Reason for Optimism

[TheCusian]

I've had this post rattling around for a while. I may try to do one after every loss or disheartening win (hopefully this is the last of both for the season, right?) if it generates some interest, opposing views, etc.

This is not a post filled with excuses for poor play. It may read that way - but the purpose is rooted in optimism and sometimes you need to adjust how you look at a crappy performance. Some of these might be weak and invalidated by future failings. Some of them might be things mitigated by more practice, change in personnel, and different opposition.

1. Terrell Hunt v Austin Wilson
McDonald said that 90% of the offense was designed with Hunt's skill set and experience in mind. How much of our offensive troubles were associated with a limited playbook and a RS freshman at QB? How much do we rely on Hunt's legs to generate positive yardage when the play breaks down? Shafer and Lester both said a lot of the goal line package was designed for Hunt (remember his last second TD's in the final two games last season). How different would Nova's offense have looked without the running ability of Robertson? Combine the lack of run threat and a limited playbook and you have to come away impressed with what Austin did do, given the circumstances.

2. Offensive Line
If you combine a lot the following factors, I think you see a really sad weak looking performance:

- Lasker in and out of position
- down two staters
- Wilson being responsible for relaying offensive line calls to the line
- first game of the season
- New center making the adjustments in his first start
- the 3-3 stack defense Nova played is unique and they did some weird things out of it that weren't on tape

3. Robertson
A well know Shafer achilles heel is the running QB. How many plays did Roberston make after he was forced from the pocket? How many sacks would we have had given a slightly less mobile QB? This is the small white kid jacking and hitting all 12 of his 3-point attempts vs the zone. The good news is that not many of our opponents have that kind of running from that position. I think our secondary got caught covering guys too long, and FCS or FBS - the danger of a running QB is that guys can get open if they are freelancing long enough against even the highest quality DB's. The pressure we usually bring and use to great affect (see Maryland, Wake Forest, NC State wins last season) turns from net positive to a big play fort the offense. TO's forced become 1st downs. It needs to be fixed for sure. But I can't wait to see us uncleat a QB like Syracuse do.

4. Encouraged by the plays we did make
It's easy to focus on the plays we didn't make (couldn't punch it in from the 1!!! Had to fake a field goal to get into the end zone!, etc.). Adonis reeled off a nice 10 yarder to get us down there. West also had a nice catch during OT. Ben Lewis looked quicker and taller than I remember. PTG is good at breaking those long runs. Would be great to get one a game. Ishmael caught a nice ball and looks the part. Robertson looked woozy at the end of the game. Took a lot of hits.

5. Nova was better than Virginia, Rutgers, UCONN, and Tulane last year (via Sagarin rating)
I think some folks think there is a huge gap between FCS and FBS. I did before reading this post and doing some research of my own. There is overlap. There would still be reasons for concern if we looked the way we did vs Rutgers or Virginia... but how much of the freakout can be attributed to this perceived gap between FCS and FBS? I know given my own biases - that I'd look at it differently.

As stated in other posts - CMU is rated much worse that Nova. I expect a large improvement on both sides of the ball. And then a ramp up to Maryland at home - and we still could see a 3-0 start heading into the Met Life game.

6. As Shafer stated, a win is a win
In the end, we won. The helmet is upside down. We're undefeated. This close call might be just the thing to jump start and prep us for for the rest of the season.

 

[Doctor44]

Appreciate the write up. These are all good points. Unfortunately, my biggest concerns are with the coaches - the offensive play calling and inability to defend a dual threat QB. These concerns go back to last year.

Many of the posters have tauted recruiting prowess over coaching ability - and i really take issue with that. With coaches who establish a good system and good players, recruits will take notice of success

 

[007]

I've had this post rattling around for a while. I may try to do one after every loss or disheartening win (hopefully this is the last of both for the season, right?) if it generates some interest, opposing views, etc.

This is not a post filled with excuses for poor play. It may read that way - but the purpose is rooted in optimism and sometimes you need to adjust how you look at a crappy performance. Some of these might be weak and invalidated by future failings. Some of them might be things mitigated by more practice, change in personnel, and different opposition.

1. Terrell Hunt v Austin Wilson
McDonald said that 90% of the offense was designed with Hunt's skill set and experience in mind. How much of our offensive troubles were associated with a limited playbook and a RS freshman at QB? How much do we rely on Hunt's legs to generate positive yardage when the play breaks down? Shafer and Lester both said a lot of the goal line package was designed for Hunt (remember his last second TD's in the final two games last season). How different would Nova's offense have looked without the running ability of Robertson? Combine the lack of run threat and a limited playbook and you have to come away impressed with what Austin did do, given the circumstances.

