GBRedneck Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 So seriously......was anything we were led to believe about this staff before the season started truthful? Other than the "nice guy" stuff...... Do you have a tapeworm? A turd in your pocket? Who is "we"? Gerry stated that the defense was simplified Banker addressed that by stating that the D was not going to be all that simple. Now I'll wait for you to show any proof that any member of the staff said that the defense was going to be more simple. http://nebraska.247sports.com/Bolt/Banker-favors-simple-aggressive-scheme-34579005 And there's a lot more where that came from. You're making this too easy for me. Note the bolded above. I carefully avoided saying that Banker said the defensive scheme was going to be simple, so you can cherry-pick your stories all you want to. Banker has said many times that he wanted to D to be simpler and faster. He never said simple. BP's scheme and Banker's scheme differ in so many ways, not the least of which was where the plays were intended to be forced. Back at ya: http://journalstar.com/sports/huskers/life-in-the-red/banker-weighs-in-on-easy-scheme-talk/article_5ccc3932-4436-11e5-8ba4-339018a4509d.html Your turn...... “And I’d have cohorts of mine say, ‘Hey, how do you guys get away with playing one front and two coverages?’ ” Banker recalled. “And I’d say, ‘Well, I don’t necessarily have an answer for that, but more is not necessarily better sometimes.’ ” http://www.omaha.com/huskers/banker-s-plan-keep-husker-defense-simple-and-fast/article_a5e63ed1-06e0-593b-b7b1-cd4d038a79c8.html ''You still have to do your assignment. It's not all free reign,'' he said. ''But it's free reign as far as what you do to get to your assignment, if that makes sense.'' Banker said, ''I hear the players say, `Hey, we're free in the system,' or the system is like being in elementary school or something like that. I don't know whether to take it as a compliment or `you don't know what you're doing.' I'm glad they feel good about it, whatever it is.'' http://www.si.com/college-football/2015/04/02/ap-fbc-nebraska-banker This is really silly. I challenged you to find one quote, anywhere, where Banker or any member of the staff said the D scheme was going to be simple and the best you can do is quotes that don't even address it. So keep posting irrelevant articles that don't address my challenge, and I'll match you with articles that refute you. You know what is really weird? I have had problems with some of the play-calling, almost all of which was offensive. But you have such an irrational agenda against this staff that I refuse to agree with anything you post. You remind me of a psycho girlfriend who can't let go..... You don't think the quote I posted shows Banker claiming his defense is simple? He's bragging about only having one front and two coverages. But keep moving the goalposts if it makes you feel better. Not sure how to move goal posts so I'll ask an expert: GBRedneck, how do you move goalposts? Oh, let the record show that you STILL haven't come up with a source stating that Banker or any member of the staff said the scheme was going to be simple>>>>>>>>>that goalpost hasn't budged. Your turn. So you're looking for an exact quote of "the scheme was going to be simple"? The quote I just gave had Banker bragging about his 1 front-2 coverages defense. He was touting the simplicity. You're moving the goalposts. Also, from January on, the media line was "Banker to simplify the D". Banker did nothing to dispute that, in fact he seemed quite proud of it. Until Banderas made the "high school" comment. Then he went into damage control. And now everyone sees you exposed. Every single post I asked you to provide a source where Banker or any member of the staff said the scheme was going to be simple. Every. Single. Post. No one, least of all me, disputed that Banker wanted to simplify the defense from BP's paralysis-by-analysis. What got me started in this sorry ass chain of exchanges with you was the assertion that Banker said it was going to be simple. THAT WAS NEVER SAID BY BANKER. By Bando, yes. By Gerry, yes, By Collins and Valentine, yes. Banker or the staff, no. But you knew that. I cited sources where Banker responded to the players by saying that it wasn't as simple as they thought. You knew that all along, which is why after three demands by me to cite your source you always dodged it, moved the goalposts, so to speak. I could have just ended this a while back and stopped responding to your trolling, something you have been called out for on this board previously. Maybe I should have. For sure I'm done with you for now because you're boring me. But understand this, the next time you troll, me or someone else is going to call you out, not necessarily because I disagree with some point you're making, but because your agenda has no reason, no balance and no place on a board for fans of Nebraska sports. Banker didn't dispute the multitude of "simple" claims from January on until Bando made the "high school" comment in the fall. And I gave you a January quote where Banker not only claimed his D was simple, but he bragged about it. Quote Link to comment
