forums

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

weownfsu said:
hughhoney said:
weownfsu said:
hughhoney said:
weownfsu said:
Why do people think we would have had 10, maybe 11 wins with Duke's schedule? We weren't as good as Duke last year. They whipped us.
Click to expand...

Because we played FSU in the regular season, and they played NC State. Pretty simple.
Click to expand...

LOL. They also beat VT--we got hammered by VT.
Click to expand...

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.
Click to expand...

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.
Click to expand...


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.
 
Last edited:
Advertisement
BWCD said:
weownfsu said:
hughhoney said:
weownfsu said:
Why do people think we would have had 10, maybe 11 wins with Duke's schedule? We weren't as good as Duke last year. They whipped us.
Click to expand...

Because we played FSU in the regular season, and they played NC State. Pretty simple.
Click to expand...

LOL. They also beat VT--we got hammered by VT.
Click to expand...
The VT game was an anomaly. That game was just a cluster-fvck of epic proportions. Turnovers abound on what should have been big ST plays for us (anyone forgetting Pat O'Donnell "taking a knee" to catch a low snap?), our D couldn't tackle (nothing new), and VT was recovering forced fumbles by us for TD's (remember that ****?).

The ONE thing that could have helped in the VT game was a solid possession early in the game in the midst of all the fvckery to calm us down, and knock them off of Cloud 9. When we did, indeed, have long drives for scores earlier in the year--who did that? Was it Morris marching us down the field? Nope. The ONLY 2 times he ever did that in his career was against Maryland as a Freshman, and against GT as a Junior.

Our long drives for scores these past few years has almost always been on the back of Duke. The only times it really wasn't was during the UNC game, and that was Dallas Crawford's coming out party.

And did anyone actually watch the Duke/VT game that Duke won? That game was an absolute abomination. They were both ******* horrible, and couldn't stick their thumbs up their asses offensively. It was comical to watch.

My overall point is--if Duke doesn't go out for the year against F$U, and we have him for the rest of the season, I think we win the Coastal. Don't give me the "he doesn't play defense" bullsh1t. He may not--but he's an elite offensive player that took a whole freaking dimension of our offense away when he went out. Also--there's the intangible impact of losing a leader to tragic injury like we did Duke, and that impacts the morale of the whole team.

I'm not agreeing/disagreeing with the "if we had Duke's schedule" bit or whatever...but for folks to imply that losing Duke Johnson against F$U didn't cost us wins against the likes of VT/Duke because "he doesn't play defense" is just dumb as ****.
Click to expand...

:ibisroflmao:
 
Big **** I'm not sure what your laughing about, that guys post made a fair amount of sense to me. I mean how many games did we fumble 50 + yd returns? How often do you see teams recovering their own fumbles for Tds... That game was a crap show from our D which was the norm, but there was a lot in that game that was just bad breaks. And none went our way.

I understand that your not having fun if your not *****ing about the exact same thing every day, but at the very least recognize logic when its presented. I can do it about our Defense, but some guys can't do it at all.
 
hughhoney said:
weownfsu said:
hughhoney said:
weownfsu said:
hughhoney said:
Because we played FSU in the regular season, and they played NC State. Pretty simple.
Click to expand...

LOL. They also beat VT--we got hammered by VT.
Click to expand...

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.
Click to expand...

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.
Click to expand...


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.
Click to expand...

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?
 
Advertisement
BWCD said:
weownfsu said:
hughhoney said:
weownfsu said:
Why do people think we would have had 10, maybe 11 wins with Duke's schedule? We weren't as good as Duke last year. They whipped us.
Click to expand...

Because we played FSU in the regular season, and they played NC State. Pretty simple.
Click to expand...

LOL. They also beat VT--we got hammered by VT.
Click to expand...
The VT game was an anomaly. That game was just a cluster-fvck of epic proportions. Turnovers abound on what should have been big ST plays for us (anyone forgetting Pat O'Donnell "taking a knee" to catch a low snap?), our D couldn't tackle (nothing new), and VT was recovering forced fumbles by us for TD's (remember that ****?).

The ONE thing that could have helped in the VT game was a solid possession early in the game in the midst of all the fvckery to calm us down, and knock them off of Cloud 9. When we did, indeed, have long drives for scores earlier in the year--who did that? Was it Morris marching us down the field? Nope. The ONLY 2 times he ever did that in his career was against Maryland as a Freshman, and against GT as a Junior.

Our long drives for scores these past few years has almost always been on the back of Duke. The only times it really wasn't was during the UNC game, and that was Dallas Crawford's coming out party.

And did anyone actually watch the Duke/VT game that Duke won? That game was an absolute abomination. They were both ******* horrible, and couldn't stick their thumbs up their asses offensively. It was comical to watch.

