Looking at the 2014 schedule...

[RiDLer80]

As bad as the Florida offense was they still put up a season-high 400+ yards on us. Some turnovers were forced, others weren't. But Florida still moved the ball on us, and we were able to pull the train horn in the red zone and get some stops.

 

[TedHendricksOffspring]

As bad as the Florida offense was they still put up a season-high 400+ yards on us. Some turnovers were forced, others weren't. But Florida still moved the ball on us, and we were able to pull the train horn in the red zone and get some stops.

And that's where the exposure of both Pease and D'Onofrio is. Florida was able to move the ball the best they could all season but still couldn't convert.

The stoppable offense meeting the movable defense.

 

[Cane Dynasty]

As bad as the Florida offense was they still put up a season-high 400+ yards on us. Some turnovers were forced, others weren't. But Florida still moved the ball on us, and we were able to pull the train horn in the red zone and get some stops.

And that's where the exposure of both Pease and D'Onofrio is. Florida was able to move the ball the best they could all season but still couldn't convert.

The stoppable offense meeting the movable defense.

That's Pulitzer stuff right there.

 

[Waffle Honcho]

We can start 5-0 just as easily as we can start 2-3.

I dont know how anyone their right mind can spin anything positively. Did you guys miss those Duke Va Tech and Louisville games?

You know the end of our season....?

Total choke **** job.

1-22 Goldens record against DECENT TEAMS.

You realize Golden is 22-15 at Miami? You seriously cannot be including what he did at Temple in those numbers. Please define "decent team" while you're at it.

I think the criteria that people have used for, "decent teams," in this regard are teams that lost 5 games or less in the entire season and they are including Golden's tenure at Temple.

That's pretty arbitrary criteria. Figures the mope squad would judge a team's decency by the number of losses they have at the end of the season. I've never heard of judging a team by how many losses they had, but I guess when you're that god**** negative all day that's all you think about. Also ridiculous to include Temple's numbers in there.

 

[TedHendricksOffspring]

As bad as the Florida offense was they still put up a season-high 400+ yards on us. Some turnovers were forced, others weren't. But Florida still moved the ball on us, and we were able to pull the train horn in the red zone and get some stops.

And that's where the exposure of both Pease and D'Onofrio is. Florida was able to move the ball the best they could all season but still couldn't convert.

The stoppable offense meeting the movable defense.

That's Pulitzer stuff right there.

Haha. Thanks. I appreciate it.

 

[TedHendricksOffspring]

We can start 5-0 just as easily as we can start 2-3.

I dont know how anyone their right mind can spin anything positively. Did you guys miss those Duke Va Tech and Louisville games?

You know the end of our season....?

Total choke **** job.

1-22 Goldens record against DECENT TEAMS.

You realize Golden is 22-15 at Miami? You seriously cannot be including what he did at Temple in those numbers. Please define "decent team" while you're at it.

I think the criteria that people have used for, "decent teams," in this regard are teams that lost 5 games or less in the entire season and they are including Golden's tenure at Temple.

That's pretty arbitrary criteria. Figures the mope squad would judge a team's decency by the number of losses they have at the end of the season. I've never heard of judging a team by how many losses they had, but I guess when you're that god**** negative all day that's all you think about. Also ridiculous to include Temple's numbers in there.

Meh. The, "Golden Slurpers," bring up Golden's Temple resume just as often as the, "Mope Squad," does to justify their points. Some say it shows that he's a miracle worker and some say it shows that he's grossly overrated. That's really a judgment call.

I'm not really sure how a team's loss total isn't a good indicator of their overall quality if wins are. There are exceptions like this year's Florida team where the final record isn't indicative of their level but that is rare. The argument of wins-losses all hinges on the opponents played and the eye test of on field performance to me. I'd rather win close against a Georgia Tech with near flawless football than blowout a Savannah State with mistakes all over the field. But that's just me. In the long run, I agree with you that criteria varies from person to person based on their own preferences.

