Football. LA Tech transformed under incoming Holtz regime - latechsports.com

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maddawg

...and HCSD was responsible for our bad situation. He'll be just as bad at Cal.

---

Off subject. Not relevant to this discussion. Aren't we having this almost exact discussion in another thread right now? The head coach of any team is responsible for the play on both sides of the ball.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bigdog13

Off subject. Not relevant to this discussion. Aren't we having this almost exact discussion in another thread right now? The head coach of any team is responsible for the play on both sides of the ball.

---

You act like that's a first.:icon_wink:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dawg06

Or we could have been in the Orange Bowl despite having the worst defense in the country if...
- Our offense didn't have 6 turnovers (mostly in the red zone) against Utah State and SJSU
- Or we didn't have kicking game blunders against Texas A&M and Utah State
- Or our offense showed up in the first half against Texas A&M or converted a 2-point conversion or two
- Or you could go on and on...

Our offense and special teams were awesome, but they did make several critical mistakes in our losses. Those were TEAM (coaching, offense, defense, special teams) losses, not just defensive losses.

---

Agree with some of what you posted. Especially the special teams in the A&M & USU games. Totally disagree on the offense in the A&M game. They scored 57. That's silly. The offense did more than enough to win that game. Do you think it's possible that going into every game knowing you had to score almost every drive in order to win put unfair pressure on the offense and the QB specifically and that contributed to many of the of the turnovers?? I do. I'm sure of it. CC played differently that last few games and threw some picks that were uncharacteristic of him. When you first read your post it's logical. But if you step back and look at it for a moment and think, what you really are asking is that the offense be perfect. #1 in the Nation wasn't good enough. Amazing wasn't good enough. You wanted perfect and because they were not perfect, you are lumping them in with the other reasons we didn't go to the Orange Bowl. This season was on the defense. Period. And you can lump any coach, (including the head coach) who is associated with the defense in there as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bigdog13

Agree with some of what you posted. Especially the special teams in the A&M & USU games. Totally disagree on the offense in the A&M game. They scored 57. That's silly. The offense did more than enough to win that game. Do you think it's possible that going into every game knowing you had to score almost every drive in order to win put unfair pressure on the offense and the QB specifically and that contributed to many of the of the turnovers?? I do. I'm sure of it. CC played differently that last few games and threw some picks that were uncharacteristic of him. When you first read your post it's logical. But if you step back and look at it for a moment and think, what you really are asking is that the offense be perfect. #1 in the Nation wasn't good enough. Amazing wasn't good enough. You wanted perfect and because they were not perfect, you are lumping them in with the other reasons we didn't go to the Orange Bowl. This season was on the defense. Period. And you can lump any coach, (including the head coach) who is associated with the defense in there as well.

---

No. He threw all logic out the window when he started the post off in an effort to legitimize the defense's terrible play. It's rather funny how he can go on and on and on and on about some of the most trivial matters, yet let a poor performing defense get a pass.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dirtydawg

No. He threw all logic out the window when he started the post off in an effort to legitimize the defense's terrible play. It's rather funny how he can go on and on and on and on about some of the most trivial matters, yet let a poor performing defense get a pass.

---

I see where he is coming from but for the most part I agree with you. If the defense was halfway decent it's likely none of the offensive or special teams mistakes he brings up even matter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bigdog13

I see where he is coming from but for the most part I agree with you. If the defense was halfway decent it's likely none of the offensive or special teams mistakes he brings up even matter.

---

THIS!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bigdog13

If the defense was halfway decent it's likely none of the offensive or special teams mistakes he brings up even matter.

---

Right. With a half decent D, we end up at 12-0 and playing in the Orange Bowl against FSU....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hookdown

Right. With a half decent D, we end up at 12-0 and playing in the Orange Bowl against FSU....

---

So we didn't need to play offense in the first half against ATM and USU?

