Moderators: jcmanson, Sly Fox, BuryYourDuke, Class of 20Something



BJWilliams wrote:Petey had 164 yards in the first half Kiwon...and only attempted 7 passes in the second half. If anything I figure he was getting a break.If he wasn't hurt he would have played. The game was never really out of reach for KSU. I doubt it was just to rest him.
forbidden wrote:Defense: about B- : still have a few issues to clean up with running qb but all in all they got settled and were more physical than KSUGiving up 35 points to a first year program is a B-? lol
Chima is a man at this level what can he do at next
O'Grady was trying to rip Qb's head off every chance he got
still have one more option team to defend in CSU so get your minds right

BJWilliams wrote:Actually yes...you have to look deeper than the point total though. While we did give up 35 points, we never really trailed after getting down 7-0 early, and they only had three "explosive" plays. I'd much rather the defense give up a bunch of 3 and 4 yard plays than getting gashed routinely for 10-30+ yard playsThe defense should not be judged by whether we trailed during the game or only by how many explosive plays we gave up. The goal is certainly not to give up 3 or 4 yards per play let alone the nearly 5/attempt that we did. If any team consistently gives up that many rushing yards, you will lose games. We did not force them to attempt any field goals and only forced 2 punts. They were 9/14 in converting on third down.
bluejacket wrote:We did not force them to attempt any field goals and only forced 2 punts.That's because they were running the option on most fourth downs.
Cider Jim wrote:JW promised a WIN and he DELIVERED!!!He promised FOUR! He's 25% of the way there. Great job by JW and everyone on the team on a good win against a surprisingly strong upstart program.
PAmedic wrote:you're absolutely right
Cider Jim wrote:That's because they were running the option on most fourth downs.Agreed. But the defense has to stop them. They were 2/3 on 4th down.

bluejacket wrote:Cider Jim wrote:That's because they were running the option on most fourth downs.Agreed. But the defense has to stop them. They were 2/3 on 4th down.

BJWilliams wrote:Yours is a sad existence bluejacket, focusing on the negative. While yes there were things that need improvement over the next couple weeks, its not like we were terrible either. We were playing a brand New opponent in a difficult at times to defend scheme and we did what we had to do to win. Would you have been more effusive if we had say...allowed only 12 points, no fourth downs and less than 33% on third plus less than 300 yards of offense or something?Quit blowing sunshine all the time. We haven't played 4 quarters of good football in any game all season.
forbidden wrote:And those 4th down chances were all for about 2yds or less, that's almost like saying hey we should still bash JW because if he doesn't leave ball short on at least 2 long balls Shells would have scored two more TD's so offense should grade out at about a CThe defense was poor. Period. Just like every time we play a running QB or option offense.

forbidden wrote:agree that a QB that is mobile has caused us problems just like they cause others problems. Cover downfield QB takes off. Think back to last times going against option teams, LU was gashed by CSU, not this time, better prepared and job was completed. If you know about option at all which I would assume HCTG DOES, then they also know its a very difficult formation in which to defend. 3 yds a pop equals 4th and 1 of course you go for it, then they lull you to sleep and throw over the top. As was stated explosive plays minus 1 were eliminated. But that why I said B- (close to a C) because it was in no way shape form or fashion a C- closing in on a D as you wanted to say.Of the 4 D-I teams that KSU has played so far, our defense performed the 2nd worst. ETSU was the only one worse. Shorter had a better defensive performance against them than we did.