Spooky Tooth Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 So seriously......was anything we were led to believe about this staff before the season started truthful? Other than the "nice guy" stuff...... Do you have a tapeworm? A turd in your pocket? Who is "we"? Gerry stated that the defense was simplified Banker addressed that by stating that the D was not going to be all that simple. Now I'll wait for you to show any proof that any member of the staff said that the defense was going to be more simple. http://nebraska.247sports.com/Bolt/Banker-favors-simple-aggressive-scheme-34579005 And there's a lot more where that came from. You're making this too easy for me. Note the bolded above. I carefully avoided saying that Banker said the defensive scheme was going to be simple, so you can cherry-pick your stories all you want to. Banker has said many times that he wanted to D to be simpler and faster. He never said simple. BP's scheme and Banker's scheme differ in so many ways, not the least of which was where the plays were intended to be forced. Back at ya: http://journalstar.com/sports/huskers/life-in-the-red/banker-weighs-in-on-easy-scheme-talk/article_5ccc3932-4436-11e5-8ba4-339018a4509d.html Your turn...... “And I’d have cohorts of mine say, ‘Hey, how do you guys get away with playing one front and two coverages?’ ” Banker recalled. “And I’d say, ‘Well, I don’t necessarily have an answer for that, but more is not necessarily better sometimes.’ ” http://www.omaha.com/huskers/banker-s-plan-keep-husker-defense-simple-and-fast/article_a5e63ed1-06e0-593b-b7b1-cd4d038a79c8.html ''You still have to do your assignment. It's not all free reign,'' he said. ''But it's free reign as far as what you do to get to your assignment, if that makes sense.'' Banker said, ''I hear the players say, `Hey, we're free in the system,' or the system is like being in elementary school or something like that. I don't know whether to take it as a compliment or `you don't know what you're doing.' I'm glad they feel good about it, whatever it is.'' http://www.si.com/college-football/2015/04/02/ap-fbc-nebraska-banker This is really silly. I challenged you to find one quote, anywhere, where Banker or any member of the staff said the D scheme was going to be simple and the best you can do is quotes that don't even address it. So keep posting irrelevant articles that don't address my challenge, and I'll match you with articles that refute you. You know what is really weird? I have had problems with some of the play-calling, almost all of which was offensive. But you have such an irrational agenda against this staff that I refuse to agree with anything you post. You remind me of a psycho girlfriend who can't let go..... You don't think the quote I posted shows Banker claiming his defense is simple? He's bragging about only having one front and two coverages. But keep moving the goalposts if it makes you feel better. Not sure how to move goal posts so I'll ask an expert: GBRedneck, how do you move goalposts? Oh, let the record show that you STILL haven't come up with a source stating that Banker or any member of the staff said the scheme was going to be simple>>>>>>>>>that goalpost hasn't budged. Your turn. So you're looking for an exact quote of "the scheme was going to be simple"? The quote I just gave had Banker bragging about his 1 front-2 coverages defense. He was touting the simplicity. You're moving the goalposts. Also, from January on, the media line was "Banker to simplify the D". Banker did nothing to dispute that, in fact he seemed quite proud of it. Until Banderas made the "high school" comment. Then he went into damage control. And now everyone sees you exposed. Every single post I asked you to provide a source where Banker or any member of the staff said the scheme was going to be simple. Every. Single. Post. No one, least of all me, disputed that Banker wanted to simplify the defense from BP's paralysis-by-analysis. What got me started in this sorry ass chain of exchanges with you was the assertion that Banker said it was going to be simple. THAT WAS NEVER SAID BY BANKER. By Bando, yes. By Gerry, yes, By Collins and Valentine, yes. Banker or the staff, no. But you knew that. I cited sources where Banker responded to the players by saying that it wasn't as simple as they thought. You knew that all along, which is why after three demands by me to cite your source you always dodged it, moved the goalposts, so to speak. I could have just ended this a while back and stopped responding to your trolling, something you have been called out for on this board previously. Maybe I should have. For sure I'm done with you for now because you're boring me. But understand this, the next time you troll, me or someone else is going to call you out, not necessarily because I disagree with some point you're making, but because your agenda has no