exact sequence I was referencing....Getting down to the one yard line with 2nd and Goal on the first series in the second half was killer. Why would we kick a field goal down 17? Did you really think the defense was going to stop them very often?
exact sequence I was referencing....Getting down to the one yard line with 2nd and Goal on the first series in the second half was killer. Why would we kick a field goal down 17? Did you really think the defense was going to stop them very often?
This is overly myopic, but when I watched our games last year, I pretty much always walked away thinking that there is no hope for improvement, we just don't have the talent to stay even close with the other teams in our conference.
Though the results have not changed and even though TTU did crush us, I still think that with the right corrections, we can become competitive this year.
I think the biggest issue is that we need to stop rushing only 3 guys on 3rd & long situations. We get teams in 3rd and long often because our run defense is much improved, but so many times the opposing QB has all day to sit back and eventually coverage breaks down and we give up yet another conversion. When the QB has to make quick decisions on 3rd down, we had much better success of forcing a short throw and then stopping them before they could make a 1st down. Without re-watching the game, I bet 4-5 TTU touchdowns had situations where we had them in 3rd & long, rushed only 3 and gave up a first down and eventually a score.
It's kind of pizzing me off that Warren is getting so much love and the OL is getting none. I'm not completely kool-aid drunk on Warren for that reason. Our O line is pretty decent as far as ISU lines go. On the flipside I can't believe that it's not 100% pull SR for that same reason. We're wasting a decent line with him back there and there's no telling when we'll have a line this good again.
Getting down to the one yard line with 2nd and Goal on the first series in the second half was killer. Why would we kick a field goal down 17? Did you really think the defense was going to stop them very often?
Maybe I'm just too aggressive, but knowing that it was 3rd and 30 at least once if not two times that game, I would've sent the freakin' house on that. Blitz 6 or 7 guys and force a quick throw, not give enough time to send a 40 yard bomb to an open receiver at or beyond the sticks already.
It's kind of pizzing me off that Warren is getting so much love and the OL is getting none. I'm not completely kool-aid drunk on Warren for that reason. Our O line is pretty decent as far as ISU lines go. On the flipside I can't believe that it's not 100% pull SR for that same reason. We're wasting a decent line with him back there and there's no telling when we'll have a line this good again.
The post radio interviews were funny Saturday. They had Warren on gushing about the O-line then Lalk was on gushing about Warren saying that they've never liked blocking for someone so much.Know who is giving credit to the OL? Mike Warren. I think I've heard that guy say three or four times, "all credit to my offensive line" or something similar.
I agree, though, the OL has been a frequent (and deserved!) target of criticism around here so they need some love when they help rack up the rushing yards we've had the last few games.
The Oline has been Sammys scapegoat for 3 years, this year they've played good enough for us to be competitive. They just get absolutely no help from their QB. Several times every game he wastes great pass blocking with indecision and very poor pocket presence.
One of the best threads I have read on this forum. Comments are educated football posts.
The three man rush was killing ISU all day. Go and rate the plays where isu sent a 4th or 5th player....better results every time I watched.
To me the turning point was the 2nd and three in tech territory. We throw a 3 yard out incomplete. (Stupid call for many reasons.) Then we take a shot with bund rage and he is out of bounds. Rhoads then kicks a field goal. Game was over then.
As another poster commented the dbacks and linebackers were flat footed all day. That was due to poor game planning. If you want them to be aggressive you can't coach passively. I like Wally and think he is a very good coach but the game planning for tech was one of the worst I have seen. Ditch it early in the game if it's not working.
Baylor and Oklahoma will do the same things as tech. Change the game plan now.
The team has promise. Richardson has lost confidence especially as the game wears on. Heat him up... rotate Lanning in and quit playing for field goals.
I don't know where Rhoads lost his understanding of needing to be aggressive at isu but he needs to lose that conservative way of thinking.
More than going for the FG is when we missed that attempt, that is the worst feeling, great drive going, potential momentum change and no points to show.
Yeah, he is not taking any changes anymore almost like he has accepted his fate......
One of the best threads I have read on this forum. Comments are educated football posts.
The three man rush was killing ISU all day. Go and rate the plays where isu sent a 4th or 5th player....better results every time I watched.
100% agree with above post.. Unfortunately I was at the game sitting amongst TT fans... The 2 comments I heard from the TT guy sitting besides me are "1. Why are you passing the ball so much when we can't stop your running game ??? and 2. Why are you only rushing 3 when it gives our banged up QB all day to pass on you" ???
Our O-line looked ****** as they were opening up holes for Warren, and then we stop pounding the rock... Also, as mentioned above when we sent 4 to 5 after McHomes we had decent success.
To me the turning point was the 2nd and three in tech territory. We throw a 3 yard out incomplete. (Stupid call for many reasons.) Then we take a shot with bund rage and he is out of bounds. Rhoads then kicks a field goal. Game was over then.
As another poster commented the dbacks and linebackers were flat footed all day. That was due to poor game planning. If you want them to be aggressive you can't coach passively. I like Wally and think he is a very good coach but the game planning for tech was one of the worst I have seen. Ditch it early in the game if it's not working.
Baylor and Oklahoma will do the same things as tech. Change the game plan now.
The team has promise. Richardson has lost confidence especially as the game wears on. Heat him up... rotate Lanning in and quit playing for field goals.
I don't know where Rhoads lost his understanding of needing to be aggressive at isu but he needs to lose that conservative way of thinking.
Weird since you would think a guy with nothing to lose would take more risks.
One of the best threads I have read on this forum. Comments are educated football posts.
The three man rush was killing ISU all day. Go and rate the plays where isu sent a 4th or 5th player....better results every time I watched.
To me the turning point was the 2nd and three in tech territory. We throw a 3 yard out incomplete. (Stupid call for many reasons.) Then we take a shot with bund rage and he is out of bounds. Rhoads then kicks a field goal. Game was over then.
As another poster commented the dbacks and linebackers were flat footed all day. That was due to poor game planning. If you want them to be aggressive you can't coach passively. I like Wally and think he is a very good coach but the game planning for tech was one of the worst I have seen. Ditch it early in the game if it's not working.
Baylor and Oklahoma will do the same things as tech. Change the game plan now.
The team has promise. Richardson has lost confidence especially as the game wears on. Heat him up... rotate Lanning in and quit playing for field goals.
I don't know where Rhoads lost his understanding of needing to be aggressive at isu but he needs to lose that conservative way of thinking.