Jellyman's Perspective on Game 1 - vs Washington

jellyman

Heisman Winner
Gold Member
Jul 25, 2001
15,252
2,916
113
I posted this on the Round Table yesterday, and thought I would post it here, as well, today.

Okay, the first game is under the team's belt - and the fans have had a chance to see if anything is different than last season. Obviously, I have my perspective, and will share it here ... a little bit of stream of consciousnous (as I think of items), but also position by position.

To begin with, if there was any fan who did not see the enormous progress versus last season, then that fan is simply hopeless ... and joyless too. I saw improvement in all but 1 (maybe 2) facet of RU's game ... and some of the improvement was very large. I saw improvements in coaching (both in pre-game and game planning prep, and in terms of in-game adjustments), and in both individual players, and positional groupings, play. And many of the improvements were clearly substantial.

I also wish to address some of the comments in various posts about the game that were critical (not all the critical comments, but a few with which I disagree). Notably, some criticized the play-calling, especially in the 2nd half, wanting RU to be more aggressive and to take more chances. Also, a couple of posters wanted more of Robert Martin.

Let me comment on Martin, 1st. Yes, he ran very well, and had 13 carries for 57 yards ... nice numbers. But 3 of those carries were on 3 consecutive carries late in the 2nd quarter, with a new formation, to which Washington had not adjusted, for 31 yards. Without those 3 carries he was 10 for 36 yards - about the same as Edwards. I thought there was a nice mix of the 2 running backs, personally, with Martin looking better as quick openers, and Edwards looking better otherwise - and with Edwards getting better as the game wore on, and as RU wore down Washington just a little.

Next, on the play calling. I do agree there were times I wish RU had opened it up more. In particular, I would have liked a little bit of lay action passing. In particular, there was one sequence (maybe in the 4th quarter, maybe in the 2nd quarter?) where RU had 3rd and 2 to go, perhaps between the Washington 30 and 40 yard line, when I would have done differently. RU was clearly going 4 downs (so it must have been in the 4th quarter), so I would have passed, a sort pass, on 3rd down and if that did not get the 1st down I would have run on 4th down. Instead RU ran both downs and did not get the 1st down. There were a couple of other times I might have passed instead of run, in shorter down situations. But generally, RU very clearly had a specific strategy to do ALMOST whatever it took to run the clock down, to keep Washington's offense OFF the field. And for the most part, that strategy was successful. RU was able to move the ball some, they were able to score 2 offensive TD's on well-put-together drives. RU was better than Washington at 3rd down conversions, out-rushed Washington, and dominated time of possession. Those plans all worked. It is true that RU only went downfield one time (TD to Bailey - on a not well-thrown pass, by the way). Washington was playing an interesting defense: 8 or 9 defenders - and sometimes even 10 defenders - within 10 yards of the line of scrimmage, and either 1 or 2 safeties very deep. That made big running plays difficult, and limited yards after catch on short pass plays ... so Washington was also successful. I will admit I am not sure how to take advantage of that scheme ... long skinny posts to WR's? Seam routes with the TE? Fly patterns to the WR on the opposite side of the field from where the ONE deep safety is? I am pretty sure that RU made a specific decision that Washington's front 7 was too good to give the QB enough time to throw at least some of those patterns ... the fly routes and skinny posts require some time for the plays to develop. And it is not clear RU has the WR's to beat high quality DB's on those routes - or that maybe the coaches do not yet have that confidence ... more on that later.

I will add that RU will have similar problems with Michigan, Penn State and Ohio State, at least, as it did with Washington's defense. We shall have to see if RU's OL, WR's and QB improve enough to allow RU to do more.

So, to different parts of RU's team:

Offensive Coordinator and Scheme: Some of that was dealt with in the above comment on play calling. I thought Kill generally did a VERY good job, with both creating an offensive game plan, and setting the players up to successfully execute the game plan. This was a VAST improvement over last year's OC and schemes. Of course, he also had better players with which to work, in my opinion. But I also felt that generally, the RU players were put in position to succeed, whereas last year that was not the case. I think you will see some situational opening up of the offense, but expect a generally conservative approach designed to move the ball, eat time, and rest the defense. Against team not quite as good as Washington (or Michigan, OSU, PSU), you might see some deeper pass patterns, some big chunk plays by the running backs, some more deception, some more wide running (could not get wide against Washington, in several attempts).

