BigRedBuster

I'm in a small town in central Nebraska. Sorry, on this forum that's as far as I'll go. Carl, The reason it is deemed unhealthy is that most of what they took away is protein. The federal guide lines state that if you offer a certain amount of protein the main line lunch, then you are not allowed to offer more protein on the salad bar. Which is just absolutely asinine because if you are eating main line then you aren't going to be eating the salad bar. ALSO....PROTEIN DOESN'T MAKE YOU FAT. Good lean protein is one of the best things you can eat if you are trying to lose weight or stay thin. It takes more calories to digest, it builds muscle that burns more calories and it gives you more of a full feeling so you don't eat as much. I am very close to one of the school board members and he and others have told me that funding is NOT the problem. It's all in governmental regulations. School lunches are NOT the problem with child hood obesity. That is farthest from the problem and as some mentioned, for some kids, this is the only meals they get all day. Sad but true. The problem is that that fat kid doesn't do anything after school as far as an activity and he pigs out on crap at home or at burger king that night for supper. Knapp.... Left overs are thrown in the trash. Honestly, from what I have heard, I would feel sorry for the people at the local shelter for being fed this crap.

Each LB needs to cover less space and you could bring up one or two safety to be LBs in case you need to cover someone and they would be there for run support.

This same theory is why TO originally didn't like the attacking 4-3 that McBride ended up running that was so successful. No matter what defense you run, your giving up something somewhere to the offense. McBride's idea (after he switched to the 4-3) was that he is going to go get the best cover corners he can and then make sure that QB has as short of time as possible to find the WRs. Then, hit him as hard as you can over and over again.

UCLA used it in the first half.

You're proposing 0-deep man-on-man coverage against a 4-wide shotgun set? Where they ultimately threw deep? Not sure I see the logic in that, at all That play was covered well on the RB and TE. I believe you will see we basically have at least 2 and maybe three people playing LB on that play. I believe the one covering the RB is Whaley. There is no excuse for one WR to beat three DBs deep on that play. Pathetic. BUT, we still only have 4 guys rushing the passer and he had all day long to find that guy deep.

I have a serious question for anyone who has kids in school. Have you seen major changes in the lunches your school provides? Our school for years was known for having very good lunches for our kids. Kids from other schools would come to our school and be very jealous of what we had. This went all the way back to before I went to school here. (graduated in 85). My kids came home the first week and were very upset with the lunches. They have changed everything and many things they liked can no longer be served. Why??? Well, I have asked school administration and school board members and they claim it is because of government mandates. Here are just a few changes that make me bang my head. We used to have a very nice salad bar. This thing was filled with fresh veggies various kinds of dressings, turkey or ham, cheese, cottage cheese...etc. NOW...it is basically only lettuce and dressing. Why? Everything else has been deemed unhealthy. My kids are involved in sports. They claim that everyone is still starving after lunch because all portions have been cut back due to calorie restrictions. Sorry, athletes need a certain amount of calories per day. We have an area where kids can go purchase ala carte items. Our lunch times are broken down into two groups. The ala carte area is completely out of food by the time the second lunch comes through because the main line is so bad that nobody wants it or they are just trying to find something to eat to fill them up. So....my daughters thought about taking their own lunches. Many of there friends were thinking the same way. I was told by the school administrator that even if all the kids brought their own lunches, the school would still need to make a meal for every single kid and throw it in the trash. Soooo....let's say they make a lunch for everyone but 50 kids don't eat it. BUT...you have an athlete that is still hungry, that athlete can't go back through the line and get seconds because he is already over his alloted calories for the day. This is a typical government program. Makes absolutely no sense in the implementation. I will be investigating this more because our school has got to be misinterpreting the rules. That is the main reason why I am posting this. What are you finding in your schools?