 

[Waffle Honcho]

We can start 5-0 just as easily as we can start 2-3.

I dont know how anyone their right mind can spin anything positively. Did you guys miss those Duke Va Tech and Louisville games?

You know the end of our season....?

Total choke **** job.

1-22 Goldens record against DECENT TEAMS.

You realize Golden is 22-15 at Miami? You seriously cannot be including what he did at Temple in those numbers. Please define "decent team" while you're at it.

I think the criteria that people have used for, "decent teams," in this regard are teams that lost 5 games or less in the entire season and they are including Golden's tenure at Temple.

That's pretty arbitrary criteria. Figures the mope squad would judge a team's decency by the number of losses they have at the end of the season. I've never heard of judging a team by how many losses they had, but I guess when you're that god**** negative all day that's all you think about. Also ridiculous to include Temple's numbers in there.

Meh. The, "Golden Slurpers," bring up Golden's Temple resume just as often as the, "Mope Squad," does to justify their points. Some say it shows that he's a miracle worker and some say it shows that he's grossly overrated. That's really a judgment call.

I'm not really sure how a team's loss total isn't a good indicator of their overall quality if wins are. There are exceptions like this year's Florida team where the final record isn't indicative of their level but that is rare. The argument of wins-losses all hinges on the opponents played and the eye test of on field performance to me. I'd rather win close against a Georgia Tech with near flawless football than blowout a Savannah State with mistakes all over the field. But that's just me. In the long run, I agree with you that criteria varies from person to person based on their own preferences.

It's just a backwards way of thinking. You don't become bowl-eligible based on the number of losses you don't have. It would diminish a team that was 8-4 or 7-5 at the end of the regular season but then lost the conference championship game and bowl game. So now that team that had a respectable 8-4 season now finished 8-6 and is no longer a "decent team".

I agree wholeheartedly in the "eye test". When people say that Florida team we beat last year wasn't decent because of their final record it's just retarded. And North Carolina who went 6-1 (the one loss being a 2 point loss to Duke) after we beat them in a Thursday night game on the road, likely a preseason top 20 as a result...they wouldn't be considered decent either.

 

[Cane Dynasty]

You realize Golden is 22-15 at Miami? You seriously cannot be including what he did at Temple in those numbers. Please define "decent team" while you're at it.

I think the criteria that people have used for, "decent teams," in this regard are teams that lost 5 games or less in the entire season and they are including Golden's tenure at Temple.

That's pretty arbitrary criteria. Figures the mope squad would judge a team's decency by the number of losses they have at the end of the season. I've never heard of judging a team by how many losses they had, but I guess when you're that god**** negative all day that's all you think about. Also ridiculous to include Temple's numbers in there.

Meh. The, "Golden Slurpers," bring up Golden's Temple resume just as often as the, "Mope Squad," does to justify their points. Some say it shows that he's a miracle worker and some say it shows that he's grossly overrated. That's really a judgment call.

I'm not really sure how a team's loss total isn't a good indicator of their overall quality if wins are. There are exceptions like this year's Florida team where the final record isn't indicative of their level but that is rare. The argument of wins-losses all hinges on the opponents played and the eye test of on field performance to me. I'd rather win close against a Georgia Tech with near flawless football than blowout a Savannah State with mistakes all over the field. But that's just me. In the long run, I agree with you that criteria varies from person to person based on their own preferences.

It's just a backwards way of thinking. You don't become bowl-eligible based on the number of losses you don't have. It would diminish a team that was 8-4 or 7-5 at the end of the regular season but then lost the conference championship game and bowl game. So now that team that had a respectable 8-4 season now finished 8-6 and is no longer a "decent team".

I agree wholeheartedly in the "eye test". When people say that Florida team we beat last year wasn't decent because of their final record it's just retarded. And North Carolina who went 6-1 (the one loss being a 2 point loss to Duke) after we beat them in a Thursday night game on the road, likely a preseason top 20 as a result...they wouldn't be considered decent either.