Defensive Coordinator and Scheme: HUGE, HUGE improvement, aided by a combination of improved players (more of this below), but a great decision to change the scheme to defend the run better ... and some player position changes to fit the scheme, that I think will work very well. In particular, I am talking about the switch to a kind of 3-4 defense - or maybe it is the 50 defense (the old Oklahoma 50 - a variation of the 52 defense, but with the DE's falling back into coverage) - or a hybrid of the 2. Lumor/Turay play on the weak-side outside as stand-up DE's/LB, while Ross-Douglas/Margolis play on the strong-side as stand-up LB/DE's. With Joseph-Day as the NT, and Bateky as the DT, Wilkins is now the DE - or DT - on the strong-side. This looked very solid against Washington - and looks to be a brilliant shift of scheme to better handle the run. The 3-4 defense (also the 50 Oklahoma defense) DOES need larger size on the DL, whereas the 4-3 defense can get away with smaller and quicker DL (what Miami used - and Schiano). But with Joseph-Day, flanked by Bateky and WIlkins, RU's DL HAS the size needed for this defensive scheme. Notice that Lumor and Turay fell back into pass coverage of shorter routes from time to time ... and that it is possible that in certain situations this is a read the player has to make (that Turay MISSED on Washington's 2nd TD of the 3rd quarter, putting them up 27-7) .. and Margolis missed on a big play on a swing pass to the TE on Washington's 1st TD of the 3rd quarter. Still, I LOVE the shift of scheme, and love having Joseph-Day, Wilkins and Bateky all in at the same time. And credit to Burnham for coaching up the defensive linemen to play the new scheme. It WILL be important to find adequate reserves ... more on that below.

Now, to the position by position discussion:

Quarterback (s): Well, singular, since only Bolin played. I think the jury remains out with Bolin, BUT ... but he is certainly a HUGE improvement over Laviano, and seems like an improvement over even a healthy Rescigno of last year. Bolin's arm seems slightly below average in strength, but he does appear to be a much more consistently accurate thrower than either Laviano or Rescigno. And, his release seems pretty quick, which partially makes up for lesser arm strength, especially on shorter throws. His mobility seems only okay, but he does seem to have good footwork in the pocket. His lack of arm strength showed the most on the TD pass to Bailey, when Bailey had a 1 1/2 to 2 step lead on the CB, but Bolin's pass was under-thrown by at least 5 yards, and Bailey had to come back for the pass. You could also see the lack of zip on some sideline throws - though his quick release helps offset the lack of zip on other types of routes. Bolin's interceptions (plus at least 1 near interception) were decision-making interceptions, not arm strength or accuracy related. On one, he was pressured, and should have thrown the ball away, rather than throw off his back foot. On the 2nd INT he just made a really bad decision and threw into quadruple coverage. In other words, it looks like Bolin WILL represent a material upgrade at QB this year, but he also has some limitations, and seems unlikely to be able be a play maker enough to "win" games for RU, unless only very occasionally.

Running Backs: Edwards is so much better than Goodwin ... so much better. Martin is Martin. And though he did not break any plays against Washington, it is clear Blackshear has some real wiggle and quickness - I would expect him to grow into RU's primary (though not exclusive) 3rd down/passing down back. Anthony played some FB - the FB was in occasionally - and did not stand out as making any real mistakes, nor any fantastic blocks either. Edwards is going to do really well against teams with less DL and LB athleticism than Washington had (in other words, the non-top 15 teams RU faces), in my opinion. And with his size he will wear down the opposing team, likely becoming more effective by the 4th quarter. You could even see some of that against Washington. He does not have breakaway speed, but he does have nimble feet, good footwork, and decent between the tackle movement. Martin is the better quick-opener runner relative to Edwards, and does show good slashing running style - he also ran very hard in this 1st game. A good complimentary combo. Unfortunately, unless Blackshear can do it, I do not see RU with a running back who can stretch the defense from sideline to sideline (nor can Hicks, the 4th back - who is also a between the tackles runner). The speed of Jon Taylor (decommitted to Wisconsin) would have been nice, eh? But all 3 running backs who played showed they can catch the ball, at least a little, which is nice.