reason, no balance and no place on a board for fans of Nebraska sports. Banker didn't dispute the multitude of "simple" claims from January on until Bando made the "high school" comment in the fall. And I gave you a January quote where Banker not only claimed his D was simple, but he bragged about it. Okay, I changed my mind..... You're lying again. "Banker didn't dispute the multitude of "simple" claims from January on until Bando made the "high school" comment in the fall." Fascinating, but help me find where Banker said the scheme was going to be simple. "And I gave you a January quote where Banker not only claimed his D was simple, but he bragged about it." I'll make a deal with you......Here's your link to the article. Show me anywhere in it where Banker said the scheme was going to be simple, and I'll do a mea cupla, admit I was wrong, and move on. A direct quote, that's all I want out of you. http://www.omaha.com/huskers/banker-s-plan-keep-husker-defense-simple-and-fast/article_a5e63ed1-06e0-593b-b7b1-cd4d038a79c8.html Now it's your turn to come back and act surprised that I want your source showing a direct quote...... 1 Quote Link to comment
GBRedneck Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 So seriously......was anything we were led to believe about this staff before the season started truthful? Other than the "nice guy" stuff...... Do you have a tapeworm? A turd in your pocket? Who is "we"? Gerry stated that the defense was simplified Banker addressed that by stating that the D was not going to be all that simple. Now I'll wait for you to show any proof that any member of the staff said that the defense was going to be more simple. http://nebraska.247sports.com/Bolt/Banker-favors-simple-aggressive-scheme-34579005 And there's a lot more where that came from. You're making this too easy for me. Note the bolded above. I carefully avoided saying that Banker said the defensive scheme was going to be simple, so you can cherry-pick your stories all you want to. Banker has said many times that he wanted to D to be simpler and faster. He never said simple. BP's scheme and Banker's scheme differ in so many ways, not the least of which was where the plays were intended to be forced. Back at ya: http://journalstar.com/sports/huskers/life-in-the-red/banker-weighs-in-on-easy-scheme-talk/article_5ccc3932-4436-11e5-8ba4-339018a4509d.html Your turn...... “And I’d have cohorts of mine say, ‘Hey, how do you guys get away with playing one front and two coverages?’ ” Banker recalled. “And I’d say, ‘Well, I don’t necessarily have an answer for that, but more is not necessarily better sometimes.’ ” http://www.omaha.com/huskers/banker-s-plan-keep-husker-defense-simple-and-fast/article_a5e63ed1-06e0-593b-b7b1-cd4d038a79c8.html ''You still have to do your assignment. It's not all free reign,'' he said. ''But it's free reign as far as what you do to get to your assignment, if that makes sense.'' Banker said, ''I hear the players say, `Hey, we're free in the system,' or the system is like being in elementary school or something like that. I don't know whether to take it as a compliment or `you don't know what you're doing.' I'm glad they feel good about it, whatever it is.'' http://www.si.com/college-football/2015/04/02/ap-fbc-nebraska-banker This is really silly. I challenged you to find one quote, anywhere, where Banker or any member of the staff said the D scheme was going to be simple and the best you can do is quotes that don't even address it. So keep posting irrelevant articles that don't address my challenge, and I'll match you with articles that refute you. You know what is really weird? I have had problems with some of the play-calling, almost all of which was offensive. But you have such an irrational agenda against this staff that I refuse to agree with anything you post. You remind me of a psycho girlfriend who can't let go..... You don't think the quote I posted shows Banker claiming his defense is simple? He's bragging about only having one front and two coverages. But keep moving the goalposts if it makes you feel better. Not sure how to move goal posts so I'll ask an expert: GBRedneck, how do you move goalposts? Oh, let the record show that you STILL haven't come up with a source stating that Banker or any member of the staff said the scheme was going to be simple>>>>>>>>>that goalpost hasn't budged. Your turn. So you're looking for an exact quote of "the scheme was going to be simple"? The quote I just gave had Banker bragging about his 1 front-2 coverages defense. He was touting the simplicity. You're moving the goalposts. Also, from January on, the media line was "Banker to simplify the D". Banker did nothing to dispute that, in fact he seemed quite proud of it. Until Banderas made the "high school" comment. Then he went into damage control. And now everyone sees you exposed. Every single post I asked you to provide a source where Banker or any member of the staff said the scheme was going to be simple. Every. Single. Post. No one, least of all me, disputed that