That is definitely photoshopped. BUT, instead of looking at the false space between the lines, look at the line up. Now, the RB is oging in motion and I'll guarantee you that Compton followed the RB to cover him in the flats. Probably 5 of the other 6 DBs will cover the 4 WRs. That leaves only 4-5 players rushing the QB and in run defense. Last a few seconds in the pocket for WRs to get down field and the running on the edge is wide open for a QB scramble of 10-20 yards. NOW....Let's say we have 4 down linemen, 3 LBs and 4 DBs. The 4 DBs cover the WRs. The down linemen plug up the middle for a run. One LB covers the RB out of in the flat and we have two LBS coming around the edges containing the QB and rushing him into a bad decision.

Why excuse it as "the other guy does it too!" Call it what it is. Also: I have a serious side question. What's with all of the names that conservatives make up for Obama? Do they think they're funny or what? I don't like lies from anyone. Especially the media. This guy would gain a lot of credibility with me if he would do the same thing now with Obama. Their convention proved they tell their fair share of lies. As for the name. Sorry, I hadn't used that one for a long time. I used it back when Obama claimed all we needed to do was sit down and talk to Iran and everything would be fine. Hmmm....when was he going to have that meeting after he was elected?

Or....Cally stating that "its just another game". He lost me after that comment.

As they just pointed out on the radio, we already have way too many DBs on the roster the way it is. We don't need another one and we need him on offense.

Does anyone have a site where I can get the offensive stats per quarter? Any that I use only have it total for the game. Thanks,

Bowfin...... I agree. Here we had a RS Freshman QB. The absolute best thing you could do to him is get in his face and fluster him. Hit him over and over and over again. Make sure that every time he goes back for a pass he realizes two things. a) He is going to get hit and hit fast. b) If he tries to scramble, there isn't any place to run. THAT is a winning defense.

Inflation calculations back when the cost of fuel and food didn't change that much made sense to leave those figures out. NOW, that is where the major inflation is and it needs to be accounted for. For instance, I firmly believe increased cost of fuel was the pin that burst the balloon on the housing market that caused this huge economic disaster. Everyone was maxed out on debt and nobody was had that extra money to account for the increased cost of fuel. Fuel goes through the roof and all of a sudden nobody has any money left in the bank and they can't make a mortgage payment. That is inflation but it's not in the calculation.

After rewatching the first half, I am just sick. It is literally amazing how many times we had a player in position to make the play and he just didn't finish. If we simply tackle in the first half, the game isn't even close at half time. The entire game is different.

And, for the record, I understand that putting DBs on an island in man coverage can allow big plays. BUT, at this point, I would rather have more people up front pressuring the QB and in run support. If the WR and QB make a great play, then at least it's because they made a great play instead of just being able to run around for 20 yards.

I have posted about this before. But, I rewatched the first half last night. I usually do this just to see if there was something I missed on plays because when I watch it live I'm all worked up and just paying attention to the result. I know...I'm a football junky that way. Anyway, this has been bothering me for a long time. I absolutely don't like a scheme where we only have one or two LBs on the field. Two isn't bad but when we have only one LB on the field, the other team just runs all over us. What happens is we end up having Compton literally being the only one running all over the field trying to make plays. One of the first long plays UCLA had, was a pass to the RB in the flats. Compton was supposed to follow him but he got picked off by the receiver (something that is against the rules but hardly ever called). The next long play showed the exact same thing but Compton made sure he was out there to cover the RB and then a TE just simply ran in the middle and caught a pass because there wasn't any other LBs there to cover him. As far as the DE goes, I still don't get what they are teaching them to do. On most plays, the first move the DE makes is down the line towards the middle of the line. It is like he is trying to compress the line and then look to see if the ball is coming his way. By that time, anyone running his direction is around him. With only one LB on the field, he is either beat to the edge or simply blocked. Now, I usually think the first move a DE should make is up field to contain. BUT, if they are going to have the DE crush down on the line, then there needs to be an LB behind him covering the edge. I know we go into this one LB set because Bo thinks we need more DBs to cover sets with 4 WRs. But, if we played more man coverage on the edge, it would allow for more LBs for run support and pressuring the QB. This is basically what McBride did and I remember it working GREAT against teams that had multiple WR sets. Thoughts? Sorry for the long post but this is very frustrating to me. This is obviously not working.

