Illinois Hokie's Recent Comments

Reposting from the game thread.

*dominant

Grind em into submission.

Over 100 comments and hour and a half before kickoff. Fair to say Hokie Nation is starting to feel it a little bit.

To be fair, I think most of the chest-thumping was in response to Andrew's answer to the final question. Up to that point, he's broken down UNC's performance with some pretty good detail. (And, as you mentioned, in his own free time.) And then when Joey asks him for a prediction, that kind of goes off the rails a little bit. I think it's comments like this that raised some hackles around here:

As great as Foster is at what he does, I don't see the Tar Heels slowing down much offensively.

Okay. Why? Is there something Andrew sees in Foster's defense that makes him think Fedora and Trusbisky can exploit it? Because despite all the in depth analysis Andrew has provided up to this point, here he just comes across as throwing shade.

It would be one thing if Andrew had said, "I see UNC coming out on top," and left it at that. But instead he basically says Foster can't stop their offense, and then turns around and says the UNC D will be ready for VT because of the offense the Tarheels run. All that after the "unless Miami just never loses" comment that, regardless of Andrew's intent, comes across as saying that if UNC is going to drop a Coastal game, it wouldn't be to VT. Those are baited comments, and some people responded only to them and not to any of the (quality) analysis.

Granted, not everyone articulated the reasons why we disagree with Andrew's assessment, but you already published a pretty good summation of that in French's analysis of UNC.

I am not a proud man.

To be honest, I still wonder how much of that was a lack of buy-in. We were off a decidedly underwhelming win against Liberty, and even though we went up two fast scores on the Vols, how much of the implosion after the bad snap/fumble was attributed to a sense of "ohshitohshitohshit" sinking in? Compare, by contrast, how the offense reacted in the first quarter against ECU, when things just weren't clicking on offense. No panic, no forcing things. They just kept grinding until they hit their groove, and then it was bye, Felicia. Granted, we weren't down at the time, but the ECU-sized monkey on the program's back might have been enough to incite panic. Plus, Fuente strikes me as very much an "ignore the scoreboard" kind of guy. If the dedication to the scheme we exhibited against the Pirates indicates buy-in, you might already have your answer.

This should honestly be posted somewhere conspicuous. Most of us know what each of those things do, because we were here when they were introduced. But they aren't intuitive, and this site is about to see an influx of new members as Fuente returns the program to national prominence and the jaded/bandwagon fans return to the discussion. There should be a "Guide to the Comments Section" somewhere.

Too soon.

Fuck Tammy.

He means the offense and defense compliment complement each other. He says as much in the same sentence.

Yeah, I get that it's a vocabulary error. I'm saying by context clues, the meaning is evident.