My overall point is--if Duke doesn't go out for the year against F$U, and we have him for the rest of the season, I think we win the Coastal. Don't give me the "he doesn't play defense" bullsh1t. He may not--but he's an elite offensive player that took a whole freaking dimension of our offense away when he went out. Also--there's the intangible impact of losing a leader to tragic injury like we did Duke, and that impacts the morale of the whole team.

I'm not agreeing/disagreeing with the "if we had Duke's schedule" bit or whatever...but for folks to imply that losing Duke Johnson against F$U didn't cost us wins against the likes of VT/Duke because "he doesn't play defense" is just dumb as ****.
Click to expand...

It wasn't an anomaly. It was par for the course with this corching staff--have a huge game at home that can put you in the coastal driver's seat, and blow the game.

And no, it's not "dumb as ****." We lost the duke and VT games because we could not stop anybody. Duke Johnson does not change that.
 
weownfsu said:
BWCD said:
weownfsu said:
hughhoney said:
weownfsu said:
Why do people think we would have had 10, maybe 11 wins with Duke's schedule? We weren't as good as Duke last year. They whipped us.
Click to expand...

Because we played FSU in the regular season, and they played NC State. Pretty simple.
Click to expand...

LOL. They also beat VT--we got hammered by VT.
Click to expand...
The VT game was an anomaly. That game was just a cluster-fvck of epic proportions. Turnovers abound on what should have been big ST plays for us (anyone forgetting Pat O'Donnell "taking a knee" to catch a low snap?), our D couldn't tackle (nothing new), and VT was recovering forced fumbles by us for TD's (remember that ****?).

The ONE thing that could have helped in the VT game was a solid possession early in the game in the midst of all the fvckery to calm us down, and knock them off of Cloud 9. When we did, indeed, have long drives for scores earlier in the year--who did that? Was it Morris marching us down the field? Nope. The ONLY 2 times he ever did that in his career was against Maryland as a Freshman, and against GT as a Junior.

Our long drives for scores these past few years has almost always been on the back of Duke. The only times it really wasn't was during the UNC game, and that was Dallas Crawford's coming out party.

And did anyone actually watch the Duke/VT game that Duke won? That game was an absolute abomination. They were both ******* horrible, and couldn't stick their thumbs up their asses offensively. It was comical to watch.

My overall point is--if Duke doesn't go out for the year against F$U, and we have him for the rest of the season, I think we win the Coastal. Don't give me the "he doesn't play defense" bullsh1t. He may not--but he's an elite offensive player that took a whole freaking dimension of our offense away when he went out. Also--there's the intangible impact of losing a leader to tragic injury like we did Duke, and that impacts the morale of the whole team.

I'm not agreeing/disagreeing with the "if we had Duke's schedule" bit or whatever...but for folks to imply that losing Duke Johnson against F$U didn't cost us wins against the likes of VT/Duke because "he doesn't play defense" is just dumb as ****.
Click to expand...

It wasn't an anomaly. It was par for the course with this corching staff--have a huge game at home that can put you in the coastal driver's seat, and blow the game.

And no, it's not "dumb as ****." We lost the duke and VT games because we could not stop anybody. Duke Johnson does not change that.
Click to expand...

oh really? Duke Johnson doesnt make a difference? He averaged 6.3 ypc last season. we averaged 2.9 ypc against virginia tech. Duke rushes equate to 1st downs which means prolonged drives and the defense can rest and regroup. In that game we were constantly in 2nd & 3rd n longs bc of the running game.WE WERE 3-12 ON 3rd DOWN CONVERSIONS! offense can't stay on the field, defense (already lacking depth) struggles even more as the game progresses. Does Duke being in the game automatically equate to a win? obviously not. however, to state that Duke playing that game doesnt help out the defense is a pretty naive comment IMO.
 
weownfsu said:
It wasn't an anomaly. It was par for the course with this corching staff--have a huge game at home that can put you in the coastal driver's seat, and blow the game.
Click to expand...
While I will definitely disagree with that game not being an anomaly (like frosty said: how many games did we fumble multiple big play kick/punt returns, or have the other team recover fumbles in their endzone for a TD, or have our punter down at the spot because his knee touched as he fielded the snap?)...I will agree that we've had several seasons (including under Shannon) where we had our Coastal fate in our hands and ****ed it away. Even after the VT loss--VT lost the next week, and put us back in the driver's seat. What did we do? We folded against Duke in their house. I do agree on that sentiment.

