Archive for Lafayette Sports Fan Forum This forum is not affiliated in any way with Lafayette College, Lafayette College Athletics, The Maroon Club or any other official organization. Please be respectful of other posters as well as the athletes, coaches and administrators.
 


       Lafayette Sports Fan Forum Forum Index -> Football
65Pard

Princeton in game....Cat Fight

Cat Fight
flyfisher

Let's go!!!
65Pard

Again.....personal foul....self destruction gene
Franks Tanks

Total crap personal call foul, and now the Tigers are at the 23.
65Pard

Personal foul call cost us a score.....!!!%&3
Franks Tanks

Well that didn't take long. Call was crap, but the Tigers just covered 50 yards in 3 plays.
Franks Tanks

65Pard wrote:
Personal foul call cost us a score.....!!!%&3


Technically true, but not sure it will matter much.
pardfan

Franks Tanks wrote:
Well that didn't take long. Call was crap, but the Tigers just covered 50 yards in 3 plays.


Worst call I've ever seen.
65Pard

Poor picture and almost no sound....anyone else?
Franks Tanks

Great catch by Matt, and we scored on a running play!
pardfan

65Pard wrote:
Poor picture and almost no sound....anyone else?


same here
Franks Tanks

Why do we even try to run the ball?  You are not keeping the D honest when every single run results in no gain (at best)
65Pard

Our team has no running ability.....Let other teams run to set up passing game....we need to do the opposite.    Dumb play calling.

Throw the damn ball......We have that ability, use it.
bethlehempard

Great catch on the TD. Just got back getting a decent picture off WPBH.
Stat from the announcers: 135 yards in the air, 10 on the ground.
Mrazek is one of our best ever and particularly as every team has to know we're throwing.
We've had great catches: Hurt! but i will always remember Ross's bump-and-grab against Lehigh.
pardfan

Drew looks sharp so far.   Lafayette came to play?
adcs2

pardfan wrote:
Drew looks sharp so far.   Lafayette came to play?


Drew is 9-for-9
flyfisher

based on the inexperienced secondary of Princeton this may be our best offensive game plan I have seen in a while. maybe the pass will open up some running lanes.
65Pard

Whoever Is calling offense plays is an idiot

Try throwing on first down once in a while!!!!  especially when we complete most passes.
pardfan

a few decades ago they used to say that Bear Bryant only recruited high school fullbacks   Now, I know why.
Our OL looks so slooooow
65Pard

So once again we run on first down, get nothing....put 3rd and 15 pressure on the offense....and INT.

The kids deserve a better game plan
Franks Tanks

65Pard wrote:
Whoever Is calling offense plays is an idiot

Try throwing on first down once in a while!!!!  especially when we complete most passes.


Guarantee that was Frank.  Play calling was pretty good in the 1st, but Frank probably asked Mickey to "establish the run" on that possession.
Franks Tanks

Great series by the D.  Our DL is playing great, and Tre Jordan and Bryant are laying the wood.
Franks Tanks

TD Pards.  Great play by Drew... Please stop handing her ball off for no gain
bethlehempard

19 carries. 38 yards. 2 yards per carry. Princeton isn't doing much better: 16 for 47, 2.9 yards per carry.
65Pard

We do not have the horses to "establish the run" FRANK!  Why is that not obvious?

60 years of watching football and this is the most frustrating.
Franks Tanks

Penn over Lehigh 28-21.  Penn has 320 yards in the 1st half !

Doesn't look like we will keep them out of the end zone before the half
65Pard

bethlehempard wrote:
19 carries. 38 yards. 2 yards per carry. Princeton isn't doing much better: 16 for 47, 2.9 yards per carry.


The difference is they have no real passing threat.

This game is very winnable.
flyfisher

we should.win. very average Princeton team
bethlehempard

Laf   Princeton
1st Downs 10 10
3rd down efficiency 5-8 5-9
4th down efficiency 0-0 0-0
Total Yards 214 178
Passing 176 103
Comp-Att 13-17 9-18
Yards per pass 10.4 5.7
Interceptions thrown 1 0
Rushing 38 76
Rushing Attempts 19 22
Yards per rush 2.0 3.5
Penalties 2-20 4-41
Turnovers 1 0
Fumbles lost 0 0
Interceptions thrown 1 0
Possession 18:33 11:27
flyfisher

I liked our offense through most of the half. Couple of situations fooled me but heck, we scored 21 points against a similar talent opponent
65Pard

Take away Drew's long run and we average about 1 yard.....

Play to your strength Frank!!
65Pard

Hooray....a first down throw,  and guess what.  Another First down
NE Leopard

Good drive, and 3 points - lead 24-21
bethlehempard

Great pick but why are we always starting at the 11?
And running for one.
Their pick.
Our pick.
Their pick.
The price of no running game.
Princeton isn't great. This isn't over. Just sobering.
bethlehempard

I'm pretty excited by the latest two-yard run. Do it again? Yes.
Incredible. Sack. This should be a case study.
All we need is a miracle, or maybe just a turnover.
65Pard

Why did we not go for 2 points???  nothing to lose.  Our coaching staff should all be fired.

Look Frank:  This is what happens when you utilize your very good passing game.   Maybe next time you won't wait until the fourth quarter.
Lafalum

Why didn't we go for 2. You don't get it and your still down two scores!!
NLF

Lafalum wrote:
Why didn't we go for 2. You don't get it and your still down two scores!!


Dumbfounded. How can you miss that?
65Pard

This loss is on the coaching staff....feel bad for the kids.
bethlehempard

Lafayette Princeton
1st Downs 19 21
3rd down efficiency 7-15 9-17
4th down efficiency 0-0 0-0
Total Yards 416 360
Passing 356 178
Comp-Att 28-36 16-32
Yards per pass 9.9 5.6
Interceptions thrown 2 1
Rushing 60 182
Rushing Attempts 34 47
Yards per rush 1.8 3.9
Penalties 3-25 6-56
Turnovers 3 1
Fumbles lost 1 0
Interceptions thrown 2 1
Possession 34:45 25:15

Doubled them up on passing. Three to one deficit in rushing. That includes the deduction of sack yards.
flyfisher

Oh well, we played better. Scored a lot of points tonight. They teed off on us the 2nd half knowing we could not run the ball. I know many here hate that we run the ball at all but a good offense needs balance. Plus the defense gets less reps.
65Pard

Interview with Frank after the game "we need the running game to open up the pass" Implied he did not know how to fix.   Sad.
The Maroon

NLF wrote:
Lafalum wrote:
Why didn't we go for 2. You don't get it and your still down two scores!!


Dumbfounded. How can you miss that?


I honestly don't understand how a college coach blows that.
65Pard

flyfisher wrote:
Oh well, we played better. Scored a lot of points tonight. They teed off on us the 2nd half knowing we could not run the ball. I know many here hate that we run the ball at all but a good offense needs balance. Plus the defense gets less reps.


Fly
We will not get 2nd and short with our running game,  but the pass would more likely do it and put opposing D in a tougher spot.  For God's sake Drew completed over 75%! With a 9 yard average.
bethlehempard

The Maroon wrote:
NLF wrote:
Lafalum wrote:
Why didn't we go for 2. You don't get it and your still down two scores!!


Dumbfounded. How can you miss that?


I honestly don't understand how a college coach blows that.


There are 10 coaches on the field and nobody screamed, "Go for two!"?

This requires an explanation. Ideally the question will be asked.
BillS

bethlehempard wrote:
The Maroon wrote:
NLF wrote:
Lafalum wrote:
Why didn't we go for 2. You don't get it and your still down two scores!!


Dumbfounded. How can you miss that?


I honestly don't understand how a college coach blows that.


There are 10 coaches on the field and nobody screamed, "Go for two!"?

