Its in another thread, but Dabo went off on a call in show and told the caller he was part of the problem. That basically they have been spoiled to the point that the "expectations" have surpassed the "appreciation" for what the Tigers have accomplished in the last 15 years since he has been coach. (2 nattys in 7 years)

This got me thinking about the Aggies- is our expectation unrealistic given the success (or lack there of) since joining the SEC, that we fail to appreciate the wins against teams like South Carolina?

For me, I can appreciate what the team has done given the injuries to our starting QBs over the past couple of seasons. So my expectation is not as high as what I am seeing on here. That's NOT settling, that's understanding that the QB is the single most important position in NCAA college football.

flame away..

You think too much about Aggie football.

If I was rooting for a team that won 10 games 12 years in a row and sprinkled in a couple national championships and found myself wondering if the coach should be fired the first time they didn't win 10 games, I might need someone to point out that I should have some appreciation for how great things have recently been.

Unfortunately, that doesn't describe me at all.

Complaining that one of the highest revenue generating football programs in the nation is 5-3 and essentially out of conference championship contention in year 6 of a coach's tenure is not unreasonable

Clemson (and A&M) "appreciate" their coaches with insane guaranteed contracts. Heaping praise on them is optional.

OP, it's really 2 fold. I mean what I am saying is, does it matter about who you have at QB? Hell yeah it does. But is it the single most important position group, I doubt it. I mean what can a good QB do behind a not so good OL when facing teams that are the in the minor league for the NFL. So, as it is on defense. Is it great that you have all world beaters in the secondary if you can't stop the run or if your front 7 can't get in the backfield? Probably not. I think you get my point.

It does no good to have a QB like King back there who was highly successful in HS against 5A competition and tore it up against the country's elite in the Elite 11 competition only to come and play behind an OL that was inexperienced and going up against top NFL talent week in and week out. Well, not so good as he got injured and was out. Come back the next year and we have changed OL coaches to where he is literally picking up the ball off the ground and running for his life. We now have a complete badass in a 5* talent and what do you know, out injured. Since then, we have seen Max in a Calzada type of style, take shot after shot and somehow come back for more but like Calzada, there is no comparison to the starters they are serving as back up to.

So, again, definitely 2 fold, a good QB at least against this type of talent can only be successful in our scheme with pretty damn good OL play. Without good OL play, you leave your QB susceptible and once your stud is out, that leaves the backup even more so which in turn makes the offense less productive. So, I fully believe if we can do better on OL production, this scheme will not only work but be very hard to stop with Weigman at the helm. With things as they currently stand, I would expect Max to continue to get harassed and offensive production to be limited.

I think most on here get wrapped up in thinking about the talent we have in guys like our WRs, RBs, DLs, better LBs than we have had in years and even some of our DBs but just completely overlook our short comings in our OL coach which directly correlates to issues for our QB no matter who is in there (point in case, injury to Weigman) and it is compounded by a very limited backup in Max and so yes, our expectations are definitely too high when you consider these factors. Next year, with hopefully a large number of returning vets, a better OL coach and Weigman back, we should be pretty hard to stop but who the hell wants to say, next year again and again, I know I don't but probably reality.

Dabo's response was *****ly and sounded just as entitled as the folks he was complaining about. But his point wasn't wrong.

greg.w.h said:

---

Dabo's response was *****ly and sounded just as entitled as the folks he was complaining about. But his point wasn't wrong.

---

Was it? He threatened to leave Clemson if they are mean to him. He also threatened to quit coaching if the players got paid so it's kinda hard to take his threats seriously.

dannyv said:

---

If I was rooting for a team that won 10 games 12 years in a row and sprinkled in a couple national championships and found myself wondering if the coach should be fired the first time they didn't win 10 games, I might need someone to point out that I should have some appreciation for how great things have recently been.

Unfortunately, that doesn't describe me at all.

---

Dabo makes Jimbo look like a peewee coach. I mean towers over little Jimbo in the record book on the field.

Our expectations are inflated given our record which has us as a top 25 team.

Our record the past 24 years, since winning the Big 12 (whoop!), is 177 and 121.

However, when you look at our conference record (13 years Big 12 and 11 SEC) we are 99 and 95.

We are more so an average team. We are much like how I used to think of the Mississippi schools (8-5 vs Ole Miss and 7-9 vs State) whom I expected to dominate the likes of our drubbing of the Gamecocks.

We are an average team with great traditions, passionate fans, superb facilities, and having watched LSU, who at one time was very much our (statistical) equivalent, achieve the success we have been hoping for and left wondering when is it our turn.

rootube said:

---

greg.w.h said:

---

Dabo's response was *****ly and sounded just as entitled as the folks he was complaining about. But his point wasn't wrong.

---

Was it? He threatened to leave Clemson if they are mean to him. He also threatened to quit coaching if the players got paid so it's kinda hard to take his threats seriously.

---

You're playing a schoolyard gotcha game. That wasn't his point:

AGinHI said:

---

Our expectations are inflated given our record which has us as a top 25 team.

Our record the past 24 years, since winning the Big 12 (whoop!), is 177 and 121.

However, when you look at our conference record (13 years Big 12 and 11 SEC) we are 99 and 95.

We are more so an average team. We are much like how I used to think of the Mississippi schools (8-5 vs Ole Miss and 7-9 vs State) whom I expected to dominate the likes of our drubbing of the Gamecocks.

We are an average team with great traditions, passionate fans, superb facilities, and having watched LSU, who at one time was very much our (statistical) equivalent, achieve the success we have been hoping for and left wondering when is it our turn.

---

this is way to clear an opinion backed by facts for the zoo.

Clemson and Alabama fans are spoiled. They've seen what winning looks like and expect that. Wish could try that.