Have y'all EVER considered ( I know Dykes/Franklin fans are blind to the fact) that when teams are beating the CRAP out of you they tend to lay down like ATM and USU did?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bigdog13

It's not flawed. It's common sense. If you can't play at a high level for what?, 5-6 minutes over a 2 and a half hour period with numerous breaks in between like huddles, halftimes, quarter breaks, official timeouts, then you are out of shape. I'm over 200 pounds and I ran on the treadmill a lot longer than that last night. I'm not talking about not being tired or winded. You can't play football without getting tired. I'm talking about being so tired and winded you can blame the offense for your poor performance. Oh and Oregon was #8 in the nation in Defense Efficiency last year. We were #112.

---

All very good points. The 6 or 7 min time factor (if you assume a player won't be playing BOTH ways) really highlights the importance of a player not "taking a play off". They shouldn't be resting while on the field.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by olddog75

WOW, I didn't know that you talk with "Many football experts", Mr. Maddawg.

---

Actually, he does. MD gets free consultation from me, Rhinodawg, and others every Saturday afternoon in the fall before home games. :icon_wink: but there's no way in hell we've encouraged him to say this stuff. In this case, the pupil has gone astray. :laugh:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maddawg

So we didn't need to play offense in the first half against ATM and USU?

Have y'all EVER considered ( I know Dykes/Franklin fans are blind to the fact) that when teams are beating the CRAP out of you they tend to lay down like ATM and USU did?

---

So 57 points on the board isn't enough for you? You are asking for more? You are saying we lost not becuase we gave up 59 POINTS but because we couldn't score more than 57??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maddawg

So we didn't need to play offense in the first half against ATM and USU?

---

So we didn't need to play defense LAST SEASON?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maddawg

So we didn't need to play offense in the first half against ATM and USU?

Have y'all EVER considered ( I know Dykes/Franklin fans are blind to the fact) that when teams are beating the CRAP out of you they tend to lay down like ATM and USU did?

---

Yeah, that's always a point. The sad conclusion to that point is that even with ATM and USU laying down, our defense still couldn't stop them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dirtydawg

The sad conclusion to that point is that even with ATM and USU laying down, our defense still couldn't stop them.

---

Not if you consider shutting USU out in the 4th quarter. People forget the game went into OT. Our high octane offense couldn't score in OT.

The D only gave up 20 to ATM and Johnny Football in the second half. Better than most SEC teams did against him.

Now do you want to know how our offense did in the second half vs. TCU in the bowl game?

Yes our D was horrible last year, but our offensive coaching decisions hurt us too. It's not as simple as saying "well we scored 50 so we should have won". The game is played for two halves and 4 quarters. A snapshot of the final score is not a good indication of how the offense played.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maddawg

Not if you consider shutting USU out in the 4th quarter. People forget the game went into OT. Our high octane offense couldn't score in OT.

The D only gave up 20 to ATM and Johnny Football in the second half. Better than most SEC teams did against him.

Now do you want to know how our offense did in the second half vs. TCU in the bowl game?

Yes our D was horrible last year, but our offensive coaching decisions hurt us too. It's not as simple as saying "well we scored 50 so we should have won". The game is played for two halves and 4 quarters. A snapshot of the final score is not a good indication of how the offense played.

---

Of course it is. What is the difference between a high scoring team who's defense is forced to play more because they score fairly quickly or sometimes turn the ball over after 4 or 5 plays and a team who's offense can't move the ball forcing the defense to have to take the field more often after 4 plays? I'll tell you the difference. The high scoring team has most likely put points on the board whereas the other cloud of dust offense has only run 4 plays and punted. The defenses on those types of teams have to play just as much due to lack of offense as does our defense due to possibly quick scoring. If somebody doesn't have it already, I think I might spend time looking to see the average number of plays we ran in a series compared to the not so high octane offenses. I suspect there won't be much of a difference.

I could buy into your point more easily if every other team we played lined up like we did without there being much delay in snaps, but that simply wasn't the case. Like 13 says, these guys only have to go all out for 4-8 seconds on any given play then get to rest and catch their breath for the next 20 seconds or so regardless of what type of what their offensive unit is running. Look, it wasn't our fast paced offense that was responsible for so many blown coverages and wide open receivers when he had them in long yardage situations. If it were a situation of poor tackling and execution due to fatigue, that would be a different factor and would lend credence to your position. But that just wasn't the case. We had too many wide open receivers or dlinemen hitting the wrong gaps, lbs out of position, etc... for this to be put on the type of offense we ran.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maddawg

Not if you consider shutting USU out in the 4th quarter. People forget the game went into OT. Our high octane offense couldn't score in OT.