This requires an explanation. Ideally the question will be asked.
why is everyone so upset did you expect a different outcome? Hey we're on track to possibly win 2 games  Rolling Eyes
NLF

Picking up on an old thread, I do not understand why our running game is based exclusively on the shotgun inside zone. I'll admit I am not a football genius, but why not line up over center and give the back a chance to hit the hole with momentum?

Oh... field position. What's with our KO returns?

On the positive, we've got a legit pair of kickers. JB and RF should both be weapons this year.
The Maroon

BillS wrote:
bethlehempard wrote:
The Maroon wrote:
NLF wrote:
Lafalum wrote:
Why didn't we go for 2. You don't get it and your still down two scores!!


Dumbfounded. How can you miss that?


I honestly don't understand how a college coach blows that.


There are 10 coaches on the field and nobody screamed, "Go for two!"?

This requires an explanation. Ideally the question will be asked.
why is everyone so upset did you expect a different outcome? Hey we're on track to possibly win 2 games  Rolling Eyes


It turned out not to matter - but it was a head scratching decision.

We're better than I thought we'd be quite honestly. The Homecoming game looms large.
bethlehempard

It's hard to say if the TOs were the difference or the running game. At one point we were almost even with Princeton in rushing yards.
Of course the turnovers and lack of running game are related.
Lafayette was in the game. That's something compared to the horror of last year and our friends at Lehigh are 1-2.
So maybe there are some wins left.
Colgate and Lehigh won, big. Bucknell lost and Holy Cross is probably going to lose.
In the game. That's something but that's what this debacle has come to.
Gotta win a couple more.
Franks Tanks

Drew Reed and the receiving crew played very well again.  Drew is making some good throws under pressure, and in tight Windows.  He knows it's all on him.  We continue to waste plays gaining one yard per run.  The New England Patriots don't worry about establishing the run when it doesn't make sense to do so.  Frank however continues to bash his stubborn head against the wall, even if it loses him football games.  

Then again, Frank is under no pressure to win.  We are now looking at 3-4 wins max this year, which improves the program from historically bad to just normal level of bad.  Given this improvement, Bruce is probably working on a 3 year extension!
flyfisher

65Pard wrote:
flyfisher wrote:
Oh well, we played better. Scored a lot of points tonight. They teed off on us the 2nd half knowing we could not run the ball. I know many here hate that we run the ball at all but a good offense needs balance. Plus the defense gets less reps.


Fly
We will not get 2nd and short with our running game,  but the pass would more likely do it and put opposing D in a tougher spot.  For God's sake Drew completed over 75%! With a 9 yard average.

I am not disagreeing with you. Just saying we can't pass every down. We need some balance. This isnt flag football. Not being rude. Just have to develop some balance.
flyfisher

Franks Tanks wrote:
Drew Reed and the receiving crew played very well again.  Drew is making some good throws under pressure, and in tight Windows.  He knows it's all on him.  We continue to waste plays gaining one yard per run.  The New England Patriots don't worry about establishing the run when it doesn't make sense to do so.  Frank however continues to bash his stubborn head against the wall, even if it loses him football games.  

Then again, Frank is under no pressure to win.  We are now looking at 3-4 wins max this year, which improves the program from historically bad to just normal level of bad.  Given this improvement, Bruce is probably working on a 3 year extension!

I fear 3-4 wins is being optimistic. Bucknell and Georetown offer opportunities, and maybe Lehigh. If any coach needs to be let go it's Coen.
Franks Tanks

Agree that Coen is also pretty bad.  The best football coach in the Lehigh Valley, by a mile, is Mike Donelly of Muhelenburg.
bethlehempard

If you were to pick who might be the best in 10 years, in the best job, I would go with Phil Stambaugh.
Just getting a team on the field for Pius X was an accomplishment. Usually a good team in that weird cobbled-together conference.
Then last year, Notre Dame's league title only resulted from Pius transfers. It should have Pius X's name on the trophy.
NDGP was terrible before Pius (119 students in six grades) collapsed.
Now Notre Dame is Stambaugh's team. It's a challenge and he will meet it.
Based on the past two decades or so, Higgins and Lembo were the best. Frank had his moments but the best local teams were Higgins's teams.