Wide Receivers: Better than last season, with better depth, and few dropped passes (1 by Mitchell), which is also an improvement. Still, I was a little disappointed. Perhaps the offensive scheme and strategy limited what they could do, and offered less time to see what patterns they could run, and whether they could get separation. The single best play by a WR was Dacoven Bailey's TD catch - a straight fly pattern/go route where he beat the CB off the snap, and had a 1 1/5 to 2 step lead on him, and then when the ball was under-thrown, made a nice adjustment and excellent catch. Grant ran a nice pattern, off a well-designed play for his short TD reception. Melton only got ONE pass directed at him (was he not open, or was he rarely the primary receiver?), but the pass was not really that catcheable. Same with Hayek - I saw no pass directed at him (maybe he nver got open). Based on VERY limited looks, I would say that Mitchell (Duwop) will help, and may be about the same as Patton (less speed, more reliable ability to catch the ball), and be serviceable possession receiver, but not be an impact receiver. Grant is what he is, no more, no less: An okay slot receiver, but dangerous if you can get him the ball in space. Bailey ended up getting a lot of playing time, and made the best single play. Wormley played some, but had little directed at him. The younger Mitchell, when he returns, if 100%, may be RU's primary hope, alongside Bailey and/or Wormley, at developing into an impact receiver. So ... slightly better options than last season, but not obviously as much improvement as I would have hoped.

Tight Ends: Much better than last year ... much, much better. Night and day, versus last season. Jerome Washington is the real deal, in my opinion: Excellent size, decent speed, good hands. In fact, he may be RU's best receiver. In my opinion, Washington ran the most consistently GOOD pass routes, and got open through his pass-running routes better than any other receiver. And while he did not make any spectacular receptions, he made all his catches, I think - including a diving catch, and several catches in traffic. For the 1st time in several years RU has 3 scholarship TE's, also.

Offensive Line: I think the OL showed some real promise in this, the 1st game of the season. It is true Washington was missing its best LB. But they still had all their DL - and those DL's were excellent (Ohio State, Penn State and/or Michigan may have better DL's - but maybe not, also). While it is true that plenty of running plays got 0 to 2 yards, only, there were few losses, and they was also SOME room to run the ball on many occasions. Part of the lack of running room was as much on Washington's defensive scheme, as on the RU OL: Washington played a LOT of defense with 8 and 9 defenders in the box (within 5 yards of the line of scrimmage), and often had 10 defenders within 8-9 yards of the line of scrimmage. And more often than not, Bolin had time to throw the ball - though by design almost all pass attempts were designed to be short passes. But even with the designed short passes, Bolin had a LOT more chances to make passes than RU's QB's did last season, where even with short passes, RU's QB often had no time at all to pass. There were a couple of mis-communications on blitzes, but also time when the OL picked up the blitzes, at least enough to allow for a reasonable pass attempt (something that never seemed to happen). In particular, Seymour appeared to be vastly improved. I do not think he got burned on pass blocking more than 1, maybe 2 times - last year it happened a LOT. In fact, Bolin's only sack occurred when he tripped over his own feet, scrambling ... had he not tripped, he surely would have been able to throw the ball. I do think the weak link right now is Applefield, who I noticed too much ... you are not supposed to really notice the individual OL, eh? The OL did not get consistent push on short yardage runs, but was able to get push plenty of times. RU only averaged 3.1 yards per rush, and WILL have to do better, if they want more than 3-4 wins. But I saw enough to think the OL is improved, maybe much improved, and it certainly has a chance to get even better.

