We are legit

hotrod2001 · Unread post by **hotrod2001** » Sat Oct 24, 2015 1:59 pm

51-0 with still 11 minutes to go. We officially did better against Clemson than Miami.

bigdaddyg · Unread post by **bigdaddyg** » Sat Oct 24, 2015 2:11 pm

Can Miami really be this bad?

appbio91 · Unread post by **appbio91** » Sat Oct 24, 2015 2:12 pm

Clemson won and went down in the pole last week. They have a chip on their shoulder this week. Not watching but assume they did not remove starters at the beginning of the 3rd. If they wanted to make a statement against App they could have.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk

hapapp · Unread post by **hapapp** » Sat Oct 24, 2015 2:12 pm

HeffnerIV wrote:Memphis is a really good team, but their D is awful. They gave up 42 to a bad Tulsa team who Monroe played tight.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Tulsa is bad but not of the offensive side of the ball. Their QB has thrown for over 2500 yards this year and they average 35 points a game. They just give up a ton.

hotrod2001 · Unread post by **hotrod2001** » Sat Oct 24, 2015 2:14 pm

They just scored again with their third stringer...apparently they are.

AppSt94 · Unread post by **AppSt94** » Sat Oct 24, 2015 4:28 pm

HeffnerIV wrote:Memphis is a really good team, but their D is awful. They gave up 42 to a bad Tulsa team who Monroe played tight.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This statement affirms my point. They can't truly be a good team of their defense is awful.

spong · Unread post by **spong** » Sat Oct 24, 2015 4:39 pm

Toledo is loosing right now to 1 win UMass. Yes that UMass. The team so bad their conference kicked them out.

If Toledo doesn't stage a pretty nice comeback that's one less team between us and a New Years Bowl.

hapapp · Unread post by **hapapp** » Sat Oct 24, 2015 5:35 pm

AppSt94 wrote:
HeffnerIV wrote:Memphis is a really good team, but their D is awful. They gave up 42 to a bad Tulsa team who Monroe played tight.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
This statement affirms my point. They can't truly be a good team of their defense is awful.

They are good enough to this point to be undefeated.

HeffnerIV · Unread post by **HeffnerIV** » Sat Oct 24, 2015 5:59 pm

hapapp wrote:
AppSt94 wrote:
HeffnerIV wrote:Memphis is a really good team, but their D is awful. They gave up 42 to a bad Tulsa team who Monroe played tight.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
This statement affirms my point. They can't truly be a good team of their defense is awful.
They are good enough to this point to be undefeated.

Yes, they are undefeated, but you can't argue that their D isn't bad. Their O has just been good enough to overcome it.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

appbio91 · Unread post by **appbio91** » Sat Oct 24, 2015 6:46 pm

Two things were clear to me Thursday. 1) Cox is an athlete (he is generating AE type buzz, he is the player everyone knows and comes to see). Forget what qtr but Lamb threw him a pass around the GaSo 30 on the west side. Bad throw, Cox turned his body full stride changed direction and made the catch. In Lamb's defense he put it where nobody but Cox could catch and he made a play. 2) Moore is a baller. We get him for three more, the future is bright. Right now a Sun Belt conference championship is this team's focus. Bowl eligibility crap behind us ball out and let the chips fall where they will. GO APP!!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk

EastHallApp · Unread post by **EastHallApp** » Sat Oct 24, 2015 11:33 pm

It's all about the bottom line. Memphis not only has the best win of any G5 team this year, they've also beaten two of the top 15 or so G5s in Bowling Green and Cincinnati. Fair to point to their defense as a question mark, but you can't say they aren't a good team.

