Navy 23 - Tulane 21
-
- Swell
- Posts: 1848
- Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:53 pm
- Status: Offline
Defense wins games. Our defense played well enough for us to win. FAU's did not--at all!!nowave wrote:fau put up 326 yards on navy last week and we only managed 262. i thought willie was supposed to be some offensive whiz?
Brantley didn't feel them out. He got it done right away. He makes better decisions in the option. It was obvious. Banks has the better passing game. We need more balance between the run and pass to win in this league.GreenPuddleSplash wrote:TPS that's not fair to Banks. Banks/offense was still feeling out Navy at the early period. We didn't really hit any traction till the 4th.tpstulane wrote:Our backup QB came in and did better than Banks.GreenPuddleSplash wrote:Well, a lot of it has to do with your starting qb going down very early in the game.nowave wrote:fau put up 326 yards on navy last week and we only managed 262. i thought willie was supposed to be some offensive whiz?
Plain and simple we didn't lose because Banks went down. Brantley did a great job replacing him.
Be proactive, being reactive is for losers..
Tulane Class of 1981
Tulane Class of 1981
-
- Swell
- Posts: 2358
- Joined: Sat May 31, 2014 8:16 pm
- Location: Houston, TX
- Status: Offline
It's too soon to tell how good Tulane is as this point. Tulane's first game against a non-Oklahoma, non-triple option team (Tulsa) should provide clarity.
- GreenPuddleSplash
- Swell
- Posts: 1434
- Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2015 10:58 am
- Location: Lower Garden District
- Status: Offline
I agree.tpstulane wrote:Brantley didn't feel them out. He got it done right away. He makes better decisions in the option. It was obvious. Banks has a better passing game.GreenPuddleSplash wrote:TPS that's not fair to Banks. Banks/offense was still feeling out Navy at the early period. We didn't really hit any traction till the 4th.tpstulane wrote:Our backup QB came in and did better than Banks.GreenPuddleSplash wrote:Well, a lot of it has to do with your starting qb going down very early in the game.nowave wrote:fau put up 326 yards on navy last week and we only managed 262. i thought willie was supposed to be some offensive whiz?
Brantley did play well. Defensive front 7 did a good job most of the day. I thought Luke Jackson did well and made a big strip on the qb.tpstulane wrote:Brantley didn't feel them out. He got it done right away. He makes better decisions in the option. It was obvious. Banks has the better passing game. We need more balance between the run and pass to win in this league.GreenPuddleSplash wrote:TPS that's not fair to Banks. Banks/offense was still feeling out Navy at the early period. We didn't really hit any traction till the 4th.tpstulane wrote:Our backup QB came in and did better than Banks.GreenPuddleSplash wrote:Well, a lot of it has to do with your starting qb going down very early in the game.nowave wrote:fau put up 326 yards on navy last week and we only managed 262. i thought willie was supposed to be some offensive whiz?
Plain and simple we didn't lose because Banks went down. Brantley did a great job replacing him.
Bears are Ready to Rhule! Sic'em
- GreenPuddleSplash
- Swell
- Posts: 1434
- Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2015 10:58 am
- Location: Lower Garden District
- Status: Offline
It is kind of ironic that when we ran the triple option against Navy, they had fits just like last year when we pulled GC and put in Brantley. Maybe we should have just stuck with it from the beginning of the game.
we werent exactly moving the chains with banks at the helm. something like 60 yards across four series. and keep in mind that six our points came from our defense. im not sold on fritzs offenseGreenPuddleSplash wrote:Well, a lot of it has to do with your starting qb going down very early in the game.nowave wrote:fau put up 326 yards on navy last week and we only managed 262. i thought willie was supposed to be some offensive whiz?
- Show Me
- Tsunami
- Posts: 5097
- Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2011 9:24 pm
- Location: Saint Bernard
- Status: Offline
Brantley was very good. He came in and gave the team a big lift. He's improved a lot from last year. If he could only develop his passing game. No way in hell can anyone blame this loss on Banks going down. This is what Tulane does every year. We have a pivotal game that's there for the taking a we fail to take advantage of it. Navy was very beatable today and we blow it.
Show Me otherwise. That's why I'm not a cheerleader I've been disappointed time and time again.
Show Me otherwise. That's why I'm not a cheerleader I've been disappointed time and time again.
As to Brantley the staff has to be more open to letting him pass. He has improved there. The staff is too risk averse. We have to open it up some.
BAYWAVE&Sophandros are SPINELESS COWARDS
YOU NEED LEVERAGE TO BE PROACTIVE!
Small time facilities for small time programs
6-4-23:Now all of the mistakes Tulane has made finally catches up with them as they descend to CUSAAC.
YOU NEED LEVERAGE TO BE PROACTIVE!
Small time facilities for small time programs
6-4-23:Now all of the mistakes Tulane has made finally catches up with them as they descend to CUSAAC.
- GreenPuddleSplash
- Swell
- Posts: 1434
- Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2015 10:58 am
- Location: Lower Garden District
- Status: Offline
No one is blaming this loss on Banks going down. I was saying that it's not fair to ask where all the offense is when your starting QB went down very early.
No question. Need to try to throw a little at least to keep the other team honest.winwave wrote:As to Brantley the staff has to be more open to letting him pass. He has improved there. The staff is too risk averse. We have to open it up some.
Be proactive, being reactive is for losers..
Tulane Class of 1981
Tulane Class of 1981
We're better than last year because our QB play is better and our defense is still strong. I projected 6-6 so I think we'll get that. I'm not panicking over this loss though I thought we would win today. But too many mistakes on the road. Still we're better than last year. If anyone is questioning WF, go look and see how Ga Southern has done since he left.
