Tiger Board Logo

Donor's Den General Leaderboards TNET coins™ POTD Hall of Fame Map FAQ
GIVE AN AWARD
Use your TNET coins™ to grant this post a special award!

W
50
Big Brain
90
Love it!
100
Cheers
100
Helpful
100
Made Me Smile
100
Great Idea!
150
Mind Blown
150
Caring
200
Flammable
200
Hear ye, hear ye
200
Bravo
250
Nom Nom Nom
250
Take My Coins
500
Ooo, Shiny!
700
Treasured Post!
1000

YOUR BALANCE
Front Page Story: Tiger Tidbits - Georgia Tech Edition
storage This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic
Replies: 11
| visibility 2,006

Front Page Story: Tiger Tidbits - Georgia Tech Edition


Oct 3, 2012, 12:56 PM

 
Tiger Tidbits - Georgia Tech Edition

In the latest edition of Tiger Tidbits, we talk about the Tajh Boyd's leadership, BC's O-line, GameDay at Clemson, and more Full Story »


flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Did I actually read this right?


Oct 3, 2012, 1:35 PM

That the BC offensive line was "soft" and struggled "all day" against our beleagured D line? Really?

Looked like BC was going up and down the field against us pretty good there partner, esp in the first half. Unless this whole comment is just an acknowledgement that we decided not to give full effort until the second half. Which is a worse indictment. So I want to know what D lineman made such statements. This is downright arrogant - with where we're at as a D line.

And our D line is described as "beleaguered"? You mean we have injuries? This article is a real laugher, and I expected better.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Did I actually read this right?


Oct 3, 2012, 2:21 PM

You really read it right there, partner. BC moved the ball, but it was more because of breakdowns in the secondary and lack of coverage than it was because of the defensive line. Boston College ran it 28 times for 51 yards - credit the defensive line and especially d-tackles for that stat. And the BC QB was sacked three times and hit several others...yeah, I would say the DL had a pretty good day. The secondary just didn't help out on some big plays. And beleaguered has nothing do with injuries - it means beset with difficulties. And Clemson's d-line has been beset by difficulties in a major way.

badge-seniorwriter.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Another angle then, and if this doesn't take, oh well


Oct 3, 2012, 4:08 PM

A beleagered line hints of either injury or some other happenstance, however they have none of this - maybe youth, maybe something else. I would call them "maligned" if anything. Main point is, I don't think any of our D linemen, based on their performance so far, has any business talking about the softness of another team's O line. How many times did they get to the BC quarterback or pressure him? I didn't see a whole lot. Saying they did great but it was the D backs played lousy - I think that's an oversimplification and finger pointing. Everythinig is team, team, and elements must work togeteher. They've got a long ways to go before calling out antoher team's O line. I'd be furious if I was their coach.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Another angle then, and if this doesn't take, oh well


Oct 3, 2012, 4:14 PM

Much-maligned might be a better term, but David is right in using beleagured, too. Their combination of youth and inexperience coupled with a new coordinator/system would present some obstacles for them to overcome. As for the success the d-line had, I agree 100% (10% wouldn't be very much, would it?) with David. Ask Rettig if he was sore on Sunday morning from the beating he took. I give Rettig credit; he stood in there and took several hard shots to complete passes. Fact is, their receivers were wide freaking open most of the day. So yes, the DBs didn't play as well as the DL. Not until Garry Peters got in the game, anyway. It's no surprise Garry is starting this week. Our secondary was much better with him in the game.


Message was edited by: David78®


2024 white level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up




The definition of awesome!


From dictionary.com...


Oct 3, 2012, 7:08 PM [ in reply to Another angle then, and if this doesn't take, oh well ]

"to surround or beset, as with troubles."

Reading Tnet this season, I'd have to say that's a pretty good description.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

"Dabo crushed my soul." --- Classof09


"best Boston accent"


Oct 3, 2012, 1:47 PM

no such thing.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Couldn't agree more. The New England accent is horrible***


Oct 3, 2012, 2:45 PM



2024 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: "best Boston accent"


Oct 3, 2012, 3:23 PM [ in reply to "best Boston accent" ]

If she was pretty, it was the "best Boston accent". A pretty girl makes any accent attractive. I assume women feel the same thing about a good looking man with an accent.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: "best Boston accent"


Oct 3, 2012, 4:17 PM

A pretty security guard working stadium security? Not a high probability.

2024 white level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up




The definition of awesome!


Re: "best Boston accent"


Oct 3, 2012, 6:32 PM

I enjoy these 'tidbits' David. Keep up the good work.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Front Page Story: Tiger Tidbits - Georgia Tech Edition


Oct 3, 2012, 9:34 PM

David....Couldn't agree with you more that BC is a great road trip for CU fans just because it's in historic Boston....We were there for the OT loss in 2006....Great CU crowd for that game....However the tailgate situation there was subpar....Has it gotten any better?

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Replies: 11
| visibility 2,006
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic