My Top 10 - reasons I'm pissed off

[Oakland]

This team has given me more hope for the program than I have had for 8-9 years. The D and O can look really good for any particular half (or sometimes even a full game!), no matter who the competition is. There are players on both sides of the ball, and there are a number who are not upperclassmen. The program is trending up - I'm happy about that.

However, there are a few things I'm not so happy about:

10) We chase their starting QB and their 2nd string QB comes in and is effective

9) We chase their starting QB and their 3rd string QB comes in and is effective

8) The refs' on field call is always against SU

7) The refs can't get the original call right

6) The replay refs can't get it right

5) Reddish drops the pick 6 (although, I'm sure he is more upset than me).

4) Way too many penalties against UCinn

3) Way too many penalties in way too many games.

2) HCDM calling for the 42 yd FG with ~6 min left - Coach you know 20x more about FB than I do, but I should be your 4th down play coach with plenipotentiate powers. That call was dumb, dumb, dumb.

1) This team finds a way to lose to yet another team that it could have easily beat

 

[Pyle]

Regarding the refs, go do some research on the treatment VT, Miami, and BC received on their way out the door. The BE has no love for us. It is much better for the sake of the BE if one of the staying members wins the conference. I'm not saying the refs are causing SU to lose, but I think the very questionable calls are going to go against us until the end of the season.

Regarding the FG, you're right the coach knows 20x more than you do. I had no problem with the call. If you make it I believe the team is down 8 at that point, you are 1 score and 2 pt conversion from tying. You go for it and miss and you are still down 2 scores. Assuming you actualy score a TD and convert after that but still lose by 3, the whole world is coming down on your for not kicking it. It's not like it was 4th and inches. The fact is DM's choice didn't work out anyway so it's easy to say we should have done the other, but make no mistake about it, if he goes for it on 4th and doesn't get it, there are even more questions to answer.

Easily beat? I don't think so. We had no answer for their 2nd string or wildcat QBs, none. And simply put they executed better than us down the stretch, the most likely reason for that is because they are just a little more talented and a little deeper than we were.

Make no mistake, the better team won on Saturday. There were mistakes on both sides of the ball, in the end they made more plays than we did and deserved to win.

 

[Oakland]

Regarding the refs, go do some research on the treatment VT, Miami, and BC received on their way out the door. The BE has no love for us. It is much better for the sake of the BE if one of the staying members wins the conference. I'm not saying the refs are causing SU to lose, but I think the very questionable calls are going to go against us until the end of the season.

Regarding the FG, you're right the coach knows 20x more than you do. I had no problem with the call. If you make it I believe the team is down 8 at that point, you are 1 score and 2 pt conversion from tying. You go for it and miss and you are still down 2 scores. Assuming you actualy score a TD and convert after that but still lose by 3, the whole world is coming down on your for not kicking it. It's not like it was 4th and inches. The fact is DM's choice didn't work out anyway so it's easy to say we should have done the other, but make no mistake about it, if he goes for it on 4th and doesn't get it, there are even more questions to answer.

Easily beat? I don't think so. We had no answer for their 2nd string or wildcat QBs, none. And simply put they executed better than us down the stretch, the most likely reason for that is because they are just a little more talented and a little deeper than we were.

Make no mistake, the better team won on Saturday. There were mistakes on both sides of the ball, in the end they made more plays than we did and deserved to win.

I'm not a conspiracy guy, and I doubt the refs intentional threw the game to Cinn. Plain and simple the refs sucked, and it cost SU, and I'm pissed about it.

The FG call was wrong because we had a far better chance of making the 4 yds than Ross had of making a 42 yder in the rain. You go for the 42 yder when time is running out in the game and you have a chance to win or tie.

The refs should have easily made the right call on the 1 qtr fumble and Reddish should have easily caught the ball throw into his gut with no one within 5-10 feet of him. Those two plays could have easily gone our way, and if they had, we probably would have won. That is what I meant by easily.

 

[Chip]

Regarding the refs, go do some research on the treatment VT, Miami, and BC received on their way out the door. The BE has no love for us. It is much better for the sake of the BE if one of the staying members wins the conference. I'm not saying the refs are causing SU to lose, but I think the very questionable calls are going to go against us until the end of the season.

Regarding the FG, you're right the coach knows 20x more than you do. I had no problem with the call. If you make it I believe the team is down 8 at that point, you are 1 score and 2 pt conversion from tying. You go for it and miss and you are still down 2 scores. Assuming you actualy score a TD and convert after that but still lose by 3, the whole world is coming down on your for not kicking it. It's not like it was 4th and inches. The fact is DM's choice didn't work out anyway so it's easy to say we should have done the other, but make no mistake about it, if he goes for it on 4th and doesn't get it, there are even more questions to answer.