Defensive Line: I LOVE it! I think the DL is really solid. Yes, more depth that can give quality minutes still has to be developed. I am very pleased with RU's starting DL, especially its big dogs: Joseph-Day, Bateky and Wilkins are very solid, in my opinion. The fact the 2 of RU's top 7 tacklers this day were DL (Bateky and Joseph-Day with 4 each) is an EXCELLENT sign. And Wilkins had 3 tackles, as well - though I thought he had a larger impact than just 3 tackles - I thought Wilkins had a terrific game. And that does not include the return of Turay - who I did not count as a DL - because I think his position is a hybrid DE/LB. If you count him as a DL, then 3 of RU's top 7 tacklers were DL (he had 5 tackles, and until Washington double-teamed him, he was literally unblockable). The back-up DL were less consistent. I thought the best of them was Previlon, who I thought had an amazing game, with 2 great pass knock downs, in addition to playing his lanes. Darnell Davis also played decently - with a great sack - backing up Wilkins - but is much smaller than Wilkins. I am not sure what the RU coaches will do about that. I did notice there was a noticeable drop off when Joseph-Day rested and Julius Turner subbed - a big difference. Waife played some, for Bateky, but was also less effective. Hogan also played, I think in RU's nickel and dime packages (Previlon must also have been in for those packages) - but I did not see him do anything. Waife needs to have more of an impact as the year goes on, but we know he can play a little. If Previlon keeps making an impact, expect to see more of him - though not sure where. I think we are kind of stuck hoping Turner gradually gets better, and does not hurt RU too much when subbing for Joseph-Day - though he is still quite young, and may have a lot of potential.

Hybrid DE/LB: I do not know how to categorize this position. This is basically the Lumor/Turay position. Turay was outstanding, I thought, in his return. Lumor looked solid. As mentioned above, Turay was tied for 2nd in tackles, with 5. Until Washington started to double-team him, he was literally unblockable, and it was only fantastic plays by Browning (the Washington QB) that prevented Turay from getting 2 sacks. He also held the edge, not losing contain - something we have been waiting 4 years for. He fell back into coverage, and on at least 2 occasions that coverage caused Browning to throw the ball away. Unfortunately, ONCE he did NOT keep contain, or rather he mis-read the running back releasing to the flat - and Turay's job was to peel away from his rush to cover that pass. He failed to do so, and a short TD pass resulted. But even so, I thought this game was a very good sign for Turay - and therefore for RU.

Linebackers: Hmmmm ... the least improved part of the team, other than special teams and maybe WR. At MLB, Roberts played well, I think - maybe very well. At a MINIMUM, Roberts increased size means he is not getting pushed around anymore - and I think it shows with his play in a very positive way. And he did have 8 tackles - and many of them much nearer the line of scrimmage than last year. At the WILL, Morris ... well, before slamming him too hard, why don't we say the jury is still out. Morris was repeatedly burned by Gaskin, in particular. Now maybe that is not fair to Morris, as Gaskin (#9 of Washington) may be an All American caliber running back and receiver. And Morris was not the only RU player victimized. But Gaskin burned Morris on at least 3 very important plays in the 2nd half, maybe 4 plays. And those plays led directly to both of Washington's TD's in the 3rd quarter. But the SAM ... Houston, we have a problem. In my opinion, RU might be better off seeing one or both of the Freshman LB sooner rather than later. Ross-Douglas is simply too small, and Margolis, though he clearly tries, is juts not athletic enough (they were splitting time, with Margolis in on more obvious running plays, and Ross-Douglas when coverage might be needed). RU is really going to MISS Maddox-Williams, who had both the size Ross-Douglas is missing and the athleticism Margolis is missing - and is probably more athletic than Ross-Douglas, also. I do not know which frosh backs up the SAM ... Fatukasi or Onyechi? Or is it the oft-injured TJ Taylor. Margolis, by the way, was caught like Turay was caught, on a big play from Washington to their TE on one of Washington's 3rd quarter scoring drives (maybe the TD drive, but maybe a FG drive): He rushed the QB, and failed to keep contain, or break off his rush to cover the TE who was initially blocking, but released to the flat ... 30-yard gain.