2. Offensive Line
If you combine a lot the following factors, I think you see a really sad weak looking performance:

- Lasker in and out of position
- down two staters
- Wilson being responsible for relaying offensive line calls to the line
- first game of the season
- New center making the adjustments in his first start
- the 3-3 stack defense Nova played is unique and they did some weird things out of it that weren't on tape

3. Robertson
A well know Shafer achilles heel is the running QB. How many plays did Roberston make after he was forced from the pocket? How many sacks would we have had given a slightly less mobile QB? This is the small white kid jacking and hitting all 12 of his 3-point attempts vs the zone. The good news is that not many of our opponents have that kind of running from that position. I think our secondary got caught covering guys too long, and FCS or FBS - the danger of a running QB is that guys can get open if they are freelancing long enough against even the highest quality DB's. The pressure we usually bring and use to great affect (see Maryland, Wake Forest, NC State wins last season) turns from net positive to a big play fort the offense. TO's forced become 1st downs. It needs to be fixed for sure. But I can't wait to see us uncleat a QB like Syracuse do.

4. Encouraged by the plays we did make
It's easy to focus on the plays we didn't make (couldn't punch it in from the 1!!! Had to fake a field goal to get into the end zone!, etc.). Adonis reeled off a nice 10 yarder to get us down there. West also had a nice catch during OT. Ben Lewis looked quicker and taller than I remember. PTG is good at breaking those long runs. Would be great to get one a game. Ishmael caught a nice ball and looks the part. Robertson looked woozy at the end of the game. Took a lot of hits.

5. Nova was better than Virginia, Rutgers, UCONN, and Tulane last year (via Sagarin rating)
I think some folks think there is a huge gap between FCS and FBS. I did before reading this post and doing some research of my own. There is overlap. There would still be reasons for concern if we looked the way we did vs Rutgers or Virginia... but how much of the freakout can be attributed to this perceived gap between FCS and FBS? I know given my own biases - that I'd look at it differently.

As stated in other posts - CMU is rated much worse that Nova. I expect a large improvement on both sides of the ball. And then a ramp up to Maryland at home - and we still could see a 3-0 start heading into the Met Life game.

6. As Shafer stated, a win is a win
In the end, we won. The helmet is upside down. We're undefeated. This close call might be just the thing to jump start and prep us for for the rest of the season.

The optimism is fine. As an SU fan, I hope that, despite some of the points you raised, that the underlying issue is not a lack of talent, lack of playmakers, lack of speed, and a staff on a steep learning curve with respect to how much experience they have at certain positions (HC, OC, OL, etc).

One other quick comment. The 3-3 stack Nova used is not "unique." SU runs a version of it out of the Okie.

 

[TheCusian]

The optimism is fine. As an SU fan, I hope that, despite some of the points you raised, that the underlying issue is not a lack of talent, lack of playmakers, lack of speed, and a staff on a steep learning curve with respect to how much experience they have at certain positions (HC, OC, OL, etc). One other quick comment. The 3-3 stack Nova used is not "unique." SU runs a version of it out of the Okie.

Fair enough. I'm with you on hoping it's not talent or bad coaching (esp on the Oline).

Shafer said specifically that the 3-3 stack and the way they were lining up in it was confusing the run blocking schemes. Seemed odd to me - but that's what he said...

 

[TDTOrange]

I'm laying a lot of the dissatisfaction with the offense at the feet of the defense for this game, if that makes sense. The biggest issue in the game (outside of not being able to punch it in at the goalline) was that the defense could not get off the field. Chris Carlson did a good job of breaking this down in an article today. The Okie defense routinely failed to get stops in 3rd and medium and 3rd and long situations.

We only had 3 possessions (granted 3 or 4 and outs) in the 2nd half after the opening TD drive. Villanova OWNED the ball, and the defense needed to do a better job of getting off the field. Now it wasn't for a lack of trying, we blitzed, we sat back in coverage. Either way there were missed tackles, lack of contain, and missed coverages that all need to improve or it won't matter what our offense does.

I mean we only ran 57 plays in regulation, not quite McDonald's vision. Obviously, having Hunt for a full game (and maybe even to complete the drive we were on at the time) might have given us a little separation and forced Villanova to change their game plan.

So my wish-list for CMU is to see better 3rd down defense and hopefully that fixes a lot of the other shortcomings we saw.

 

[CousCuse]

I hear a lot of people being dismissive of a unique defense run by a coach who has been at an institution for 30+ years and has won a national championship. Does this sound familiar?

 

[Crusty]

I hear a lot of people being dismissive of a unique defense run by a coach who has been at an institution for 30+ years and has won a national championship. Does this sound familiar?

People realize that this is not a unique defense. We kicked the crap out of WVU's 3-3 stack and, as has been mentioned we have a version of our own. This makes it hard to understand why this was such an issue.
I am not a coach but as I understand it, a strong running game (between the tackles) is supposed to be the way to beat the 3-3 stack. Some coaches say to wide your splits so that they have a harder time plugging gaps.

The point is that this is nothing new and is not an excuse.

 

[007]

Fair enough. I'm with you on hoping it's not talent or bad coaching (esp on the Oline).

Shafer said specifically that the 3-3 stack and the way they were lining up in it was confusing the run blocking schemes. Seemed odd to me - but that's what he said...

Yeah, I remember reading something similar and I understand why many fans would take it that way. I am fairly certain that SS meant that the players were unsure a couple of times of blocking assignments and not that the 3-3 defense is unique, or that they (coaches) were caught off guard or unprepared by what they faced.

The point remains that you can not explain Foy, Lasker, Miller getting blasted backward/pancaked multiple times as a function of being confused by a "unique" D and one that they likely face every day in practice. That was more likely a strength and talent issue, and that's what you should be concerned about going forward.

 

[Crusty]

Yeah, I remember reading something similar and I understand why many fans would take it that way. I am fairly certain that SS meant that the players were unsure a couple of times of blocking assignments and not that the 3-3 defense is unique, or that they (coaches) were caught off guard or unprepared by what they faced.

The point remains that you can not explain Foy, Lasker, Miller getting blasted backward/pancaked multiple times as a function of being confused by a "unique" D and one that they likely face every day in practice. That was more likely a strength and talent issue, and that's what you should be concerned about going forward.

Exactly. I do understand that if you are confused for an instant you will probably get knocked on your butt by guy that knows where he is going. But 5 times in a row?

 

[CousCuse]

People realize that this is not a unique defense. We kicked the crap out of WVU's 3-3 stack and, as has been mentioned we have a version of our own. This makes it hard to understand why this was such an issue.
I am not a coach but as I understand it, a strong running game (between the tackles) is supposed to be the way to beat the 3-3 stack. Some coaches say to wide your splits so that they have a harder time plugging gaps.

The point is that this is nothing new and is not an excuse.

My point is Beohiem runs a 2-3 zone , which I have many people say is no big deal , but as we as we know , the wrinkles and permutations an old veteran coach puts into a defense he has built his career around makes it quite a difficult nut to crack.

 

[FAL]

My point is Beohiem runs a 2-3 zone , which I have many people say is no big deal , but as we as we know , the wrinkles and permutations an old veteran coach puts into a defense he has built his career around makes it quite a difficult nut to crack.

Whose nuts you trying to crack?

 

[Crusty]

My point is Beohiem runs a 2-3 zone , which I have many people say is no big deal , but as we as we know , the wrinkles and permutations an old veteran coach puts into a defense he has built his career around makes it quite a difficult nut to crack.

OK point taken. However, JB runs a top 25 program with players that go to the league - Nova football is not and does not. Something is wrong in Orangeville.

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

I've had this post rattling around for a while. I may try to do one after every loss or disheartening win (hopefully this is the last of both for the season, right?) if it generates some interest, opposing views, etc.

This is not a post filled with excuses for poor play. It may read that way - but the purpose is rooted in optimism and sometimes you need to adjust how you look at a crappy performance. Some of these might be weak and invalidated by future failings. Some of them might be things mitigated by more practice, change in personnel, and different opposition.

1. Terrell Hunt v Austin Wilson
McDonald said that 90% of the offense was designed with Hunt's skill set and experience in mind. How much of our offensive troubles were associated with a limited playbook and a RS freshman at QB? How much do we rely on Hunt's legs to generate positive yardage when the play breaks down? Shafer and Lester both said a lot of the goal line package was designed for Hunt (remember his last second TD's in the final two games last season). How different would Nova's offense have looked without the running ability of Robertson? Combine the lack of run threat and a limited playbook and you have to come away impressed with what Austin did do, given the circumstances.