Easily beat? I don't think so. We had no answer for their 2nd string or wildcat QBs, none. And simply put they executed better than us down the stretch, the most likely reason for that is because they are just a little more talented and a little deeper than we were.

Make no mistake, the better team won on Saturday. There were mistakes on both sides of the ball, in the end they made more plays than we did and deserved to win.

I'm with Rahme (per his article this morning). That team was not at all more talented than us. We beat ourselves. They pulled a few tricks out on TD plays and capitalized more on our mistakes than we did on theirs.

 

[Oakland]

I'm with Rahme (per his article this morning). That team was not at all more talented than us. We beat ourselves. They pulled a few tricks out on TD plays and capitalized more on our mistakes than we did on theirs.

Gotta say, I loved that jump pass: great call. Too bad it worked against us. I wish there was more of that in football. The Statue of Liberty play that Boise St pulled off on Oklahoma, a few years ago, may be the best executed play I have ever seen in FB.

 

[Pyle]

I'm with Rahme (per his article this morning). We beat ourselves. They pulled a few tricks out on TD plays and capitalized more on our mistakes than we did on theirs.

In other words, they made more plays than we did. This is a common theme this year, NW, Rutgers, Cinci, we fell just a little short in every game. There is a reason. It's not crazy to think those teams were a little more talented. Does that mean they are better at every skill position? No. Maybe what it means is their bench is a little deeper so their starters rest more giving them that extra umpf when they need it most. Maybe our guys are spread too thin and that's why they make more mistakes. This is what I mean by a little more talented and a little deeper. Did their punter shank a kick? No. He's more talented. It's the little things in close games that make all the difference. Of the 2 close games we've won, Pitt and USF, it was us who had the extra umpf and made less mistakes in the long run.

If you don't think it's talent, then it must be coaching. How many offsides were we called for? How many were they called for? You mention the trick plays, that would be our coaches getting beat as well. They completely caught us with our pants down on the jump pass. Why didn't we attempt a jump pass. It all adds up. We didn't get blown off the field but we certainly got beat.

 

[All4SU]

Gotta say, I loved that jump pass: great call. Too bad it worked against us. I wish there was more of that in football. The Statue of Liberty play that Boise St pulled off on Oklahoma, a few years ago, may be the best executed play I have ever seen in FB.

Agreed. Loved the creativity of that call. Faked us out of our jocks.

 

[kingtidge]

I'm with Rahme (per his article this morning). That team was not at all more talented than us. We beat ourselves. They pulled a few tricks out on TD plays and capitalized more on our mistakes than we did on theirs.

You can say that, but they also moved the ball on offense better against our defense consistently ( in second half particularly.)

Lots of mistakes on both sides, but at the end of the day, the team that executed better won.

I am really not on board with the "but if we only made this play or didn't make this mistake we would have won..." crowd.

We seem to make too many mistakes or focus blunders with far too much regularity (easy dropped passes, missed blocks, blown coverages).

A one-game aberration is one thing, a consistent track record of shooting yourself in the foot and finding ways to lose is another.

We're in the latter category this year. It's frustrating to be sure.

 

[Chip]

In other words, they made more plays than we did. This is a common theme this year, NW, Rutgers, Cinci, we fell just a little short in every game. There is a reason. It's not crazy to think those teams were a little more talented. Does that mean they are better at every skill position? No. Maybe what it means is their bench is a little deeper so their starters rest more giving them that extra umpf when they need it most. Maybe our guys are spread too thin and that's why they make more mistakes. This is what I mean by a little more talented and a little deeper. Did their punter shank a kick? No. He's more talented. It's the little things in close games that make all the difference. Of the 2 close games we've won, Pitt and USF, it was us who had the extra umpf and made less mistakes in the long run.

If you don't think it's talent, then it must be coaching. How many offsides were we called for? How many were they called for? You mention the trick plays, that would be our coaches getting beat as well. They completely caught us with our pants down on the jump pass. Why didn't we attempt a jump pass. It all adds up. We didn't get blown off the field but we certainly got beat.

Of course we got beat, did anyone argue that? More talented to me means that no matter where they play, the more talented team should win. Is that how you felt after Saturday's game? That even if we had them in the Dome, it wouldn't matter because they were flat out a more talented team? That's what we've seen in years past.

You're certainly entitled to that opinion, I just completely disagree with it.

They were the better team on Saturday because they made the most of their opportunities. Doesn't make them the more talented team. But again, we've had the discussion here before, I'm not sure anyone can define what the more talented team even means. So I'm just agreeing with Rahme on this one, because I think he knows more about football than just about anyone here.

 

[Pyle]

Of course we got beat, did anyone argue that? More talented to me means that no matter where they play, the more talented team should win. Is that how you felt after Saturday's game? That even if we had them in the Dome, it wouldn't matter because they were flat out a more talented team? That's what we've seen in years past.