Banker wanted to simplify the defense from BP's paralysis-by-analysis. What got me started in this sorry ass chain of exchanges with you was the assertion that Banker said it was going to be simple. THAT WAS NEVER SAID BY BANKER. By Bando, yes. By Gerry, yes, By Collins and Valentine, yes. Banker or the staff, no. But you knew that. I cited sources where Banker responded to the players by saying that it wasn't as simple as they thought. You knew that all along, which is why after three demands by me to cite your source you always dodged it, moved the goalposts, so to speak. I could have just ended this a while back and stopped responding to your trolling, something you have been called out for on this board previously. Maybe I should have. For sure I'm done with you for now because you're boring me. But understand this, the next time you troll, me or someone else is going to call you out, not necessarily because I disagree with some point you're making, but because your agenda has no reason, no balance and no place on a board for fans of Nebraska sports. Banker didn't dispute the multitude of "simple" claims from January on until Bando made the "high school" comment in the fall. And I gave you a January quote where Banker not only claimed his D was simple, but he bragged about it. Okay, I changed my mind..... You're lying again. "Banker didn't dispute the multitude of "simple" claims from January on until Bando made the "high school" comment in the fall." Fascinating, but help me find where Banker said the scheme was going to be simple. "And I gave you a January quote where Banker not only claimed his D was simple, but he bragged about it." I'll make a deal with you......Here's your link to the article. Show me anywhere in it where Banker said the scheme was going to be simple, and I'll do a mea cupla, admit I was wrong, and move on. A direct quote, that's all I want out of you. http://www.omaha.com/huskers/banker-s-plan-keep-husker-defense-simple-and-fast/article_a5e63ed1-06e0-593b-b7b1-cd4d038a79c8.html Now it's your turn to come back and act surprised that I want your source showing a direct quote...... I gave you a direct quote where he was bragging about how simple his 1 front-2coverages defense is. If your claim is that he never spoke the exact phrase "The scheme is going to be simple" then I cannot disprove your claim. If you want to claim that Banker didn't ride in basking in how aggressive the D would be with his simpler attacking D, then I already proved your wrong. Quote Link to comment
Spooky Tooth Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 So seriously......was anything we were led to believe about this staff before the season started truthful? Other than the "nice guy" stuff...... Do you have a tapeworm? A turd in your pocket? Who is "we"? Gerry stated that the defense was simplified Banker addressed that by stating that the D was not going to be all that simple. Now I'll wait for you to show any proof that any member of the staff said that the defense was going to be more simple. http://nebraska.247sports.com/Bolt/Banker-favors-simple-aggressive-scheme-34579005 And there's a lot more where that came from. You're making this too easy for me. Note the bolded above. I carefully avoided saying that Banker said the defensive scheme was going to be simple, so you can cherry-pick your stories all you want to. Banker has said many times that he wanted to D to be simpler and faster. He never said simple. BP's scheme and Banker's scheme differ in so many ways, not the least of which was where the plays were intended to be forced. Back at ya: http://journalstar.com/sports/huskers/life-in-the-red/banker-weighs-in-on-easy-scheme-talk/article_5ccc3932-4436-11e5-8ba4-339018a4509d.html Your turn...... “And I’d have cohorts of mine say, ‘Hey, how do you guys get away with playing one front and two coverages?’ ” Banker recalled. “And I’d say, ‘Well, I don’t necessarily have an answer for that, but more is not necessarily better sometimes.’ ” http://www.omaha.com/huskers/banker-s-plan-keep-husker-defense-simple-and-fast/article_a5e63ed1-06e0-593b-b7b1-cd4d038a79c8.html ''You still have to do your assignment. It's not all free reign,'' he said. ''But it's free reign as far as what you do to get to your assignment, if that makes sense.'' Banker said, ''I hear the players say, `Hey, we're free in the system,' or the system is like being in elementary school or something like that. I don't know whether to take it as a compliment or `you don't know what you're doing.' I'm glad they feel good about it, whatever it is.'' http://www.si.com/college-football/2015/04/02/ap-fbc-nebraska-banker This is really silly. I challenged you to find one quote, anywhere, where Banker or any member of the staff said the D scheme was going to be simple and the best you can do is quotes that don't even address it. So keep posting irrelevant articles that don't address my challenge, and I'll match you with articles that refute you. You know what is really weird? I have had problems with some