Defensive Backs: Generally, as good as expected. Sure, some passes were caught, and they were beaten a couple of times (on a 49-yard long pass play, and on a couple of other plays). But still, I thought the starters in particular were excellent - they were playing 1 on 1 a lot out there. I thought Hester was very good at safety, but Hampton was truly outstanding (though he got beaten long once). Each of Austin and Wharton was beaten once, also - but they each also played generally good coverage, I thought, on islands. I will say that Gray, subbing for Hampton when Hampton had to leave for a couple of plays, missed a tackle on a key play - maybe too the worng angle, and was certainly in the wrong position to make a tackle, and then tried to tackle below the knees (poor technique). And in much less playing time, Hayes was burned as much as Wharton was - so not quite as impressive initially. Still, the DB's were very solid overall, I thought - and played pretty darned well.

Special Teams: I will lump these in all together. Oops. Coverage was awful (duh) on punts (decent on kick returns). And in fact, the punt teams, you could argue, cost RU any reasonable chance at an upset here. And the punting, though longer distances than last season, was inconsistent: Soem really good outcomes, but some poor ones. For example, on the 61-yarder from the end zone, the ball was kicked right down the middle of the field. There are almost no circumstances where you want to punt the ball to the middle of the field, especially against a high quality return man - and Washington's returner is pretty much as good as Grant is. On the big 19-yard return, the punt was a 45-yard punt - but little hang time, too much line drive ... and then a 15-yard personal foul tacked on. Ouch. That was 10 points on the board for Washington right there. But the kick off return blocking was not great either. On the few return chances Grant got to return kicks, there was little blocking (just once did he had any reasonable blocking, and he got a 25+ return on that kick). There is work to do on punt coverage, in particular, and punting, plus on kick return blocking. Too early to tell on the FG kicking. The 47-yard attempt was not a terrible kick ... it did hook a little, but might have been good from 44 yards, and certainly from 42 to 43 yards out ... distance was not the problem, just a little hook. Anyway, 47-yarders are not gimmies in college.

Overall: I am very encouraged. I saw large improvements in the DL, TE, RB, OL; decent to better than decent improvements in QB; Some improvement at WR and DB; and even at LB, Roberts was much improved, and Morris, despite not being great, was still better than last season, I think. I might add, RU was penalized a rather small amount. I should also add, on the downside, RU was unable to cause any turnovers - they will have to figure out how to do that (I heard on the TV broadcast that Washington created 33 turnovers last season - amongst the top in the USA).

Sidebar, apropos of nothing: The TV announcers mentioned that Neiman (RUs DC) was an assistant coach at Northern Illinius while KIll was the head coach there, which I did not know.
 

Zombo NJ

All Conference
Jan 3, 2007
3,073
182
63
I agree with just about everything....

Morris was really struggling and I actually hoped they would let him watch from the side for a while....lack of
quality depth a huge factor...hoping that changes in the coming years

I left feeling better than I did all last year...yeah losing sucks but I was so happy about the coaching...saw guys in
the correct places (last year was atrocious there)...saw discipline....saw heart...saw hope in the stands

I was almost totally deflated after last season...feeling better and looking forward to at least one 'wow' win
this year
 

KnightsofChrome

All Conference
Sep 20, 2012
2,896
1,060
113
Nice Jellyman. Didn't know you were a "Moderator," now. I know it took you a long time to come up with these evaluations, which were on the money. At least from what I saw on one viewing of the game, even though it's on my recorder. I will tell you that many of us appreciate you taking time from life, to give an honest, fair opinion based on observations. Thank you.
And, I don't have premium. So, glad you came over to the dark side and reposted.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wolv RU

Abro1975

Hall of Famer
Nov 21, 2009
24,470
12,819
113
I think Will Previllon has a good chance of being starting NT next season after Joseph-Day graduates.
He has the frame to put on even more good weight.

He's starting to remind me a bit of Muhammad Wilkerson who came out of Linden HS pretty raw, spent a year at a Prep school before going to Temple.
Than developed into a high draft pick and now a terrific pro.

Still very early to make this comparison, but man, what a breakout game he had !
 

