Syracuse Post Game

stinger78

stinger78

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,256
alagold said:
My point was --I knew the DEF would struggle big time.We didn't know the OFF would fail llke that. (or at least,I didn't)
Click to expand...
I think I've come to the conclusion that had Syracuse been pulling away fast, things would have changed fast. Every time they scored, we answered, and it was a 7-point lead at half and could have been less than that. Then, Syracuse only scores 3 in the 3rd quarter to make is a 10-point lead. When they went up 17 in the 4th, we seemed to change things up, went vertical, and slammed in 2 TD's.

My question is why did we wait so long to begin going vertical?
 
slugboy

slugboy

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
11,490
alagold said:
My point was --I knew the DEF would struggle big time.We didn't know the OFF would fail llke that. (or at least,I didn't)
Click to expand...
There were a lot of expectations that we would run amok on them, after seeing them torched by Ohio.

There were picks for a 35-31 game. Had our offense been on track, we could have seen a touchdown or better win. It wasn’t on track though.

Defense definitely needs a pass rush
 

Root4GT

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,025
apatriot1776 said:
A lot of people were predicting a 38-31 shootout. You can't go into that type of game, score 14 points in the first 3.5 quarters, and blame the loss solely on the defense.
Click to expand...
Our defense could not get Syracuse off the field. They punted 2 times one on a 7 plat drive and the other on an 8 play drive. Syracuse first half possessions: TD, Missed FG, TD, TD, Punt. Second half possessions: FG, Punt, TD, Run out the game. The offense was not good but the defense was terrible!
 

MtnWasp

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
986
Maybe this observation is a product of sample bias, but it looks to me like analytics based defenses heavily emphasize preventing the big play against evenly matched opponents. The result is giving up short-underneath passing game and playing very soft coverage until the red zone.

So, offenses take the short passing gains, allowing tiresome, long, clock-eating drives on one dink 'n' dunk play after another. This reduces the number of possession in a game, further reducing scoring.

It's like the defenses don't even start trying to stop offenses until the red zone is reached.

I'm sure the analytics say this is the way to go. But from a purely aesthetic point of view, I hate this. It is dull, dull football. I prefer "poop or get off the pot" football. Let's see some risk taking and big plays on either side of the ball.
 

MWBATL

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,522
MtnWasp said:
I'm sure the analytics say this is the way to go. But from a purely aesthetic point of view, I hate this. It is dull, dull football. I prefer "poop or get off the pot" football. Let's see some risk taking and big plays on either side of the ball.
Click to expand...
Isn’t this what we were doing the last few years? Which resulted in letting teams score quickly on us?
 

MtnWasp

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
986
MWBATL said:
Isn’t this what we were doing the last few years? Which resulted in letting teams score quickly on us?
Click to expand...
I think it was the opposite. We just played so soft that there were chunk plays everywhere. We didn't cover anything, especially on third down.
 

Spalding Jacket

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
435
stinger78 said:
I think I've come to the conclusion that had Syracuse been pulling away fast, things would have changed fast. Every time they scored, we answered, and it was a 7-point lead at half and could have been less than that. Then, Syracuse only scores 3 in the 3rd quarter to make is a 10-point lead. When they went up 17 in the 4th, we seemed to change things up, went vertical, and slammed in 2 TD's.

My question is why did we wait so long to begin going vertical?
Click to expand...
Key coaches he wants us to be a tough running football team and he wanted consistency. At the half it was a one possession game. I believe (as most of us did) that if we kept running we’d eventually break through, remember body blows. This did not happen coupled with our D unable to get their O off the field kept Cuse D fresh. If our D had been able to stop them sooner I think the ground n’ pound would have worked. The good thing is that we showed we could score quickly through the air when needed. I think we will need to display this again against Louisville for the W. The Oline just has to step up and consistently give King time.
 

alagold

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,730
Location
Huntsville,Al
The flat fact is we will have probably have to play our best game to beat Lville there --which means better running, getting "some" stops on DEF and not miss FGs inside 50, and no TOs. --good luck with all that..
 
Top