Canes QB Ryan Williams says he's still targeting Wk 1 start

[Waffle Honcho]

LOL. They also beat VT--we got hammered by VT.

And they lost to Ga Tech and Pitt, who we beat. What's your point?

Fact is, we replace FSU with NC State on our schedule and we have 10 wins instead of 9. You guys have the hardest time comprehending the most simple things.

You just made it for me, nimrod. Saying we'd have "10-11" wins with another team's schedule is mealy-mouthed horse****, especially when that team that only had 10 wins with their own schedule kicked the **** out of us. Football simply doesn't work that way and it's dumb as **** to discuss.

Good god. You realize that besides their 4 cupcakes, our schedules differed by one game, right? You know what conference play is, right? How about presenting an argument, since you're disputing mine.

NC Central
Memphis
Georgia Tech
Pittsburgh
Troy
Navy
Virginia
Virginia Tech
NC State
Wake Forest
North Carolina

How many wins do the 2013 canes win with that schedule? I say 10 based on the fact that we beat 5 of those teams last year, we'd beat the 4 cupcakes, and we'd beat NC State who was 0-8 in conference play...I'll take a wild guess and say we would've beaten the 5 cupcakes.

And I say less based on the fact that we weren't as good as Duke, so we wouldn't have won as many games as they did if we had played their schedule?. Football simply doesn't work the way you want it to. And LOL @ this discussion about a hypothetical UM schedule that doesn't include FSU. What am I supposed to take away from that?

So you think that we would've lost to one of the following teams: NC Central, Memphis, Troy, Navy, NC State.

That shows the extraordinarily low level of intellect you're bringing to the debate.

This isn't a hypothetical UM schedule, this was Duke's schedule last year. I said we would've won 10 regular season games if we played Duke's schedule, you asked why, and I have showed you why.

 

[weownfsu]

And they lost to Ga Tech and Pitt, who we beat. What's your point?

Fact is, we replace FSU with NC State on our schedule and we have 10 wins instead of 9. You guys have the hardest time comprehending the most simple things.

You just made it for me, nimrod. Saying we'd have "10-11" wins with another team's schedule is mealy-mouthed horse****, especially when that team that only had 10 wins with their own schedule kicked the **** out of us. Football simply doesn't work that way and it's dumb as **** to discuss.

Good god. You realize that besides their 4 cupcakes, our schedules differed by one game, right? You know what conference play is, right? How about presenting an argument, since you're disputing mine.

NC Central
Memphis
Georgia Tech
Pittsburgh
Troy
Navy
Virginia
Virginia Tech
NC State
Wake Forest
North Carolina

How many wins do the 2013 canes win with that schedule? I say 10 based on the fact that we beat 5 of those teams last year, we'd beat the 4 cupcakes, and we'd beat NC State who was 0-8 in conference play...I'll take a wild guess and say we would've beaten the 5 cupcakes.

And I say less based on the fact that we weren't as good as Duke, so we wouldn't have won as many games as they did if we had played their schedule?. Football simply doesn't work the way you want it to. And LOL @ this discussion about a hypothetical UM schedule that doesn't include FSU. What am I supposed to take away from that?

So you think that we would've lost to one of the following teams: NC Central, Memphis, Troy, Navy, NC State.

That shows the extraordinarily low level of intellect you're bringing to the debate.

This isn't a hypothetical UM schedule, this was Duke's schedule last year. I said we would've won 10 regular season games if we played Duke's schedule, you asked why, and I have showed you why.

Of course it's a hypothetical UM schedule. Do you know what the word hypothetical means? And no, I don't think we would have lost to one of those teams--if we had played the same schedule as Duke, we'd just have lost some other game to some **** team we shouldn't have lost to, but maybe beat in the context of our actual schedule last year, in addition to getting our teeth kicked in by Duke, FSU, Virginia Tech, and Texas A&M because that's the type of team we are.

Your level of "intellect" is claiming that we'd have the same performance against the same schedule as a team that beat us by 18 points. OK.

 

[Waffle Honcho]

You just made it for me, nimrod. Saying we'd have "10-11" wins with another team's schedule is mealy-mouthed horse****, especially when that team that only had 10 wins with their own schedule kicked the **** out of us. Football simply doesn't work that way and it's dumb as **** to discuss.

