Re: Arizona Wildcats 2014 Predictions
Posted: Sat Aug 23, 2014 9:03 pm
Did we not ever win another game without Ka'Deem?
A co-op community for Arizona Fans
https://beardownwildcats.com/
I never said we "Can't" beat Utah at SLC, I just don't think we will. Utah returns more starters (including their QB) and will be playing at home, where they are quite tough. They beat Stanford at home last year and should have knocked of the scum. Our primary weapon that we relied on to beat them last year is now playing in the league.dc4azcats wrote:Seriously? So we can't beat Utah because we don't have KaDeem TY? That's some insight right there.dmjcat wrote: Whats to get??? How about we don't have Kadeem this year?? Do you GET that??????
Let's see Utah doesn't have the same team as LY, and stay with me on this, but we don't have the same team either. We won't be relying on the running game TY like we did LY to win games. Are you still with me? See guys graduate so LY's team has nothing to do with TY's team. Utah had the 3rd best D vs the run LY which goes back to my point that they felt they could stop KaDeem and win the game because they didn't think KaDeem was worth a crap. Denker wasn't worth a crap in that game and they couldn't stop KaDeem. Again, none of that has anything to do with TY's game.
Utah ranked 10th in the conf LY in pass defense. That's a big deal because they lost most of their secondary and they lost their best pass rusher in Reilly. It's also a big deal when you look at what Arizona will have when it goes 5 wide. When you couldn't cover anybody LY and the guys you have coming in are unproven it makes for a tall task to think you can cover what Arizona will bring to the WR position.
Correct me if I'm wrong but you think we don't have a QB to get the ball to the WR's and thus because we don't have KaDeem to run the ball we will lose the game? Is that what you're saying?
We had 4th and 1's shoved back in our face? We attempted 30 4th down conversions over a 13 game schedule which is a little more than 2 a game so I guess I don't remember all of those conversions shoved back in our face? Especially when we had KaDeen rushing the ball most of those conversions. The guy fell forward on every carry so again, I guess I don't remember those times when KaDeem got shoved back.dmjcat wrote:
I would argue that we had better depth when Foles/Scott were #1/#2 (I would take Scott over all 3 of the backups we have at the moment). A large chunk of the 4000 yards you refer to were a direct result of having a top-flight college back (now in the NFL) that we won't have this year. Regarding our OL, the tackles are quite good (Ebelles and Baucus both have a shot at the league) but the interior of the line was pretty weak last year. We had so many 4th and 1's shoved back into our face it would be hard to count.
I'm all for pre-season Kool-Aid drinking............just as long as we can all understand that its Kool-Aid!
Let me help your obviously failing memory...........Do you remember Kadeem Carey being stuffed on two 4th & 1's during the asu game last year??? I have pasted an article about it below:dc4azcats wrote:We had 4th and 1's shoved back in our face? We attempted 30 4th down conversions over a 13 game schedule which is a little more than 2 a game so I guess I don't remember all of those conversions shoved back in our face? Especially when we had KaDeen rushing the ball most of those conversions. The guy fell forward on every carry so again, I guess I don't remember those times when KaDeem got shoved back.dmjcat wrote:
I would argue that we had better depth when Foles/Scott were #1/#2 (I would take Scott over all 3 of the backups we have at the moment). A large chunk of the 4000 yards you refer to were a direct result of having a top-flight college back (now in the NFL) that we won't have this year. Regarding our OL, the tackles are quite good (Ebelles and Baucus both have a shot at the league) but the interior of the line was pretty weak last year. We had so many 4th and 1's shoved back into our face it would be hard to count.
I'm all for pre-season Kool-Aid drinking............just as long as we can all understand that its Kool-Aid!
Utah according to Phil Steele returns 6 on O and 6 on D while Arizona returns 7 on O and 6 on D.dmjcat wrote:I never said we "Can't" beat Utah at SLC, I just don't think we will. Utah returns more starters (including their QB) and will be playing at home, where they are quite tough. They beat Stanford at home last year and should have knocked of the scum. Our primary weapon that we relied on to beat them last year is now playing in the league.dc4azcats wrote:Seriously? So we can't beat Utah because we don't have KaDeem TY? That's some insight right there.dmjcat wrote: Whats to get??? How about we don't have Kadeem this year?? Do you GET that??????