You imply that Bo plays seniors because they are seniors. That just flat out isn't true. The depth chart is full of players that beat out older players. No, the defense stinks and nobody has proven they deserve to keep their jobs. The entire side of the ball needs to be open for the job. BUT, it still needs to be proven to the coaches that they know what they are doing and can make plays.

There is absolutely no way to fix the problem without MASSIVE spending cuts. Look at the numbers. They don't lie like the politicians do. Every single argument we have about tax rates, doesn't even come close to covering the built in costs that have been put into place in the government through entitlements. Time to suck it up America. Every single person needs to have a gut check and realize they can't rely on government support.

Are you saying that Obambi doesn't do the same thing? I think you are falling into what is being discussed in the other thread.

I don't have a problem with the way Bo is doing this. Sure, the guy who is a stud athlete looks cool on the plays they make, but if he doesn't know what he is doing most of the time, he is a liability. The way you put it, we should just play whoever comes in as the highest rated recruit and forget about everything else. In reality, to be really good, the player has to have both. He has to be a stud athlete AND know the system. This is a team game. Not just a bunch of individuals running around out there on their own. If he doesn't know what he is supposed to do then the team doesn't work. There are many examples of this. Joe Dailey. Everyone thought he was a stud and was pissed that Lord started instead of him. How did that work when we finally saw what he was like on the field? Carnes. Everyone last year thought he should be on the field because he was so good. Well, he is now passed up on the depth chart by a walk on and a true freshman. Obviously he is not the great QB that everyone thought he was last year. Obviously the QB position is the highly visible position so examples were easy to see. BUT, the same thing happens everywhere else. You want to play?? Work your azz off and give the coaches a reason to trust that you will know what you are doing when you step on the field. When things don't go right, the fans always think the guy on the bench is better. The fact is, the coaches know these players way better than any fan.

I didn't read the article. But, didn't the conventions prove that BOTH parties are full of crap and lie to get your vote?

And, this is why our media is so dangerous right now. So much of our media is entrenched with one party or the other. It never fails. When I post something about our media, it doesn't matter if I post about Fox or MSNBC, the respective side always comes to their rescue. Meanwhile, both media outlets have perfected the art of what is in the OP and once they put something out to the airways, to a certain number of people on each side, they will always believe it. The political conventions are another prime example. They don't give a flying rip if they are proven to have lied because that lie sewed up a certain amount of their base voters.

The picture is pretty funny. Old Uncle Joe is the best security blanket for Obama. Nobody wants anything to happen to Obama because nobody wants Joe as President.

I would put the problems at DB ahead of any of these three. Our DBs looked like they had absolutely no clue what they were doing all the way from coverage to tackling. I'm sorry, but when the QB can stand back there and scratch his nuts for 5 seconds before deciding where to throw it then I blame the defensive line. It's hard to cover people for that long. I thought Mitchell played pretty well. I can't say that about any of the defensive line. I disagree. There were MANY times that the ball was thrown quickly and our DB had absolutely no play on the ball. Now, there were a few times that their receiver/TE just simply made great plays like the TD against Stafford and the long reception against Baptist. The Baptist reception was simply an amazing play by a WR. BUT, there were many other times when the DB seemed out of position to make a play or simply was beat and it wasn't because the QB had forever in the pocket. And, that doesn't even begin to talk about their tackling in run support.

I agree with this in addition to what I stated above. After the 1st quarter I started counting guys around the ball diving for the ball carrier and on several plays there were 3-4 guys who mistackled. I can't tell you how many times a D-end came around the edge about to get a sack but they took a bad angle or over ran the QB. Meredith was the worst at it last night. Then the LB's and Safeties were taking HORRIBLE angles and missing. On each of the running plays and a lot of the passing plays where they gained yardage... there was AT LEAST 1 mistackle. Another problem is that when we have that one LB or D-end coming around the end and they miss the tackle, there isn't anyone there to help. How many times when we have a good defense did we see the first man miss on the sack but that makes the QB have to adjust and the next guy come in and cleans him up. That is how many sacks happen. That isn't what is happening here because instead of the D line attacking and everyone getting after the ball, most of them are dancing with the O line trying to see what gap the ball is going through.