Good god. You realize that besides their 4 cupcakes, our schedules differed by one game, right? You know what conference play is, right? How about presenting an argument, since you're disputing mine.

NC Central
Memphis
Georgia Tech
Pittsburgh
Troy
Navy
Virginia
Virginia Tech
NC State
Wake Forest
North Carolina

How many wins do the 2013 canes win with that schedule? I say 10 based on the fact that we beat 5 of those teams last year, we'd beat the 4 cupcakes, and we'd beat NC State who was 0-8 in conference play...I'll take a wild guess and say we would've beaten the 5 cupcakes.

And I say less based on the fact that we weren't as good as Duke, so we wouldn't have won as many games as they did if we had played their schedule?. Football simply doesn't work the way you want it to. And LOL @ this discussion about a hypothetical UM schedule that doesn't include FSU. What am I supposed to take away from that?

So you think that we would've lost to one of the following teams: NC Central, Memphis, Troy, Navy, NC State.

That shows the extraordinarily low level of intellect you're bringing to the debate.

This isn't a hypothetical UM schedule, this was Duke's schedule last year. I said we would've won 10 regular season games if we played Duke's schedule, you asked why, and I have showed you why.

Of course it's a hypothetical UM schedule. Do you know what the word hypothetical means? And no, I don't think we would have lost to one of those teams--if we had played the same schedule as Duke, we'd just have lost some other game to some **** team we shouldn't have lost to, but maybe beat in the context of our actual schedule last year, in addition to getting our teeth kicked in by Duke, FSU, Virginia Tech, and Texas A&M because that's the type of team we are.

Your level of "intellect" is claiming that we'd have the same performance against the same schedule as a team that beat us by 18 points. OK.

So now you're saying that we would've lost to a team that we actually DID beat? Jesus, this just gets better and better.

My level of intellect is saying that we would've beaten NC State last year. That's really it. That's all I'm saying. Again, not sure why this is so terrifically hard to understand.

 

[weownfsu]

Good god. You realize that besides their 4 cupcakes, our schedules differed by one game, right? You know what conference play is, right? How about presenting an argument, since you're disputing mine.

NC Central
Memphis
Georgia Tech
Pittsburgh
Troy
Navy
Virginia
Virginia Tech
NC State
Wake Forest
North Carolina

How many wins do the 2013 canes win with that schedule? I say 10 based on the fact that we beat 5 of those teams last year, we'd beat the 4 cupcakes, and we'd beat NC State who was 0-8 in conference play...I'll take a wild guess and say we would've beaten the 5 cupcakes.

And I say less based on the fact that we weren't as good as Duke, so we wouldn't have won as many games as they did if we had played their schedule?. Football simply doesn't work the way you want it to. And LOL @ this discussion about a hypothetical UM schedule that doesn't include FSU. What am I supposed to take away from that?

So you think that we would've lost to one of the following teams: NC Central, Memphis, Troy, Navy, NC State.

That shows the extraordinarily low level of intellect you're bringing to the debate.

This isn't a hypothetical UM schedule, this was Duke's schedule last year. I said we would've won 10 regular season games if we played Duke's schedule, you asked why, and I have showed you why.

Of course it's a hypothetical UM schedule. Do you know what the word hypothetical means? And no, I don't think we would have lost to one of those teams--if we had played the same schedule as Duke, we'd just have lost some other game to some **** team we shouldn't have lost to, but maybe beat in the context of our actual schedule last year, in addition to getting our teeth kicked in by Duke, FSU, Virginia Tech, and Texas A&M because that's the type of team we are.

Your level of "intellect" is claiming that we'd have the same performance against the same schedule as a team that beat us by 18 points. OK.

So now you're saying that we would've lost to a team that we actually DID beat? Jesus, this just gets better and better.

My level of intellect is saying that we would've beaten NC State last year. That's really it. That's all I'm saying. Again, not sure why this is so terrifically hard to understand.

No, you're saying that we would have won 10 games playing the same exact schedule as a team that also won 10 games, except that team was 18 points better than us. And yes, UM probably would have blown a game against some other team. That's UM's M.O. under this corching staff and they haven't proved any differently.

 

[Waffle Honcho]

And I say less based on the fact that we weren't as good as Duke, so we wouldn't have won as many games as they did if we had played their schedule?. Football simply doesn't work the way you want it to. And LOL @ this discussion about a hypothetical UM schedule that doesn't include FSU. What am I supposed to take away from that?