Let's see Utah doesn't have the same team as LY, and stay with me on this, but we don't have the same team either. We won't be relying on the running game TY like we did LY to win games. Are you still with me? See guys graduate so LY's team has nothing to do with TY's team. Utah had the 3rd best D vs the run LY which goes back to my point that they felt they could stop KaDeem and win the game because they didn't think KaDeem was worth a crap. Denker wasn't worth a crap in that game and they couldn't stop KaDeem. Again, none of that has anything to do with TY's game.
Utah ranked 10th in the conf LY in pass defense. That's a big deal because they lost most of their secondary and they lost their best pass rusher in Reilly. It's also a big deal when you look at what Arizona will have when it goes 5 wide. When you couldn't cover anybody LY and the guys you have coming in are unproven it makes for a tall task to think you can cover what Arizona will bring to the WR position.
Correct me if I'm wrong but you think we don't have a QB to get the ball to the WR's and thus because we don't have KaDeem to run the ball we will lose the game? Is that what you're saying?
Correct me if I'm wrong but you said "We had so many 4th and 1's shoved back into our face it would be hard to count" and of the 30 attempts you're talking about 2 that happened against an Assu team that was pretty good on D? They also had 9 starters who are gone from that D. 2 of 30?dmjcat wrote:Let me help your obviously failing memory...........Do you remember Kadeem Carey being stuffed on two 4th & 1's during the asu game last year??? I have pasted an article about it below:dc4azcats wrote:We had 4th and 1's shoved back in our face? We attempted 30 4th down conversions over a 13 game schedule which is a little more than 2 a game so I guess I don't remember all of those conversions shoved back in our face? Especially when we had KaDeen rushing the ball most of those conversions. The guy fell forward on every carry so again, I guess I don't remember those times when KaDeem got shoved back.dmjcat wrote:
I would argue that we had better depth when Foles/Scott were #1/#2 (I would take Scott over all 3 of the backups we have at the moment). A large chunk of the 4000 yards you refer to were a direct result of having a top-flight college back (now in the NFL) that we won't have this year. Regarding our OL, the tackles are quite good (Ebelles and Baucus both have a shot at the league) but the interior of the line was pretty weak last year. We had so many 4th and 1's shoved back into our face it would be hard to count.
I'm all for pre-season Kool-Aid drinking............just as long as we can all understand that its Kool-Aid!
The Wildcats went for it on 4th and 1 two plays into the second quarter, but running back Ka’Deem Carey was stopped seven yards behind the line of scrimmage by Devil backer Carl Bradford and ASU took over at their own 47. 1:23 later, the score stood at 20-0 after running back D.J. Foster ran in from 14 yards out for another Sun Devil touchdown. UA went for it on 4th and 1 again the next drive and Carey was again stopped, but this time for no gain
Teams may not have to stack the box against us........we won't have Kadeem running the ball this year. Opposing defenses will be able to play the pass without the threat of Kadeem running all over them.azcat49 wrote:I certainly agree with the Foles/Scott 1-2 being the best but of course that is because we have seen what they could do.
One can only wonder what kind of output Foles/Grigsby and the Gronk might have had with RR.
Our line should be better this year and I think Gurrola with a year of experience along with Bundage and Alsadek should help us be close to the top in rushing. Teams won't be able to stack the box this year because of our wideout and a QB who can get it to them
Pure speculation? Not according to the folks that I know who have watched every practice of the Fall camp. Not even close. I haven't heard anybody say we're screwed because we don't have a QB that can get it to our WR's. Again, I'm talking about people that have been at every practice and focused on our QB situation.dmjcat wrote:Teams may not have to stack the box against us........we won't have Kadeem running the ball this year. Opposing defenses will be able to play the pass without the threat of Kadeem running all over them.azcat49 wrote:I certainly agree with the Foles/Scott 1-2 being the best but of course that is because we have seen what they could do.