---

That's because they were worn out from having to dig us out of the hole the defense put us in the rest of the game. If the defense had done their job and stopped USU from scoring so much early on and played a little bend don't break game, our offense would have been more rested to be able to execute more perfectly and wouldn't even have had to go to overtime.

Dirty, I rebutted your point from post 113 (a bit of irony). Try to stay on track by replying to my rebutt. Don't act like a Democrat and BD13 by trying to change the subject after getting schooled.:icon_razz:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dirtydawg

That's because they were worn out from having to dig us out of the hole the defense put us in the rest of the game. If the defense had done their job and stopped USU from scoring so much early on and played a little bend don't break game, our offense would have been more rested to be able to execute more perfectly and wouldn't even have had to go to overtime.

---

Seriously? The Defense SHUT THEM OUT in the 4th quarter. The offense was tired(?) because they had to score 38 after only scoring 3 in the first half.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maddawg

Dirty, I rebutted your point from post 113 (a bit of irony). Try to stay on track by replying to my rebutt. Don't act like a Democrat and BD13 by trying to change the subject after getting schooled.:icon_razz:

---

And I rebutted your rebut with my rebuttal in post 115 and did my best not to show my butt in doing so, to a certain extent.:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maddawg

So we didn't need to play offense in the first half against ATM and USU?

Have y'all EVER considered ( I know Dykes/Franklin fans are blind to the fact) that when teams are beating the CRAP out of you they tend to lay down like ATM and USU did?

---

Lay down? Well from a player who was out there the whole game, I can tell you they didn't "lay down" for one second. Every defensive lineman and linebacker that I hit that game hit me the same from start to finish and the effort never changed either. This notion that players lay down while they are up in a game is ridiculous. None of us laid down while we were beating the brakes off of Idaho, I wanted to put 70 up on them just as bad as everyone else and I wasn't going to "lay down" and hope we still got it. I was going to play as hard as possible all game no matter what. Nobody from USU or TAM laid down that entire game. We found holes in their defense and scored at will after that. Same with USU. But this crap about teams laying down and that's how we stayed in the game is a truck full of BS.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maddawg

So we didn't need to play offense in the first half against ATM and USU?

Have y'all EVER considered ( I know Dykes/Franklin fans are blind to the fact) that when teams are beating the CRAP out of you they tend to lay down like ATM and USU did?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SWarner63

Lay down? Well from a player who was out there the whole game, I can tell you they didn't "lay down" for one second. Every defensive lineman and linebacker that I hit that game hit me the same from start to finish and the effort never changed either. This notion that players lay down while they are up in a game is ridiculous. None of us laid down while we were beating the brakes off of Idaho, I wanted to put 70 up on them just as bad as everyone else and I wasn't going to "lay down" and hope we still got it. I was going to play as hard as possible all game no matter what. Nobody from USU or TAM laid down that entire game. We found holes in their defense and scored at will after that. Same with USU. But this crap about teams laying down and that's how we stayed in the game is a truck full of BS.

---

You are taking a beating maddawg.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SWarner63

Lay down? Well from a player who was out there the whole game, I can tell you they didn't "lay down" for one second. Every defensive lineman and linebacker that I hit that game hit me the same from start to finish and the effort never changed either. This notion that players lay down while they are up in a game is ridiculous. None of us laid down while we were beating the brakes off of Idaho, I wanted to put 70 up on them just as bad as everyone else and I wasn't going to "lay down" and hope we still got it. I was going to play as hard as possible all game no matter what. Nobody from USU or TAM laid down that entire game. We found holes in their defense and scored at will after that. Same with USU. But this crap about teams laying down and that's how we stayed in the game is a truck full of BS.

---

+1,000,000

Yall are right. The defense shutting out USU in the 4th and holding ATM to 20 in the second half cost us the games. Lack of offensive production in the first half (and OT) had no bearing on the outcomes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maddawg

Yall are right. The defense shutting out USU in the 4th and holding ATM to 20 in the second half cost us the games. Lack of offensive production in the first half (and OT) had no bearing on the outcomes.

---

You're right. Our defense coming up with 0 turnovers against Utah State, giving up 6.8 yds per rush against USU and 6.2 yds per rush against TAM, and giving up 1,324 total yards both games combined along with 107 total points had no effect on the outcomes either. The whole point of this argument anyway is that it only takes a mediocre defense to win games with the type of offense we had. I'd say mediocre would have helped quite a bit to shave off some of these ugly stats and probably give us some wins.

Swarner is schooling MD. Maybe it's time for a dance off as well?

What are you clowns arguing about we went 9-3 and last I checked this is a team sport our defense struggled through some injuries and played with some young guys but they played hard every Saturday don't let Warner flood you guys with all of this propaganda about you don't need defense to play football he's just mad cause they won't let him back in the cafe for chicken fried steak day... if you remember in 2011 we were mediocre offensively at best and cost our team at least two games early but this is like I said a team sport it doesn't say tech offense 9-3 tech defense sucked or tech defense WAC champs tech offense sucked

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TRILLFAM57

What are you clowns arguing about we went 9-3 and last I checked this is a team sport our defense struggled through some injuries and played with some young guys but they played hard every Saturday don't let Warner flood you guys with all of this propaganda about you don't need defense to play football he's just mad cause they won't let him back in the cafe for chicken fried steak day... if you remember in 2011 we were mediocre offensively at best and cost our team at least two games early but this is like I said a team sport it doesn't say tech offense 9-3 tech defense sucked or tech defense WAC champs tech offense sucked

---

My God, man...take a breath, and some grammar lessons.

Hey suck it man I'm not trying to get a English lesson just want to get in on the discussion if you don't like my grammar idk flunk me I mean should I submit my post to turn it in dot come for you or what bru

http://stuffgaijinlike.files.wordpre...-very-well.gif

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TRILLFAM57

Hey suck it man I'm not trying to get a English lesson just want to get in on the discussion if you don't like my grammar idk flunk me I mean should I submit my post to turn it in dot come for you or what bru

---

Just taking a wild guess here, are you a former football player as well?

My grammar nazi sense are tingling. PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF GOOD USE BASIC ENGLISH SKILLS! In all seriousness, if you can't use basic grammar the chances of you getting a well paying job is gonna go way down.

Utah State was the first Top 50 rated defense that we faced last year and they MANHANDLED our offense for most of the game. Many Tech fans believed our offense would roll the Aggies, but that just wasn't the case. Like Warner said previously, football is a TEAM sport. Our defense was an undeniable liability, but our offense had it's own issues in big games.

Score by Quarters	1	2	3	4	OT	[5]	Score
Utah State	14	3	24	0	7	[7]	48
Louisiana Tech	0	3	21	17	0	[0]	41

Come on 2013 football season!!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DogsWin

Utah State was the first Top 50 rated defense that we faced last year and they MANHANDLED our offense for most of the game. Many Tech fans believed our offense would roll the Aggies, but that just wasn't the case. Like Warner said previously, football is a TEAM sport. Our defense was an undeniable liability, but our offense had it's own issues in big games.

Score by Quarters	1	2	3	4	OT	[5]	Score
Utah State	14	3	24	0	7	[7]	48
Louisiana Tech	0	3	21	17	0	[0]	41

Come on 2013 football season!!!!

---

Doesn't matter. Our offense scored 34 points in that game. It should have been enough!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maddawg

Not if you consider shutting USU out in the 4th quarter. People forget the game went into OT. Our high octane offense couldn't score in OT.

The D only gave up 20 to ATM and Johnny Football in the second half. Better than most SEC teams did against him.

Now do you want to know how our offense did in the second half vs. TCU in the bowl game?

Yes our D was horrible last year, but our offensive coaching decisions hurt us too. It's not as simple as saying "well we scored 50 so we should have won". The game is played for two halves and 4 quarters. A snapshot of the final score is not a good indication of how the offense played.