So you think that we would've lost to one of the following teams: NC Central, Memphis, Troy, Navy, NC State.

That shows the extraordinarily low level of intellect you're bringing to the debate.

This isn't a hypothetical UM schedule, this was Duke's schedule last year. I said we would've won 10 regular season games if we played Duke's schedule, you asked why, and I have showed you why.

Of course it's a hypothetical UM schedule. Do you know what the word hypothetical means? And no, I don't think we would have lost to one of those teams--if we had played the same schedule as Duke, we'd just have lost some other game to some **** team we shouldn't have lost to, but maybe beat in the context of our actual schedule last year, in addition to getting our teeth kicked in by Duke, FSU, Virginia Tech, and Texas A&M because that's the type of team we are.

Your level of "intellect" is claiming that we'd have the same performance against the same schedule as a team that beat us by 18 points. OK.

So now you're saying that we would've lost to a team that we actually DID beat? Jesus, this just gets better and better.

My level of intellect is saying that we would've beaten NC State last year. That's really it. That's all I'm saying. Again, not sure why this is so terrifically hard to understand.

No, you're saying that we would have won 10 games playing the same exact schedule as a team that also won 10 games, except that team was 18 points better than us. And yes, UM probably would have blown a game against some other team. That's UM's M.O. under this corching staff and they haven't proved any differently.

What bad teams did we lose to last year? FSU was 14-0, Louisville was 12-1, Duke was 10-3, and Va Tech was 8-5.

I'm not sure who you think we would've lost to, but the fact that you're even arguing this blows my mind. Because you're saying we would've lost to a team we actually beat.

 

[BWCD]

Duke Johnson is worth 20 points per game. When we lost him we lost 20 points per game. With him last year we go undefeated or have 1 loss tops.

Duke Johnson against Duke was worth 300 yards rushing and about 15 minutes of possession.

Losing Duke Johnson made our defense bad. It was stellar before he went down.

You guys are ****-stupid and completely missing the point I made. Speaking of strawman points--look no further than the snarky, short-sided comments above.

Duke Johnson isn't worth any "stat". I'm saying he changes the gameplan offensively, and allows you to possess the ball longer, and sustain drives better. Against teams like Duke/Louisville, he would have made a difference. I never said he made 20 points difference. I never said without him we lose 1 game or go undefeated. I never said he was worth 300 yards rushing and 15 minutes of possession. If you can't differentiate the point I made from all the bullsh1t you posted following that, then maybe you don't belong in this conversation to begin with. One thing I did do was point out before anyone else did that we won TOP against Duke...but that it could have been even better had the playcalling been different.

The D sucks. I've said that. It's absolutely sh1tty, no argument from me there.

There's also an argument to be made about Coley's playcalling (which I've been highly critical of). We averaged 6.4 per carry against Duke, yet Morris throws it 49 times. Why the fvck did that happen? Duke ran for nearly 400 yards against our D in that game, and didn't stop doing it because we couldn't do anything about it. Why couldn't Coley have done the same to them? Simple #Dale. Just like "Simple Jack" from Tropic Thunder, just a worse playcaller.

If you don't like the argument that having Duke Johnson wouldn't have made a difference, then maybe you can at least see the validity in another short-coming we have...which is Coley's playcalling not being conducive to possessing the football more for chunks of time to help us keep the D off the field. Again--look no further than that 4th quarter against Duke to see what I'm talking about.

 

[weownfsu]

So you think that we would've lost to one of the following teams: NC Central, Memphis, Troy, Navy, NC State.

That shows the extraordinarily low level of intellect you're bringing to the debate.

This isn't a hypothetical UM schedule, this was Duke's schedule last year. I said we would've won 10 regular season games if we played Duke's schedule, you asked why, and I have showed you why.

Of course it's a hypothetical UM schedule. Do you know what the word hypothetical means? And no, I don't think we would have lost to one of those teams--if we had played the same schedule as Duke, we'd just have lost some other game to some **** team we shouldn't have lost to, but maybe beat in the context of our actual schedule last year, in addition to getting our teeth kicked in by Duke, FSU, Virginia Tech, and Texas A&M because that's the type of team we are.

Your level of "intellect" is claiming that we'd have the same performance against the same schedule as a team that beat us by 18 points. OK.