One can only wonder what kind of output Foles/Grigsby and the Gronk might have had with RR.
Our line should be better this year and I think Gurrola with a year of experience along with Bundage and Alsadek should help us be close to the top in rushing. Teams won't be able to stack the box this year because of our wideout and a QB who can get it to them
As far as "A QB that can get it to them".......that is pure speculation that remains to be seen.
I hope you are correct.
We had 4th and 1's shoved back in our face? We attempted 30 4th down conversions over a 13 game schedule which is a little more than 2 a game so I guess I don't remember all of those conversions shoved back in our face? Especially when we had KaDeen rushing the ball most of those conversions. The guy fell forward on every carry so again, I guess I don't remember those times when KaDeem got shoved back.[/quote]dmjcat wrote:I would argue that we had better depth when Foles/Scott were #1/#2 (I would take Scott over all 3 of the backups we have at the moment). A large chunk of the 4000 yards you refer to were a direct result of having a top-flight college back (now in the NFL) that we won't have this year. Regarding our OL, the tackles are quite good (Ebelles and Baucus both have a shot at the league) but the interior of the line was pretty weak last year. We had so many 4th and 1's shoved back into our face it would be hard to count.
I'm all for pre-season Kool-Aid drinking............just as long as we can all understand that its Kool-Aid!
Wow!! we go from saying we had "so many" to naming 2, to if I can't remember shame on me? Let's see, we won't win because we don't have KaDeem but, it wouldn't matter anyway because he couldn't convert on 4th down because our OL sucked. The same OL that doesn't know how to block while we still found a way to gain 3,444 yard on the ground? Which is it? KaDeem sucks but he doesn't really suck? Or the OL sucks because we couldn't convert on the just over 2 4th down conversions that we averaged a game? I don't know the breakdown between pass or run on 4th down but I'll go out on a limb and say that it wasn't a hand off to KaDeem every time. But all of the above is why we will lose to Utah and the fact that they beat Stanford LY?dmjcat wrote:
I can provide more examples, but as you already stated "I guess I don't remember all of those conversions shoved back in our face? Especially when we had KaDeen rushing the ball most of those conversions"
Hell, if you can't even remember the asu game you surely don't remember anything before that! ROTFLMAO
Wow!! we go from saying we had "so many" to naming 2, to if I can't remember shame on me? Let's see, we won't win because we don't have KaDeem but, it wouldn't matter anyway because he couldn't convert on 4th down because our OL sucked. The same OL that doesn't know how to block while we still found a way to gain 3,444 yard on the ground? Which is it? KaDeem sucks but he doesn't really suck? Or the OL sucks because we couldn't convert on the just over 2 4th down conversions that we averaged a game? I don't know the breakdown between pass or run on 4th down but I'll go out on a limb and say that it wasn't a hand off to KaDeem every time. But all of the above is why we will lose to Utah and the fact that they beat Stanford LY?[/quote]dmjcat wrote:
I can provide more examples, but as you already stated "I guess I don't remember all of those conversions shoved back in our face? Especially when we had KaDeen rushing the ball most of those conversions"
Hell, if you can't even remember the asu game you surely don't remember anything before that! ROTFLMAO
Teams may not have to stack the box against us........we won't have Kadeem running the ball this year. Opposing defenses will be able to play the pass without the threat of Kadeem running all over them.dmjcat wrote:One can only wonder what kind of output Foles/Grigsby and the Gronk might have had with RR.
Our line should be better this year and I think Gurrola with a year of experience along with Bundage and Alsadek should help us be close to the top in rushing. Teams won't be able to stack the box this year because of our wideout and a QB who can get it to them
Hahahaha!! Because it takes an NFL expert to know if a QB can complete a pass and lead a team down the field? News flash for you - it's not that difficult of a task to watch the one on one drills, then the 7 on 7 drills, then the 11 on 11 drills to see if somebody can play the position or not. You wouldn't believe what I'm saying even if I told you who my sources are so it's no sweat of my back. Again, it goes back to what I was discussing with azcat49 the other night and you truly have been the poster child of a large portion of the Arizona fan base. Props to you.dmjcat wrote:
"I'm talking about people that have been at every practice and focused on our QB situation" No doubt these experts you refer to are NFL QB coaches who don't have anything better to do at the moment??? I hope I end up drinking the same Kool-Aid you've been drinking (It must be pretty good stuff!) but you will forgive me if I await actual results on the field. We'll find out if our QB talent has elevated since last year soon in Eugene Oregon. If we lose before then I suspect at least half the board will be calling for RRods scalp and the other half will start doing a basketball tip-off countdown.