ClassOf02

Heisman Winner
Sep 30, 2010
10,789
10,434
113
Question for Jellyman (or anyone who has rewatched the game in detail).....

On a whole, what players do we have out there on special teams, specifically kickoff/punt coverage? I know Schiano/Flood liked using top players/athletes but we just look so damn slow under Ash/Okruch. I'm guessing it's just lack of quality depth, but any other insight?
 

Shelby65

All Conference
Apr 1, 2008
2,763
1,637
113
one game isn't enough to determine whether or not the team is better than last year, and what matters for recruiting gains is overall record (improvement relative to other Big10 teams on the schedule.)
 

PaRU102

Redshirt
Sep 2, 2014
55
35
18
A great assessment, thanks. So that was Turay 's assignment to cover the RB on that wheel route that was an approx 10 yard TD?
 

jellyman

Heisman Winner
Gold Member
Jul 25, 2001
15,252
2,916
113
A great assessment, thanks. So that was Turay 's assignment to cover the RB on that wheel route that was an approx 10 yard TD?

Apparently ... according to Ash's post game comments.

When you rewatch the game, you see two plays where the outside defender (Margolis on 1 play - playing the strong side, and Turay on the TD play - playing the weak side) rush the passer, but do not follow the potential receiver leaking out of the backfield. On the play where Margolis failed to do so, the TE blocked for a fraction of time, leaked out, and then gained 30 yards after Browning flipped to ball to him in the flat. Same thing happened with the 6-7 yard TD pass ... the running back leaked out to the flat, but Turay did not follow him, instead continuing the pass rush ... Morris was left to try to chase the RB - and obviously had no shot (Morris had been covering another receiver in the middle of the field).

I would GUESS that the outside defender has to read and react on those plays ... and if he sees a receiver blocking, then releasing, is supposed to follow the receiver. You DID see Turay do so on several occasions, by the way - and in fact at least once caused Browning to throw the ball away, since Browning had no outlet receiver to throw to, since Turay was covering him.

The running back Turay was supposed to follow did not run a wheel route, was just releasing to the flat. Now Morris was beaten on a wheel route for a TD by Gaskin - though his coverage was pretty decent on that route, just a great route ran, a great pass and a really good catch.

I thought that even with that 1 mistake, Turay was terrific.
 

Ole Cabbagehead

All American
Apr 21, 2011
8,074
6,218
113
one game isn't enough to determine whether or not the team is better than last year, and what matters for recruiting gains is overall record (improvement relative to other Big10 teams on the schedule.)

Is this a response to the OP? I must've missed where he said anything about recruiting.

As he said in his first paragraph...any fan who could not see improvement in this game is hopeless, and joyless too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RUChoppin

jellyman

Heisman Winner
Gold Member
Jul 25, 2001
15,252
2,916
113
Question for Jellyman (or anyone who has rewatched the game in detail).....

On a whole, what players do we have out there on special teams, specifically kickoff/punt coverage? I know Schiano/Flood liked using top players/athletes but we just look so damn slow under Ash/Okruch. I'm guessing it's just lack of quality depth, but any other insight?

I only got the players on the kick-off team, not the coverage teams (usually I get them all, but was lazy at the game). You can only really get all the numbers when you are at the game, not from TV.

The kick-off team had the following players other than the kicker: Fatukasi, KJ Gray, D. Hayes, Devera, Omyechi, D. Bailey, Hicks, Wharton, Hampton and either Jabbie or D. Roberts (both are #6) - I THINK it might have been Jabbie - I have a dim memory of seeing his name on the jersey.
 

mildone

Hall of Famer
Dec 19, 2011
48,463
44,972
113
Thanks, @jellyman. Great post as always.

Agree about there being noticeable improvements. There may be some hope for a few more wins than last season. We need to stay reasonably healthy because we lack depth at pretty much all position groups except the RB spot.

I'm excited to see what Kill can do w/the offense as he gets more time seeing his players in action on game day.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Loyal-Son

Shelby65

All Conference
Apr 1, 2008
2,763
1,637
113
And my response was that one 'better than expected game/loss' doesn't suggest anything....and the only improvement that matters in the big picture is measured in W-L.