So now you're saying that we would've lost to a team that we actually DID beat? Jesus, this just gets better and better.

My level of intellect is saying that we would've beaten NC State last year. That's really it. That's all I'm saying. Again, not sure why this is so terrifically hard to understand.

No, you're saying that we would have won 10 games playing the same exact schedule as a team that also won 10 games, except that team was 18 points better than us. And yes, UM probably would have blown a game against some other team. That's UM's M.O. under this corching staff and they haven't proved any differently.

What bad teams did we lose to last year? FSU was 14-0, Louisville was 12-1, Duke was 10-3, and Va Tech was 8-5.

I'm not sure who you think we would've lost to, but the fact that you're even arguing this blows my mind. Because you're saying we would've lost to a team we actually beat.

Va Tech was not a good team. The fact that you're actually arguing that we'd get 10 wins against the same schedule as a team that won 10 games, but was 18 points better than us, blows my mind. Maybe you haven't been watching much Hurricane football lately, but if it's not one thing, it's something else. Since you couldn't tell from the exchange before about how Duke beat VT but we lost to VT and Duke lost to GT but we beat them, this is a useless discussion.

Oh, and I didn't even check, but in all likelihood, we'd get wrecked by Navy. They won 9 games last year, and Al Golden's 8.3% winning percentage against teams with 8 or more wins does not give me much confidence in a game against a 9 win team.

 

[BWCD]

What bad teams did we lose to last year? FSU was 14-0, Louisville was 12-1, Duke was 10-3, and Va Tech was 8-5.

I'm not sure who you think we would've lost to, but the fact that you're even arguing this blows my mind. Because you're saying we would've lost to a team we actually beat.

I would say VT is a bad team, record aside. We should have beaten the **** out of them, but a sh1tstorm of epic proportions kept that from happening. We play them without the crazy turnovers and without fumbles going their way, I believe we would have won that game. All of the crazy fluky stuff in the 1st Half killed us.

 

[Dingaan1828]

Of course it's a hypothetical UM schedule. Do you know what the word hypothetical means? And no, I don't think we would have lost to one of those teams--if we had played the same schedule as Duke, we'd just have lost some other game to some **** team we shouldn't have lost to, but maybe beat in the context of our actual schedule last year, in addition to getting our teeth kicked in by Duke, FSU, Virginia Tech, and Texas A&M because that's the type of team we are.

Your level of "intellect" is claiming that we'd have the same performance against the same schedule as a team that beat us by 18 points. OK.

So now you're saying that we would've lost to a team that we actually DID beat? Jesus, this just gets better and better.

My level of intellect is saying that we would've beaten NC State last year. That's really it. That's all I'm saying. Again, not sure why this is so terrifically hard to understand.

No, you're saying that we would have won 10 games playing the same exact schedule as a team that also won 10 games, except that team was 18 points better than us. And yes, UM probably would have blown a game against some other team. That's UM's M.O. under this corching staff and they haven't proved any differently.

What bad teams did we lose to last year? FSU was 14-0, Louisville was 12-1, Duke was 10-3, and Va Tech was 8-5.

I'm not sure who you think we would've lost to, but the fact that you're even arguing this blows my mind. Because you're saying we would've lost to a team we actually beat.

Va Tech was not a good team. The fact that you're actually arguing that we'd get 10 wins against the same schedule as a team that won 10 games, but was 18 points better than us, blows my mind. Maybe you haven't been watching much Hurricane football lately, but if it's not one thing, it's something else. Since you couldn't tell from the exchange before about how Duke beat VT but we lost to VT and Duke lost to GT but we beat them, this is a useless discussion.

Oh, and I didn't even check, but in all likelihood, we'd get wrecked by Navy. They won 9 games last year, and Al Golden's 8.3% winning percentage against teams with 8 or more wins does not give me much confidence in a game against a 9 win team.

^^^ this. They might score on every possession. They are GT with guys that fit their offense. Navy would be HUGE trouble for UM.

 

[Bigtip]

What bad teams did we lose to last year? FSU was 14-0, Louisville was 12-1, Duke was 10-3, and Va Tech was 8-5.

I'm not sure who you think we would've lost to, but the fact that you're even arguing this blows my mind. Because you're saying we would've lost to a team we actually beat.

I would say VT is a bad team, record aside. We should have beaten the **** out of them, but a sh1tstorm of epic proportions kept that from happening. We play them without the crazy turnovers and without fumbles going their way, I believe we would have won that game. All of the crazy fluky stuff in the 1st Half killed us.

you are in denial. the first step to recovery is admitting there is a major problem

 

[weownfsu]

Duke Johnson is worth 20 points per game. When we lost him we lost 20 points per game. With him last year we go undefeated or have 1 loss tops.

Duke Johnson against Duke was worth 300 yards rushing and about 15 minutes of possession.

Losing Duke Johnson made our defense bad. It was stellar before he went down.

You guys are ****-stupid and completely missing the point I made. Speaking of strawman points--look no further than the snarky, short-sided comments above.

Duke Johnson isn't worth any "stat". I'm saying he changes the gameplan offensively, and allows you to possess the ball longer, and sustain drives better. Against teams like Duke/Louisville, he would have made a difference. I never said he made 20 points difference. I never said without him we lose 1 game or go undefeated. I never said he was worth 300 yards rushing and 15 minutes of possession. If you can't differentiate the point I made from all the bullsh1t you posted following that, then maybe you don't belong in this conversation to begin with. One thing I did do was point out before anyone else did that we won TOP against Duke...but that it could have been even better had the playcalling been different.

The D sucks. I've said that. It's absolutely sh1tty, no argument from me there.

There's also an argument to be made about Coley's playcalling (which I've been highly critical of). We averaged 6.4 per carry against Duke, yet Morris throws it 49 times. Why the fvck did that happen? Duke ran for nearly 400 yards against our D in that game, and didn't stop doing it because we couldn't do anything about it. Why couldn't Coley have done the same to them? Simple #Dale. Just like "Simple Jack" from Tropic Thunder, just a worse playcaller.

If you don't like the argument that having Duke Johnson wouldn't have made a difference, then maybe you can at least see the validity in another short-coming we have...which is Coley's playcalling not being conducive to possessing the football more for chunks of time to help us keep the D off the field. Again--look no further than that 4th quarter against Duke to see what I'm talking about.

How much longer does Duke Johnson allow us to posses the ball? How much more yards is he worth? How many more points?

You just admitted that you're arguing about ******* nothing. What I said was that Duke doesn't stop Duke from scoring, so we'd still lose. Yet you're here stomping your feet about how Duke might have made a difference. IF that difference isn't good enough to get us a win, who the **** cares and what are you talking about?

You're the same guy who said that our offense did no favors for the defense even though they won TOP and put up over 560 yards. Just stop.

 

[Waffle Honcho]

Of course it's a hypothetical UM schedule. Do you know what the word hypothetical means? And no, I don't think we would have lost to one of those teams--if we had played the same schedule as Duke, we'd just have lost some other game to some **** team we shouldn't have lost to, but maybe beat in the context of our actual schedule last year, in addition to getting our teeth kicked in by Duke, FSU, Virginia Tech, and Texas A&M because that's the type of team we are.

Your level of "intellect" is claiming that we'd have the same performance against the same schedule as a team that beat us by 18 points. OK.

So now you're saying that we would've lost to a team that we actually DID beat? Jesus, this just gets better and better.

My level of intellect is saying that we would've beaten NC State last year. That's really it. That's all I'm saying. Again, not sure why this is so terrifically hard to understand.

No, you're saying that we would have won 10 games playing the same exact schedule as a team that also won 10 games, except that team was 18 points better than us. And yes, UM probably would have blown a game against some other team. That's UM's M.O. under this corching staff and they haven't proved any differently.

What bad teams did we lose to last year? FSU was 14-0, Louisville was 12-1, Duke was 10-3, and Va Tech was 8-5.

I'm not sure who you think we would've lost to, but the fact that you're even arguing this blows my mind. Because you're saying we would've lost to a team we actually beat.

Va Tech was not a good team. The fact that you're actually arguing that we'd get 10 wins against the same schedule as a team that won 10 games, but was 18 points better than us, blows my mind. Maybe you haven't been watching much Hurricane football lately, but if it's not one thing, it's something else. Since you couldn't tell from the exchange before about how Duke beat VT but we lost to VT and Duke lost to GT but we beat them, this is a useless discussion.

