My One Concern From Yesterday

There was a rush - a rush is not just sacks. Sacks occur when the QB is willing at least in principle to take one.

This QB was not. He was snap 1, 2 throw every time.

He was TTU-style. He was not standing in the pocket under pressure in the face of the rush he got the ball out immediately whether anyone was open or not. This was great in the first quarter but not so much after that.

This is a successful rush. Count how long he ever held the ball.
 
For once, the preseason reports appear accurate: we have better line play, better lb play, leaky frightening secondary, average rb's and wr's. The predictions of 8-4 or 9-3 appear accurate.
 
Jesus Christ, some fans drive me ******* nuts.

It was the first game for a young secondary that has nothing but F and RSF playing at safety, in its first game under a new D coordinator. Did you geniuses think they'd come out and play mistake free football in their very first game against a very good QB and receiver corp? If so, have fun being miserable this season.

This will be a defense that is inconsistent early, but I fully expect them to improve each week. If things progress the way I believe they will, we'll have one hell of a good D by OU. Not perfect but one we can win the conference w/.

As far as the pressure, we played a pretty vanilla base from what I could tell. If there were a lot of blitzes, they came when I wasn't watching the game.

I'd like to see some things get done better myself, but I'm willing to say that FOR A FIRST GAME, it was a pretty good ******* performance.
 
I saw the game on PPV and the D line did pressure their QB, a lot. Maybe the stats did not reflect it, but our line was in his face many times and rushed his throws.

Remember, their QB is a great passer and will be drafted. And Shellenberger know how to coach passing schemes well. He designed their attack to get the ball out quickly due to our line strength.
 
I don't think the pressure was fantastic, but it wasn't bad either. Their QB is legit,and he did a great job of getting rid of the ball before we could get to him. If the pass rush wasn't as good as it was, he would have completed a lot more passes.
 
I also think it's too early to judge the running backs. First series we ran the ball well, and then GD went to the spread to work on the pass. I think we could have run the ball all night if he wanted to. Colt got hot (hit his for 13), so you go with the hot hand. McGee averaged over 5 yards a carry.

They overplayed the zone read to the backs side and Colt kept the ball a lot. He gets over 100 yds and a lot of that was within the offense. If he can successfully run, that opens up the zone read. The one disappointment in the running game was Chiles. Hopefully he can get it going next time.
 
FAU's QB had a very quick release and wasn't going to take a sack. The pressure got to him a number of times causing him to force throws, resulting in 1 int, and more than a couple over/under thrown balls.

The front 4 did a good job of getting in there, but Smith just would get rid of the ball very quick and FAU usually left the TE and RB in to block.
 
I echo Maduro's post.

They only had 292 total yards for the game and most of that came in the 1st half. UT absolutely shut them down in the 2nd half. They only had 37 rushing yards for the game. Overall they gained 6.5 yards per completion and 4.7 yards per play. That is not bad for a young secondary that features 5 frosh safeties and 2 frosh DB's.

Let's just all take a step back and realize that this was a great scrimmage for that young secondary. Yes they made mistakes. Yes they will make many more mistakes. Let's watch for the improvement.
 
Clearly we're disguising our playbook so that when the OU game comes around we can surprise them by running all the same plays from earlier in the year. You might think we would unleash our secret plays then but thats just what they are expecting!
 
in our opener last year we gave up 272 yards passing and 125 rushing to Arkansas State. and that was with three seniors starting in the secondary! nuff said, quit your bitching. this is definately a step forward.
 
The prior one and a half seasons, we've had a hell of a time getting any pressure on the QB at all. We were pretty good at it up through the game @Nebraska in 2006, but as soon as Lokey went down our ability to get into the backfield went to **** for the rest of the year. And in 2007, we never really established that aspect of the game much at all.

On Saturday, I saw a different problem. I thought we did a great job actually getting into the backfield, but we didn't get any sacks for 2 reasons. First, as others have mentioned, FAU's QB has a very quick release. Second, the coverage downfield wasn't good enough. People often forget that sacks actually tend to require two elements: 1) getting into the backfield, and 2) having good enough coverage that the QB isn't able to throw it to an open receiver right before he gets hit. There were quite a few instances on Saturday where I thought #2 was lacking.
 
Wow. Some of you are thin skinned.

I made clear I had not seen the game in any capacity and had nothing but a box score to go on at the time; I wasn't claiming telepathy. Based on QB Hurry stats it appeared one way but that's why I was asking for feedback from others who actually saw it to tell me if the stats were decieving. Thanks to most of you who gave the calm rational feedback.

To those who melted down over an attempt to get some clarification I can only say go have another beer, take your blood pressure medication, and count to ten before interacting with curious children.
laugh.gif
 
My biggest concern was the lack of open field tackling by the secondary in the first half. I didn't see it as bad in the second half so maybe it was addressed in the locker room at halftime.

hookem.gif
 
As expected the area that concerns me the most is the DBs. They were having to think about it before they could react to it. This will get better in time, as should the open field tackling. I saw a lot of raw talent that needs a year or two of game experience. Taking into account the way the young RBs and Colt looked, I think we are only a season away from being a very serious MNC contender.
 
