Watching TCU....

#51
#51
tvols75 said:
Yeah, that UCLA team was loaded with NFL talent, especially that amazing QB.

So pretty much, you have:

1. Bragged about Kiffin being a head coach while also saying Al Davis controlled the team. Also said that Al Davis was a moron, which would give us the reason why he hired Kiffin.

2. Bragged about Kiffin orchestrating the USC offense, but forgetting that key point of Sarkisian being the OC as well.

3. Bashed Dooley for losing to UNC and UGA while defending Kiffin's losses to UCLA and a beatdown by Ole Miss.

And you wonder why people do not take your seriously?
Click to expand...

I don't care how people here take me. I'm not here to make friends or get e-cred points.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#52
#52
SGMVols said:
I don't care how people here take me. I'm not here to make friends or get e-cred points.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

You're obviously not here to make logical points as you have still not told us what was on Kiffin's resume outside of a moron hiring him (a guy that you said death was good for the Raiders because of his decision making), and not having control of an offense.
 
#53
#53
SGMVols said:
10-3, same difference. Do all 10 of those coaches automatically suck for losing to that team because JMU beat them?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

No, it's clear that with you, the only way to for someone to suck by losing a game is if Derek Dooley is the coach.

Shockingly, that Virginia Tech team whose greatness you continually espouse and who absolute beat the doors off your hero lost to the ACC version of UK in 2009. UNC beat them 20-17. So, let's go back to your analogy with Dooley: Dooley sucks because he lost to them in Nashville.

HOwever, Kiffin is the greatest coach to ever live when he was absolutely annihilated by a team that lost to UNC.

Your logic is so impressive.
 
#55
#55
SGMVols said:
Better than the Georgia team that handed Doofus his ass in 2010.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Georgia's 6 and 7 >>> UCLA 7-6. Georgia atleast, with the exception of colorado, lost that were in the top 25 and/or played in and won new years day bowl games. Ucla lost to teams who lost in bowl games such as the las vegas bowl.
 
#56
#56
LawVol13 said:
Great point. Because we know that Kiffin would have stomped UGA with an all-freshman offensive line, Matt Simms, and Tauren Poole at running back. Also, he would have dominated without Dan Williams and Eric Berry defensively. That's just a given, right SGM? Oh wait, it's not. What is a given is that you have your entire head up Lane Kiffin's ass.
Click to expand...

Good one LV but quit wasting your time. SGM thrives off the attention that he gets from his lost love of Kiffy. It is pathetic and has run its course. Kiffin NFL experience lol.
 
#57
#57
Kiffin losing five games last year with by far the most talented team in his conference is a much bigger disgrace than anything on Derek Dooley's thin resume.
 
#58
#58
Vercingetorix said:
Kiffin losing five games last year with by far the most talented team in his conference is a much bigger disgrace than anything on Derek Dooley's thin resume.
Click to expand...

I was very impressed with his 18-16 victory over a Minnesota team that was beaten 58-0 the following week. That's coaching at its finest.
 
#59
#59
Vercingetorix said:
Kiffin losing five games last year with by far the most talented team in his conference is a much bigger disgrace than anything on Derek Dooley's thin resume.
Click to expand...

Blasphemy. Just look at all the attrition and lack of talen....oh, hold on. That excuse doesn't fly.
 
#60
#60
lylsmorr said:
Blasphemy. Just look at all the attrition and lack of talen....oh, hold on. That excuse doesn't fly.
Click to expand...

Of course it does. But only for Lane Kiffin. Attrition numbers, lack of talent, youth, and injury issues can not ever be used as an excuse for Derek Dooley.
 
#61
#61
Recruiting rankings, according to Rivals:

2007 USC #2, Stanford not in top 50
2008 USC #8, Stanford #50
2009 USC #4, Stanford #20
2010 USC #1, Stanford #26
2011 USC #4, Stanford #22

So big blowout tomorrow night for USC, right? Home game, NFL-quality coaches, players that are a couple orders of magnitude more talented. No excuses.
 
#62
#62
Vercingetorix said:
Recruiting rankings, according to Rivals:

2007 USC #2, Stanford not in top 50
2008 USC #8, Stanford #50
2009 USC #4, Stanford #20
2010 USC #1, Stanford #26
2011 USC #4, Stanford #22

So big blowout tomorrow night for USC, right? Home game, NFL-quality coaches, players that are two or three orders of magnitude more talented. No excuses.
Click to expand...

If they lose, SGM will claim they're decimated by injuries, attrition, and the NCAA sanctions. He'll add that Kiffin is doing a miraculous job just keeping them competitive. Either that, or he'll be a pussy and not post anything. Come to think of it, I think he'll choose option 2.
 
#64
#64
LawVol13 said:
If they lose, SGM will claim they're decimated by injuries, attrition, and the NCAA sanctions. He'll add that Kiffin is doing a miraculous job just keeping them competitive. Either that, or he'll be a pussy and not post anything. Come to think of it, I think he'll choose option 2.
Click to expand...

