|
|
Post by texasaztec on Jul 17, 2010 9:11:53 GMT -8
|
|
tim
Bench Warmer
Posts: 81
|
Post by tim on Jul 17, 2010 9:41:09 GMT -8
Somebody in SD is a little Bullish claiming this squad is the best in a decade. Midwestern folks are suckers.
"Talking to a buddy down San Diego way, says San Diego State will have its best team in a decade and the QB is a NFL-type guy. Just for whatever it's worth."
Classic.
|
|
|
|
Post by k5james on Jul 17, 2010 9:53:35 GMT -8
Think about the last decade here, the bar isn't exactly set very high.
|
|
|
|
Post by steveaztec on Jul 17, 2010 9:55:09 GMT -8
Somebody in SD is a little Bullish claiming this squad is the best in a decade. Midwestern folks are suckers. "Talking to a buddy down San Diego way, says San Diego State will have its best team in a decade and the QB is a NFL-type guy. Just for whatever it's worth." Classic. I think the guy from San Diego that made that statement may just be right. Of course, the flip side of that statement is that he is saying this team is better than... -Last years 4-8 team -Chuck Longs 3 years -Tom Crafts 4 years -Tollners last 2 years Very possible. |
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Jul 17, 2010 10:04:47 GMT -8
As we all know, "the best team in a decade" isn't saying much.  However, we also know that there is a decent chance that this team might actually be a lot better than what we've had in a decade. That may well be insufficient to beat Missouri on the road, but it might be enough to make the Tigers work hard for the W. What we all want to know is this; if the Hoke era is going to reach the 7 or more wins a season level, when will the trend leading to that outcome be evident? It wasn't last year, at least not after the promising 4-4 start. Is the second year too soon to see serious improvement? How about the third? My position is this. If we cannot look at the 2011 Aztecs and say, "Now that is what we've been waiting for!" something is amiss. But then, you all know my theory. Namely, Aztec football must make a turnaround pretty quickly or we may start to look like San Jose State. In any event, if 2010 doesn't end up a winner, I believe SDSU fans should take the position that 2011 must be! Otherwise we would be saying, "Well, one of these decades maybe we'll get the job done." That's not acceptable; we simply don't have decades. AzWm |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2010 10:19:56 GMT -8
To answer the question, one thing: constant pressure on Blaine Gabbert.
For anybody who hasn't seen the guy, think Dan McGwire. He's huge physically and tough to bring down but immobile. So if we allow him to stand in the pocket, he's got a strong and accurate arm and he's going to destroy us. However, Navy made him uncomfortable the entire game in the Texas Bowl last year, sacking him four times, and the Middies beat Mizzou easily. OTOH, in three consecutive games just before that against KSU, ISU and Kansas, Gabbert was cumulatively sacked just once and his composite stats were 66-100 for 938 yards.
BTW, Missouri's record in its last 17 regular season non-conference games is 17-0.
|
|
|
|
Post by brokencurse on Jul 17, 2010 10:24:06 GMT -8
As we all know, "the best team in a decade" isn't saying much. However, we also know that there is a decent chance that this team might actually be a lot better than what we've had in a decade. That may well be insufficient to beat Missouri on the road, but it might be enough to make the Tigers work hard for the W. What we all want to know is this; if the Hoke era is going to reach the 7 or more wins a season level, when will the trend leading to that outcome be evident? It wasn't last year, at least not after the promising 4-4 start. Is the second year too soon to see serious improvement? How about the third? My position is this. If we cannot look at the 2011 Aztecs and say, "Now that is what we've been waiting for!" something is amiss. But then, you all know my theory. Namely, Aztec football must make a turnaround pretty quickly or we may start to look like San Jose State. In any event, if 2010 doesn't end up a winner, I believe SDSU fans should take the position that 2011 must be! Otherwise we would be saying, "Well, one of these decades maybe we'll get the job done." That's not acceptable; we simply don't have decades. AzWm We've been looking like San Jose State since Chuck Long. We need a turnaround to no longer look like them. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2010 10:25:14 GMT -8
you all know my theory. Namely, Aztec football must make a turnaround pretty quickly or we may start to look like San Jose State. And you know mine. Which is that there are a couple key differences. One is that we play in a better league which gets us another couple mil per year more than they get via additional TV and bowl game revenue. (Not that we've earned it, mind you.) And the other is that although by mid-season you can hear crickets at Qualcomm just like at Spartan Stadium ("spartan" as in the number of butts in the seats), SDSU always sells about 10K more tickets. In other words, while we're an on-the-field mess just like they are, our financial ledger isn't close to the disaster theirs is. |
|
|
|
Post by texasaztec on Jul 17, 2010 10:32:04 GMT -8
To answer the question, one thing: constant pressure on Blaine Gabbert. If this is the key, how does our D-line, and especially pass rushers, line up with their O-Line offense pass protect? I don't think on the face of things it looks too positive for us. |
|
|
|
Post by aztech on Jul 17, 2010 10:42:58 GMT -8
We've been looking like San Jose State since Chuck Long. We need a turnaround to no longer look like them. Do you remember the scores against SJSU with Long? Just "looking like SJSU" would have been wishful thinking. That's how far below ground we're trying to climb from. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2010 10:49:51 GMT -8
We've been looking like San Jose State since Chuck Long. We need a turnaround to no longer look like them. Do you remember the scores against SJSU with Long? Just "looking like SJSU" would have been wishful thinking. That's how far below ground we're trying to climb from. Considering the scores as compared to how Tom Craft blew out SJSU, those two games honestly qualify as SJSU I and SJSU II and are just behind Cal Poly I and II as being complete embarrassments to Aztecs football. (SGF takes a deep breath and reminds himself that he actually somehow managed to survive those three nightmare seasons.) |
|
|
|
Post by steveaztec on Jul 17, 2010 10:56:21 GMT -8
Do you remember the scores against SJSU with Long? Just "looking like SJSU" would have been wishful thinking. That's how far below ground we're trying to climb from. Considering the scores as compared to how Tom Craft blew out SJSU, those two games honestly qualify as SJSU I and SJSU II and are just behind Cal Poly I and II as being complete embarrassments to Aztecs football. (SGF takes a deep breath and reminds himself that he actually somehow managed to survive those three nightmare seasons.) How about losing at Idaho last year, after beating them the year before by 25 or so points? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2010 10:58:25 GMT -8
Considering the scores as compared to how Tom Craft blew out SJSU, those two games honestly qualify as SJSU I and SJSU II and are just behind Cal Poly I and II as being complete embarrassments to Aztecs football. (SGF takes a deep breath and reminds himself that he actually somehow managed to survive those three nightmare seasons.) How about losing at Idaho last year, after beating them the year before by 25 or so points? I'm not going to debate you anymore on this, Steve. You have your opinion and I and 90% of the rest of the board have ours. |
|
|
|
Post by steveaztec on Jul 17, 2010 11:01:01 GMT -8
How about losing at Idaho last year, after beating them the year before by 25 or so points? I'm not going to debate you anymore on this, Steve. You have your opinion and I and 90% of the rest of the board have ours. OK, then I will lay it out for you since you don't want to debate. One of the San Jose State teams and BOTH of the Cal Poly teams that Chuck Long lost to, were better than the Idaho team we lost to last year. Just a friendly reminder......And no, I don't follow the majority. I have my own mind.  |
|
|
|
Post by rickdoerr on Jul 17, 2010 11:33:39 GMT -8
As to the question, Mizzu plays a so-so Illinois team followed by McNeese St. They also have Miami of Ohio after us. We might catch them a bit overconfident, especially after McNeese.
Their QB is supposed to be good but gets rattled easily. His problem this year is lack of quality receivers. As always, they're big up front. But Navy proved them to be slow of foot. Don't think anyone in the Big 12-2 runs a defense anywhere similar to what Long can throw at 'em. Supposedly the defensive secondary isn't that great. From what little I've read on them Missouri fears a passing team. As to a 17-0 OOC record, there's a first time for everything!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2010 11:40:17 GMT -8
Don't think anyone in the Big 12-2 runs a defense anywhere similar to what Long can throw at 'em. Supposedly the defensive secondary isn't that great. From what little I've read on them Missouri fears a passing team. As to a 17-0 OOC record, there's a first time for everything! FWIW, Rocky Long won at Missouri 45-35 in 2005 and lost to Mizzou at Albuquerque 27-17 the next year. Those were Gary Pinkel's fifth and sixth years as coach of the Tigers. |
|
|
|
Post by ron on Jul 17, 2010 11:43:50 GMT -8
Considering the scores as compared to how Tom Craft blew out SJSU, those two games honestly qualify as SJSU I and SJSU II and are just behind Cal Poly I and II as being complete embarrassments to Aztecs football. (SGF takes a deep breath and reminds himself that he actually somehow managed to survive those three nightmare seasons.) How about losing at Idaho last year, after beating them the year before by 25 or so points? Idaho won a bowl game last year. It might be tough to admit, but they were better than we were. |
|
|
|
Post by ron on Jul 17, 2010 11:47:08 GMT -8
To answer the original question, I think our OL will have to find a way to contain their pass rush specailist (name escapes me).
On D I'd say we have to avoid giving up big plays.
I don't see a win here, so I really just want to come out of it healthy.
|
|
|
|
Post by steveaztec on Jul 17, 2010 11:52:44 GMT -8
How about losing at Idaho last year, after beating them the year before by 25 or so points? Idaho won a bowl game last year. It might be tough to admit, but they were better than we were. Yes they did......Which gets brings us back to my point to SGF above. San Jose State was 9-4 one of the years we lost to them and they also won their bowl game (New Mexico Bowl). Just pointing out the myopic thoughts of Long Haters. It is ok for Brady Hoke and staff to lose at Idaho (even though Long and staff beat them by 25 the year before).....because Idaho improved and was a bowl team... Yet, Chuck Long and staff lost to San Jose State (a 9-4 team and bowl winner too), but "Long Haters" felt disgraced by that lost and wanted Chuck Long fired. "Long Haters" can't have it both ways.....but oh myyyy how they try too. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2010 12:12:03 GMT -8
Idaho won a bowl game last year. It might be tough to admit, but they were better than we were. Yes they did......Which gets brings us back to my point to SGF above. San Jose State was 9-4 one of the years we lost to them and they also won their bowl game (New Mexico Bowl). There are losses and then there are losses. Craft beat SJSU by 31 in 2005, then Chuck LOST to them by 21 in 2006. As you say they won a bowl game that year but a 52-point turnaround speaks volumes about how far Aztecs football fell in just one year. As to 2008, we lost by 25 to an SJSU team which except for playing us won just five games. Four of those wins were over DIA schools which had a collective record of 15-35. The fifth was over mighty UC Davis by a FG. SGF: "Cal Poly I & II." SteveAztec: "Dammit, SGF, two miserable games in three years don't mean Chuck was a bad coach!" SGF: "SJSU I & II." SteveAztec: "Dammit, SGF, four miserable games in three years don't mean Chuck was a bad coach!" SGF: "70-7" SteveAztec: "Dammit, SGF, five miserable games in three years don't mean Chuck was a bad coach!" SGF: "52-0 at TCU in which SDSU was outgained 614-87." SteveAztec: "Dammit, SGF, six miserable games in three years don't mean Chuck was a bad coach!" SGF: "I give up!" |
|
