ADVERTISEMENT

My Opinion On Last Night

gef21

All Conference
Jan 25, 2005
4,244
8,300
113
I figured I would give my brief opinion on what I thought about last night.

QB- Does not step into his throws but can make some money on short routes. Does not take contact well and we saw multiple under thrown balls to open WRs (more on this later). The play that really worried me was the rushed throw for the first interception and the boot that was almost a pick. No composure on either. Can not run the read without the QB ever keeping it

RB/FB- When we get our shoulders square we run the ball well and when we do not we look sloppy running the ball. I think at times we looked to bounce it outside when that was not necessary. FB play was solid when used. Poor route run on the non catch in the endzone

WR- We are fast at this position. Multiple times our guys got even or behind the CB and were under thrown. There is a lot of potential here and I think the big plays will come. I think we run fairly good routes and have solid hands BUT things need to be cleaned up. This group of young WRs makes me very excited.

OL- Played okay. Right side of the line struggled at times with dead feet. Saw positives in the unit and I think they can gel into something solid. Need to see better feet and communication on stunts in pass protection.

TE- Glad to see the TE being utilizeed again. I think we are going to see the TE starting to stretch the middle of the field as the offense opens up more which is going to force teams to move their safeties a lot.

DL- I was very impressed with the DL. We got penetration, we got off the ball, we had good balance but I think they can play better. Backside DEs got cut too easily. We also sometimes played too high resulting in us losing our assignment. Need to be aware of the screen pass a bit more (that could be a scheme plan though). We need to do a better job when being cut across the line.

LB- I think we played well in swarming to the ball but our eyes in the passing game were below average. I know that giving up the swing pass was the DEs responsibility BUT the LB had zero eyes on anything coming in or out to help (again could be a scheme plan). Need to do a better job on QB scramble and the WRs reacting to that.

DBs- They played very well. This unit is going to perform for us but we need to go after the ball. I think as the safeties become more experienced we will see more turnovers.

Offense over all- Very conservative. I thought they should have gone play action deep route or play action boot much earlier in the game. I think our RBs had their shoulders going easy and west too much as opposed to north and south. That being said I am happy to see a forming identity and some success.

Defense- Thought they had a great game plan and executed it. They got tired as the game went on and were not able to contain the speed that Washington had.

The kicking and coverage game needs work..still.
 
I can't recall a single game last year with our up tempo offense where we ripped off 5+ yard gainers in succession. Last night Kill sprinkled in some uptempo on one drive in the first half that produced 3 8+ yard gainers in a row - against a stoudt Power 5 defense. I wonder what the read option mike look like with a true runner like Lewis in the gun?
 
  • Like
Reactions: RutHut
I can't recall a single game last year with our up tempo offense where we ripped off 5+ yard gainers in succession. Last night Kill sprinkled in some uptempo on one drive in the first half that produced 3 8+ yard gainers in a row - against a stoudt Power 5 defense. I wonder what the read option mike look like with a true runner like Lewis in the gun?

It will add a dimension that we are currently missing big time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Loyal-Son
I also think the play calling was more conservative by design. Game one was more about establishing some success and chemistry to gain confidence and experience. I bet we will see improvement, and the playbook open up more once we get into the heart of the schedule, especially if they have success opening up the middle and start making a few more downfield throws.
 
I also think the play calling was more conservative by design. Game one was more about establishing some success and chemistry to gain confidence and experience. I bet we will see improvement, and the playbook open up more once we get into the heart of the schedule, especially if they have success opening up the middle and start making a few more downfield throws.

I would like to see the next two games used to create a vertical threat on offense so teams need to start respecting it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RUonBrain and czxqa
I would like to see the next two games used to create a vertical threat on offense so teams need to start respecting it.
Agreed. Would like to see Kill use Grant and Melton to start stretching the field. Joe Montana used to eat teams up with those short passing routes because they always had to defend against the deep threat any time Jerry Rice was on the field. Totally changes how a defense has to play.
 
Agreed. Would like to see Kill use Grant and Melton to start stretching the field. Joe Montana used to eat teams up with those short passing routes because they always had to defend against the deep threat any time Jerry Rice was on the field. Totally changes how a defense has to play.