Given that Rusty Smith completed fewer than half of his passes, I think our defense did a good job of getting pressure on him. They did give up way too many big plays in the first half, but they are young and still learning. Hopefully they will get better with experience.

I only have one other nitpick with the game: our offensive playcalling seemed to go conservative on the last series of the first half. I would have liked to have seen us run some kind of two-minute drill on offense and move the ball down the field. Perhaps our coaches did not want to chance running up the score, but we ended up having to punt back to FAU again. If our defense had given up a big play for a score after that, the game would have been much closer at the half.

Great game overall though. Lots to build on from here.
 
In reply to:
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Not real familiar with the loss of personnel at UVA since last year, are you?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Actually, I am. They lost a lot of guys. (By the way, so did SC, including 4 OL, their QB, and a few other guys on offense -- which scored 52 and rolled up 555 anyway. Most of the defense returned, but the offense was decimated by graduation.)

So what? UVa is still a BCS school playing at home and FAU is still a mid-minor playing on the road in front of 98,000. The two are simply not comparable in terms of the "impressiveness" of the wins.
 
No defensive coordinator brings out his entire scheme against a first game opponent like FAU. That just gives everyone else tape to work against.

You'll see some sacks for sure against Arky and even more schemage once we hit mizzou and OU, as Muschamp starts sending in the dogs at linebacker.
 
Muschamp didn't break out too many exotic blitz packages for this game, and with good reason. It seemed to me that the main focus was getting everyone into pass coverage to act as a safety net for the young secondary. It's kind of the opposite of last year, where the safeties were picking up all the slack for the linebackers. The linemen were harassing the qb, but couldn't get to him without any pressure from the linebackers. As the safeties and especially the corner backs get better, I think the linebackers will help spread out the offensive line, creating some sack opportunities. Once Rak and Roy Miller get freed up from the double teams they saw on Saturday, they should start piling up some great looking stats.
 
I don't see him on the top 11 from this site:

Hunter Cantwell, Louisville
Height: 6'5 - Weight: 230
Cantwell has the size and arm strength of a pro QB. He just has to prove he can play every week.
Tim Tebow, Florida
Height: 6'3 - Weight: 235
Tebow looked good throwing the ball last season, but needs to prove he can sit in the pocket most downs and throw the ball accurately.
Matthew Stafford, Georgia
Height: 6'3 - Weight: 237
Matthew Stafford has all the physical attributes you look for in an NFL quarterback. Like Cantwell and Tebow he just needs to show he can get the job done consistently.
Chase Daniel, Missouri
Height: 6'0 - Weight: 223
Chase Daniel is a little on the short side for an NFL quarterback, but so was Drew Brees.
Todd Boeckman, Ohio State
Height: 6'5 - Weight: 243
Boeckman is a huge QB with a cannon for an arm. He just needs to show he can avoid the rush in the pocket and get rid of the ball.
Cullen Harper, Clemson
Height: 6'4 - Weight: 215
Cullen Harper looked fantastic last season. Another year like that will get him into 2009's second round.
Nate Long shore, California
Height: 6'5 - Weight: 233
Like most of the other QB's in this class, Longshore has shown flashes of brilliance. He just needs to do it week in and week out.
Graham Harrell, Texas Tech
Height: 6'2 - Weight: 196
Harrell is next years Colt Brennan. Scout will want to know if he's a system QB, or if he can get it done at the NFL level.
Curtis Painter, Purdue
Height: 6'4 - Weight: 223
When he's on, Painter is as good as any QB in this group. The problem is he's too streaky, not just from game to game, but from quarter to quarter.
Colt McCoy, Texas
Height: 6'3 - Weight: 205
McCoy needs to rebound from an interception plagued season in 2007. If he can return to his 2006 form he one of the best in the country.
Pat White, West Virginia
Height: 6'2 - Weight: 185
Pat White will likely move to wide receiver in the NFL. Unless, he shows he can sit in the pocket and make all the throws in a pro QB's arsenal.

Or the top 30 from this site (even McGee made this list):
The Link
 
My bad. I was looking at 2009 rankings. He is ranked #10 in the 2010 draft. Oddly enough, he jumps in front of McCoy. Still not sold the guy is any better than Harrell, Bradford, Daniel, or even Reesing.

Here is the link:
The Link
 
"Their front four really did a number on us tonight. They pressured me well. We knew they would have great athletes and they did."

- FAU Quarterback Rusty Smith after the game -
 
Like Rusty Smith is going to say - "I really did not think they got much pressure on me. I see no difference between this line and the pressure from the linebackers as the tape I saw from last year's team."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Recent Threads

Back
Top