• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

Tim Beck (HC Coastal Carolina)

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
Thump said:
I have no idea how my second post is any different than my first.

Seems to me that a bunch of people want to take the easy way out and blame coaching, which I agree was subpar, instead of admitting the "better" team won.

It is OK to give others credit as unpopular as that may be around here.
Click to expand...
The team was down by only 17 mid way through the third quarter despite only achieving 2 first downs. The idea that a different OC would not have made an impact and kept the game close is not intelligent.

So you changed the angle to focus specifically on which team was more "talented," a subjective measure that people can argue for days about.
 
Upvote 0
Thump said:
That's because they are a bunch of homers.

Have we ever beat someone by 31 and you thought that team was more talented?
Click to expand...
Nope. But I remember feeling like a team that got beat 41-14 was, at a minimum, equal to the talent that beat them.

In both cases, a combination of being out coached and talented players not executing at a level that they were capable lead to the asses being handed to the losing team.

The teams may not have been equally talented, but far closer in talent than the score would have suggested.

At least that's the way I see it.
 
Upvote 0
Thump said:
I have no idea how my second post is any different than my first.

Seems to me that a bunch of people want to take the easy way out and blame coaching, which I agree was subpar, instead of admitting the "better" team won.

It is OK to give others credit as unpopular as that may be around here.
Click to expand...
I would say the better team did win. Are they the better team and did they win because they have more pure physical talent? I don't think that's the case. They definitely don't have 31 points worth of better talent.

They won because their offensive coaches made their talent better and put their talent in a position to succeed.
 
Upvote 0
Buckeye86 said:
The team was down by only 17 mid way through the third quarter despite only achieving The idea that a different OC would not have made an impact and kept the game close is not intelligent.

So you changed the angle to focus specifically on which team was more "talented," a subjective measure that people can argue for days about.
Click to expand...
We were down 17-0, not 40-23. We had shown little ability to move the ball.
 
Upvote 0
Thump said:
I have no idea how my second post is any different than my first.

Seems to me that a bunch of people want to take the easy way out and blame coaching, which I agree was subpar, instead of admitting the "better" team won.

It is OK to give others credit as unpopular as that may be around here.
Click to expand...
JFC. No one is refusing to give Clemson credit for the win. They were clearly better-prepared, and unfortunately appeared to be more motivated. That doesn't mean they had more pure talent.

You can whine and bitch all day about talent level, but once in a great while, a team that has slightly less talent but is far better prepared and motivated will pound the more talented team. Hell, look at the 2006 NCG. You think Florida was more talented that Ohio State? They weren't, although the talent disparity wasn't much. Clemson is very similar to Sparty in that they don't give as much top-flight talent, but develop who they do get extremely well.
 
Upvote 0
sparcboxbuck said:
My $0.02 offered as discussion fodder.

Or, as we used to say when I worked at GE, he was put on 'special assignment,' which is to say that he was back burnered until the time was right for him to gracefully exit (two year commitment?) or turn things around (hasn't happened yet).
Click to expand...

When I worked for GE individuals with performance deficiencies were put on the "Get Well Program" which meant the health of their career at GE was terminal. Of course this was during Neutron Jack's reign where it was policy to annually turn over 10% of the staff to bring in fresh ideas and competition.
 
Upvote 0
Thump said:
Correct
Click to expand...
my bad forgot you are literal. fine Utah was up 21-3 before a freak end of half punt return... that is an ass kicking on par with 31-0 ... but the game was never that close... same with the OU Vs Bama - 31-17 at the half....

I get it our team sucks badly and needs a talent upgrade... I'm guessing you would bench everyone and start a buncha freshman?
 
Upvote 0
sparcboxbuck said:
The teams may not have been equally talented, but far closer in talent than the score would have suggested.

At least that's the way I see it.
Click to expand...

I agree with this.
MililaniBuckeye said:
Which was about 95% due to play calling...
Click to expand...
What plays would you have called?

I do not pretend to be a coach, we have not shown the ability to complete the deep ball all year. Our bread and butter has been JT running but that was squashed as well.

Jordan going down was the death knell.
 
Upvote 0
OregonBuckeye said:
I saw an Ohio State team loaded with NFL talent get taken to the brink by Northern Illinois last year. Not even one of the stronger NIU teams. We should've smoked them by 50. So yeah, it is possible to be more talented and lose big.
Click to expand...
We didn't lose 31-0 so your argument is invalid... Sorry channeling my Thumpiness
 
Upvote 0
Thump said:
We were down 17-0, not 40-23. We had shown little ability to move the ball.
Click to expand...
So Pitt is more talented than OSU because they managed to move the ball against Clemson? Or did they have a better OC who utilized the talented they did have more efficiently.

The answer is obviously #2, highlighting once again you are simply trolling with nonsense.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top