of the play-calling, almost all of which was offensive. But you have such an irrational agenda against this staff that I refuse to agree with anything you post. You remind me of a psycho girlfriend who can't let go..... You don't think the quote I posted shows Banker claiming his defense is simple? He's bragging about only having one front and two coverages. But keep moving the goalposts if it makes you feel better. Not sure how to move goal posts so I'll ask an expert: GBRedneck, how do you move goalposts? Oh, let the record show that you STILL haven't come up with a source stating that Banker or any member of the staff said the scheme was going to be simple>>>>>>>>>that goalpost hasn't budged. Your turn. So you're looking for an exact quote of "the scheme was going to be simple"? The quote I just gave had Banker bragging about his 1 front-2 coverages defense. He was touting the simplicity. You're moving the goalposts. Also, from January on, the media line was "Banker to simplify the D". Banker did nothing to dispute that, in fact he seemed quite proud of it. Until Banderas made the "high school" comment. Then he went into damage control. And now everyone sees you exposed. Every single post I asked you to provide a source where Banker or any member of the staff said the scheme was going to be simple. Every. Single. Post. No one, least of all me, disputed that Banker wanted to simplify the defense from BP's paralysis-by-analysis. What got me started in this sorry ass chain of exchanges with you was the assertion that Banker said it was going to be simple. THAT WAS NEVER SAID BY BANKER. By Bando, yes. By Gerry, yes, By Collins and Valentine, yes. Banker or the staff, no. But you knew that. I cited sources where Banker responded to the players by saying that it wasn't as simple as they thought. You knew that all along, which is why after three demands by me to cite your source you always dodged it, moved the goalposts, so to speak. I could have just ended this a while back and stopped responding to your trolling, something you have been called out for on this board previously. Maybe I should have. For sure I'm done with you for now because you're boring me. But understand this, the next time you troll, me or someone else is going to call you out, not necessarily because I disagree with some point you're making, but because your agenda has no reason, no balance and no place on a board for fans of Nebraska sports. Banker didn't dispute the multitude of "simple" claims from January on until Bando made the "high school" comment in the fall. And I gave you a January quote where Banker not only claimed his D was simple, but he bragged about it. Okay, I changed my mind..... You're lying again. "Banker didn't dispute the multitude of "simple" claims from January on until Bando made the "high school" comment in the fall." Fascinating, but help me find where Banker said the scheme was going to be simple. "And I gave you a January quote where Banker not only claimed his D was simple, but he bragged about it." I'll make a deal with you......Here's your link to the article. Show me anywhere in it where Banker said the scheme was going to be simple, and I'll do a mea cupla, admit I was wrong, and move on. A direct quote, that's all I want out of you. http://www.omaha.com/huskers/banker-s-plan-keep-husker-defense-simple-and-fast/article_a5e63ed1-06e0-593b-b7b1-cd4d038a79c8.html Now it's your turn to come back and act surprised that I want your source showing a direct quote...... I gave you a direct quote where he was bragging about how simple his 1 front-2coverages defense is. If your claim is that he never spoke the exact phrase "The scheme is going to be simple" then I cannot disprove your claim. If you want to claim that Banker didn't ride in basking in how aggressive the D would be with his simpler attacking D, then I already proved your wrong. Thanks for playing. 1 Quote Link to comment
Bowfin Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 Now it's your turn to come back and act surprised that I want your source showing a direct quote...... Are you refusing to acknowledge the gist of the article? What do YOU think Banker is saying in it? That he is AGAINST simple, he hates having only chocolate and vanilla? My guess is that you hit F3 and when it didn't highlight the word "simple" you hung your whole argument on that and hoped nobody else read it. Fail. Anyhow, regardless of what Banker said, we have what Banker did. Some people liked it, some didn't, and those are opinions, so they really can't be argued. The Miami quarterback thought the defense was simple, and since he lined up across from it and had success playing against it with such an opinion, I'll take his word for it. You don't have to agree with his opinion, naturally. 1 Quote Link to comment