I concur, four wins is a stretch. Today was the chance to steal one. Close but no theft. Lehigh suddenly looks good. The Shaf detractors will be quiet. Colgate and Fordham are good.
Holy Cross has Pujols. Georgerown is one team that didn't improve but walloped us last year. Bucknell isn't looking strong, yet.
Lafayette's weaknesses are glaring and everybody's going to attack them.
Drew made some great plays and the WRs are good. Can't throw all the time though.
Franks Tanks

bethlehempard wrote:
If you were to pick who might be the best in 10 years, in the best job, I would go with Phil Stambaugh.
Just getting a team on the field for Pius X was an accomplishment. Usually a good team in that weird cobbled-together conference.
Then last year, Notre Dame's league title only resulted from Pius transfers. It should have Pius X's name on the trophy.
NDGP was terrible before Pius (119 students in six grades) collapsed.
Now Notre Dame is Stambaugh's team. It's a challenge and he will meet it.
Based on the past two decades or so, Higgins and Lembo were the best. Frank had his moments but the best local teams were Higgins's teams.


Was talking college coaches, but Phil is a great coach, and would do well at the college level.
NLF

Probably not the best time to talk about a program enjoying ridiculous success, but how 'bout them Bison? NDSU beats FBS #13 Iowa. Good on them.
Kpard

Same old, same old
bethlehempard

Credit Paul Reinhard with asking about the go-for-two issue.
Does Tavani's comment make sense?

"We needed to have the ball back one more time," Tavani said about the closing minutes. Lafayette scored a touchdown with 5:27 left in the game and trailed by four.

Tavani said he thought about going for a two-point conversion to get within a field goal but decided that, no matter what, the thing his team needed was the ball.

? They needed the ball yes but that's pretty obvious. They were down. Going for 1 had nothing to do with getting the ball. Weird.

http://www.mcall.com/sports/colle...lege-football-20160917-story.html
pardfan

[quote="The Maroon:55801"]
NLF wrote:
Lafalum wrote:
Why didn't we go for 2. You don't get it and your still down two scores!!


Dumbfounded. How can you miss that?




Frank has forgotten how to win.  

 PU scored 40 last yr and 35 this year.  The difference:  Drew played waaay better. He completed pass after pass when the whole world knew we had no choice BUT to pass. While a crucial interception is still part of his landscape, the game was lost when we couldn't hold them before the end of the first half.  They went down the field like we weren't even there to tie the game.
Pards Rule

flyfisher wrote:
65Pard wrote:
flyfisher wrote:
Oh well, we played better. Scored a lot of points tonight. They teed off on us the 2nd half knowing we could not run the ball. I know many here hate that we run the ball at all but a good offense needs balance. Plus the defense gets less reps.


Fly
We will not get 2nd and short with our running game,  but the pass would more likely do it and put opposing D in a tougher spot.  For God's sake Drew completed over 75%! With a 9 yard average.

I am not disagreeing with you. Just saying we can't pass every down. We need some balance. This isnt flag football. Not being rude. Just have to develop some balance.


agreed! obviously Frank knows running is gonna be a major problem this year as last year. How does one address this with the current O line and RB portfolio. Stick in a frosh? Help?
Pards Rule

Franks Tanks wrote:
bethlehempard wrote:
If you were to pick who might be the best in 10 years, in the best job, I would go with Phil Stambaugh.
Just getting a team on the field for Pius X was an accomplishment. Usually a good team in that weird cobbled-together conference.
Then last year, Notre Dame's league title only resulted from Pius transfers. It should have Pius X's name on the trophy.
NDGP was terrible before Pius (119 students in six grades) collapsed.
Now Notre Dame is Stambaugh's team. It's a challenge and he will meet it.
Based on the past two decades or so, Higgins and Lembo were the best. Frank had his moments but the best local teams were Higgins's teams.


Was talking college coaches, but Phil is a great coach, and would do well at the college level.


Replacement for Fein??
Pards Rule

NLF wrote:
Probably not the best time to talk about a program enjoying ridiculous success, but how 'bout them Bison? NDSU beats FBS #13 Iowa. Good on them.


Yes my NDSU friend I met at Lafayette-NDSU in Fargo 5 years ago (BTW Wentz was a redshirt frosh in his first collegiate game on the bench that game) was texting me updates on that game.
seenalot

Sticking in a frosh if the frosh was a stud sitting on the bench like Marsh was, yeah, maybe.  Sticking in a frosh just for the sake of it makes little sense to me.  

Have no clue how to fix, but am pretty convinced that Stan Clayton falls more on the problem than the solution side of this equation, as we have all agreed kids don't really make a ton of progress under his coaching.
NewXbo

seenalot wrote:
Sticking in a frosh if the frosh was a stud sitting on the bench like Marsh was, yeah, maybe.  Sticking in a frosh just for the sake of it makes little sense to me.  

Have no clue how to fix, but am pretty convinced that Stan Clayton falls more on the problem than the solution side of this equation, as we have all agreed kids don't really make a ton of progress under his coaching.


I sat just behind the offensive line bench in last evenings game. I was surprised that Stan did not yell at the O linemen at all. Many times he didn't say a word to the O line when they came off the field. I'm not sure if they are trying a new approach or if they just gave up.
NE Leopard

seenalot wrote:
Sticking in a frosh if the frosh was a stud sitting on the bench like Marsh was, yeah, maybe.  Sticking in a frosh just for the sake of it makes little sense to me.  

Have no clue how to fix, but am pretty convinced that Stan Clayton falls more on the problem than the solution side of this equation, as we have all agreed kids don't really make a ton of progress under his coaching.


The current OLINE is more than capable. IMHO it has more to do with schemes and the actual offense we employ. Our backs can't operate in this offense, if we can't change up the backs short term, then change up the offense to compliment the talent we do have.

#26 was more effective as a slot, then being a featured RB. Line up in the I, put a blocking FB and run ISO and play action pass.
Lafalum

NE Leopard wrote:
seenalot wrote:
Sticking in a frosh if the frosh was a stud sitting on the bench like Marsh was, yeah, maybe.  Sticking in a frosh just for the sake of it makes little sense to me.  

Have no clue how to fix, but am pretty convinced that Stan Clayton falls more on the problem than the solution side of this equation, as we have all agreed kids don't really make a ton of progress under his coaching.


The current OLINE is more than capable. IMHO it has more to do with schemes and the actual offense we employ. Our backs can't operate in this offense, if we can't change up the backs short term, then change up the offense to compliment the talent we do have.

#26 was more effective as a slot, then being a featured RB. Line up in the I, put a blocking FB and run ISO and play action pass.


I like it, makes sense!!
seenalot

...but its not stubborn insistence on doing what we SHOULD do....never happen.
Pardsfriend

Princeton follow-up

Congratulations to the Tigers.

Having said that, I had a great seat near the field.  Game was ready for our execution to win.

I was last night, and continue to be perplexed that we continue to force a stretch run game against a small and scheme based defense.  We had the opportunity to run down hill from the very first snap.  Base blocking., man to man.  However, we continue to run stretch, slow developing runs against a small defense.  NELeopard understands this.  When your running horizontally, you give a quickness based defender time and space to shed blocks.   It was right in front of me last night.

 Late in third quarter, I felt momentum shift to PU .  On 3rd down, and one-half yard for first, we were late giving the play to Reed, near midfield.  We called pass, PU brings the house and we are stopped.  Timing and play coordination was problematic, to say the least.  We needed about two-feet to convert.

 On D, I thought we stayed in our base defense far too long.  On plays where we blitzed, or brought extra heat, PU was ineffective.  We will be better next week.

I thought Reed played very hard, and was determined to make plays.  Remember, he is playing the cards (plays and scheme) dealt to him.  He will surely have better days ahead.
Pards Rule

Lafalum wrote:
NE Leopard wrote:
seenalot wrote:
Sticking in a frosh if the frosh was a stud sitting on the bench like Marsh was, yeah, maybe.  Sticking in a frosh just for the sake of it makes little sense to me.  

Have no clue how to fix, but am pretty convinced that Stan Clayton falls more on the problem than the solution side of this equation, as we have all agreed kids don't really make a ton of progress under his coaching.


The current OLINE is more than capable. IMHO it has more to do with schemes and the actual offense we employ. Our backs can't operate in this offense, if we can't change up the backs short term, then change up the offense to compliment the talent we do have.

#26 was more effective as a slot, then being a featured RB. Line up in the I, put a blocking FB and run ISO and play action pass.


I like it, makes sense!!


THEN DO IT!! Jesus we have nothing to lose!! We have got to get traction for Nova, Army and W&M!!  PLEASE!
Pards Rule

How did we fall out of favor with Penn on schedule when they are still playing Lehigh? A victory for the Hawks at Franklin Field! I still recall our last minute Davis Rodriguez 29 yarder (as a frosh) to beat them 8-7 after they took the intentional safety in their end zone daring Davis to make it. I went out partying on Long Beach Island after the win! And that was the first in a string of Pard wins over the Quakers! I couldnt stand Bagnoli!
Andy

I have no luck with the Princeton game archive. Anyone get it to work?

http://livestream.com/lafayette/events/6226883

Ok, had to hit "update" tab.
Pards Rule

seenalot wrote:
Sticking in a frosh if the frosh was a stud sitting on the bench like Marsh was, yeah, maybe.  Sticking in a frosh just for the sake of it makes little sense to me.  

Have no clue how to fix, but am pretty convinced that Stan Clayton falls more on the problem than the solution side of this equation, as we have all agreed kids don't really make a ton of progress under his coaching.


Is there one? IDK
Pards Rule

Re: Princeton follow-up

Pardsfriend wrote:
Congratulations to the Tigers.

Having said that, I had a great seat near the field.  Game was ready for our execution to win.

I was last night, and continue to be perplexed that we continue to force a stretch run game against a small and scheme based defense.  We had the opportunity to run down hill from the very first snap.  Base blocking., man to man.  However, we continue to run stretch, slow developing runs against a small defense.  NELeopard understands this.  When your running horizontally, you give a quickness based defender time and space to shed blocks.   It was right in front of me last night.

 Late in third quarter, I felt momentum shift to PU .  On 3rd down, and one-half yard for first, we were late giving the play to Reed, near midfield.  We called pass, PU brings the house and we are stopped.  Timing and play coordination was problematic, to say the least.  We needed about two-feet to convert.

 On D, I thought we stayed in our base defense far too long.  On plays where we blitzed, or brought extra heat, PU was ineffective.  We will be better next week.

I thought Reed played very hard, and was determined to make plays.  Remember, he is playing the cards (plays and scheme) dealt to him.  He will surely have better days ahead.


Late inbound play was my eruption last week vs Delaware when we had a first down at the 11. Reed and number 12 were begging a call.
Pards Rule

bethlehempard wrote:
Credit Paul Reinhard with asking about the go-for-two issue.
Does Tavani's comment make sense?

"We needed to have the ball back one more time," Tavani said about the closing minutes. Lafayette scored a touchdown with 5:27 left in the game and trailed by four.

Tavani said he thought about going for a two-point conversion to get within a field goal but decided that, no matter what, the thing his team needed was the ball.

? They needed the ball yes but that's pretty obvious. They were down. Going for 1 had nothing to do with getting the ball. Weird.

http://www.mcall.com/sports/colle...lege-football-20160917-story.html



Its not mutually exclusive: you can go for the two and you need the ball back one last time. A 2 pointer takes what 5-10 seconds off the clock? If successful, the D is even more keyed up for a stop knowing 3 ties the game.
flyfisher

Little surprised we did not go for 2 there but maybe there is something I don't understand. doesn't matter now on to Villanova.
Pards Rule

flyfisher wrote:
Little surprised we did not go for 2 there but maybe there is something I don't understand. doesn't matter now on to Villanova.