I think Grant is at his best when you put him in motion and get him space where he can quickly get into the open field. I think Melton is the better deep ball option - provided he is a 100%. From what I've heard - the best deep threat in the team, when is at 100%, is Ahmir Mitchell (rumors from last year's practices). Mitchell has the speed and the size/height to come down with this deep passes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: czxqa
I figured I would give my brief opinion on what I thought about last night.

QB- Does not step into his throws but can make some money on short routes. Does not take contact well and we saw multiple under thrown balls to open WRs (more on this later). The play that really worried me was the rushed throw for the first interception and the boot that was almost a pick. No composure on either. Can not run the read without the QB ever keeping it

RB/FB- When we get our shoulders square we run the ball well and when we do not we look sloppy running the ball. I think at times we looked to bounce it outside when that was not necessary. FB play was solid when used. Poor route run on the non catch in the endzone

WR- We are fast at this position. Multiple times our guys got even or behind the CB and were under thrown. There is a lot of potential here and I think the big plays will come. I think we run fairly good routes and have solid hands BUT things need to be cleaned up. This group of young WRs makes me very excited.

OL- Played okay. Right side of the line struggled at times with dead feet. Saw positives in the unit and I think they can gel into something solid. Need to see better feet and communication on stunts in pass protection.

TE- Glad to see the TE being utilizeed again. I think we are going to see the TE starting to stretch the middle of the field as the offense opens up more which is going to force teams to move their safeties a lot.

DL- I was very impressed with the DL. We got penetration, we got off the ball, we had good balance but I think they can play better. Backside DEs got cut too easily. We also sometimes played too high resulting in us losing our assignment. Need to be aware of the screen pass a bit more (that could be a scheme plan though). We need to do a better job when being cut across the line.

LB- I think we played well in swarming to the ball but our eyes in the passing game were below average. I know that giving up the swing pass was the DEs responsibility BUT the LB had zero eyes on anything coming in or out to help (again could be a scheme plan). Need to do a better job on QB scramble and the WRs reacting to that.

DBs- They played very well. This unit is going to perform for us but we need to go after the ball. I think as the safeties become more experienced we will see more turnovers.

Offense over all- Very conservative. I thought they should have gone play action deep route or play action boot much earlier in the game. I think our RBs had their shoulders going easy and west too much as opposed to north and south. That being said I am happy to see a forming identity and some success.

Defense- Thought they had a great game plan and executed it. They got tired as the game went on and were not able to contain the speed that Washington had.

The kicking and coverage game needs work..still.


Good job. Clearly:

- LB's need work in the passing game and

- ST's need work, HOWEVER, I'm willing to say Wash has a top 5 ST unit nationally (as they do on D) so willing to see what we have out there this Saturday
 
  • Like
Reactions: gef21
Good job. Clearly:

- LB's need work in the passing game and

- ST's need work, HOWEVER, I'm willing to say Wash has a top 5 ST unit nationally (as they do on D) so willing to see what we have out there this Saturday

Absolutely. Their team speed is insane.
 
Very surprised by you guys last night. Showed a lot more than I expected and I honestly feel you guys are a couple players away from winning that one, although I think you guys could've pulled it out with a few breaks and some more consistency on offense coupled with more overall aggression. Talent level depth wise isn't there yet, it shows on special teams (i.e. punt return) and in the trenches late in game. You have some very good skill players and your QB is solid, but I'd have liked to see him stretch the feild more. Defense is where I saw the most improvement from a year ago. Front 7 wasn't getting manhandled and for the most part definitely held their own. Linebacker is a position I noticed that could use a lift and some depth and the secondary was solid, but really lacked the high end speed to consistently keep up with UW's top playmakers. Overall though the talent upgrade is huge from last year and it is apparent you guys have some young talent in your pipeline, but depth is what I'd be most concerned about going forward. Things are looking up for RU though, there's no reason why they can't be a middle of the pack B1G team in the years going forward, but they're going to have to do some things differently schematically and personell wise to compete if recruiting doesn't pick up going forward.
 
Agree that Grant is at his best when he is put in motion. Blackshear and Hayek probably the same. What do all 3 have in common? Small and quick.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT