Tigers X - Number one Source to Talk Auburn Tigers Sports

Pat Dye Field => War Damn Eagle => Topic started by: Birmingham on September 28, 2009, 06:30:14 PM

Title: Serious question
Post by: Birmingham on September 28, 2009, 06:30:14 PM
I haven't watched but a couple of the Auburn games.  Has Todd been taken out of any games this year (putting in the 2nd or 3rd stringers)?  As everyone's comparing McElroy's and Todd's stats that becomes a relevant point.  I honestly don't know.  I know that McElroy hasn't finished a game this year.  I know that in 1 of them he was taken out in the 3rd Qtr and in another he was taken out in the 2nd Qtr.

None of this shit really matters I was just wondering if Todd is being played the whole game or not.
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: jadennis on September 28, 2009, 06:38:49 PM
I haven't watched but a couple of the Auburn games.  Has Todd been taken out of any games this year (putting in the 2nd or 3rd stringers)?  As everyone's comparing McElroy's and Todd's stats that becomes a relevant point.  I honestly don't know.  I know that McElroy hasn't finished a game this year.  I know that in 1 of them he was taken out in the 3rd Qtr and in another he was taken out in the 2nd Qtr.

None of this poop really matters I was just wondering if Todd is being played the whole game or not.

He has been replaced, but that still doesn't make any comparison's relevant.  

In the first two games we ran the ball 111 times.  Whether he's in there or not, he only threw the ball about 30% of the plays in those two games.  

If he's in there but not throwing it, it's no different than McElroy standing on the sideline holding hands with Julio.

You have to factor in 28 snaps Kodi has taken as well.  That's about a third of a game right there.
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: Pell City Tiger on September 28, 2009, 06:47:43 PM
None of this shit really matters I was just wondering if Todd is being played the whole game or not.
You're right, so why did you ask? It's none of your fucking business. Go French kiss a baboon's asshole, asshole.
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: Birmingham on September 28, 2009, 06:58:09 PM
You're right, so why did you ask? It's none of your phuking business. Go French kiss a baboon's butthole, butthole.

I'll take that as his ass has been in the game to the bitter end of most of the games.  Thanks.
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: Birmingham on September 28, 2009, 07:04:40 PM
Todd
Game one 17-26
Game two 10-23
Game three 16-31
Game four 19-26
total of 4 games 62-106

Year stats:
171.05 RATING, 1,012yds, 11 TD’s



G. McElroy
Game one 15-30
Game two 18-24
Game three 13-15
Game four 17-24
total of 4 games 63-93

Year stats:
175.15 RATING, 938 yds, 7 TD’s

McElroy has been on the sideline for more than 4 Qtrs so far this season and is less than a hundred yds behind Todd’s total.  Todd has played "an entire game" more than McElory and we played against a team tough enough to start 7th in the country, lose to us, and 3 weeks later be ranked higher than they were preseason.  McElroy is way the hell more consistent as can be seen in his completion percentages.   I don’t have to even mention that Auburn has played zero teams this year with a defense because this weekend will tell the story for me, for better or worse. 


I say Todd will go 12-29, 148yds, 1 TD, 3 INT's
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: Pell City Tiger on September 28, 2009, 07:11:18 PM
How about this stat:

number of posts by you: 858
number of posts by you that people give a shit about: 0


Congrats. You're batting a thousand, fuckwad. Go buy yourself a trophy.
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: Birmingham on September 28, 2009, 07:26:08 PM
Quote
How about this stat:

number of posts by you: 858
number of posts by you that people give a poop about: 0


Congrats. You're batting a thousand, phukwad. Go buy yourself a trophy.

Actually, your stats seem to imply that I'm batting 0 for 858. Are you sure you know what you're doing on this thread? :cough cough-dumb-as-shit cough: :bowl:
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: Pell City Tiger on September 28, 2009, 07:29:41 PM
bama math, shit for brains. You of all people should have picked that up. You're slipping.
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: Birmingham on September 28, 2009, 07:47:09 PM
bama math, poop for brains. You of all people should have picked that up. You're slipping.