Yep but better be better game mgmt there!
SixtyEighter

I agree with the 2 point analysis- if you get two and remain down by three you still need to get the ball again to tie but at least you wouldn't need a touch down to stay in the game. Not going for two leaves you down by 4 with no alternative but get 6 to go for the win instead of staying alive for OT. Saying you need the ball again is a non seqitur.
Bogus Megapardus

I just have my head in my hands after that one.  Couldn't run the ball; couldn't stop the run.  So many opportunities to win it, though.  Just one fumble or one interception back would have changed the game.

I agree that something really must be done about the OL situation.  By the same token, are the backs not seeing the seams?  Trying to run to the edge when they shouldn't?  Not being patient enough to allow the blocks to get set? I dunno.

It was a heckuva lot better than last season, though.
killaBee

Some game notes


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OYhz3nq0kys



On to Villanoa"

Gooooooo Leopardssssssss
bethlehempard

[quote="killaBee:55869"]Some game notes


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OYhz3nq0kys



On to Villanoa"

Gooooooo Leopardssssssss[/quote

killaBee don't get me wrong. I love your enthusiasm and insights and devotion. And yes Lafayette is better than last year; and we will never forget the horrible personal loss the team and school suffered before the season.

We continue to bring in great kids who represent the school well. Great kids.

But what the F at some point there has to be a change! For the sake of tradition, return on investment, pride, common sense, whatever!!!! This has to get better!

It's just that at some point this *#^#^ stuff has to get better!

Right now maybe Bucknell away looks like the best shot? I may have to go to Lewisburg.
killaBee

Lmao... Beth...

Your request are far beyond my reach..

I can only be as positive and supportive as I can, as a parent and fan..

I am a loyal person, and refuse to believe that on September 24th the Leopards don't have a chance to win against Villanova.

I see kids out there playing without a chip on their shoulder.
I have not seen opposing players on their backs.  I believe the kids need to be more aggressive and oppose their will on their opponents.  We need to deliver the blows instead of absorbing the blows.

We must become more aggressive.
Pards Rule

killaBee wrote:
Some game notes


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OYhz3nq0kys



On to Villanoa"

Gooooooo Leopardssssssss


I realized there are TWO Killabees!  BB and Beau Bosch!!
NewXbo

In today's LVL Tavani admits he should have gone for the 2.
flyfisher

killaBee wrote:
Lmao... Beth...

Your request are far beyond my reach..

I can only be as positive and supportive as I can, as a parent and fan..

I am a loyal person, and refuse to believe that on September 24th the Leopards don't have a chance to win against Villanova.

I see kids out there playing without a chip on their shoulder.
I have not seen opposing players on their backs.  I believe the kids need to be more aggressive and oppose their will on their opponents.  We need to deliver the blows instead of absorbing the blows.

We must become more aggressive.


Well said. I could probably add to this but maybe later. You're right Killa. Although this is just part of the equation.
LeopardBall10

flyfisher wrote:
Well said. I could probably add to this but maybe later. You're right Killa. Although this is just part of the equation.


Is this our kumbaya moment!?We could all give our takes on where the aggressiveness comes from. Is it the players jobs to be aggressive themselves? Is it coached aggression? Does aggression come from confidence and continued success, or play calling, etc. etc. But I don't think there is anyone on this board who would argue that we have some talent on this team but a lack of the killer instinct we all know and love about successful teams.
ed65

I don't know if we have a killer instinct but we have "killa bee" and no one else does!
killaBee

Lol.. thanks.. its not easy...

Gooooo leopardsssss.. beat down the wild kittenssss...
flyfisher

pardfan wrote:
a few decades ago they used to say that Bear Bryant only recruited high school fullbacks   Now, I know why.
Our OL looks so slooooow


they are not built to run through blocking scheme we use. lateral movement is not their strength. they are better than they show.

       Lafayette Sports Fan Forum Forum Index -> Football
Page 1 of 1
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum