The underachieving comes down to how we started the season

This forum is for Football related topics only. Other topics will be moved to the appropriate forum.
GameFAQSAggie
Posts: 8996
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 11:10 am
Has thanked: 284 times
Been thanked: 2733 times

The underachieving comes down to how we started the season

Post by GameFAQSAggie » November 26th, 2022, 7:30 am

Alot of people will say we did underachieve this year, which we did, but what it all comes down to is starting the season slow, and being a different team in October and November than we were in September, doing pretty much what we were supposed to do in October and November. The two losses we had in September were bad, admittedly horrible, but the only two games we lost after that were to Wyoming and Boise State. We don't beat Boise even when we are good, and even if you want to be harsh and say we SHOULD beat Wyoming on the road with a fourth string true freshman, we did beat Air Force who we weren't supposed to beat.

YES, the Weber loss will stick out and be talked about for decades and in the long term this year will be remembered for that loss, but in the short term, we can be grateful that after that and UNLV, we came together played better and were a different team the last two months of the year. It's easily forgotten how some people thought after losing to Weber, it would go downhill to a 2-10 or 1-11 season. And at least we have some momentum into next year, as the announcers yesterday were positive about our future with who we have coming back.

I would love to think that our only problem is we have the wrong offensive coordinator, and that how it works is that if we only fire Tucker and hire the right offensive coordinator, we will dominate everyone enroute to the Mountain West championship next year, but I am realistic enough to know it doesn't work that way. The fact is, Anthony Tucker was here when we won the championship last year and was here for us getting the wins we did get this year, and I'm not so sure there is an abundance of guys we can hire who would be just as good as him. And to prove I'm not a kiss butt fan who blindly defends every coach we have, I did think ending the Gary 2.0 experiment had to be done and will say that most of the coaches he brought in DID suck and should not be brought back.

And people were saying that Cooper was the problem yesterday. He did make some poor decisions, but he also did alot to get us back in the game. There were people saying that Bonner wasn't the whole problem when he was in, and other guys were playing poorly too, which there was some truth to. And the fact is, the offense did look better with Cooper in, but we also saw that Cooper has a ways to go, and also that we did have other problems besides quarterback. The reality is that both the people calling for Bonner to be benched for Cooper AND the people adamant about us having other problems were both validated.
These users thanked the author GameFAQSAggie for the post (total 2):
vegasaggieGidbob