You appear to become dumber and dumber every day.  As usual, the only thing dumber than your comment is your attempt at responding.  You need to know when to just push that little red "X" in the top right corner.  Seriously lame reply, cityfuck.
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: ibelonginprison on September 28, 2009, 08:05:44 PM


Todd has played "an entire game" more than McElory



And your backup quarterback has thrown exactly 6, yes, SIX, more times than our backup quarterbacks.  Soooooooooooooooooooooo.... your "time in game" doesn't mean much really does it?  We swap our QB's in and out throughout the game.  We run, we hand off, we generally have a good time, and from the looks of it our backup QB's are exponentially better than yours.

Cause... if you really want to look at something fun... our backup QB's have 6 TD's between the two of them.
How's your "backup" working out?  Oh... what's that you say? Nothing?  That pickle tickler doesn't even know what an endzone looks like.  He might as well have a wet dream of fucking a porn star under a goal post at Bryant Denny, cause he has about the same shot of getting there with a hooker with his pants around his ankles as he does during a football game.

Idiot.






You know what... let's take it a little further.  If we take the total number of passing and rushing plays and add them together, then take out our main QB's "rushing" you get this:

Bama – 268 rushing+passing plays not counting McElroy rushing
AU – 291 rushing+passing plays not counting Todd rushing


Then you take out the main QB passing game and you'll have the total plays run by a backup QB... let's see what totals we get:

Bama - Plays using a backup QB – 175
AU - Plays using a backup QB - 185

That's a whopping grand total of....... *drumroll please* 10 more plays we've run with a backup QB.  How that adds up to a whole game's worth of sitting on the bench.............. I'm not sure.  Guess that Tuscaloosa math is always mixed with a dime bag of meth.  Cause the way we burn through our drives with no huddle that should equal about... oh, 5 minutes.

Fucking twatwaffle... I swear.



Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: RWS on September 28, 2009, 08:07:51 PM
Todd
Game one 17-26
Game two 10-23
Game three 16-31
Game four 19-26
total of 4 games 62-106

Year stats:
171.05 RATING, 1,012yds, 11 TD’s



G. McElroy
Game one 15-30
Game two 18-24
Game three 13-15
Game four 17-24
total of 4 games 63-93

Year stats:
175.15 RATING, 938 yds, 7 TD’s

McElroy has been on the sideline for more than 4 Qtrs so far this season and is less than a hundred yds behind Todd’s total.  Todd has played "an entire game" more than McElory and we played against a team tough enough to start 7th in the country, lose to us, and 3 weeks later be ranked higher than they were preseason.  McElroy is way the hell more consistent as can be seen in his completion percentages.   I don’t have to even mention that Auburn has played zero teams this year with a defense because this weekend will tell the story for me, for better or worse. 


I say Todd will go 12-29, 148yds, 1 TD, 3 INT's

Still, I think Todd has done a better than expected job, and his stats are pretty good. A true test is coming up this weekend. I think if UT can get good consistant pressure on Todd, then AU will be in for a long day. For whatever reason he locks up like a bitch if he comes close to being hit. Plus, pressure is a big factor in stopping offenses such as Malzahn's. If AU can cut through UT, then that will be pretty damn impressive. However, I don't really see it happening. I mean, shit, if they can hold UF to 23 points in The Swamp, especially with the incentive UF had to hand them a total as whipping, then they will probably have some success against AU. But then again, they lost to UCLA.....so who the fuck knows.
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: ibelonginprison on September 28, 2009, 08:11:23 PM
Still, I think Todd has done a better than expected job, and his stats are pretty good. A true test is coming up this weekend. I think if UT can get good consistant pressure on Todd, then AU will be in for a long day. For whatever reason he locks up like a bitch if he comes close to being hit. Plus, pressure is a big factor in stopping offenses such as Malzahn's. If AU can cut through UT, then that will be pretty damn impressive. However, I don't really see it happening. I mean, shit, if they can hold UF to 23 points in The Swamp, especially with the incentive UF had to hand them a total as whipping, then they will probably have some success against AU. But then again, they lost to UCLA.....so who the fuck knows.