dmjcat wrote:
"I'm talking about people that have been at every practice and focused on our QB situation" No doubt these experts you refer to are NFL QB coaches who don't have anything better to do at the moment??? I hope I end up drinking the same Kool-Aid you've been drinking (It must be pretty good stuff!) but you will forgive me if I await actual results on the field. We'll find out if our QB talent has elevated since last year soon in Eugene Oregon. If we lose before then I suspect at least half the board will be calling for RRods scalp and the other half will start doing a basketball tip-off countdown.
Teams may not have to stack the box against us........we won't have Kadeem running the ball this year. Opposing defenses will be able to play the pass without the threat of Kadeem running all over them.dmjcat wrote:Our line should be better this year and I think Gurrola with a year of experience along with Bundage and Alsadek should help us be close to the top in rushing. Teams won't be able to stack the box this year because of our wideout and a QB who can get it to them
dmjcat wrote:
"I'm talking about people that have been at every practice and focused on our QB situation" No doubt these experts you refer to are NFL QB coaches who don't have anything better to do at the moment??? I hope I end up drinking the same Kool-Aid you've been drinking (It must be pretty good stuff!) but you will forgive me if I await actual results on the field. We'll find out if our QB talent has elevated since last year soon in Eugene Oregon. If we lose before then I suspect at least half the board will be calling for RRods scalp and the other half will start doing a basketball tip-off countdown.
Where did I say Summer? I'm talking Fall camp right now. I did say practices didn't I? Stay with me on this, the team during Fall Camp does one on one drills, then they will do some 7 on 7 drills then they do 11 on 11 drills. At the end of practice RR will put the O (that includes the QB) in some difficult positions to see who is doing sprints at the end of practices - offense or defense. You know the whole bit on comfortable being uncomfortable? It's also at those times when the Non NFL experts that I know get a chance to watch the QB's under pressure. So again, pretty much every thing you wrote above is nothing but garbage on your part. Nice effort. You are really nailing it tonight with your insight into the Arizona football program.dmjcat wrote:
If you really think that summer 7 on 7 drills (where the players all know each other and go half speed) are an indicator of actual play on the field then you are even MORE clueless than I thought. By your logic half the HS QB's in Tucson will be Heisman trophy candidates.
Pure speculation? Not according to the folks that I know who have watched every practice of the Fall camp. Not even close. I haven't heard anybody say we're screwed because we don't have a QB that can get it to our WR's. Again, I'm talking about people that have been at every practice and focused on our QB situation.dc4azcats wrote:Teams may not have to stack the box against us........we won't have Kadeem running the ball this year. Opposing defenses will be able to play the pass without the threat of Kadeem running all over them.dmjcat wrote:Our line should be better this year and I think Gurrola with a year of experience along with Bundage and Alsadek should help us be close to the top in rushing. Teams won't be able to stack the box this year because of our wideout and a QB who can get it to them
As far as "A QB that can get it to them".......that is pure speculation that remains to be seen.
I hope you are correct.
dmjcat wrote:
"I'm talking about people that have been at every practice and focused on our QB situation" No doubt these experts you refer to are NFL QB coaches who don't have anything better to do at the moment??? I hope I end up drinking the same Kool-Aid you've been drinking (It must be pretty good stuff!) but you will forgive me if I await actual results on the field. We'll find out if our QB talent has elevated since last year soon in Eugene Oregon. If we lose before then I suspect at least half the board will be calling for RRods scalp and the other half will start doing a basketball tip-off countdown.