Oh, and I didn't even check, but in all likelihood, we'd get wrecked by Navy. They won 9 games last year, and Al Golden's 8.3% winning percentage against teams with 8 or more wins does not give me much confidence in a game against a 9 win team.

You're right, it is useless! You're the one that brought up all that nonsense.

I'm just saying that we would've beaten NC State if they were on our schedule.

 

[Fountain of Canes]

What bad teams did we lose to last year? FSU was 14-0, Louisville was 12-1, Duke was 10-3, and Va Tech was 8-5.

I'm not sure who you think we would've lost to, but the fact that you're even arguing this blows my mind. Because you're saying we would've lost to a team we actually beat.

I would say VT is a bad team, record aside. We should have beaten the **** out of them, but a sh1tstorm of epic proportions kept that from happening. We play them without the crazy turnovers and without fumbles going their way, I believe we would have won that game. All of the crazy fluky stuff in the 1st Half killed us.

you are in denial. the first step to recovery is admitting there is a major problem

He is not in denial its the truth. You cant have back to back to back Turnovers and expect to win. Our defense was not good enough to hold them from scoring. the game was lost and the spirit was gone in the first half.

 

[weownfsu]

So now you're saying that we would've lost to a team that we actually DID beat? Jesus, this just gets better and better.

My level of intellect is saying that we would've beaten NC State last year. That's really it. That's all I'm saying. Again, not sure why this is so terrifically hard to understand.

No, you're saying that we would have won 10 games playing the same exact schedule as a team that also won 10 games, except that team was 18 points better than us. And yes, UM probably would have blown a game against some other team. That's UM's M.O. under this corching staff and they haven't proved any differently.

What bad teams did we lose to last year? FSU was 14-0, Louisville was 12-1, Duke was 10-3, and Va Tech was 8-5.

I'm not sure who you think we would've lost to, but the fact that you're even arguing this blows my mind. Because you're saying we would've lost to a team we actually beat.

Va Tech was not a good team. The fact that you're actually arguing that we'd get 10 wins against the same schedule as a team that won 10 games, but was 18 points better than us, blows my mind. Maybe you haven't been watching much Hurricane football lately, but if it's not one thing, it's something else. Since you couldn't tell from the exchange before about how Duke beat VT but we lost to VT and Duke lost to GT but we beat them, this is a useless discussion.

Oh, and I didn't even check, but in all likelihood, we'd get wrecked by Navy. They won 9 games last year, and Al Golden's 8.3% winning percentage against teams with 8 or more wins does not give me much confidence in a game against a 9 win team.

You're right, it is useless! You're the one that brought up all that nonsense.

I'm just saying that we would've beaten NC State if they were on our schedule.

No, you mouth breather. I was the one that laughed at the notion we'd win 10 games against Duke's schedule. I wasn't the one who brought it up. And no, you're trying to change your argument now. It wasn't just about NCSU, it was about UM winning 10 games against Duke's schedule. That was the discussion. Now that I bothered to look at Duke's OOC opponents, I know that isn't true at all because Navy would have shredded UM. So UM would have 9 wins, and if it wasn't one thing, it was just something else. Like I said.

 

[Calinative]

Of course it's a hypothetical UM schedule. Do you know what the word hypothetical means? And no, I don't think we would have lost to one of those teams--if we had played the same schedule as Duke, we'd just have lost some other game to some **** team we shouldn't have lost to, but maybe beat in the context of our actual schedule last year, in addition to getting our teeth kicked in by Duke, FSU, Virginia Tech, and Texas A&M because that's the type of team we are.

Your level of "intellect" is claiming that we'd have the same performance against the same schedule as a team that beat us by 18 points. OK.

So now you're saying that we would've lost to a team that we actually DID beat? Jesus, this just gets better and better.

My level of intellect is saying that we would've beaten NC State last year. That's really it. That's all I'm saying. Again, not sure why this is so terrifically hard to understand.

No, you're saying that we would have won 10 games playing the same exact schedule as a team that also won 10 games, except that team was 18 points better than us. And yes, UM probably would have blown a game against some other team. That's UM's M.O. under this corching staff and they haven't proved any differently.

What bad teams did we lose to last year? FSU was 14-0, Louisville was 12-1, Duke was 10-3, and Va Tech was 8-5.