---

That is the most ignorant thing I have ever heard. The final score isn't just a snap shot. It's everything. You don't lose a quarter, you lose a game. AGAIN, you are asking the offense to be perfect. You are saying 57 points in one game isn't good enough for you. You want more. That's insane. Your extreme hatred for SD/TF has made it to where you can't even see reality anymore. Step back a second and read your posts. They are ridiculous. You are upset about the offense not producing for a quarter in a game where we scored 57 points, yet giving the defense props for playing average for a quarter or a half. We still scored enough against USU and SJSU to win the game if we had an average defense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maddawg

Yall are right. The defense shutting out USU in the 4th and holding ATM to 20 in the second half cost us the games. Lack of offensive production in the first half (and OT) had no bearing on the outcomes.

---

You are the only person I have ever known that breaks things down this way. "well the offense won the 2nd and 4th quarter but the defense won the first 1st so even though the offense put up 45 points and the defense gave up 99 points both sides are responsible because the offense had a bad first quarter and the defense only allowed a field goal in the first quarter. " It's nonsense. WON/LOSS records are determined by the score at the end of the game.

I'm pretty sure that MD is under this pile somewhere. :laugh:


http://i.imgur.com/cHQ0n.jpg

Your are still picking and choosing your debates.

TCU - Our offense was horrible in the second half

ATM - Our offense didn't show in the first half

USU - Our offense didn't play up to par the entire game. (34 points) We had a better than average defense in the most important game of the year.

SJSU - Didn't really matter. Our coach had already quit at that point.

You can stop digging now, MD!!! :laugh:


http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:A...ny0Id_CDUfurB1

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HogDawg

You can stop digging now, MD!!! :laugh:


http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:A...ny0Id_CDUfurB1

---

I've been having this discussion with BD13 since the TCU game. I'm not going to clam up just because one of our great offensive players has decided to join the board and the discussion.

There are lots of other fans out there who agreed with me and posted after the games being discussed. I don't expect them to chime in, but I'm not going to back off on being consistently correct.:icon_razz:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maddawg

Your are still picking and choosing your debates.

TCU - Our offense was horrible in the second half - Not relevant to this argument. We were always talking about last year.

ATM - Our offense didn't show in the first half - Doesn't matter. Wins/Losses are given out by the game not the half.

USU - Our offense didn't play up to par the entire game. (34 points) We had a better than average defense in the most important game of the year. That WAS MOST DEFINITELY NOT AN AVERAGE DEFENSE!!! We gave up 646 YARDS and 48 points!!! And if the refs didn't allow USU to RAPE our WR's we would have scored even more!!!!

SJSU - Didn't really matter. Our coach had already quit at that point.

---

You're the one changing the debate. I thought we were talking about last year this entire time and now here comes the TCU game??? Different team altogether. It's also very interesting that what other schools would be happy with you call not up to par and what other teams would be disappointed with you are content with. I think you think this is a debate on Sonny as a coach. It's not. Before you changed the subject it WAS about Fast paced offenses having a negative effect on the defense. I just re-read the thread and it is quite obvious you are the one changing the subject MD. Not surprised though, your very good at it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maddawg

I've been having this discussion with BD13 since the TCU game. I'm not going to clam up just because one of our great offensive players has decided to join the board and the discussion.

There are lots of other fans out there who agreed with me and posted after the games being discussed. I don't expect them to chime in, but I'm not going to back off on being consistently correct.:icon_razz:

---

For the record, I do agree with you about the SJSU game. Dykes folded his tent after the home loss to Utah St in OT and he had his head up his ass in San Jose. No question he was more interested in dusting off his resume than beating a very beatable SJSU.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maddawg

I've been having this discussion with BD13 since the TCU game. I'm not going to clam up just because one of our great offensive players has decided to join the board and the discussion.

There are lots of other fans out there who agreed with me and posted after the games being discussed. I don't expect them to chime in, but I'm not going to back off on being consistently correct.:icon_razz:

---

But you are changing the discussion. It was about whether our defense suffered from having such a fast paced offense. Now you are talking about the TCU game from last year????? Note: The subject changed when you said a Fast Paced team never has a good defense and hasn't "Come Close" to winning a NC. You were given the examples you said didn't exist and now we are talking about the TCU game from last year.