That's exactly what I'm saying. We played tough but still lost by almost 2 TDs. Their backup qb threw 2 TDs against us. The RB had over 100 yards rushing. Legaux was a liability for them, and as soon as they pulled him, they never looked back. I'm pretty sure that teams beats us 8/10 even in the Dome.

 

[Chip]

That's exactly what I'm saying. We played tough but still lost by almost 2 TDs. Their backup qb threw 2 TDs against us. The RB had over 100 yards rushing. Legaux was a liability for them, and as soon as they pulled him, they never looked back. I'm pretty sure that teams beats us 8/10 even in the Dome.

Fair enough. I'm not trying to orange colored glasses this one. I just really don't agree. But unfortunately, we'll never know. Beating Louisville this weekend would help me believe my case.

 

[Pyle]

Fair enough. I'm not trying to orange colored glasses this one. I just really don't agree. But unfortunately, we'll never know. Beating Louisville this weekend would help me believe my case.

If we beat UL this weekend I will come back and declare beyond any doubt that I was dead wrong. I would love nothing more than to have you proven right.

 

[dollarbill44]

We lost because we played at noon. Same reason we will lose this Saturday and win @ Mizz.

 

[billsin01]

1) This team finds a way to lose to yet another team that it could have easily beat

This^^^ I think DM is doing a nice job here but the nagging, frustrating, scary thing about this program is that there have been an awful lot of truly winnable games going the other way the last calendar year or so. It's not inexcusable, but it can be troubling, particlarly when we're doing really bizarre things like kicking that -ing FG.

 

[billsin01]

Fair enough. I'm not trying to orange colored glasses this one. I just really don't agree. But unfortunately, we'll never know. Beating Louisville this weekend would help me believe my case.

The thing I fear about the talent argument is when do you stop pointing to talent (or, conversely, when do you get blamed for not addressing the talent disparity)? I don't find it hard to believe that Cincy is more talented than us but I do find it hard to believe it's "the reason" we lost.

If you look at this in a broader context, sloppy play, mental errors, strange clock/game situation management decisions -- they feel like they are starting to become a trend.

That said, I'm not panicking. I think this was a team somewhere in the neighborhood of .500. If DM gets them there or even to 5-7, the sky won't be falling.

 

[dollarbill44]

This^^^ I think DM is doing a nice job here but the nagging, frustrating, scary thing about this program is that there have been an awful lot of truly winnable games going the other way the last calendar year or so. It's not inexcusable, but it can be troubling, particlarly when we're doing really bizarre things like kicking that -ing FG.

While you may not agree with it, calling it "really bizarre" to kick a 42-yard FG when you're down a TD and a FG is quite a stretch.

I agree that the trend of losing most of the winnable, close games is troubling.

 

[billsin01]

While you may not agree with it, calling it "really bizarre" to kick a 42-yard FG when you're down a TD and a FG is quite a stretch.

I can see your point but I guess I feel that way b/c you have a struggling (or at least inconsistent) kicker, your defense hasn't exactly been stellar (meaning you may end up needing more than 11 points anyway), you have a senior QB, an experienced OL that has been playing well, a big back and a veteran receiving corps. And, it's raining and you're outdoors. And, let's not forget, that in close to four years your special teams have failed you far more often than not.

So I just feel like with a veteran QB and an offense that was moving the ball, it's just sort of a no-brainer to try and pick up 3 yards. Not only am I'm 99% certain it's the right call, but I remember when it was 3rd down thinking 'i'd play this like 2nd down b/c this has to be 4-down territory at this point.'

But perhaps that's why I'm not a football coach.

 

[FAL]

So I just feel like with a veteran QB and an offense that was moving the ball, it's just sort of a no-brainer to try and pick up 3 yards. Not only am I'm 99% certain it's the right call, but I remember when it was 3rd down thinking 'i'd play this like 2nd down b/c this has to be 4-down territory at this point.'

So-o-o right! That was not a "play to win" call. Very disappointing.

 

[dollarbill44]

I can see your point but I guess I feel that way b/c you have a struggling (or at least inconsistent) kicker, your defense hasn't exactly been stellar (meaning you may end up needing more than 11 points anyway), you have a senior QB, an experienced OL that has been playing well, a big back and a veteran receiving corps. And, it's raining and you're outdoors. And, let's not forget, that in close to four years your special teams have failed you far more often than not.

So I just feel like with a veteran QB and an offense that was moving the ball, it's just sort of a no-brainer to try and pick up 3 yards. Not only am I'm 99% certain it's the right call, but I remember when it was 3rd down thinking 'i'd play this like 2nd down b/c this has to be 4-down territory at this point.'

But perhaps that's why I'm not a football coach.

I totally agree with you, btw (going for it instead of kicking). When the FG team came out, I verbally disagreed with the call.