VMI post game thread

roadkill

roadkill

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,815
Good to see play: Philo, Maddox, Elko, Blackburn (first TD catch), Harpring

Good to see back and looking good: Rutherford, Alexander

Areas of concern: Jamal Haynes - 7 carries for 19 yards (2.7 ave), 1 fumble. Still dinged up? Fortunately, our RB depth is looking better at this point in the season. Also, I hope Biggers is ok.
 
Golden Tornadoes

Golden Tornadoes

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
745
Bright spots today were Philo, Maddox, and Butler. Butler looks absolutely like a baller at LB, but I would want to see him is coverage before making any claims on him. He’s great at filling gaps and snuffing out the run. Philo looks the part at QB. If he’s that composed and has that good of an arm, I’d love to see how Knowles looks. Maddox is a great power back. He can really bounce off tackles and showed a nice burst getting by some guys.

I’ll post an unpopular opinion based on the eye test as the stats don’t really back this up. I was VERY dissatisfied with the starting offensive line group. Sure, they didn’t give up any sacks, but their run blocking left a lot to be desired. Too many times Haynes was making people miss in the backfield. We have way too much length, height, and size for VMI to be making plays in our backfield. Is it the zone scheme that makes this hard? Is it guys not blocking their assignments? I’m not sure, but I was very unhappy with their lack of push against a much inferior d-line. Again, it’s hard to say that after rushing for 192 yards, but when your starting running back has 7 rushes for 19 yards and he got 14 of those on one play, something is amiss and it really worries me for the rest of the season when we face much better d-lines.
 
slugboy

slugboy

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
11,471
In the game yesterday, the color guy kept mentioning that King was a little late in his reads—the receivers were open long before the ball got there, and DBs had a chance to recover.

It makes me think the play designs are really good, but we don’t know how to execute them yet
 

MWBATL

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,506
Golden Tornadoes said:
Bright spots today were Philo, Maddox, and Butler. Butler looks absolutely like a baller at LB, but I would want to see him is coverage before making any claims on him. He’s great at filling gaps and snuffing out the run. Philo looks the part at QB. If he’s that composed and has that good of an arm, I’d love to see how Knowles looks. Maddox is a great power back. He can really bounce off tackles and showed a nice burst getting by some guys.

I’ll post an unpopular opinion based on the eye test as the stats don’t really back this up. I was VERY dissatisfied with the starting offensive line group. Sure, they didn’t give up any sacks, but their run blocking left a lot to be desired. Too many times Haynes was making people miss in the backfield. We have way too much length, height, and size for VMI to be making plays in our backfield. Is it the zone scheme that makes this hard? Is it guys not blocking their assignments? I’m not sure, but I was very unhappy with their lack of push against a much inferior d-line. Again, it’s hard to say that after rushing for 192 yards, but when your starting running back has 7 rushes for 19 yards and he got 14 of those on one play, something is amiss and it really worries me for the rest of the season when we face much better d-lines.
Click to expand...
I don’t disagree about our interior rush offense. It hasn’t been good since the FSU game, tbh. Syracuse absolutely manhandled us there and both Ga State and VMI were decent ahainst Jamal. A bigger back would help that some. (Hint: Maddox)

But my guess is we simply aren’t that good onb the OL as yet. I am not smart enough to know if that’s just who we are or whether we can correct that shortcoming with scheme in some way. But we shouldn’t do what we did at Syracuse and continue to run into a 7 or 8 man front designed to stop the rushing game.

Here’s hoping Faulkner can sort out some new wrinkles for our O.
 

MWBATL

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,506
slugboy said:
In the game yesterday, the color guy kept mentioning that King was a little late in his reads—the receivers were open long before the ball got there, and DBs had a chance to recover.

It makes me think the play designs are really good, but we don’t know how to execute them yet
Click to expand...
It would be helpful if we could correct that in 1 week.

I do wonder of King has been hesitant because of his INT numbers last year and a strong desire to avoid them this year.
 

yeti92

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,026
I haven't seen the second half yet, but from watching the first half we took care of business about like expected. Came out slow and a little bit sloppy still on offense but it didn't matter against this opponent - it will next week.

Worried about Jamal Haynes, he's done poorly the last couple weeks and seemed unfocused. I wonder if he has some nagging injuries or possibly a concussion.

We had more points than they had yards of offense for most of the game. Even considering the opponent, that's kind of impressive.
 

whitegoldsphinx

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
816
Their D gave our run game way too much respect. It's hard to block 8 men with 6. We should have thrown the ball every down to make them back off. Singleton was getting a lot of loose single coverage. I don't blame the OL or Haynes for the early struggles in the run game at all.
 
HurricaneJacket

HurricaneJacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,685
roadkill said:
Good to see play: Philo, Maddox, Elko, Blackburn (first TD catch), Harpring

Good to see back and looking good: Rutherford, Alexander

Areas of concern: Jamal Haynes - 7 carries for 19 yards (2.7 ave), 1 fumble. Still dinged up? Fortunately, our RB depth is looking better at this point in the season. Also, I hope Biggers is ok.
Click to expand...
Jamal looks like he's hurting. Which is unfortunate since he is definitely still RB1
 
roadkill

roadkill

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,815
slugboy said:
In the game yesterday, the color guy kept mentioning that King was a little late in his reads—the receivers were open long before the ball got there, and DBs had a chance to recover.

It makes me think the play designs are really good, but we don’t know how to execute them yet
Click to expand...
Aaron Murray made a similar comment in his FSU game analysis. Several times he commented that King should get the ball out a split second sooner, even if the play ended up being successful. I chalked that up to it being the first game of the season. It's a bit concerning that it persists into the fourth game.
 
dressedcheeseside

dressedcheeseside

Helluva Engineer
Messages
14,212
roadkill said:
Aaron Murray made a similar comment in his FSU game analysis. Several times he commented that King should get the ball out a split second sooner, even if the play ended up being successful. I chalked that up to it being the first game of the season. It's a bit concerning that it persists into the fourth game.
Click to expand...
I thought he was late on his td toss to Singleton who had to make an acrobatic catch when it should not have needed to be.
 
roadkill

roadkill

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,815
dressedcheeseside said:
I thought he was late on his td toss to Singleton who had to make an acrobatic catch when it should not have needed to be.
Click to expand...
Agreed.

Just speculation, but I wonder if King is taking extra time, consciously or subconsciously, to ensure he doesn't throw a pick. If so, it may actually increase the risk since it can allow DBs more time to recover if they are out of position.
 
Techster

Techster

Helluva Engineer
Messages
18,211
The biggest thing I took away from this game is GT is finally acting like a team that wants to be considered among the best in the ACC and P4 football. They went out, took care of business, could have EASILY made the score look so much worse, but gave way to our back ups and young players...who continued to have a productive day. This is what good football teams do.

This was a good game to have before one of the tougher games on our schedule. Louisville will be a good barometer of where this team is. We know they're a good team, we are big underdogs, and GT still has something to prove. VMI gave us the opportunity to give our starters a good workout, and we got to build depth. Now it's time to move on to the next obstacle.
 
Last edited:

SOWEGA Jacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,074
roadkill said:
Agreed.

Just speculation, but I wonder if King is taking extra time, consciously or subconsciously, to ensure he doesn't throw a pick. If so, it may actually increase the risk since it can allow DBs more time to recover if they are out of position.
Click to expand...
This is it exactly. King had a fantastic year last year yet everyone always bring up the picks. Not all picks are created equal. Are end of half or end of game picks that important when they are essentially hail marys? He’s playing very tentative right now because that’s what he’s been told “ you gotta get your picks under control for the NFL to see you”. He’s a gunslinger so they gotta let him gunslung. Remember that first spring game when he had zero on his mind and just went out there and showed out. That’s what we need. If a few picks come along the way then fine. But so will some freaking outstanding play. We aren’t UGA where the QB just has to be a robot and win. GT wins when our QB makes plays when everything falls apart. We saw it with Jones, Hamilton, Goose, Nesbitt, and Thomas. We need King to just play ball and let it rip. The Louisville game is going to be whoever scores 50 first because we aren’t stopping them so our offense has to play loose and fast.
 
bobongo

bobongo

Helluva Engineer
Messages
7,543
Techster said:
The biggest thing I took away from this game is GT is finally acting like a team that wants to be considered among the best in the ACC and P4 football. They went out, took care of business, could have EASILY made the score look so much worse, but gave way to our back ups and young players...who continued to have a productive way. This is what good football teams do.

This was a good game to have before one of the tougher games on our schedule. Louisville will be a good barometer of where this team is. We know they're a good team, we are big underdogs, and GT still has something to prove. VMI gave us the opportunity to give our starters a good workout, and we got to build depth. Now it's time to move on to the next obstacle.
Click to expand...
I liked how they came out and played hard with focus, even though the game portended to be an easy one. That goes back to our coach. It hasn't always been so, but now it seems the culture he wants to instill is taking hold. I know some think the Jackets didn't put in their best effort in Syracuse, but I didn't see that. I just saw a good team beaten by another good team on a given day.
 
Top