Pacheco's situation tells us much about the state of RU football affairs. Much hand wringing occurs here about coaching, schemes and the many reasons RU struggled this year. Pacheco's situation should bring the issues into more clarity.
What is that situation? One year ago Pacheco started at RU as a rb and did not register a 100 yard game. Total of over 640 yards. Had many plays drawn up for him and emphasis in the offense was not the issue.
One year later, he has a 100+ yard game in the NFL. Against infinitely better competition. What does it tell us? That he is now surrounded by talent that is at or exceeds his competition-but while at RU he was surrounded by talent below the majority of the teams played. No scheming could overcome getting hit before the line of scrimmage, or having no holes. And when injuries occurred, including to the OL, there was no depth to keep things from falling off worse.
RU is playing at a talent deficiency in most games, and worse, at a depth deficiency. The latter makes games later in the season (when it was Mich MSU PSU) all the more challenging, as an already tilted talent differential, became even more pronounced.
Looking at the entire schedule I would say RU had:
- a talent advantage in 2 definite games (Temple and Wagner)
-a talent toss up against BC and Indiana (perhaps better than Indiana but close)
-a talent differential in 8 other games
A 4-8 record can be construed as winning two toss up games talent wise. Our local media and posters somehow issue predictions that presume RU has talent sufficient to win B10 games (not when pushed though) with Nebraska Iowa and MSU. It's just not so. Those would all have bene upsets. Thus, the Pacheco lesson should tell us somewhat what to expect, and should note that two toss ups were won. 4-8 with this lesson in hand is not not terribly unexpected.
Was there coaching issues that made situations worse-yes definitely. Did it tilt outcomes--can argue Iowa and Nebraska but then you have to give advantage to BC and Indiana wins so it's at best a wash.
Can make an argument that the team and coaches overperformed against Mich and PSU until the talent differential caught up (as did the experience differential at qb).
Thus, yes the offsides on kickoffs were maddening. Not pulling an upset is a bummer. But some perspective on what we are dealing with is needed. RU won the games it should have-also won two toss ups, but won none it was trying for an upset (even slight ones). Talent and DEPTH is needed to get over the hump. Yes coaching needs to re-evaluate but to ignore the obvious Pacheco lesson misses the main point. Lewis, Powell, Melton, Hamilton, Bailey, Brown, Monangai and Long are all players who can compete in B10 games. But more are needed, especially on O and especially at wr and likely OL. This is the lesson we are hit over the head with. We have talent to hang in there for awhile-but not get over the top. And coaching didnt this year tip any non toss up games. Both are needed to notch some B 10 wins, with the talent and depth clearly being the main issue.
What is that situation? One year ago Pacheco started at RU as a rb and did not register a 100 yard game. Total of over 640 yards. Had many plays drawn up for him and emphasis in the offense was not the issue.
One year later, he has a 100+ yard game in the NFL. Against infinitely better competition. What does it tell us? That he is now surrounded by talent that is at or exceeds his competition-but while at RU he was surrounded by talent below the majority of the teams played. No scheming could overcome getting hit before the line of scrimmage, or having no holes. And when injuries occurred, including to the OL, there was no depth to keep things from falling off worse.
RU is playing at a talent deficiency in most games, and worse, at a depth deficiency. The latter makes games later in the season (when it was Mich MSU PSU) all the more challenging, as an already tilted talent differential, became even more pronounced.
Looking at the entire schedule I would say RU had:
- a talent advantage in 2 definite games (Temple and Wagner)
-a talent toss up against BC and Indiana (perhaps better than Indiana but close)
-a talent differential in 8 other games
A 4-8 record can be construed as winning two toss up games talent wise. Our local media and posters somehow issue predictions that presume RU has talent sufficient to win B10 games (not when pushed though) with Nebraska Iowa and MSU. It's just not so. Those would all have bene upsets. Thus, the Pacheco lesson should tell us somewhat what to expect, and should note that two toss ups were won. 4-8 with this lesson in hand is not not terribly unexpected.
Was there coaching issues that made situations worse-yes definitely. Did it tilt outcomes--can argue Iowa and Nebraska but then you have to give advantage to BC and Indiana wins so it's at best a wash.
Can make an argument that the team and coaches overperformed against Mich and PSU until the talent differential caught up (as did the experience differential at qb).
Thus, yes the offsides on kickoffs were maddening. Not pulling an upset is a bummer. But some perspective on what we are dealing with is needed. RU won the games it should have-also won two toss ups, but won none it was trying for an upset (even slight ones). Talent and DEPTH is needed to get over the hump. Yes coaching needs to re-evaluate but to ignore the obvious Pacheco lesson misses the main point. Lewis, Powell, Melton, Hamilton, Bailey, Brown, Monangai and Long are all players who can compete in B10 games. But more are needed, especially on O and especially at wr and likely OL. This is the lesson we are hit over the head with. We have talent to hang in there for awhile-but not get over the top. And coaching didnt this year tip any non toss up games. Both are needed to notch some B 10 wins, with the talent and depth clearly being the main issue.