Fuck it... we're in for a long day no matter WHAT they do to Todd.  UT isn't a cake walk team.  They're too unpredictable right now to really make a call on how they'll play.

It's like playing hot potato with a quarter stick of dynamite.  50/50 chance you go home with all your digits on your hands.
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: jadennis on September 28, 2009, 08:13:29 PM
Congratulations, your 4-star (7th ranked) QB has stats almoat as good as our guy that couldn't start at Tech, had bad stats iat a community college, got benched last year, and just had shoulder surgery.  You must be so proud of your abulity to develop talent.

And you're really gonna go back to "you haven't played anyone"?  Three of the four teams you played have 3 of the worst defenses in football, that's just not a good argument for you.  

And you do realize Mcelroy isn't even in the top 25 in passing yards or passing TDs right?  Why the hell are you even making arguments for how great he is?  
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: The Prowler on September 28, 2009, 08:18:33 PM
And your backup quarterback has thrown exactly 6, yes, SIX, more times than our backup quarterbacks.  Soooooooooooooooooooooo.... your "time in game" doesn't mean much really does it?  We swap our QB's in and out throughout the game.  We run, we hand off, we generally have a good time, and from the looks of it our backup QB's are exponentially better than yours.

Cause... if you really want to look at something fun... our backup QB's have 6 TD's between the two of them.
How's your "backup" working out?  Oh... what's that you say? Nothing?  That pickle tickler doesn't even know what an endzone looks like.  He might as well have a wet dream of fucking a porn star under a goal post at Bryant Denny, cause he has about the same shot of getting there with a hooker with his pants around his ankles as he does during a football game.

Idiot.






You know what... let's take it a little further.  If we take the total number of passing and rushing plays and add them together, then take out our main QB's "rushing" you get this:

Bama – 268 rushing+passing plays not counting McElroy rushing
AU – 291 rushing+passing plays not counting Todd rushing


Then you take out the main QB passing game and you'll have the total plays run by a backup QB... let's see what totals we get:

Bama - Plays using a backup QB – 175
AU - Plays using a backup QB - 185

That's a whopping grand total of....... *drumroll please* 10 more plays we've run with a backup QB.  How that adds up to a whole game's worth of sitting on the bench.............. I'm not sure.  Guess that Tuscaloosa math is always mixed with a dime bag of meth.  Cause the way we burn through our drives with no huddle that should equal about... oh, 5 minutes.

Fucking twatwaffle... I swear.


Bammerham after he got through reading these stats.....

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v697/lordnut/splode.gif)
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: Birmingham on September 28, 2009, 08:23:05 PM
Quote
And you do realize Mcelroy isn't even in the top 25 in passing yards or passing TDs right?  Why the hell are you even making arguments for how great he is? 

You don't suppose that's because we're burning through the clock in the 4th Qtr by handing it off do you.  I know you have vivid memories of him throwing 6-point bombs with 4 minutes to go in the 4th Qtr but that is far from what has happened this year.  When we have a game in hand we don't do things to risk injuries to our starters.  The same can't be said about Auburn. 


....fake punt.
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: Buzz Killington on September 28, 2009, 08:35:39 PM
You don't suppose that's because we're burning through the clock in the 4th Qtr by handing it off do you.  I know you have vivid memories of him throwing 6-point bombs with 4 minutes to go in the 4th Qtr but that is far from what has happened this year.  When we have a game in hand we don't do things to risk injuries to our starters.  The same can't be said about Auburn. 


....fake punt.