Saunders Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 I love threads where we argue semantics. Banker's plan: Keep Husker defense simple and fasthttp://www.omaha.com/huskers/banker-s-plan-keep-husker-defense-simple-and-fast/article_a5e63ed1-06e0-593b-b7b1-cd4d038a79c8.html This "simple" mantra was pushed by the players, media, and coaches since Riley took over. Whether or not it's "simple" or "simpler" really doesn't matter. Quote Link to comment
adc7236 Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 That exchange was a considerable amount of effort that amounted to nothing more than....... toˈmeɪ.t̬oʊ or təˈmɑː.təʊ. Quote Link to comment
Spooky Tooth Posted December 22, 2015 Share Posted December 22, 2015 Now it's your turn to come back and act surprised that I want your source showing a direct quote...... Are you refusing to acknowledge the gist of the article? What do YOU think Banker is saying in it? That he is AGAINST simple, he hates having only chocolate and vanilla? My guess is that you hit F3 and when it didn't highlight the word "simple" you hung your whole argument on that and hoped nobody else read it. Fail. Anyhow, regardless of what Banker said, we have what Banker did. Some people liked it, some didn't, and those are opinions, so they really can't be argued. The Miami quarterback thought the defense was simple, and since he lined up across from it and had success playing against it with such an opinion, I'll take his word for it. You don't have to agree with his opinion, naturally. Fair question. I think Banker had looked at BP's scheme and realized the D line was under-utilized, the linebackers were paralyzed and the DBs were being asked to carry the load. I absolutely think Banker wanted to simplify the defensive scheme. My beef actually started in post #3. I object to the "we" and the statement that the staff lied to "us". GBRedneck took over from there. And BTW, I think Connor Cook might disagree with Brad Kayaa. Quote Link to comment
Bowfin Posted December 22, 2015 Share Posted December 22, 2015 If former coach Bo Pelini’s scheme was more “paralysis by analysis,” linebacker Josh Banderas said in that press conference, then Banker’s system allowed instincts to flow freely. Banderas even compared Banker’s scheme to “being back in high school.” Banker had to chide Banderas — one of the keystones of the Huskers’ 2015 defense — for that one. “I’m starting to get offended a little bit,” Banker told reporters. Except that he’s not offended at all. “I’m glad to hear they think it’s simple,” he said a few minutes later. “I told the whole group: ‘If we think this is so simple, we should be right from a standpoint of alignment, assignment and responsibility on every play.’ ” “The simplicity is this: Even the words we use, we try to make them make common sense,” Banker said. “Rather than calling some pressure ‘Crazy’ or ‘Psycho’ that you have to memorize, we put meaning to the calls.” http://www.omaha.com/huskers/banker-s-scheme-makes-life-easier-for-husker-front-seven/article_ff19c577-9593-5f7b-944c-938cdd918362.html Quote Link to comment
Saunders Posted December 22, 2015 Share Posted December 22, 2015 And BTW, I think Connor Cook might disagree with Brad Kayaa.Why? Cook threw for over 300 yards and 4TD's with 1 pick. Quote Link to comment
Spooky Tooth Posted December 22, 2015 Share Posted December 22, 2015 And BTW, I think Connor Cook might disagree with Brad Kayaa.Why? Cook threw for over 300 yards and 4TD's with 1 pick. And lost. If it's a high school defense he faced he should have won the game going away. Quote Link to comment
Saunders Posted December 22, 2015 Share Posted December 22, 2015 And BTW, I think Connor Cook might disagree with Brad Kayaa.Why? Cook threw for over 300 yards and 4TD's with 1 pick. And lost. If it's a high school defense he faced he should have won the game going away. MSU didn't lose just because of our defense, but at the same time, one can say that MSU lost because of their defense. Of course, their defense is similar to ours... Quote Link to comment
TheSker Posted December 22, 2015 Share Posted December 22, 2015 You have to recruit to your philosophy, which is why it is mostly ignorant to bitch too much in a new staff's first one to three years. They need a chance to get their guys in, and then be judged on the results. If this staff has another year similar to this one, they won't get a third year. Taking over a program that had won 9/10 for seven seasons, then immediately going 5-7 is an unacceptable transition. Quote Link to comment
Bowfin Posted December 22, 2015 Share Posted December 22, 2015 And lost. If it's a high school defense he faced he should have won the game going away. Cook's accuracy was way off in the first quarter. He was his own worst enemy at that point in the game. Quote Link to comment
Swiv3D Posted December 22, 2015 Share Posted December 22, 2015 And lost. If it's a high school defense he faced he should have won the game going away. Cook's accuracy was way off in the first quarter. He was his own worst enemy at that point in the game.I agree. If I recall correctly MSU's first offensive play against us was a wide open out route for a first down that Cook overthrew. Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.