HeffnerIV · Unread post by **HeffnerIV** » Sun Oct 25, 2015 12:25 am

I never did and I don't believe they're not.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

bigdaddyg · Unread post by **bigdaddyg** » Sun Oct 25, 2015 6:48 am

If we take care of our remaining business we will no doubt finish the season among the top 50 (at least) teams in the country. Heck, I can name a handful of P5's we could probably take on and beat- BC, Wake, Kansas, KState, Purdue, Oregon St, Colorado. I am sold on Clemson. They are loaded and deep. We slugged it out with them and the turnovers killed us. They didn't just stomp on us like they did to Miami yesterday.

ashugh · Unread post by **ashugh** » Sun Oct 25, 2015 6:59 am

Duke would probably beat us. But noboy else in the state scares me. State sucks, Heels suck so bad they can barely beat UVA, ECU sucks and Wake is the worst of that group. I would love to see App and Duke on a neutral field.
Everybody's entitled to their opinion and mine happens to be that we could possibly be the best team in the state. Had a big time donor to State tell me the exact same thing Friday. People are taking notice weather the media has caught on or not.

bigdaddyg · Unread post by **bigdaddyg** » Sun Oct 25, 2015 7:16 am

I tend to agree that we would play State, UNC and ECU tough and have a good shot at beating them. I was somewhat impressed at what State did to South Alabama but now I see how bad they are. The Sunbelt bottom feeders are FCS like horrific- or are we just really good and truly top 40-50 and in a place we have never really known before? It is really hard to gauge teams like Duke and the second tier P5's. Going from top FCS to growing in strength G5 really shows how much difference the added scholarships and overall talent level really matters. I really have an appreciation for what we accomplished with 65 scholarship players, a handful of which were FBS level and the remainder who just played their tails off. I'll say it again. We are legit. Being a Panther fan as well I can say it feels great to have my teams at 11-1! Go Apps and go Panthers.

T-Dog · Unread post by **T-Dog** » Sun Oct 25, 2015 7:29 am

The advantage App has over other Sun Belt teams like LOS dominance and physicality would be leveled out against ACC teams who get bigger players. Satt would have to get a bit more creative with the play-calling than just driving with outside zone stretch plays.

In a one-off game against Chapel Hill and NC State, App would have a decent chance while Wake could be a blow out win and Duke would be really tough. ECU would probably be the second toughest game.

EastHallApp · Unread post by **EastHallApp** » Sun Oct 25, 2015 11:20 pm

Duke has not beaten a team with a .500 or better record all year, and two of their wins came by 2 points each.

They'd be tough for App of course, but far from unbeatable. I don't think they're better than UNC, and I don't think they're that much better than State or ECU.

bigdaddyg · Unread post by **bigdaddyg** » Mon Oct 26, 2015 7:54 am

Looked back over our games this year. Howard- no points in the 4th quarter (could have easily been over 60), ODU (same as Howard), Wyoming (pouring rain, we know that deal), Georgia State (took the foot off the pedal, could have scored 50 at least), GSU (took a knee at the end, a TD puts us over 40), LMU (59 points, enough said). I guess my point is that if we needed more impressive style points we could have easily gotten them.

hapapp · Unread post by **hapapp** » Mon Oct 26, 2015 11:23 am

I thought we had 31 against Ga Southern?

bigdaddyg · Unread post by **bigdaddyg** » Mon Oct 26, 2015 11:50 am

bigdaddyg wrote:Looked back over our games this year. Howard- no points in the 4th quarter (could have easily been over 60), ODU (same as Howard), Wyoming (pouring rain, we know that deal), Georgia State (took the foot off the pedal, could have scored 50 at least), GSU (took a knee at the end, a TD puts us over 40), LMU (59 points, enough said). I guess my point is that if we needed more impressive style points we could have easily gotten them.

I had 38 against GSU in my head.

We are legit

Re: We are legit

Re: We are legit

Re: We are legit

Re: We are legit

Re: We are legit

Re: We are legit

Re: We are legit

Re: We are legit

We are legit

Re: We are legit

Re: We are legit

Re: We are legit

Re: We are legit

Re: We are legit

Re: We are legit

Re: We are legit

Re: We are legit

Re: We are legit

Re: We are legit

Re: We are legit

Login • Register