Lets win a big10 game or two before we decide whether there's been improvement.
 

jellyman

Heisman Winner
Gold Member
Jul 25, 2001
15,252
2,916
113
Nice Jellyman. Didn't know you were a "Moderator," now. I know it took you a long time to come up with these evaluations, which were on the money. At least from what I saw on one viewing of the game, even though it's on my recorder. I will tell you that many of us appreciate you taking time from life, to give an honest, fair opinion based on observations. Thank you.
And, I don't have premium. So, glad you came over to the dark side and reposted.

I have been a moderator since almost the beginning, with John's blessings. I do take a much less active role moderating now - mainly contributing these types of posts. For a number of years I was a regular contributing "writer" for John, probably a lengthy piece once a week, roughly. John had invited me to be a permanent staff person. But I had to beg off, since I can only write when I have the time to do so, in my spare time ... I did not think it fair to John to make a commitment I could not back up, especially since the money would be very tiny (back when the site was just beginning, and starting to grow).

Then John developed the site into being even more professional, and Rivals, as a part of that professional development, required all contributing writers to use their real names. I was reluctant to do so, only wanting to use my Board name, so John and I decided the site would still be well-served if I limited my writings to those of a poster, not of a site writer ... which also gives me a bit more flexibility in my critiques (not having to worry about ticking off the RU athletic administration, if I was too critical on any one aspect).

So I just post, and in a pinch, when there are no other moderators available, moderate.
 

RU-05

Heisman Winner
Jun 25, 2015
10,298
6,606
113
And my response was that one 'better than expected game/loss' doesn't suggest anything....and the only improvement that matters in the big picture is measured in W-L.

Lets win a big10 game or two before we decide whether there's been improvement.
I'll say yeah, we need to get some W's on the board, first beating EMU this weekend, but then getting some B1G W's as well.

But c'mon, you didn't see massive improvement in week 1?
 

Shelby65

All Conference
Apr 1, 2008
2,763
1,637
113
No, not really. I didn't see enough. I didn't see a stronger team or a weaker team. I saw some nice first half drives which didn't end in points.

And I was very disappointed with the special teams (missed FG and Grant letting two punts be downed at the 1.).

In all, the needle didn't move in either direction for me.
 

mildone

Hall of Famer
Dec 19, 2011
48,463
44,972
113
No, not really. I didn't see enough. I didn't see a stronger team or a weaker team. I saw some nice first half drives which didn't end in points.

And I was very disappointed with the special teams (missed FG and Grant letting two punts be downed at the 1.).

In all, the needle didn't move in either direction for me.
Try Viagra?
 

Shelby65

All Conference
Apr 1, 2008
2,763
1,637
113
I hear you Choppin but it's more than just bad luck....i know all about the general concepts but we knew we needed big plays and our star player should have caught and returned the punts, or at least the second one.

We lost by doing several things poorly, and fewer things well.

The one thing we did best was pressure the QB.
 

KnightsofChrome

All Conference
Sep 20, 2012
2,896
1,060
113
OK, I'll give a little food for thought, and a question that always haunts me.......Special teams, particularly the Punt and Kickoff team, why in the world do we put Offensive Ends, and an abundance of heavy footed people on those coverage teams?
As an example, on the Punt returned for a TD. I saw our TE covering the kick(for a lack of a better term)? The kid was still near the original line of scrimmage, as the Washington's Kick Returner waved when he passed him! And, he wasn't alone!
I know we have to have some sort of protection for the Kicker, but ca mon. I would put more fleet footed players into the game, who can tackle in open field, as opposed to some others who can't even get up field, don't you think?
 

Shelby65

All Conference
Apr 1, 2008
2,763
1,637
113
yeah, that too...why did we fair catch two with no one near the kid who caught it, when they kicked away from JG ?
 
  • Like
Reactions: G- RUnit

RUInsanity

All American
May 5, 2006
8,139
7,756
113
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Either a true troll, completely clueless or just an AH...I'm not saying which one I think or maybe all three...but food for thought.

