Provided DRad pulls the trigger

beej67 said:
Soo... ...the reason we complain about losses is because Chan is our coach? And if we get a new coach we won't complain about losses because at least it wasn't Chan that lost? Or did you mean something else by that? I'm not following you.
Click to expand...
Well that makes two of us, im not really following your logic either. I guess what im trying to get at is that what makes Chan so Chanesque is his history of being Chanesque, year in and year out doing the same exact thing over and over again. You cant really say that about the other schools. :stickpoke:
 
I would not consider Clemson's loss to us Chan-esque at all. A close loss to a traditional rival on the road without any major mental errors or supremely flawed strategy.
Click to expand...
So all those sacks they allowed, and all those wide open passes they outright dropped, and their only TD called back on a penalty ... those aren't mental errors? And their total lack of an offensive game plan, that's not strategy?

They had like 8 dropped passes in that game. Didn't we block a kick too?
 
beej67 said:
So all those sacks they allowed, and all those wide open passes they outright dropped, and their only TD called back on a penalty ... those aren't mental errors? And their total lack of an offensive game plan, that's not strategy?

They had like 8 dropped passes in that game. Didn't we block a kick too?
Click to expand...

BUT CHAN WASN'T COACHING THAT TEAM!!! Duh-huh! :flame:

C'mon, BJ = only Chan has "chanesque" losses - everybody else just has losses. :rolleyes:
 
Clemson missed like 4 FGs in that game that is why they lost.

I am not saying other teams don't have Chan-esque games, but none of the ones that have them as frequently as we do keeps their HC around for 6 years.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top