I thought to underachieve was to fail to meet expectations. Most expectations are for a 2-3 loss season. So is he saying he's thinking 4-5 losses? Or is he just wanting to redefine "underachieve" so that he can jab at LSU? Cause his article reads more like he doesn't expect LSU to achieve much with the adversity in front of them, not that he suspects LSU will underachieve. One final thought - Dorsey was terrific, no doubt. But the author obviously has no clue about the DL, in my opinion. They'll be better than last year as a unit, I think.
Agree - West Virginia and Virginia Tech predictions. Strongly Disagree - LSU's D-Line won't "pop" without Dorsey??? And ONCE AGAIN...for the 735th season in a row, USC is "by far" the most "complete" team in the country. Note to reporters: STOP BUYING BRAND NAMES AND START LOOKING AT THE PRODUCT!!
Most of these guys regurgitate what they read and rarely do a fair assessment. He obvioulsy has no clue about our d-line. Dorsey is a huge loss but we will still have 'pop'. We won't underachieve this year b/c the expectations aren't as high as last year due to what we lost from last year's team and our inexperience at QB. However, if our QB can at least not lose games for us, we may very well overachieve.
Skeptical, certainly. Heck, I'm skeptical, as well as a homer. But skeptical is different from calling us an underachiever. If we struggle this year, it'll be because of holes we have. I think we're just as capable of being called an overachiever by season's end. Tennessee? Not so much. And how can he have Tennessee as his overachiever if they aren't going to win their division? Isn't that the mark of achievement in the SEC? Oh, that's right, UGA convinced everyone last year that they were the best, even though they didn't win their division.