PSU Troll....

where did I mention any sort of morals clause in my post? Is it you that immediately sees 'liberal cesspool' and jumps to a morals review? No doubt that moron planning liked your post because he's too dense to see that connection but you are smarter than that.

for the challenged, not sending to RU due to RU' move to the far left as liberal cesspool in no way infers I think RU has low morals. Interesting that where some on the the left equate the two

PSU is superior in every regard without the liberal bs
 
  • Like
Reactions: NotInRHouse

urbanecane

Senior
Jan 26, 2015
1,283
1,606
113
I think we're just going to have to bite the bullet on the LB's this year. Similar to the CB position a few years ago. Just seems like 2/3 positions are not at a P5 level.
 

beaced

Hall of Famer
Jul 18, 2004
31,374
9,365
113
97
sunrise fl
I always respect your Posts.Objective and informative at all times. I take issue,not with you,but with the Coaches selling out completely to running the clock and keeping the Dogs O off of the field. There HAS to be some GIVE,so that at specific opportunities RU does what is needed to keep making First Downs.I note that you do not disagree with this.Looking forward to your future posts as we start to pile up some W's.
 
Sep 11, 2006
57,007
16,233
113
I thought your comments on Martin revealed some motivation to "reach" on that point for some reason.

That is.. certainly Edwards benefited from "new formations" to which Washington had "not yet adjusted". It is a reach to mention this for Martin alone to discount his effective running.

And to that point, our OC's recent press conference revealed very positive comments on both Edwards and Martin.. without any discounting of some runs.

As to conservative play calls.. you have to be willing to take your shot.. to seize opportunity. When we are in 4 down territory.. be that a place on the field or time and point differential on the scoreboard.. we have to be ready for it in every way.. the right play calls on 3rd and 4th (you do not have to wait for 4th down to make the decision) and have the right players on the field to execute a 4 down plan.

Often when these situations come up you are behind and are passing and the D has in their nickel pass D packages.. so you do not give them the chance to sub in a run stopper squad.. so you have on the field players that can handle both. I saw Edwards pick up a blitzer nicely.. not sure about Martin's pass blocking.. but he is a strong runner. So you need them one of them on the field.. and we did not have that.
 
Last edited:

yesrutgers01

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Nov 9, 2008
28,965
27,485
113
I think we're just going to have to bite the bullet on the LB's this year. Similar to the CB position a few years ago. Just seems like 2/3 positions are not at a P5 level.

I think we do bite the bullet but that bullet is only stopping us from being Avg/maybe better than ave on D rather than very good to elite. Wish we had S. Joseph for one more year.

Our DL may be as good as it has been since 2005/2006. S. Joseph played that game at an SEC level for a NT. CB's, they always get burnt here or there but they allow us to put them on an island. Hampton and Hester did very good at their S positions. All of this goodness, allows for us to look at coaching and say...earn your money. 3 groups on D are average to good, maybe very good. 1 group is below average. Figure this shit out...This is so muc better than 3 out of 4 being bad or very bad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RuSnp

Scoutnmayo

Freshman
Oct 6, 2012
238
128
43
Thanks Jellyman. Great summary and opinion. Points all well thought out. One missed point was Justin Davidowicz as Kickoff Specialist. First collegiate kick landed at the 1 yard line, second kick was a touch back, and I missed the distance after the second touchdown. I don't know about most of you, but I love that we have a kicker that backs up the opposing team.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rokodesh

BillyC80

Heisman Winner
Gold Member
Oct 23, 2006
11,954
8,294
113
Great analysis Jelly, as usual. Many thanks. In addition to more play-action, I would've liked to see Bolin pull the ball back and keep it on a 3rd or 4th down, and try to run for a first down, especially in place of at least one of those second half punts we've been discussing on here.
 

BlockR

Heisman Winner
Gold Member
Dec 28, 2015
15,166
13,661
113
beware game one highs and lows. Dont forget all teams had a whole off season to prep a game plan for its first weeks foe. Starting in week 2 things change and the after the first three weeks you get a better grasp on where the strengths and weakness lie with each team.