Fair enough.

Tell us, who are the 'decent' teams that a Dorito Golden led team has beaten? (Intramurals don't count)

 

[poncho0091]

As bad as the Florida offense was they still put up a season-high 400+ yards on us. Some turnovers were forced, others weren't. But Florida still moved the ball on us, and we were able to pull the train horn in the red zone and get some stops.

And that's where the exposure of both Pease and D'Onofrio is. Florida was able to move the ball the best they could all season but still couldn't convert.

The stoppable offense meeting the movable defense.

This actually made me laugh.

 

[poncho0091]

There are 3 things to consider when discussing whether or not Florida was a "decent" team. I truly believed before the Florida game that they were a 4-5 loss team at minimum before the season started. I felt like LSU, UGA, Scar, and FSU were locks for losses for them. We were the toss up game imo.

Consideration 1. Their defense was elite.... before the injuries. Their defense alone was going to keep them in nearly every game imo and was easily one of the best in college football. Problem is consideration #2.

Consideration 2. Their offense was horrible and Driskel sucks. What would you say about a team if I told you all they did on offense was run the ball? In my eyes they better be **** good at it, like Wisconsin maybe. The problem is they don't have a good run game and they don't have a good passing game if they needed to be bailed out. That offense is one of the worst offenses of a top tier team I've seen in some time. Every defense literally has to just stack the box and then if take the chance Driskel passes which leaves a good chance of him throwing a pick anyways. Dnofrio honestly didn't even have to game plan. All he had to do was say everyone get in the box and then DB's just sat back and waited for the occasional pass (which they had a season high on us I believe). As elite as their defense was, their offense was equally bad. Their elite defense could have beaten us with as many mistakes as we make on offense only if their offense didn't make more mistakes.

Consideration 3. The deciding factor for me. I don't give a **** how many injuries they had. A top tier BCS team in the best conference has no business losing to Ga Southern. It's one thing if we are talking about UVA, WF, Kentucky, etc, but we are talking about Florida. This tells me already they were not that good of a team and just as bad, they had no depth.

That Florida team was just above average and that's only because of their defense, but no matter how you want to look at it, they weren't going anywhere with that offense.

 

[Waffle Honcho]

There are 3 things to consider when discussing whether or not Florida was a "decent" team. I truly believed before the Florida game that they were a 4-5 loss team at minimum before the season started. I felt like LSU, UGA, Scar, and FSU were locks for losses for them. We were the toss up game imo.

Consideration 1. Their defense was elite.... before the injuries. Their defense alone was going to keep them in nearly every game imo and was easily one of the best in college football. Problem is consideration #2.

Consideration 2. Their offense was horrible and Driskel sucks. What would you say about a team if I told you all they did on offense was run the ball? In my eyes they better be **** good at it, like Wisconsin maybe. The problem is they don't have a good run game and they don't have a good passing game if they needed to be bailed out. That offense is one of the worst offenses of a top tier team I've seen in some time. Every defense literally has to just stack the box and then if take the chance Driskel passes which leaves a good chance of him throwing a pick anyways. Dnofrio honestly didn't even have to game plan. All he had to do was say everyone get in the box and then DB's just sat back and waited for the occasional pass (which they had a season high on us I believe). As elite as their defense was, their offense was equally bad. Their elite defense could have beaten us with as many mistakes as we make on offense only if their offense didn't make more mistakes.

Consideration 3. The deciding factor for me. I don't give a **** how many injuries they had. A top tier BCS team in the best conference has no business losing to Ga Southern. It's one thing if we are talking about UVA, WF, Kentucky, etc, but we are talking about Florida. This tells me already they were not that good of a team and just as bad, they had no depth.

That Florida team was just above average and that's only because of their defense, but no matter how you want to look at it, they weren't going anywhere with that offense.

They had an 11-1 regular season in 2012, and their team was largely unchanged going into 2013 outside of losing Gillislee and Bostic. Driskel led that 11-1 team.

 

[TedHendricksOffspring]

You realize Golden is 22-15 at Miami? You seriously cannot be including what he did at Temple in those numbers. Please define "decent team" while you're at it.

I think the criteria that people have used for, "decent teams," in this regard are teams that lost 5 games or less in the entire season and they are including Golden's tenure at Temple.

That's pretty arbitrary criteria. Figures the mope squad would judge a team's decency by the number of losses they have at the end of the season. I've never heard of judging a team by how many losses they had, but I guess when you're that god**** negative all day that's all you think about. Also ridiculous to include Temple's numbers in there.

Meh. The, "Golden Slurpers," bring up Golden's Temple resume just as often as the, "Mope Squad," does to justify their points. Some say it shows that he's a miracle worker and some say it shows that he's grossly overrated. That's really a judgment call.

I'm not really sure how a team's loss total isn't a good indicator of their overall quality if wins are. There are exceptions like this year's Florida team where the final record isn't indicative of their level but that is rare. The argument of wins-losses all hinges on the opponents played and the eye test of on field performance to me. I'd rather win close against a Georgia Tech with near flawless football than blowout a Savannah State with mistakes all over the field. But that's just me. In the long run, I agree with you that criteria varies from person to person based on their own preferences.

It's just a backwards way of thinking. You don't become bowl-eligible based on the number of losses you don't have. It would diminish a team that was 8-4 or 7-5 at the end of the regular season but then lost the conference championship game and bowl game. So now that team that had a respectable 8-4 season now finished 8-6 and is no longer a "decent team".

I agree wholeheartedly in the "eye test". When people say that Florida team we beat last year wasn't decent because of their final record it's just retarded. And North Carolina who went 6-1 (the one loss being a 2 point loss to Duke) after we beat them in a Thursday night game on the road, likely a preseason top 20 as a result...they wouldn't be considered decent either.

Excellent counterpoint. That would skew a team to being considered no longer decent. But how many teams did Golden play that fit that description? I guess that's a separate issue.

The North Carolina game was lot more impressive in hindsight. Hostile environment where the last time we were dominant died, Dorset goes down, Duke goes down, Morris throwing to anybody not wearing white. We beat a 1-5 team that day that then went on a tear. That being said, I still wouldn't qualify them as good or decent. I think respectable is the better word. Their 6-1 stretch included only 2 wins against above .500 teams in Boston College and Pittsburgh who only went 7-6. Old Dominion finishing 8-4 is irrelevant due to the competition differences. But I would say that it's pretty evident that Fedora has them moving in the right direction and that's picked up by the eye test on the field.

 

[Waffle Honcho]

I think the criteria that people have used for, "decent teams," in this regard are teams that lost 5 games or less in the entire season and they are including Golden's tenure at Temple.

That's pretty arbitrary criteria. Figures the mope squad would judge a team's decency by the number of losses they have at the end of the season. I've never heard of judging a team by how many losses they had, but I guess when you're that god**** negative all day that's all you think about. Also ridiculous to include Temple's numbers in there.

Meh. The, "Golden Slurpers," bring up Golden's Temple resume just as often as the, "Mope Squad," does to justify their points. Some say it shows that he's a miracle worker and some say it shows that he's grossly overrated. That's really a judgment call.

I'm not really sure how a team's loss total isn't a good indicator of their overall quality if wins are. There are exceptions like this year's Florida team where the final record isn't indicative of their level but that is rare. The argument of wins-losses all hinges on the opponents played and the eye test of on field performance to me. I'd rather win close against a Georgia Tech with near flawless football than blowout a Savannah State with mistakes all over the field. But that's just me. In the long run, I agree with you that criteria varies from person to person based on their own preferences.

It's just a backwards way of thinking. You don't become bowl-eligible based on the number of losses you don't have. It would diminish a team that was 8-4 or 7-5 at the end of the regular season but then lost the conference championship game and bowl game. So now that team that had a respectable 8-4 season now finished 8-6 and is no longer a "decent team".

