. One that can actually recruit. By the way the time ucf's pace was the fastest, where they implemented portions of the no huddle, under O'Leary was 2013 the year they won the fiesta bowl.
But that's ok, because as you just said you are a moron.
Umm ... oh boy.
Wow. Just wow.
I just remember joining the conference, and looking at the C-USA statistics versus the BCS, let alone the MAC. And in the subsequent years, with the few, good defenses gone to the Big East, it only skyrocketed. It often explained why and how we kept BCS teams down, offensively.
I distinctly remember several road trips during the C-USA years, listening to the opposing radio announcers, constantly reminding their fans that UCF doesn't allow an excessive amount of points, so don't expect a big win, and possibly a loss. One of the reasons they would constantly cite is how UCF was in the top 25, if not top 10, defensively, despite C-USA being #1 or #2 in offensive production, statistically. Heck, even as late as 2012, Urban Meyer was warning the local media in their local media conferences how UCF was big defensively, and that we were ball control.
So I honestly don't know what to tell you dude. You are staring right at the face of truth, and you are absolutely on another planet. All while calling me a moron, saying I didn't get into UCF football until after 2013 and other things. Just WTF is your point by now? That you can excel at calling me a moron? That I don't know anything about UCF? Formations and strategies? Just what credibility do you honestly think you still have at this point with how you've repeatedly made such statements?
That you know how to look like you're the one that doesn't know anything? Like my join date? That one ... oh boy, really got a great laugh here.
Obviously. And people like me are in the way. So it's not that we don't know anything. It's that we just disagree. And that makes me a moron. That makes me blinded by the 2013 win.
That makes me whatever you need to yell about, because people like me are in the way of what you want. And you're tired of us. Understood. We're morons because we're in the way.
Last edited:
You moron! You dipsh--! We need Bo running the "no huddle"! That will keep the score down and our offense on the field more.
> go for broke.
Great, you just jinxed us. Broken arm. Broken leg.![[jumpingsmile]](http://l.yimg.com/j/assets/img/emoticons/happy/happy0028.r191677.gif "Jumping Smile [jumpingsmile]")
![[roll]](http://l.yimg.com/j/assets/img/emoticons/classic/roll.r191677.gif "roll [roll]")
Great, you just jinxed us. Broken arm. Broken leg.
Normally I'm not so superstitious.> go for broke.
Great, you just jinxed us. Broken arm. Broken leg.
If you told me we'd be losing our most experienced players on the first kickoff and drive of games, I would have said that was statistically very unlikely. But we did, and in each case, that utterly obliterates the primary gameplan. So now ... I won't even joke.
That said ... maybe the anti-GoL people have something going in their favor. It is very statistically unlikely we'll be a better G5 team without GoL. But we've been hitting those rare statistics this year, so maybe they're right about that too. Unlikely, but still ...
You moron! You dipsh--! We need Bo running the "no huddle"! That will keep the score down and our offense on the field more.
Uhh, wasn't saying it was a good thing. GOL will run Patti and guarantee a close (maybe 24 pts) loss rather than 30+ by running a gameplan with the hope of actually executing and winning. Sad really.
No-huddle is fine for changing your tempo but running it all game long just wreaks of "gimmick offense" unless you're a P5 school that can reel-in the talent and depth. Mainly G5 schools that do this can't physically beat better oppononents utilizing it. A solid, physical football team almost always wins. Look at how many times our physical play beat houston when they had "a high powered offense". We're not going to play much different this weekend. The kids will be thrown into the fire and have to block and be physical. Building forca future where they do this successfully. Problem is we don't look like we got the parts to do this yet. It'll probably be another ugly loss, something like 31-10 or something like that. I just want to see progress this season. The team can certainly prove me wrong.[/QUOTE]
FYI ... that was all tongue-in-cheek. Especially the insults, pretending to be another poster.
I actually agreed with you. That it's likely what we'll do to keep the score closer, even if not close enough.
The point is to win the conference. This game doesn't matter. None of these games mattered, because they don't encompass our season goal. At this point we're looking for which players have the most fieldsmanship.
I am sure we will like hell. I just don't know if it's the good kind.
We will feel like a JV squad after they faced Georgia last week. They don't have Chubb and Sony Michel equipped with a solid OL on the other side this week. Georgia did a good job of successfully balancing the run and pass. This week, they can stack the box on our predictable run plays and shut us down. Game over.
But we're not even doing the dive. We're doing a prolonged hand-off, allowing the back to find a hole. Unfortunately we don't have a good O-line, so it would probably be better if we would actually dive and fall forward.
I did not understand why we did not run more east west as that seemed to work a little more.
Nicki Patti was our game change and game plan after FIU and Stanford! Brilliant! Just Brilliant!
If we had gone east and west for Furman, we would have won. FIU also! Use the Hash marks!
I won't touch Furman, but I remember a number of plays against FIU where we stretched things to the sidelines and their south Florida speed was right there with us.
Latest posts
-
-
-
AD Chats with Mohajir and Marc: Dennis Dodd of CBS Sports Joins the Show!
- Latest: Central Floridave
-
