C Vereen and Lane

[volinbama256]

Did Corey Vereen play yesterday? Couldn't find him. Also, two costly fumbles already this season for Neal. He better sit and finally have Lane start IMO.

 

[ericberry4heisman]

He played. He had good pass rush for much of the game.

 

[SandoVOL]

Loved his pass rush, and still like lane better

 

[volinbama256]

Thanks- Had to watch game w bunch of AU and Bammerz and it was hard to catch certain players I wanted to keep an eye on.

 

[sjt18]

You can like Lane all you want. Neal is running better.

 

[babyavi]

You can like Lane all you want. Neal is running better.

No he is not. What games are you watching?

 

[keckjm]

You can like Lane all you want. Neal is running better.

No, not at all. Neal consistently misses holes. If lane were 100% healthy he would be getting 80% of the carriers.

 

[volinbama256]

You can like Lane all you want. Neal is running better.

And fumbling better... Which gives your opponent the ball....

 

[TennesseeOrange]

That fumble wasn't Rajions fault. He's better than Lane, and definitely was yesterday.

 

[Biopsyman]

If Vereen gives up a pass rush... Exciting

 

[fatvol]

You can like Lane all you want. Neal is running better.

Yea. Running the running game into the ground.

 

[Section KK]

That fumble wasn't Rajions fault. He's better than Lane, and definitely was yesterday.

Agree not Rajion's fault ..

That fumble may have cost the game... If Peterman reads the defense correctly, he keeps, runs left, and possibly scores. I imagine Neal expected no handoff, which in part, led to the fumble. If Peterman runs and scores a touchdown, then pick 6, then we're up 14, maybe he settles in and plays better.

All 4 first quarter turnovers are squarely on Peterman, and the game was obviously moving way too fast for him by the time he threw that ridiculous 2nd INT.

 

[sonofUT62]

Lane I'd more physical, and more decisive. If he were healthy and getting more carries, this wouldn't even be a discussion.

 

[TennesseeOrange]

Agree not Rajion's fault ..

That fumble may have cost the game... If Peterman reads the defense correctly, he keeps, runs left, and possibly scores. I imagine Neal expected no handoff, which in part, led to the fumble. If Peterman runs and scores a touchdown, then pick 6, then we're up 14, maybe he settles in and plays better.

All 4 first quarter turnovers are squarely on Peterman, and the game was obviously moving way too fast for him by the time he threw that ridiculous 2nd INT.

They showed a close up view of the exchange during the game, and it looked to me like Peterman tried to pull the ball out too late and caused the fumble. I'd have to see it again to be positive though. That turnover didn't technically cost us anything, but the two INT's killed us.