Final: Louisiana (27) vs A-State (37)

[Turbine]

This isn't little league. Not everyone gets a chance to play and a participation trophy. I'm not sure why some are so hell bent on making excuses for poor mr Haack. If the guy was the next Jake Delhomme, you can bet your ___ he'd be starting.

You are stealing my point (I should say we agree) except this staff is more like Haslett's, enamored with Brooks.

Jake rode the bench.

[basinbear]

Anyone know which shoulder Nixon keeps injuring?

Throwing shoulder

[Just1More]

I had people with "the info" tell me Connor Morel could pass better than Babb and run better than Desormeaux. It's the age old debate of the backup should be starting. Happens at every school. I'm not saying Nixon is great, all I'm saying is Haack clearly couldn't separate himself from Nixon.

That isn't what happened. Hud chose Haack as the starter despite his major preference to go with a prototypical dual threat QB. Everyone knows, including Hud, that Haack is a better passer. Hud doesn't want to resolve that his offense sucks. Why would he? He's seen it work with good to real good athletic QBs. He knew this wasn't a year that he had a bruiser RB that could do Hud's first love... pound it up the middle, wear down the opponent, and ride out a small margin of safe victory into the 4th quarter. He also knew that Eli is a great review, Jamal supposedly was a great receiver, and with Fuse, Scott and Haynes he'd have some options.

The issue I agree with Hud is that we aren't good enough to operate a balanced attack. I didn't realize it until we played Tech. I accepted, only lightly, that Akron was a "distraction game". But Tech proved our OL isn't good (a fact Hud's won't admit), and that Haack isn't good under duress.

I have no issue at this point with Haack or Nixon starting, playing, whatever. We aren't good. This staff has shown us one of their limitations. When you don't have better athletes, they don't know what to do. They require superior personnel, a superstar or two, to compensate for their lack of teaching and imagination.

Now comes SBC play... where we barely win out with better athletes. Oops, not this year (more than likely). Could we? Should we with this talent? Yes. It isn't who starts at QB. I know what I'd do if my staff had prepared an OL and receiver corps, and my OC wasn't lame. I'd have Haack distributing the ball. But now, it doesn't matter. We can use either QB just as ineffectively. Our staff stinks without superior athletes. No big deal. They're our staff. We just have to know... with Hud you need to recruit through the roof, or we cannot beat good teams.

[cajunhawk]

It was Haacks job to lose and he lost it. Quit making excuses for the guy. Maybe he'll earn it back, maybe he won't. You aren't the coach and I highly doubt your a good judge of talent. So let it be.....

Nixon has played worse...and kept his job. By all means...keep being wrong. I won't mind.

[zephyr]

Clearly? Really? Then why did he go in as starter? Because he was clearly better... But not who the coach clearly wanted. So far, Nixon has looked great twice when down by 30... They each had outstanding performances against "CLEARLY" inferior opponents. I have still yet to see Haack throw directly into the turf 10 yards short of a WR

You also have yet to see him run for over 200 yards when the defense is stacking the line of scrimmage and pressing our pedestrian receivers on the outside. This offense is even more stagnant when Haack is in.

[zephyr]

Clearly? Really? Then why did he go in as starter? Because he was clearly better... But not who the coach clearly wanted. So far, Nixon has looked great twice when down by 30... They each had outstanding performances against "CLEARLY" inferior opponents. I have still yet to see Haack throw directly into the turf 10 yards short of a WR

It took Hud months to declare the job Haack's. I don't think it was necessarily a "clear" decision. Plus, its one thing to go out and do it in August in practice and another thing to do it under the lights.

[CrazyCajun]

You also have yet to see him run for over 200 yards when the defense is stacking the line of scrimmage and pressing our pedestrian receivers on the outside. This offense is even more stagnant when Haack is in.

What did the 200 yards get us? Besides and ___ whipping? Why did he need to put up 500 yards only to lose by 10? He was a big part of the reason he had to nearly kill himself running to get us back in the game. This wasn't 200 yards Broadway style... Over a 100 came on 2 plays... 1 on the first drive for about 40 then 75 yards when we were down 30. Everyone is letting effort fool their eyes into seeing something you want to see. I'd rather him rush for 75 yards and stop throwing the ball directly into the turf or in the wrong spot all together. Yards don't mean ___... W's and L's

[CrazyCajun]

It took Hud months to declare the job Haack's. I don't think it was necessarily a "clear" decision. Plus, its one thing to go out and do it in August in practice and another thing to do it under the lights.

Has it ever crossed your mine HUD is in the minority on wanting Nixon? But he was gonna get his way eventually? If you don't see how short haacks leash was and how long nixons is your blind. He even said Nixon would have started nwst if he wasn't hurt. So he was gonna make his call on the 2nd half of Kentucky when Nixon had the advantage of coming in down against a relaxed defense and given them a total different look, sounds pretty fair to throw out your team captains 6 months of work based on 1 half....1 half that wasn't nearly as bad as nixons latech performance or first half Tuesday.

[zephyr]

What did the 200 yards get us? Besides and ___ whipping? Why did he need to put up 500 yards only to lose by 10? He was a big part of the reason he had to nearly kill himself running to get us back in the game. This wasn't 200 yards Broadway style... Over a 100 came on 2 plays... 1 on the first drive for about 40 then 75 yards when we were down 30. Eberyine is letting effort fool their eyes into seeing something you want to see. I'd rather him rush for 75 yards and stop throwing the ball directly into the turf or in the wrong spot all together. Yards don't jean ___... W's and L's

The point is that when Haack would have been as unsuccessful in the passing game, those would have been 3 and outs or worse. He wouldn't add that dimension to the offense, even if the passing game is struggling. The passing game has struggled all season, regardless of who is at QB. As I mentioned before, a lot of this falls on play calling and the common denominator is the receiving corp, its not just on the QB. We are going to have to be willing to concede that the passing game is not going to be a strength at all this year and we will need to do other things to make up for it. Haack doesn't do those things.

[zephyr]

Has it ever crossed your mine HUD is in the minority on wanting Nixon? But he was gonna get his way eventually? If you don't see how short haacks leash was and how long nixons is your blind. He even said Nixon would have started nwst if he wasn't hurt. So he was gonna make his call on the 2nd half of Kentucky when Nixon had the advantage of coming in down against a relaxed defense and given them a total different look, sounds pretty fair to throw out your team captains 6 months of work based on 1 half....1 half that wasn't nearly as bad as nixons latech performance or first half Tuesday.

Call me blind because the offense has moved better with Nixon in the lineup. Sorry