And no, it's not "dumb as ****." We lost the duke and VT games because we could not stop anybody. Duke Johnson does not change that.
Click to expand...
Yes it is. Do you not understand that if our offense performs better and/or stays on the field longer because Duke Johnson is on the field...what impact that has on the defense?

Duke was one of the few games where we won overall TOP--32 min to 28. However, Morris threw the ball 49 times in that game. Imagine if we cut that back to 30-35, giving those 14-19 touches to Duke Johnson, possessed the ball for 4-5 more minutes, and keep our Defense (as putrid as it was and is) off the field? I think that gives us a legit shot to win that ballgame.

More proof--late in the 3rd quarter, we were down 31-30 to Duke. We had possessed the football earlier in the game on 4 different drives for 10 plays apiece, and 3 FG's and a TD. I think if we flip some of those earlier drives from FG's to TD's (which Duke Johnson certainly couldn't have hurt the cause for), we are leading. Also, the last 5 drives of the Duke game when we were down 31-30...our drives went like this:

3rd Qtr: TOP - 02:29 Start - MIA 9 Plays - 5 Yards - 35 Result - Punt
4th Qtr: TOP - 01:40 Start - MIA 1 Plays - 4 Yards - 40 Result - Punt
4th Qtr: TOP - 01:28 Start - MIA 24 Plays - 4 Yards - 18 Result - Punt
4th Qtr: TOP - 01:34 Start - MIA 25 Plays - 4 Yards - 7 Result - Turnover on Downs
4th Qtr: TOP - 01:02 Start - MIA 29 Plays - 8 Yards - 55 Result - Turnover on Downs

So, in crunch time, when Duke Johnson most likely could/would have helped, we had 3 punts and 2 turnovers on downs because Morris was pretty much exclusively throwing the ball. He went a combined 7 of 16 on those drives (NOTE: 16 throws on 25 of our final offensive plays).

Now...when you're 4-5 plays and off the field as an offense, and your defense sucks pretty hard anyways, and you're asking them to go keep going out after only a 1:30 or so rest, and stop a pretty good Duke offense that was wearing our D out...good offenses (with all their healthy guys) will go out there, possess the ball for a while, score, and put the defense in a not-so-tenuous position. Instead...our guys are ****-near going 3-and-out each drive, and Duke's offense took full advantage of a worn out sh1tty Defense to pull away with 17 points in the final frame.

Show me ONE place where I've said our D doesn't suck. It indeed, does. 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 ****".
 
frostycane said:
Big **** I'm not sure what your laughing about, that guys post made a fair amount of sense to me. I mean how many games did we fumble 50 + yd returns? How often do you see teams recovering their own fumbles for Tds... That game was a crap show from our D which was the norm, but there was a lot in that game that was just bad breaks. And none went our way.

I understand that your not having fun if your not *****ing about the exact same thing every day, but at the very least recognize logic when its presented. I can do it about our Defense, but some guys can't do it at all.
Click to expand...

the "logic" dictates that we frequently get embarrassed in big games and the wheels come off very quickly with a horrible defense like we have. so no it was not an anomaly but rather the norm under F.A.G.
 
Advertisement
You guys are morons. Miami had the ball longer than Duke in that game. We averaged 6.4 yards per carry. We put up 565 yards. You can't perform that much better on offense than we did in that game. We torched them even without Duke Johnson. I hate to break it to you guys, but even with Duke Johnson, our team has had drives where they didn't score all throughout the year. Duke wasn't changing anything, except maybe making it 37-48 instead of 48-30. He wasn't stopping their offense from scoring, which is why we lost that game.
 
weownfsu said:
You guys are morons. Miami had the ball longer than Duke in that game. We averaged 6.4 yards per carry. We put up 565 yards. You can't perform that much better on offense than we did in that game. We torched them even without Duke Johnson. I hate to break it to you guys, but even with Duke Johnson, our team has had drives where they didn't score all throughout the year. Duke wasn't changing anything, except maybe making it 37-48 instead of 48-30. He wasn't stopping their offense from scoring, which is why we lost that game.
Click to expand...

yep. I'm still having a hard time deciding which performance was more embarrassing defensively:

Dook '13
VT '13
UL '13
FSU '13
ND '12
KSU '12
VT '11

I'm sure I'm forgetting a handful
 
Advertisement
weownfsu said:
You guys are morons. Miami had the ball longer than Duke in that game. We averaged 6.4 yards per carry. We put up 565 yards. You can't perform that much better on offense than we did in that game.
Click to expand...
Yes you can. You can possess the ******* football better to give your Defense a fighting chance in ****. We torched them, they torched us. Difference is, they torched us in the 4th quarter when our D was even sh1ttier than usual due to us punting 3 times and turning it over on downs 2 times. No doubt the defensive performance was terrible...but if we didn't know by the Duke game that our D was sh1tty and that the offense needed to help them out some...then we never had a chance to begin with.