That WAS MOST DEFINITELY NOT AN AVERAGE DEFENSE!!! We gave up 646 YARDS and 48 points!!!




I thought only the final score mattered. Where do they put the yards given up on the scoreboard?

Yes, we gave up 41 pts in regulation. According to your math 34 should have been enough to top that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maddawg

That WAS MOST DEFINITELY NOT AN AVERAGE DEFENSE!!! We gave up 646 YARDS and 48 points!!!




I thought only the final score mattered. Where do they put the yards given up on the scoreboard?

Yes, we gave up 41 pts in regulation. According to your math 34 should have been enough to top that.

---

You said the defense played well. Defenses that play well don't give up over 600 yards. When blame is placed for a loss you can most definitely look at the scoreboard. And the scoreboard says we gave up 48 points. You are saying since the offense didn't score 49 against a very good defense it's their fault. The offense shouldn't have to walk into the stadium knowing that if they don't score about 50 points we will lose. You don't think that might be the reason CC was forcing some throws and throwing some pics at the end of the season??? I'm sure of it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maddawg

That WAS MOST DEFINITELY NOT AN AVERAGE DEFENSE!!! We gave up 646 YARDS and 48 points!!!




I thought only the final score mattered. Where do they put the yards given up on the scoreboard?

Yes, we gave up 41 pts in regulation. According to your math 34 should have been enough to top that.

---

Also how can you in one post blame the offense for not scoring in OT then in another leave out the TD the defense gave up in OT saying we only gave up 41 in regulation. B.S., we gave up 48 points.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bigdog13

You said the defense played well. Defenses that play well don't give up over 600 yards. When blame is placed for a loss you can most definitely look at the scoreboard. And the scoreboard says we gave up 48 points. You are saying since the offense didn't score 49 against a very good defense it's their fault. The offense shouldn't have to walk into the stadium knowing that if they don't score about 50 points we will lose. You don't think that might be the reason CC was forcing some throws and throwing some pics at the end of the season??? I'm sure of it.

---

I said the D played better than average. That wasn't my qualification. It was stated by others here that all we needed was "better than average" defensive play. They did that against a top offense. Yes, our D, holding USU to 41 in regulation was better than average.

W/out looking it up, didn't CC's streak last until the USU game? I don't think anybody was blaming those interceptions on our own defense.

2012- #1 Offense in the Nation http://www.ncaa.com/stats/football/f...rent/team/1028 2012- #116 in Scoring Defense in the Nation. http://www.ncaa.com/stats/football/f...t/team/1043/p3 #120 in Total Defense in the Nation http://www.ncaa.com/stats/football/f...t/team/1042/p3 #105 in Red Zone Defense (BTW Utah ST. was #1) http://www.ncaa.com/stats/football/f...t/team/1053/p3 #106 in 3rd down conversion defense http://www.ncaa.com/stats/football/f...t/team/1051/p3 I don't know what else needs to be said.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maddawg

I said the D played better than average. That wasn't my qualification. It was stated by others here that all we needed was "better than average" defensive play. They did that against a top offense. Yes, our D, holding USU to 41 in regulation was better than average.

W/out looking it up, didn't CC's streak last until the USU game? I don't think anybody was blaming those interceptions on our own defense.

---

Utah St averaged scoring 34 points a game last year. We gave up 48. Utah St. averaged 469 yards of offense per game. We gave up 646 to them. Utah St. gave up 15 points per game last year. We scored 41. Utah St. gave up 322 yards per game. We ran up 629 yards on them. Utah St. was number 1 in the nation in redzone defense giving up only 6 RZ rushing TD's all year. 3 of them were to us in one game. Tell me again about average.

the sexual tension in this thread is intense

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DogtorEvil

the sexual tension in this thread is intense

---

He just won't take no for an answer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bigdog13

He just won't take no for an answer.

---

twss

I think maddawg needs some man love.

Offense may sell tickets, but defense wins championships. Period.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dawg80

Offense may sell tickets, but defense wins championships. Period.

---

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_BC...mpionship_Game