I'm not sure who you think we would've lost to, but the fact that you're even arguing this blows my mind. Because you're saying we would've lost to a team we actually beat.

Va Tech was not a good team. The fact that you're actually arguing that we'd get 10 wins against the same schedule as a team that won 10 games, but was 18 points better than us, blows my mind. Maybe you haven't been watching much Hurricane football lately, but if it's not one thing, it's something else. Since you couldn't tell from the exchange before about how Duke beat VT but we lost to VT and Duke lost to GT but we beat them, this is a useless discussion.

Oh, and I didn't even check, but in all likelihood, we'd get wrecked by Navy. They won 9 games last year, and Al Golden's 8.3% winning percentage against teams with 8 or more wins does not give me much confidence in a game against a 9 win team.

Ur just not understanding the only difference in our schedule is they played NCST instead of FSU. We lost to FSU, but if we had played ncst we would have won. That is literally the only difference other than the non conference games which were all easier than ours. That adds up to 10 wins. All he did was correctly answer a hypothetical zcenario

 

[weownfsu]

So now you're saying that we would've lost to a team that we actually DID beat? Jesus, this just gets better and better.

My level of intellect is saying that we would've beaten NC State last year. That's really it. That's all I'm saying. Again, not sure why this is so terrifically hard to understand.

No, you're saying that we would have won 10 games playing the same exact schedule as a team that also won 10 games, except that team was 18 points better than us. And yes, UM probably would have blown a game against some other team. That's UM's M.O. under this corching staff and they haven't proved any differently.

What bad teams did we lose to last year? FSU was 14-0, Louisville was 12-1, Duke was 10-3, and Va Tech was 8-5.

I'm not sure who you think we would've lost to, but the fact that you're even arguing this blows my mind. Because you're saying we would've lost to a team we actually beat.

Va Tech was not a good team. The fact that you're actually arguing that we'd get 10 wins against the same schedule as a team that won 10 games, but was 18 points better than us, blows my mind. Maybe you haven't been watching much Hurricane football lately, but if it's not one thing, it's something else. Since you couldn't tell from the exchange before about how Duke beat VT but we lost to VT and Duke lost to GT but we beat them, this is a useless discussion.

Oh, and I didn't even check, but in all likelihood, we'd get wrecked by Navy. They won 9 games last year, and Al Golden's 8.3% winning percentage against teams with 8 or more wins does not give me much confidence in a game against a 9 win team.

Ur just not understanding the only difference in our schedule is they played NCST instead of FSU. We lost to FSU, but if we had played ncst we would have won. That is literally the only difference other than the non conference games which were all easier than ours. That adds up to 10 wins. All he did was correctly answer a hypothetical zcenario

Except that's not the only difference. They played an out of conference team that would have shredded us. Navy had 9 wins. Golden is 1-12 against teams with 8 or more wins, so we would have lost that game. Equalling 9 wins. And we'd be right back where we started: if it isn't one thing with UM, it's something else. That's how it works when you're not a good team.

 

[BWCD]

How much longer does Duke Johnson allow us to posses the ball? How much more yards is he worth? How many more points?

Don't know. And neither do you.

You just admitted that you're arguing about ******* nothing. What I said was that Duke doesn't stop Duke from scoring, so we'd still lose. Yet you're here stomping your feet about how Duke might have made a difference. IF that difference isn't good enough to get us a win, who the **** cares and what are you talking about?

I think having Duke in the offensive gameplan would have made a difference against at least Duke and Louisville. The gameplan changes, maybe we possess the ball even longer and stick to the run more. That's my assertion. Disagree if you wish, but there's nothing faulty about that line of thought. It's just different from yours.

You're the same guy who said that our offense did no favors for the defense even though they won TOP and put up over 560 yards. Just stop.

I said our O did our D no favors in the last 5 possessions against Duke. I gave evidence to back that up. If you can't understand the evidence well enough to see what I'm saying (even if you want to disagree), then you can go **** up a rope.

 

[Waffle Honcho]

No, you're saying that we would have won 10 games playing the same exact schedule as a team that also won 10 games, except that team was 18 points better than us. And yes, UM probably would have blown a game against some other team. That's UM's M.O. under this corching staff and they haven't proved any differently.

What bad teams did we lose to last year? FSU was 14-0, Louisville was 12-1, Duke was 10-3, and Va Tech was 8-5.

