Objectivness
- Thread starter TitanClone
- Start date
Good season. Overachieved record-wise. Underachieved schematically. I am seeing Paul Rhoads in essence. A masterful patchwork of highly motivated lowly rated players who on average get the job done, but like a '68 Mustang, will occasionally fall apart and are not built to compete against modern sports cars. There is no easy answer. We are not Colorado or Ohio State. We can't just whip out the checkbook to solve our problems. We need to take average players and make them error proof somehow. That takes really good coaching and development in all areas: special teams, offense, and defense. By the numbers, ISU is in the top 6 in offensive batted balls, they are 102 in run defense, 65 in kickoff returns, 6 in punt returns, 4 in pass defense. #8 in B12 defense, #9 in B12 offense. Mediocre stats compared to the WL record.
It really just shows how nice our schedule set up. We avoided the teams that finished 1,3,4 and got our next 3 best opponents at home. Our conference road games were at the 9th, 10th, 12th and 13th place teams. The coaching staff would sign up for that every year. It's the same kind of "fake ID" schedule we mock Iowa for that got them to their two b1g title games.
We saw every p4 conference have teams who's schedules worked out like this and then you had teams like KU or Ohio State who played all the top teams in their league, so there is the another side to it. It'll be important to keep level headed no matter which end of this we are on because next year looks like we'll be at the other end of the spectrum and play a very tough league schedule. Schedule will decide who plays in every CCG.
I think we are a good team but Campbell has had a better teams here. I think us getting to 10 wins was more about the schedule than our program taking a step forward. Don't get me wrong, I'm excited about, we probably deserve it after some of the schedule's we've been dealt the last 40 years but with the schedules changing so much from year to year, it's hard to tell what it means long term. Everyone will get their turns with both easy and tough schedules.
That's right, ASU adjusted defensively and we did nothing. Look, the defense got killed yesterday, but the offense did absolutely nothing. It's college football, teams are going to score points. Everyone including defenses loaded with NFL guys give up 40 points a few times each year.
We can keep doing what we are doing and win 6 or 7 games a lot, and that's fine. If we want to win this conference, and get to a playoff we are going to have to be better offensively in a lot of areas. It's not a total gut job, it's some tweaks and some more creativity, quicker adjustments, better play ant a couple positions, and some better game planning.
As long as Campbell is here we will put a defense on the field that can compete in 90 percent of the games. But, if we want to get better, we are going to have to be more dangerous offensively and more consistent.
It's not easy, we are talking about being a top 25 team consistently, it's a tall task given our limitations as a program. Not the end of the world, we are close, just not quite there yet.
Objective ISU was one of 18 teams out of 130 to get 10 wins
They benefitted from their schedule but they beat 8-4 Iowa, KSU, Baylor, lost to 8-4 Tech by a point
The only bad loss was Kansas.
Objective they were at the bottom of college football in sacks. If you run a 3-3-5 you need to blitz more. They blitzed at a greater rate against KSU and it was highly successful. The pass D certainly benefitted from the fact that everyone ran on you. I don't think it was great. With no QB pressure there is no way they were ranked so high in pass D
The defense has a big talent drop if people get hurt. Though I think all the young guys playing will pay off long term
I do think you can find even FCS players who would provide an upgrade
Objective they ranked in the top 40 in points per game. The ranked 63rd in red zone offense which means if they don't hit some big plays for scores you are probably settling for field goals. I think we all agree if they got it in the red zone they struggled most times than not
They benefitted from their schedule but they beat 8-4 Iowa, KSU, Baylor, lost to 8-4 Tech by a point
The only bad loss was Kansas.
Objective they were at the bottom of college football in sacks. If you run a 3-3-5 you need to blitz more. They blitzed at a greater rate against KSU and it was highly successful. The pass D certainly benefitted from the fact that everyone ran on you. I don't think it was great. With no QB pressure there is no way they were ranked so high in pass D
The defense has a big talent drop if people get hurt. Though I think all the young guys playing will pay off long term
I do think you can find even FCS players who would provide an upgrade
Objective they ranked in the top 40 in points per game. The ranked 63rd in red zone offense which means if they don't hit some big plays for scores you are probably settling for field goals. I think we all agree if they got it in the red zone they struggled most times than not
Last edited:
I agree with this totally. Earlier this week, I saw where some ISU fans were saying they feel like we had more of a chance this Championship game more so than 2020 because of the match up. I understand that sentiment but never agreed with it because that 2020 team had already beaten OU once and had tons of talent. The only mismatch that year was our O line vs their d line. I saw Hakeem Butler and Enyi at the game and realized especially defensively that even though we have had injuries, we do not have the talent and correct size in certain positions to be dominant in that 3-3-5 scheme. We had Will, Jaquan, Enyi and behind them speed and aggression at linebacker. We were soooo passive yesterday. When Mike Rose played that Sam position Over the slot he was literally unblockable by any wr trying to block him on any wr screen plays. My point is we have seen the successful body types, size, speed for our scheme yet we have recruited slower, less twitchy athletes. I hate to say it but the team out east has played the same defensive scheme for 40 years and ever LB is the same size speed and great tacklers. We are at a point where we have run this scheme where we should be able to do the same. I do feel we did but lost some kids to the transfer portal. Heacock has worked wonders with what he had this year but it was embarrassing to see several people in the place to make the play but just not aggressive enough. There has been a talent decrease overall. Maybe we got a little spoiled with NFL talent at RB for 4 years and at WR every year (still is the case) qb as well because Rocco needs a lot of work. We need to get bigger and more athletic on defense and need more explosive running back. Hansen is decent but he can't break tackles. He went down on a arm tackle that ASU running back would have scored on. Sama has not progressed at all. We will get better. I trust CMC but agree our overall talent is not very good right now.
