Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="RF2044, post: 4762397, member: 40"]
Well, wanted to circle back to close the loop on this thread after the debate leading up to the Purdue game.

Mixed bag for my prognostications.

Not surprisingly, throwing the ball was a major part of our game plan [versus running inside on their big DL / LBs].  And as I expected, for the most part the WRs did a good job of getting open and sometimes beating the Purdue DBs long.  Purdue's press coverage at the LOS was generally ineffective, and our guys easily got past them to the extent that Purdue resorted to grabbing / pass interference in the second half to prevent themselves from getting beaten.  That's all good.

But I completely didn't expect them to have so many drops.  So [U]mea cupla[/U] there -- never saw that being a problem.  The barometer isn't perfection [i.e., catching every ball], but they simply have to do better.  Even though in the end, they got the job done -- the WRs left a lot of meat on the bone and probably cost us 7 - 14 points with drops.

Need to clean up that inconsistency ASAP.  Glad the coaches have something to gripe on during film sessions.

But in the main, despite the drops, I think the Purdue game was a solid indicator that this group can be good.  But to badly paraphrase Dino, now they must do it all the time and be CONSISTENTLY good.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?