I agree wholeheartedly in the "eye test". When people say that Florida team we beat last year wasn't decent because of their final record it's just retarded. And North Carolina who went 6-1 (the one loss being a 2 point loss to Duke) after we beat them in a Thursday night game on the road, likely a preseason top 20 as a result...they wouldn't be considered decent either.

Fair enough.

Tell us, who are the 'decent' teams that a Dorito Golden led team has beaten? (Intramurals don't count)

Last year I'd say Florida, UNC, and Ga Tech. Some would argue Pitt as well.

2012 NC State and Va Tech. Ga Tech won the coastal by default that year, that was an ok win.

2011 Ga Tech again.

Those were all "decent" teams.

 

[TedHendricksOffspring]

There are 3 things to consider when discussing whether or not Florida was a "decent" team. I truly believed before the Florida game that they were a 4-5 loss team at minimum before the season started. I felt like LSU, UGA, Scar, and FSU were locks for losses for them. We were the toss up game imo.

Consideration 1. Their defense was elite.... before the injuries. Their defense alone was going to keep them in nearly every game imo and was easily one of the best in college football. Problem is consideration #2.

Consideration 2. Their offense was horrible and Driskel sucks. What would you say about a team if I told you all they did on offense was run the ball? In my eyes they better be **** good at it, like Wisconsin maybe. The problem is they don't have a good run game and they don't have a good passing game if they needed to be bailed out. That offense is one of the worst offenses of a top tier team I've seen in some time. Every defense literally has to just stack the box and then if take the chance Driskel passes which leaves a good chance of him throwing a pick anyways. Dnofrio honestly didn't even have to game plan. All he had to do was say everyone get in the box and then DB's just sat back and waited for the occasional pass (which they had a season high on us I believe). As elite as their defense was, their offense was equally bad. Their elite defense could have beaten us with as many mistakes as we make on offense only if their offense didn't make more mistakes.

Consideration 3. The deciding factor for me. I don't give a **** how many injuries they had. A top tier BCS team in the best conference has no business losing to Ga Southern. It's one thing if we are talking about UVA, WF, Kentucky, etc, but we are talking about Florida. This tells me already they were not that good of a team and just as bad, they had no depth.

That Florida team was just above average and that's only because of their defense, but no matter how you want to look at it, they weren't going anywhere with that offense.

They had an 11-1 regular season in 2012, and their team was largely unchanged going into 2013 outside of losing Gillislee and Bostic. Driskel led that 11-1 team.

I don't know about that. They also lost Reed, Jenkins, Sturgis, and two first round picks in Elam and Floyd.

 

[TrueCane100]

Who knows it was a miracle golden got this team to win 9 games last year... The new qb doesnt help though

 

[TedHendricksOffspring]

Who knows it was a miracle golden got this team to win 9 games last year... The new qb doesnt help though

You've said this for 64% of your comments and it wasn't true the first time you said it and it isn't true now.

 

[CaneAlmighty]

As bad as the Florida offense was they still put up a season-high 400+ yards on us. Some turnovers were forced, others weren't. But Florida still moved the ball on us, and we were able to pull the train horn in the red zone and get some stops.

You think losing Driskell in Sept and his backup Murphy, their best RB in Matt Jones and their best OL in DJ Humphries in October didn't affect their offensive performance against opponents?

 

[Miami82]

Pointless argument... WE should have won the coastal last year and WE should win it this year.

I know the Golden gobblers will excuse the **** out of it if we don't, but that should be the bar this year... again. smdh at how far U football has fallen. Hoping to win the coastal of the ******* ACC.

 

[chicanego]

Who knows it was a miracle golden got this team to win 9 games last year.

No. STFU. Negged.

 

[UMFarArcher]

Ridiculous.

Here we are, arguing how "good" a 4-8 team is that we beat.

Talk about grasping at straws to take our measure of this coaching staff. It reeks of desperation.