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.
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.