***cough cough*** second quarter ***cough cough***
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: Snaggletiger on September 28, 2009, 08:46:07 PM
Neil Caudle came in late in the 3rd and his first pass was a bullet, right between the numbers, of the Ball State corner.  Then he kept it on and option play the next series and blew past everyone for a about 60 and 6.

Our backup is the manteets.
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: Birmingham on September 28, 2009, 08:46:44 PM
***cough cough*** second quarter ***cough cough***

***cough cough*** score was 30-7*** cough cough****
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: The Prowler on September 28, 2009, 09:02:50 PM
Neil Caudle came in late in the 3rd and his first pass was a bullet, right between the numbers, of the Ball State corner.  Then he kept it on an option play the next series and blew past everyone for a about 60 and 6.

Our backup is the manteets.
Caudle is a mixture of Pat White and Matt Jones....Championship
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: wesfau2 on September 28, 2009, 09:03:41 PM
I mean, shit, if they can hold UF to 23 points in The Swamp, especially with the incentive UF had to hand them a total as whipping, then they will probably have some success against AU.

I think UT played waaaay above their heads for the UF game.  They were out there to make a statement for their coach.  They came up short, but looked salty.  I don't think they will have the same fire for Auburn.
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: Jumbo on September 29, 2009, 03:34:38 AM
I think UT played waaaay above their heads for the UF game.  They were out there to make a statement for their coach.  They came up short, but looked salty.  I don't think they will have the same fire for Auburn.
Jesus fumbled going inside the 5! That Td would have blow Ut out.
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: Buzz Killington on September 29, 2009, 08:43:56 AM
***cough cough*** score was 30-7*** cough cough****

I don't care if it was 100-7.  The game wasn't "out of hand" simply because there was too much time left on the clock.  Try and keep up.
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: Kaos on September 29, 2009, 09:14:25 AM
***cough cough*** score was 30-7*** cough cough****

As you ignorant son of a bitches have repeatedly pointed out, the backup quarterback must be given a chance to run the offense.  If he comes in and never throws the ball, how will he be prepared should he be needed to fill in for the starter? 

30-7.  Differential is 23 points. Caudle was not throwing deep bombs.  He was throwing for first downs. 

29-0. Differential is 29 points. McElroy was gunning for the endzone late in the fourth quarter. 

Please. Shut the fuck up now.  You've embarrassed yourself.
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: Godfather on September 29, 2009, 09:34:57 AM
Frankly don't see how playing time has anything to do with the equation, they have almost the same number of passing attempts, and Todd has better numbers (ie yards and TD's (which is the most important)) playing against higher ranking defenses.  Those are the numbers and they cannot be disputed....even.

Now...why don't you...
(http://www.snagglepuss.info/snagglepuss/img/snagglepuss1.jpg)

Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: wesfau2 on September 29, 2009, 09:45:01 AM
Frankly don't see how playing time has anything to do with the equation, they have almost the same number of passing attempts, and Todd has better numbers (ie yards and TD's (which is the most important)) playing against higher ranking defenses.  Those are the numbers and they cannot be disputed....even.

Now...why don't you...
(http://www.snagglepuss.info/snagglepuss/img/snagglepuss1.jpg)



Heavens to mergatroids....exit stage good.
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: Buzz Killington on September 29, 2009, 09:59:00 AM
Now...why don't you...
(http://www.snagglepuss.info/snagglepuss/img/snagglepuss1.jpg)



Get the fuck out....and leave even.
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: AUChizad on September 29, 2009, 10:00:50 AM
Bamerham, since you started your own thread in a pathetic attempt to avoid the facts that were presented to you, here they are again.
Lets compare shall we:

Alabama  Opp.            Defensive Rank                              Auburn   Opp.           Def Rank
Virginia Tech                   38                                              La Tech                     100
FIU                              118                                              Miss. St                       31
N. Texas                        84                                              WVU                            35
Arkansas                        91                                              Ball St                        104

Avg Def Ranking for bama Opponents= 82.75
Avg Def Ranking for Auburn Opponents= 67.5

McElmo = 63-93  67%   938 yds  7tds 1int
Todd    = 62-106 58% 1012 yds 11tds 1int

Jeez what are we talking about you are so right, Chris Todd does suck.


