Ohio Football Topic
Topic: Army QB UTM 60+ TD
Page: 1 of 1
mail
person
Bcat2
12/27/2016 2:24 PM
So there was an inventive play. Hope Albin was watching.
mail
person
GoCats105
12/27/2016 2:26 PM
Except Army's offense, and other triple option offenses around the country, are designed for that.
mail
person
BillyTheCat
12/27/2016 8:15 PM
GoCats105 wrote:expand_more
Except Army's offense, and other triple option offenses around the country, are designed for that.
Yeah, bcat has no clue on the basic differences, from line schemes to formations.
mail
person
Bcat2
12/27/2016 8:33 PM
BillyTheCat wrote:expand_more
Except Army's offense, and other triple option offenses around the country, are designed for that.
Yeah, bcat has no clue on the basic differences, from line schemes to formations.
Basically the option version of the Ohio QB draw UTM. Ohio already has it. Guess I was too subtle with a suggestion for more UTM. Should have added a :).
mail
person
BillyTheCat
12/27/2016 9:01 PM
Bcat2 wrote:expand_more
Except Army's offense, and other triple option offenses around the country, are designed for that.
Yeah, bcat has no clue on the basic differences, from line schemes to formations.
Basically the option version of the Ohio QB draw UTM. Ohio already has it. Guess I was too subtle with a suggestion for more UTM. Should have added a :).
Again, you have no clue
mail
person
Bcat2
12/27/2016 9:12 PM
BillyTheCat wrote:expand_more
Except Army's offense, and other triple option offenses around the country, are designed for that.
Yeah, bcat has no clue on the basic differences, from line schemes to formations.
Basically the option version of the Ohio QB draw UTM. Ohio already has it. Guess I was too subtle with a suggestion for more UTM. Should have added a :).
Again, you have no clue
You are too kind.
mail
person
allen
12/28/2016 1:49 AM
Bcat2 wrote:expand_more
Except Army's offense, and other triple option offenses around the country, are designed for that.
Yeah, bcat has no clue on the basic differences, from line schemes to formations.
Basically the option version of the Ohio QB draw UTM. Ohio already has it. Guess I was too subtle with a suggestion for more UTM. Should have added a :).
Again, you have no clue
You are too kind.

The defenses we play are too good for the triple option and we will never get a top notch qb running that offense. We can run some variations of it with an athletic QB, to keep a defense guessing and confuse their defensive line. the only way to win as a non power 5 is too run the spread, no FBS defense can cover 4 good wide receivers. That is why teams like bugs use to thrash us.
mail
person
Monroe Slavin
12/28/2016 2:44 AM
Please do not feed the Bcat2. It's best when he or she is ignored.

Give him or her time to absorb that we lost 3 of our last 4 this year, with the only win being a fine 9-3 performance over a terrific Akron squad.
mail
person
GoCats105
12/28/2016 7:16 AM
allen wrote:expand_more
Except Army's offense, and other triple option offenses around the country, are designed for that.
Yeah, bcat has no clue on the basic differences, from line schemes to formations.
Basically the option version of the Ohio QB draw UTM. Ohio already has it. Guess I was too subtle with a suggestion for more UTM. Should have added a :).
Again, you have no clue
You are too kind.

The defenses we play are too good for the triple option and we will never get a top notch qb running that offense. We can run some variations of it with an athletic QB, to keep a defense guessing and confuse their defensive line. the only way to win as a non power 5 is too run the spread, no FBS defense can cover 4 good wide receivers. That is why teams like bugs use to thrash us.
I'm gonna disagree with you on the defenses being too good. Navy has proven year after year you can consistently win with the triple option. Georgia Southern has their own version of it. Air Force is good. Georgia Tech won an Orange Bowl using it.

Would I like to see the triple option return to Athens? No. But it can work, in theory, on a consistent basis.
mail
OhioCatFan
12/28/2016 11:37 AM
Monroe Slavin wrote:expand_more
Please do not feed the Bcat2. It's best when he or she is ignored.

Give him or her time to absorb that we lost 3 of our last 4 this year, with the only win being a fine 9-3 performance over a terrific Akron squad.
Me thought you were always fact-based in your analysis. You've been informed by never wrong WikiBAleaks that bcat2 is a male; yet you continue to indicate his gender is unknown. So much for fact-based rhetoric. Little journalistic errors of this sort put into question your otherwise sterling reputation as our certified pigskin analyst.
mail
person
Monroe Slavin
12/28/2016 7:09 PM
I'll believe it when the Bcat2 himself or herself shows some grace and steps up and acknowledges.


Isn't it about time for the 2017 season prediction thread?
mail
bshot44
12/28/2016 10:06 PM
Monroe Slavin wrote:expand_more
I'll believe it when the Bcat2 himself or herself shows some grace and steps up and acknowledges.


Isn't it about time for the 2017 season prediction thread?
Allow me

Hampton W
Purdue L
Kansas W
UMass W
Kent W
Akron W
BG L
Miami L
UB W
MAC West W
MAC West L
MAC West L
Boring Bowl L

7-6 (4-4)
Showing Messages: 1 - 12 of 12
MAC News Links



extra small (< 576px)
small (>= 576px)
medium (>= 768px)
large (>= 992px)
x-large (>= 1200px)
xx-large (>= 1400px)