Does anyone think we should have played Harris a bit more against Kentucky? It seems like it'll be pretty tricky to rotate him in against Ole Miss, though I think we might actually need him to win the game. We should employ a dual QB system with Harris running some triple option read with our a badass running backs. We've got to be a little daring against Ole Miss.
Here is my prediction and it is sort of a preemptive strike against the SSC. Instead of coming in after the fact, this time I'm going to call the ball before the kickoff and see what say the pumpers then. Some of you may not understand this, many of you won't but a few may catch on. There is a difference between playing to win and trying or "playing" not to lose. Anyone with 1 single competitive cell in their body should NEVER under any circumstances EVER game plan, coach or play "not to lose" Our coach does it ALL the time and it has been the root cause for most of the losses on his record (granted there aren't a ton of them) but a vast majority of the ones that are there are because of that very reason. This is exactly what you will see on Saturday evening in our house. He has the crowd, he has what he thinks is a good running game and he has a pocketful of fescue and that my friends is all he needs. Like the great Don Henley once sang "I could be wrong...but I'm not"
Come on...surely, we'll do better than that. Maybe. Maybe not, but that is why I don't make predictions. Personally, this game could fall anywhere from an AU-style debacle to a victory for our Tigers. None of us have any idea about that until the game starts tomorrow night. But I do know this...only foolish people predict for Les Miles' Tigers to lose. Just look at the odds.
That's your football prediction? Wasn't a lot of football in it, coach. What exactly constitutes "playing to lose"? Make an actual friggin' prediction. What specifically will Miles do on the football field "ALL of the time" that is playing "not to lose". Stick your neck out. For the moment we will just ignore that "not losing" constitutes "winning".
What kind of prediction is that? What am I supposed to be watching for? It was a simple question. What does "playing not to lose" mean?
I think you know exactly what "playing not to lose" means. You have watched enough football in your life to know the difference. If you still can't figure it out ask Gus Malzahn. He took his foot off the gas last season vs Florida State when Auburn had rolled to a 21-3 lead and lost the National Championship. He started playing not to lose one his team got a lead. You have seen coaches do that all the time.