FOR THE WIN!!!!!!!!
:haha:
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: GH2001 on September 29, 2009, 10:34:55 AM
Bamerham, since you started your own thread in a pathetic attempt to avoid the facts that were presented to you, here they are again. :haha:

Nice!! Some real facts....you know, those things that screw up people's invalid perceptions and rhetoric. Who would have thought under Mullen, that MSU's D would be ranked higher than their O?
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: RWS on September 29, 2009, 12:18:41 PM
29-0. Differential is 29 points. McElroy was gunning for the endzone late in the fourth quarter.  
Actually, that play is designed to be like a 5 yard route to the TE across the middle. We ran that play about fifty hojillion times last season. CNS and McElroy both said after the game that he had to check down to his last choice. He checked down and Maze was option #3 on that play. Maybe you guys should have given him the underneath route and he wouldn't have to check down.

Personally, I would have been happy had they gone for a 2-point conversion afterwards. But thats just me.....
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: AWK on September 29, 2009, 12:22:10 PM
Actually, that play is designed to be like a 5 yard route to the TE across the middle. We ran that play about fifty hojillion times last season. CNS and McElroy both said after the game that he had to check down to his last choice. He checked down and Maze was option #3 on that play. Maybe you guys should have given him the underneath route and he wouldn't have to check down.

Personally, I would have been happy had they gone for a 2-point conversion afterwards. But thats just me.....
Did you design the play, and call it in from the press box?
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: RWS on September 29, 2009, 12:26:09 PM
Did you design the play, and call it in from the press box?
Nope, but I'm pretty sure CNS and McElroy know what the play is, since both of them said thats what it was in different interviews.
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: AUsweetheart on September 29, 2009, 12:52:16 PM
Nope, but I'm pretty sure CNS and McElroy know what the play is, since both of them said thats what it was in different interviews.

The ass licking play? Serious question.
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: RWS on September 29, 2009, 01:21:16 PM
The ass licking play? Serious question.
Yes. The Shocker is the third option.
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: Saniflush on September 29, 2009, 01:31:59 PM
Yes. The Shocker is the third option.

I figured they would rather go for The Spocker?
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: AUChizad on September 29, 2009, 01:37:36 PM
I figured they would rather go for The Spocker?
Exactly, why waste the ring finger?
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: AUsweetheart on September 29, 2009, 02:43:31 PM
I figured they would rather go for The Spocker?
I am almost positive I am going to be sorry I asked....but I tried to find out on my own with no results...what is The Spocker?
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: AUTailgatingRules on September 29, 2009, 02:52:56 PM
I am almost positive I am going to be sorry I asked....but I tried to find out on my own with no results...what is The Spocker?

2 fingers in one, 2 in the other
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: djsimp on September 29, 2009, 02:53:45 PM
I am almost positive I am going to be sorry I asked....but I tried to find out on my own with no results...what is The Spocker?

 :rofl: You shouldnt of asked that. You know the Spock symbol for hello from the show "Star Trek" right?
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: Saniflush on September 29, 2009, 03:00:41 PM
I am almost positive I am going to be sorry I asked....but I tried to find out on my own with no results...what is The Spocker?

I will be happy to demonstrate.
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: djsimp on September 29, 2009, 03:00:41 PM
Spock Gets Told: Barry Atwater As Surak (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JkyJi4dH0CI#)
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: AUsweetheart on September 29, 2009, 03:13:57 PM
It seems I should have thought about that a little harder.
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: Saniflush on September 29, 2009, 03:16:51 PM
It seems I should have thought about that a little harder.