Where did I say Summer? I'm talking Fall camp right now. I did say practices didn't I? Stay with me on this, the team during Fall Camp does one on one drills, then they will do some 7 on 7 drills then they do 11 on 11 drills. At the end of practice RR will put the O (that includes the QB) in some difficult positions to see who is doing sprints at the end of practices - offense or defense. You know the whole bit on comfortable being uncomfortable? It's also at those times when the Non NFL experts that I know get a chance to watch the QB's under pressure. So again, pretty much every thing you wrote above is nothing but garbage on your part. Nice effort. You are really nailing it tonight with your insight into the Arizona football program.dmjcat wrote:
If you really think that summer 7 on 7 drills (where the players all know each other and go half speed) are an indicator of actual play on the field then you are even MORE clueless than I thought. By your logic half the HS QB's in Tucson will be Heisman trophy candidates.
Utah is going to have to cover Hill, Philips, Neal and Jones. If those guys need a break then there's Grant, Richards, Griffey, and more. Their secondary isn't going to have the experience and then they're also going to be gassed trying to run around the field with those guys. By then we're going to have the running attack figured out very nicely and the O-line is already a strong point for the team. If these guys want to believe Utah is going to beat Arizona, they're entitled to their opinion, but that's a hard opinion to defend.dc4azcats wrote:It's always the guy that has nothing to respond with that posts what you just did.
Hmm... I read somewhere else that Utah had 16 returners to UA's 14, but I wouldn't distrust Phil Steele.dc4azcats wrote: Utah according to Phil Steele returns 6 on O and 6 on D while Arizona returns 7 on O and 6 on D.
Wrong again. I merely posted my prediction for UA's season....7-5 and I was attacked by a dimwit who called me "Poster Child". From now on thats my new name for you.........."Poster Child". A typical, pompous ass armchair QB who wouldn't recognize real talent if it bit him in the ass.dc4azcats wrote:It's always the guy that has nothing to respond with that posts what you just did.
Nope, it's not. But it ain't SLC either. Head up there and go for a jog sometime. You won't think it's overblown then. But these kids are elite athletes, so it won't be a huge barrier. A noticeable one? Yeah.Chicat wrote:I feel like the altitude thing is overblown. Tucson isn't some low lying sea level town.
It's always the guy that has nothing to respond with that posts what you just did. Two pages and you brought nothing to the discussion. Except the above. That and we don't have KaDeem anymore and Utah beat Stanford LY.dmjcat wrote:Wrong again. I merely posted my prediction for UA's season....7-5 and I was attacked by a dimwit who called me "Poster Child". From now on thats my new name for you.........."Poster Child". A typical, pompous ass armchair QB who wouldn't recognize real talent if it bit him in the ass.dc4azcats wrote:It's always the guy that has nothing to respond with that posts what you just did.
It's a greater climb for schools near or at sea level to play in Tucson (2400 feet) than it is for us to play in Salt Lake City (4200 feet).Puerco wrote:Nope, it's not. But it ain't SLC either. Head up there and go for a jog sometime. You won't think it's overblown then. But these kids are elite athletes, so it won't be a huge barrier. A noticeable one? Yeah.Chicat wrote:I feel like the altitude thing is overblown. Tucson isn't some low lying sea level town.
Chicat wrote:I feel like the altitude thing is overblown. Tucson isn't some low lying sea level town.
I live in Tucson but I've been to SLC a bunch the last year, and I have run both training runs and races up there. I've never noticed a difference up there, and I'm obviously not nearly as trained as our athletes are. I agree that the altitude thing is way overblown, at least in reference to the altitude in SLC. FWIW, I lived at sea level until coming here for college 7 year ago.Chicat wrote:I feel like the altitude thing is overblown. Tucson isn't some low lying sea level town.
azgreg wrote:These guys have us 6-6, but anywhere from 5-7 to 8-4.