I'm not sure who you think we would've lost to, but the fact that you're even arguing this blows my mind. Because you're saying we would've lost to a team we actually beat.

Va Tech was not a good team. The fact that you're actually arguing that we'd get 10 wins against the same schedule as a team that won 10 games, but was 18 points better than us, blows my mind. Maybe you haven't been watching much Hurricane football lately, but if it's not one thing, it's something else. Since you couldn't tell from the exchange before about how Duke beat VT but we lost to VT and Duke lost to GT but we beat them, this is a useless discussion.

Oh, and I didn't even check, but in all likelihood, we'd get wrecked by Navy. They won 9 games last year, and Al Golden's 8.3% winning percentage against teams with 8 or more wins does not give me much confidence in a game against a 9 win team.

You're right, it is useless! You're the one that brought up all that nonsense.

I'm just saying that we would've beaten NC State if they were on our schedule.

No, you mouth breather. I was the one that laughed at the notion we'd win 10 games against Duke's schedule. I wasn't the one who brought it up. And no, you're trying to change your argument now. It wasn't just about NCSU, it was about UM winning 10 games against Duke's schedule. That was the discussion. Now that I bothered to look at Duke's OOC opponents, I know that isn't true at all because Navy would have shredded UM. So UM would have 9 wins, and if it wasn't one thing, it was just something else. Like I said.

I was about to argue with you the millions of places where you're wrong -- but this is really, really pointless. May your 9,727 post on CanesInsight be more productive. Have a good weekend.

 

[weownfsu]

How much longer does Duke Johnson allow us to posses the ball? How much more yards is he worth? How many more points?

Don't know. And neither do you.

You just admitted that you're arguing about ****ing nothing. What I said was that Duke doesn't stop Duke from scoring, so we'd still lose. Yet you're here stomping your feet about how Duke might have made a difference. IF that difference isn't good enough to get us a win, who the **** cares and what are you talking about?

I think having Duke in the offensive gameplan would have made a difference against at least Duke and Louisville. The gameplan changes, maybe we possess the ball even longer and stick to the run more. That's my assertion. Disagree if you wish, but there's nothing faulty about that line of thought. It's just different from yours.

You're the same guy who said that our offense did no favors for the defense even though they won TOP and put up over 560 yards. Just stop.

I said our O did our D no favors in the last 5 possessions against Duke. I gave evidence to back that up. If you can't understand the evidence well enough to see what I'm saying (even if you want to disagree), then you can go **** up a rope.

Except I do know that our defense sucked before Duke Johnson went down, regardless of how much extra TOP we had with Duke.

"I think having Duke in the offensive gameplan would have made a difference against at least Duke and Louisville. The gameplan changes, maybe we possess the ball even longer and stick to the run more. That's my assertion. Disagree if you wish, but there's nothing faulty about that line of thought. It's just different from yours. "

Yeah, how does that win the game? Otherwise, all your telling me is that adding a player would have changed the game, but not necessarily the outcome. In which case, what the **** are you arguing about?

"I said our O did our D no favors in the last 5 possessions against Duke. I gave evidence to back that up. If you can't understand the evidence well enough to see what I'm saying (even if you want to disagree), then you can go **** up a rope."

No, this is what you said:

However, our Offense, especially in all of our losses save for maybe F$U, didn't do our Defense any favors either. The numbers show it. It's empirically provable. To ignore that is "dumb as ****"

Yeah, our offense that won TOP and put up 565 yards didn't do our defense any favors. LOL. All you're saying is that our offense didn't play PERFECT. Guess what, perfect football doesn't happen, and that's what is needed when your D is as bad as ours. Duke Johnson doesn't change that.

 

[Bigtip]

its really very simple. it is a proven FACT that our defense is PATHETIC. we have seen it now countless times under F.A.G./Dorito where we literally cannot stop the other team, and the only way to win is to score on every single possession and have the ball last.

that is no way to win games on average. we've lost to really bad teams (UVA'12) in the exact same fashion. having Duke vs Dook would have helped sure but it would still AT BEST have been a situation where we would have to score every possession and have the ball last.

once a couple of things go wrong (a la the VT'13 game), then the wheels come flying off and you have an embarrassing loss because the defense is PUTRID.

get ready for lots more of that this year with huge ? at QB and an offense that will likely struggle at times due to poor QB play