Color me surprised that you needed to be led to that one. 
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: AUsweetheart on September 29, 2009, 03:20:22 PM
Color me surprised that you needed to be led to that one. 

I'm not a trekkie.
Still, I see your point...now that I know the answer it seems pretty self explanatory.
Thanks for the education.
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: Saniflush on September 29, 2009, 03:24:11 PM
I'm not a trekkie.
Still, I see your point...now that I know the answer it seems pretty self explanatory.
Thanks for the education.

I'm no trekkie either.  Just a fan of the Urban Dictionary.
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: AUChizad on September 29, 2009, 03:49:57 PM
Exactly, why waste the ring finger?
I thought I provided enough context clues to prevent this from being explicitly spelled out with this quote.
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: AUsweetheart on September 29, 2009, 04:24:13 PM
I thought I provided enough context clues to prevent this from being explicitly spelled out with this quote.

The fact that I am incredibly intelligent does not preclude me from occasionally being a fucking idiot.
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: AWK on September 29, 2009, 04:51:18 PM
The fact that I am incredibly intelligent does not preclude me from occasionally being a fucking idiot.
Hence, Female. 
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: AUsweetheart on September 29, 2009, 04:55:22 PM
Hence, Female. 

AWK stop trying to get into my pants.
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: AWK on September 29, 2009, 04:57:14 PM
AWK stop trying to get into my pants.
Wait, I thought I was trying to get you out of your pants.  Now I'm confused.
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: AUsweetheart on September 29, 2009, 05:03:38 PM
Wait, I thought I was trying to get you out of your pants.  Now I'm confused.

Well now I'm confused as well....I thought, as a little gay man, you'd be more interested in wearing my pants...I do, afterall, have pretty good taste.
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: Godfather on September 29, 2009, 05:05:09 PM
Well now I'm confused as well....I thought, as a little gay man, you'd be more interested in wearing my pants...I do, afterall, have pretty good taste.
Careful sweetheart he has a history of this.
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: Godfather on September 29, 2009, 05:07:32 PM
He has been banned before.

(http://i87.photobucket.com/albums/k136/autiger518/sucker.jpg)











your patience has been noted, your welcome.  :thumbsup:
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: Snaggletiger on September 29, 2009, 05:20:13 PM
He has been banned before.

(http://i87.photobucket.com/albums/k136/autiger518/sucker.jpg)


Oooooo..I know you di'in't











your patience has been noted, your welcome.  :thumbsup:

Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: ibelonginprison on September 29, 2009, 05:35:31 PM
Let's not forget the Mollywop / Mushroom Stamp.
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: AWK on September 29, 2009, 05:46:43 PM
He has been banned before.

(http://i87.photobucket.com/albums/k136/autiger518/sucker.jpg)











your patience has been noted, your welcome.  :thumbsup:

I'm 93% sure that picture is not me, and I'm 100% sure they haven't caught me yet.
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: The Prowler on September 29, 2009, 06:41:15 PM
Wait, I thought I was trying to get you out of your pants.  Now I'm confused.
AWK are you trying to say that there's a party in your pants?
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: AWK on September 29, 2009, 07:34:55 PM
AWK are you trying to say that there's a party in your pants?
I love Lamp.
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: The Prowler on September 29, 2009, 08:27:24 PM
I love Lamp.
I killed a man today.
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: AUChizad on September 29, 2009, 10:32:01 PM
After all these years, that picture still makes me lol myself.
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: Jumbo on September 30, 2009, 03:18:22 AM
Back on topic. The Spocker is how us internet geeks get down, after a tough night of Dungeons and Dragons.
Title: Re: Serious question
Post by: djsimp on September 30, 2009, 08:41:16 AM
Back on topic. The Spocker is how us internet geeks get down, after a tough night of Dungeons and Dragons.

sssshhhhh! You have opened the matrix of secrecy...............wait a minute, did I say matrix.