2. Offensive Line
If you combine a lot the following factors, I think you see a really sad weak looking performance:

- Lasker in and out of position
- down two staters
- Wilson being responsible for relaying offensive line calls to the line
- first game of the season
- New center making the adjustments in his first start
- the 3-3 stack defense Nova played is unique and they did some weird things out of it that weren't on tape

3. Robertson
A well know Shafer achilles heel is the running QB. How many plays did Roberston make after he was forced from the pocket? How many sacks would we have had given a slightly less mobile QB? This is the small white kid jacking and hitting all 12 of his 3-point attempts vs the zone. The good news is that not many of our opponents have that kind of running from that position. I think our secondary got caught covering guys too long, and FCS or FBS - the danger of a running QB is that guys can get open if they are freelancing long enough against even the highest quality DB's. The pressure we usually bring and use to great affect (see Maryland, Wake Forest, NC State wins last season) turns from net positive to a big play fort the offense. TO's forced become 1st downs. It needs to be fixed for sure. But I can't wait to see us uncleat a QB like Syracuse do.

4. Encouraged by the plays we did make
It's easy to focus on the plays we didn't make (couldn't punch it in from the 1!!! Had to fake a field goal to get into the end zone!, etc.). Adonis reeled off a nice 10 yarder to get us down there. West also had a nice catch during OT. Ben Lewis looked quicker and taller than I remember. PTG is good at breaking those long runs. Would be great to get one a game. Ishmael caught a nice ball and looks the part. Robertson looked woozy at the end of the game. Took a lot of hits.

5. Nova was better than Virginia, Rutgers, UCONN, and Tulane last year (via Sagarin rating)
I think some folks think there is a huge gap between FCS and FBS. I did before reading this post and doing some research of my own. There is overlap. There would still be reasons for concern if we looked the way we did vs Rutgers or Virginia... but how much of the freakout can be attributed to this perceived gap between FCS and FBS? I know given my own biases - that I'd look at it differently.

As stated in other posts - CMU is rated much worse that Nova. I expect a large improvement on both sides of the ball. And then a ramp up to Maryland at home - and we still could see a 3-0 start heading into the Met Life game.

6. As Shafer stated, a win is a win
In the end, we won. The helmet is upside down. We're undefeated. This close call might be just the thing to jump start and prep us for for the rest of the season.

 

[TheCusian]

The color of optimism.

 

[TheCusian]

Yeah, I remember reading something similar and I understand why many fans would take it that way. I am fairly certain that SS meant that the players were unsure a couple of times of blocking assignments and not that the 3-3 defense is unique, or that they (coaches) were caught off guard or unprepared by what they faced. The point remains that you can not explain Foy, Lasker, Miller getting blasted backward/pancaked multiple times as a function of being confused by a "unique" D and one that they likely face every day in practice. That was more likely a strength and talent issue, and that's what you should be concerned about going forward.

Foy and Lasker played last year. So your hypothesis is that they got weaker and forgot how to play? More likely that it was scheme related, first game, and new center/frosh QB, IMO.

 

[tipphill]

its more coaching issues --still learning, poor preparation of players for game, and players who were immature, overconfident and got their collective asses kicked. they need to be quiet and just play. celebrating tackles after a 8yd gain???c'mon really.

 

[Chip]

its more coaching issues --still learning, poor preparation of players for game, and players who were immature, overconfident and got their collective asses kicked. they need to be quiet and just play. celebrating tackles after a 8yd gain???c'mon really.

I'm not excusing it, but overall maybe some of this is related to the first time in forever that we opened against a monster underdog at home.

Every year it's either a big game opener, or in one case a road MAC (Akron), but even then you know a roadie can sneak up on you.

We'll find out a lot about this team next Saturday. Blowing the doors off CMU might not be all that impressive, but after the first game, it will be encouraging to see they really put the opener behind them.

 

[TheCusian]

its more coaching issues --still learning, poor preparation of players for game, and players who were immature, overconfident and got their collective asses kicked. they need to be quiet and just play. celebrating tackles after a 8yd gain???c'mon really.

I agree - much of it is on the coaches. But to put the optimistic spin on it - did they forget how to coach from last year? There are real questions related to McDonald's play calling, Bulluogh's defense vs mobile QB's, and the juries out on Joe Adam... But effort has never been an issue and will be rectified by SS. I'm honestly envisioning a 21+ point win next game and then solid, focused effort from then on.

I'd like to see the celebration tone-down or be more appropriate. It's one thing to play with a swagger - and another the forget where you are in the game or how things have been going...