We torched them even without Duke Johnson. I hate to break it to you guys, but even with Duke Johnson, our team has had drives where they didn't score all throughout the year. Duke wasn't changing anything, except maybe making it 37-48 instead of 48-30. He wasn't stopping their offense from scoring, which is why we lost that game.
Click to expand...
I know Duke was on the field for some turrible drives earlier in the season...and a lot of that had to do with not giving him the ball and letting Morris miss open receivers underneath while trying to hit the long ball. It worked sometimes, and looked pretty and explosive, but you live by the sword...you die by the sword.

No way you can say with a straight face that giving Duke some carries in those VT or Duke games instead of letting Morris wing it all over the field wouldn't have made a difference. If you truly can, you're dumber than I thought.

And had we "torched" them, we would have won. We put up a lot of yards, but we couldn't score enough. So much for that "explosive" offense when they couldn't cash in with enough TD's to win. If your D sucks, your Offense had better be able to outscore the other guys to even have a shot. We couldn't in the Duke game nor the Louisville game. The VT game--again, an anomaly due to the perfect sh1tstorm of turnovers and craziness that went on and doomed us.
 
Bigtip said:
yet the VT'13 game was def an anomaly
Click to expand...
Name all the games where we had 3 turnovers in the 1st half on special teams, and the other team fumbled a ball forward and recovered it for a TD. All in the same game.

I'll wait. That list is probably as long as your so-called "Bigtip".

Remembering a loss to a rival at home and how it sucked is one thing, remembering how it happened and the craziness around it is another. The latter takes a little higher order thought process, apparently.
 
Advertisement
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.
 
BWCD said:
weownfsu said:
You guys are morons. Miami had the ball longer than Duke in that game. We averaged 6.4 yards per carry. We put up 565 yards. You can't perform that much better on offense than we did in that game.
Click to expand...
Yes you can. You can possess the ******* football better to give your Defense a fighting chance in ****. We torched them, they torched us. Difference is, they torched us in the 4th quarter when our D was even sh1ttier than usual due to us punting 3 times and turning it over on downs 2 times. No doubt the defensive performance was terrible...but if we didn't know by the Duke game that our D was sh1tty and that the offense needed to help them out some...then we never had a chance to begin with.

We torched them even without Duke Johnson. I hate to break it to you guys, but even with Duke Johnson, our team has had drives where they didn't score all throughout the year. Duke wasn't changing anything, except maybe making it 37-48 instead of 48-30. He wasn't stopping their offense from scoring, which is why we lost that game.
Click to expand...
I know Duke was on the field for some turrible drives earlier in the season...and a lot of that had to do with not giving him the ball and letting Morris miss open receivers underneath while trying to hit the long ball. It worked sometimes, and looked pretty and explosive, but you live by the sword...you die by the sword.

No way you can say with a straight face that giving Duke some carries in those VT or Duke games instead of letting Morris wing it all over the field wouldn't have made a difference. If you truly can, you're dumber than I thought.

And had we "torched" them, we would have won. We put up a lot of yards, but we couldn't score enough. So much for that "explosive" offense when they couldn't cash in with enough TD's to win. If your D sucks, your Offense had better be able to outscore the other guys to even have a shot. We couldn't in the Duke game nor the Louisville game. The VT game--again, an anomaly due to the perfect sh1tstorm of turnovers and craziness that went on and doomed us.
Click to expand...

You clown, we had more TOP than Duke. We had more yards. Our defense had a "fighting chance in ****"--our offense put up almost 600 yards, but according to you, they didn't help our the defense at all. LMAO.

If your D sucks, you tend to lose games when the other team has even a decent offense. It is what it is. Our defense sucks so bad that even when our offense plays great, we still tend to lose games. Duke Johnson doesn't increase our offensive production to like 700 yards and 45 minutes with the ball. He's worth maybe a touchdown, but Duke doesn't stop the other squad from putting up almost 400 yards rushing. They kicked our *** and a RB doesn't stop them. We moved the ball at will on them, and you're basically telling me "well if our offense played perfect football, then maybe we would have won." Uh, okay. Duke Johnson doesn't make our offense play perfect football and UM already had all the advantages on Duke that #8 supposedly would have given us, yet we still got our *** kicked. You're delusional. Duke whipped us.

And no, Al Golden teams turning the ball over and looking like they just **** their pants in a big game isn't an anomaly, it's business as usual.

And you can keep building up that strawman about Duke Johnson making "zero difference" but that's not what this discussion was about so until you can be honest, please don't address me.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top