http://www.sports-ratings.com/college_f ... dcats.html
The loss of ... BJ Denker hits the offense hard
His numbers weren't bad once they figured out his accuracy improved when he was on the run. But nobody ever watched a UA game and thought he was anything more than ball security.BJ Denker (2,516 yards, 16 TDs, 7 int) was a good passer
2600 feet, actually, so you're even more right. Yeah, I can't comment much on that.TheBlackLodge wrote:It's a greater climb for schools near or at sea level to play in Tucson (2400 feet) than it is for us to play in Salt Lake City (4200 feet).Puerco wrote:Nope, it's not. But it ain't SLC either. Head up there and go for a jog sometime. You won't think it's overblown then. But these kids are elite athletes, so it won't be a huge barrier. A noticeable one? Yeah.Chicat wrote:I feel like the altitude thing is overblown. Tucson isn't some low lying sea level town.
How good is CU football?Chicat wrote:I feel like the altitude thing is overblown. Tucson isn't some low lying sea level town.
http://espn.go.com/college-football/sto ... tions-2014If you think Rich Rodriguez lost his touch at Michigan, you haven't been paying attention to what the Wildcats have done the past two seasons. Rodriguez went 8-5 both years playing with a team not recruited for his spread system. He's in year three now, and as long as redshirt freshman quarterback Anu Solomon takes care of the ball, Arizona will put up points. The Wildcats skip Stanford and Oregon State and get two weeks off in the first eight weeks of the season, which should keep them healthy for the stretch run. This is a good dark horse.
Say what?! Most coaches, DCs or otherwise, respect the hell out of Rich Rodriguez and what he can do with an offense. Not a one of them, anywhere, is going to consider Arizona's offense a "breather," especially at that point in the season.dmjcat wrote: I understand exactly how talented our WR corps is.........What you fail to realize is that we do not have a proven QB to get them the ball. Two of our top 3 QB's couldn't even complete 50% of their passes at the JC level.......and the PAC12 is not a JC league. The presumed starter is a frosh. I doubt our passing game is going to instill fear in our PAC12 opponents. Given the depth/quality of the returning QB's in the conference this year I suspect most defensive coordinators will look at the UA game as a breather.
So you think that after facing:BearDown89 wrote:Say what?! Most coaches, DCs or otherwise, respect the hell out of Rich Rodriguez and what he can do with an offense. Not a one of them, anywhere, is going to consider Arizona's offense a "breather," especially at that point in the season.dmjcat wrote: I understand exactly how talented our WR corps is.........What you fail to realize is that we do not have a proven QB to get them the ball. Two of our top 3 QB's couldn't even complete 50% of their passes at the JC level.......and the PAC12 is not a JC league. The presumed starter is a frosh. I doubt our passing game is going to instill fear in our PAC12 opponents. Given the depth/quality of the returning QB's in the conference this year I suspect most defensive coordinators will look at the UA game as a breather.
Easily the most ridiculous statement I've read on the internet. Ever.
No. They BEAT us in Tucson, we lose our starting QB and our best player (Carey) and we are playing them at Wazzu and you think we are a cinch to win??? Your logic escapes me.azgreg wrote:Anybody want to change their Cougar prediction?
You want to stop putting words in my mouth asshole?dmjcat wrote:No. They BEAT us in Tucson, we lose our starting QB and our best player (Carey) and we are playing them at Wazzu and you think we are a cinch to win??? Your logic escapes me.azgreg wrote:Anybody want to change their Cougar prediction?
You predicted a 9-4 record for the UA....which obviously implies you think UA will beat WSU.azgreg wrote:You want to stop putting words in my mouth asshole?dmjcat wrote:No. They BEAT us in Tucson, we lose our starting QB and our best player (Carey) and we are playing them at Wazzu and you think we are a cinch to win??? Your logic escapes me.azgreg wrote:Anybody want to change their Cougar prediction?
And their defense looks like garbage.dc4azcats wrote:It's great that Wazzu can throw it all over the field, but at some point you need to run the ball. 7 yards rushing on 11 carries is pretty pathetic.
Nope. Not one bit. WSU is a one trick pony.dmjcat wrote:
You predicted a 9-4 record for the UA....which obviously implies you think UA will beat WSU.
Halliday, by the way, is starting to smoke Rutgers.........do YOU want to change your WSU prediction????