-
- Surge
- Posts: 854
- Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2014 2:02 pm
- Status: Offline
They are getting better. Ten years ago we didn't even compete. Fritz made some mistakes, but if he beats Army then six wins remains on the table.
I think we underestimate how far in the tank Tulane football really was. A lot went wrong and we only lost by 15 fewer points than two years ago.
We were on FIU's level not that long ago.
I think we underestimate how far in the tank Tulane football really was. A lot went wrong and we only lost by 15 fewer points than two years ago.
We were on FIU's level not that long ago.
- GreenPuddleSplash
- Swell
- Posts: 1434
- Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2015 10:58 am
- Location: Lower Garden District
- Status: Offline
This. I also think once Fritz' lineman start to develop we will really start seeing dividends. Our line was all over the place today. They couldn't pass protect and at times had trouble with the run and then they started run blocking like madmen for a couple of drives. We need more Corey Dublins.oliveandblue wrote:They are getting better. Ten years ago we didn't even compete. Fritz made some mistakes, but if he beats Army then six wins remains on the table.
I think we underestimate how far in the tank Tulane football really was. A lot went wrong and we only lost by 15 fewer points than two years ago.
We were on FIU's level not that long ago.
And, oh, by the way; Final: Tulsa 66, ULALA 42. Tulsa will be a very winnable game for us.Aberzombie1892 wrote:It's too soon to tell how good Tulane is as this point. Tulane's first game against a non-Oklahoma, non-triple option team (Tulsa) should provide clarity.
-
- Riptide
- Posts: 2761
- Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2015 7:26 pm
- Status: Offline
Oh it's obvious you are not a cheerleader. Your constant negativity is tiresome and boring. If you don't like Tulane, follow someone else.Show Me wrote:Brantley was very good. He came in and gave the team a big lift. He's improved a lot from last year. If he could only develop his passing game. No way in hell can anyone blame this loss on Banks going down. This is what Tulane does every year. We have a pivotal game that's there for the taking a we fail to take advantage of it. Navy was very beatable today and we blow it.
Show Me otherwise. That's why I'm not a cheerleader I've been disappointed time and time again.
Why did we attempt less than 10 passes in the 1st half with dual threat qbs? And why in the hell can we not find a kicker that can kick a 20 harder?
Defense played admirably but 3rd down on both sides was less than stellar.
Whoever was returning kicks and punts (Badie?) made horrible decisions at wrong points in the game.
One last thing re quarterbacks-- Brantley did well overall from what I saw. He had a few too many balls batted down at the line though. Too many drop back passes behind a Swiss cheese line with a smallish qb. Any word on Banks' injury?
Defense played admirably but 3rd down on both sides was less than stellar.
Whoever was returning kicks and punts (Badie?) made horrible decisions at wrong points in the game.
One last thing re quarterbacks-- Brantley did well overall from what I saw. He had a few too many balls batted down at the line though. Too many drop back passes behind a Swiss cheese line with a smallish qb. Any word on Banks' injury?
You're right about third dows. We were among the worst on both sides of the ball last year and despite emphasis on it this year we are still doing poorly.
BAYWAVE&Sophandros are SPINELESS COWARDS
YOU NEED LEVERAGE TO BE PROACTIVE!
Small time facilities for small time programs
6-4-23:Now all of the mistakes Tulane has made finally catches up with them as they descend to CUSAAC.
YOU NEED LEVERAGE TO BE PROACTIVE!
Small time facilities for small time programs
6-4-23:Now all of the mistakes Tulane has made finally catches up with them as they descend to CUSAAC.
- Show Me
- Tsunami
- Posts: 5097
- Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2011 9:24 pm
- Location: Saint Bernard
- Status: Offline
Losing will tend to do that. I'm not negative only pointing out the negative. I wish it were otherwise. Just gets old losing this type of game year after year.anEngineer wrote:Oh it's obvious you are not a cheerleader. Your constant negativity is tiresome and boring. If you don't like Tulane, follow someone else.Show Me wrote:Brantley was very good. He came in and gave the team a big lift. He's improved a lot from last year. If he could only develop his passing game. No way in hell can anyone blame this loss on Banks going down. This is what Tulane does every year. We have a pivotal game that's there for the taking a we fail to take advantage of it. Navy was very beatable today and we blow it.
Show Me otherwise. That's why I'm not a cheerleader I've been disappointed time and time again.
Unlikely. I don't see how we keep up with their offense. Houston is probably a better matchup for us. Right now I think the path to 6-6 runs through Army, FIU, ECU, and two of SMU/UH/Cincinnati.Wave755 wrote:And, oh, by the way; Final: Tulsa 66, ULALA 42. Tulsa will be a very winnable game for us.Aberzombie1892 wrote:It's too soon to tell how good Tulane is as this point. Tulane's first game against a non-Oklahoma, non-triple option team (Tulsa) should provide clarity.
-
- High Tide
- Posts: 432
- Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 9:39 am
- Status: Offline
Blah, Blah, Blah..we're getting better, things are on the right track, we're making progress. Blah, Blah, Blah.
UNTIL we win games like this, HANDILY, we ain't doing nothing!!'
UNTIL we win games like this, HANDILY, we ain't doing nothing!!'
I don't know, they gave up 42 points to ULALA?OUG wrote:Unlikely. I don't see how we keep up with their offense. Houston is probably a better matchup for us. Right now I think the path to 6-6 runs through Army, FIU, ECU, and two of SMU/UH/Cincinnati.Wave755 wrote:And, oh, by the way; Final: Tulsa 66, ULALA 42. Tulsa will be a very winnable game for us.Aberzombie1892 wrote:It's too soon to tell how good Tulane is as this point. Tulane's first game against a non-Oklahoma, non-triple option team (Tulsa) should provide clarity.