Kiffin is basically playing with Alabama players in a league where everybody else has Ole Miss talent. There's no excuse for him not to be blowing almost everybody on his schedule out.
 
#65
#65
Vercingetorix said:
Kiffin is basically playing with Alabama players in a league where everybody else has Ole Miss talent. There's no excuse for him not to be blowing almost everybody on his schedule out.
Click to expand...

I agree completely. They're really kind of a middle of the pack Pac-12 program right now.
 
#66
#66
When he left here, I would have given Kiffin the same grade of incomplete that I currently give Dooley, but with the qualification that I was impressed with how he held the team together and the way he handled and developed Crompton. I would have said at the time, yeah, that guy's going to be a good coach. But then A) Kiffin has gone on to field a completely mediocre, halfassing team at USC despite having overwhelming talent, and B) La Tech's own Derek Dooley came into Knoxville and had basically the same season Kiffin had despite having a significantly less talented team. There's no reason to be impressed at all with Kiffin anymore.
 
#68
#68
I despise Kiffin, but the one thing he had that Dooley didn't, was Monte Kiffin. Say what you will about his defenses at the college level, but Monte was considered a defensive genius in the NFL. I remember reading somewhere at the time that Lane's deal was contingent on Monte coming with him. So yes, Lane hadn't proven much himself, but Monte had proven quite a bit. They both also had the appeal of having coached in the league, and they sold guys on that. In no way do I feel Kiffin is a better coach than Dooley, but if we had hired Dooley at the time over the Kiffins, people would have rioted in the streets. I know many on here do not like SGM, but in this case, he has a point. Let's not kid ourselves that we would have been happy to see Dooley succeed Fulmer, at that time. Many weren't happy to see him succeed Kiffin, but Fulmer? That arguement does not fly.
 
#70
#70
Weezer said:
I despise Kiffin, but the one thing he had that Dooley didn't, was Monte Kiffin. Say what you will about his defenses at the college level, but Monte was considered a defensive genius in the NFL. I remember reading somewhere at the time that Lane's deal was contingent on Monte coming with him. So yes, Lane hadn't proven much himself, but Monte had proven quite a bit. They both also had the appeal of having coached in the league, and they sold guys on that. In no way do I feel Kiffin is a better coach than Dooley, but if we had hired Dooley at the time over the Kiffins, people would have rioted in the streets. I know many on here do not like SGM, but in this case, he has a point. Let's not kid ourselves that we would have been happy to see Dooley succeed Fulmer, at that time. Many weren't happy to see him succeed Kiffin, but Fulmer? That arguement does not fly.
Click to expand...

What point does SGM make? That kiffin isn't crap without his daddy? That's basically what you are saying. SGM's only point is to degrade our coach. Dissenting opinions are welcome but one must be able to substantiate. SGM does nothing but berate our coach and our team. He's nothing but a dull tool.
 
#71
#71
KoachKletus said:
What point does SGM make? That kiffin isn't crap without his daddy? That's basically what you are saying. SGM's only point is to degrade our coach. Dissenting opinions are welcome but one must be able to substantiate. SGM does nothing but berate our coach and our team. He's nothing but a dull tool.
Click to expand...

If you want me to stop "berating" Dooley, then maybe he should beat someone worth a damn for once.

Hint: tonight may be a chance to finally do that. On the other hand, if he loses to a South Carolina team at home that is down to their waterboys at RB, the criticism will only intensify, and not just from me.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#73
#73
thestrip said:
SGM, how would you grade Kiffin so far at USC? just curious
Click to expand...

6-1 start to the season is pretty good. They had Stanford on the ropes last year so it will be interesting to see how the rematch goes. I haven't seen them play enough to really grade them though.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#74
#74
SGMVols said:
If you want me to stop "berating" Dooley, then maybe he should beat someone worth a damn for once.

Hint: tonight may be a chance to finally do that. On the other hand, if he loses to a South Carolina team at home that is down to their waterboys at RB, the criticism will only intensify, and not just from me.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Let the criticism intensify. You do understand that we are playing yet another ranked team? IIRC, SC was ranked in the pre-season - and they are still ranked. So, just because they are down to "waterboy" at running back, what does it mean that we are using our 3rd at depth red shirt freshman QB? Does it make a difference whom the coach is after coming off a brutal schedule, playing the number 1, then number 2, now number 14th ranked team in the country?
 
#75
#75
KoachKletus said:
Let the criticism intensify. You do understand that we are playing yet another ranked team? IIRC, SC was ranked in the pre-season - and they are still ranked. So, just because they are down to "waterboy" at running back, what does it mean that we are using our 3rd at depth red shirt freshman QB? Does it make a difference whom the coach is after coming off a brutal schedule, playing the number 1, then number 2, now number 14th ranked team in the country?
Click to expand...

I can't help you if you're dumb enough to think South Carolina is among the 15 best teams in the country sans Lattimore.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top