ADVERTISEMENT

"We belonged on the same field"...RU-UW comments and observations

Scarlet Shack

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Feb 4, 2004
25,457
14,026
113
on rewatching the game, the bottom line is we belonged on the same field with #7/8 Washington ...period

It's not like Washington made mistakes that allowed us to stay close ...we lost the turnover battle 2-0....special teams cost us 7 against and three we didn't get. If anything, our mistakes truly hurt our chances to make this a game for us to get ....

And we still very much stayed toe-toe with them, especially being able to run the
Ball decently and STOPPING the run

Will add a lot of stuff as the weekend goes on ...but i really am impressed with the improvement from the end of last year to yesterday and now need to sustain it and take care of business the next two weeks
 
Agreed. Their Punter changed the momentum pinning is on the 1 twice. We were More aggressive than they were.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TB4RU
I think all games have to be competitive.

We have to put a scare on the BIG three this year otherwise it will be another lost year.

Maryland and Indiana have improved a lot.

We may not win any games in the BIG again unless we improve a lot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: soundcrib
Light years better. Light years to go.A light year is a long time and a long way. Will we arrive by the year 38 million? I might not make it..But I hope I will.
 
I think all games have to be competitive.

We have to put a scare on the BIG three this year otherwise it will be another lost year.

Maryland and Indiana have improved a lot.

We may not win any games in the BIG again unless we improve a lot.
Let's go point by point:

I think all games have to be competitive.


Blowouts happen in college football. In 2014 we went 8-5, a result I think most of us would find acceptable. That year, we lost games by 37 (Wisconsin), 39 (OSU), and 42 (MSU).

We have to put a scare on the BIG three this year otherwise it will be another lost year.

If we can find six wins somehow (doesn't matter against who) and get to a bowl, NOBODY will consider it a lost year. Not the media, not the HS coaches, not recruits - NOBODY.

Maryland and Indiana have improved a lot.

And you know that how? From the results of one game - or in the case of Indiana, one HALF? We played a good half too, do we get credit for it?

We may not win any games in the BIG again unless we improve a lot.

Not win again, as in ever? A bit overdramatic. We came close a few times last year, and we were terrible. We really don't have that far to go to get to mediocrity. The trick of course is to get to good.
 
I think all games have to be competitive.

We have to put a scare on the BIG three this year otherwise it will be another lost year.

Maryland and Indiana have improved a lot.

We may not win any games in the BIG again unless we improve a lot.


You're kidding right? Other than Maryland and Indiana improving a lot (and how much better IU is is questionable) you are out there on the other points. By the way, we have improved more than IU (IMHO). Maryland looked very good today. Actually the whole BIG EAST looks improved.
 
IMO, we played Washington about even over the entire game, but Washington had two gigantic advantages that resulted in 16 point loss:

1. Big Plays. Washington had them and we didn't. That's okay, because we Ash can sell that to the most promising recruits - come and be difference makers that make a good team great.
2. Turnover. Felt bad for the defense - they were hitting hard and should have been rewarded.
 
It was like watching a kind of Army game I've seen a lot of over last decade. When Army played a powerhouse (like Stanford), they played with all they had the first half. The dominant team would be caught sleep-walking by a team they had chalked-up as a W months in advance. In the second half, the good team came out woke and iced Army pretty easy. I saw that game on Friday. RU did look better than last year but its still a mediocre BE team
 
If we can not star completing the deep ball teams will stack the box. We have to stop under throwing the vertical routes in order for us to win.
 
And a kickoff that only got us back to the seven

The defense did an amazing job keep that thing at 10-7....especially considering that the defense did give up the TD
 
It was like watching a kind of Army game I've seen a lot of over last decade. When Army played a powerhouse (like Stanford), they played with all they had the first half. The dominant team would be caught sleep-walking by a team they had chalked-up as a W months in advance. In the second half, the good team came out woke and iced Army pretty easy. I saw that game on Friday. RU did look better than last year but its still a mediocre BE team

Why are you here? You don't appear to have any real connection to Rutgers and seem to exist only to get banned from the CE board.
 
Why are you here? You don't appear to have any real connection to Rutgers and seem to exist only to get banned from the CE board.

This.

Just surprised he didn't post 15 different links that had NOTHING to do with fridays game or this thread/topic.

That's more his style.
 
Certainly seem improved based on Friday night but I am interested in how we take care of business the next two before getting too worked up about one reasonably good showing.
 
Why are you here? You don't appear to have any real connection to Rutgers and seem to exist only to get banned from the CE board.
I took his CE posts at face value.. but after seeing this comment on Rutgers football.. he really does like to troll.
 
I took his CE posts at face value.. but after seeing this comment on Rutgers football.. he really does like to troll.

Sorry but not going along with the group think isn't trolling. I played football in college and dont need to "watch the film" to know a team is good. Is Rutgers better than last year? Yes. Is Rutgers a good team? No - but it has improved to mediocre.

The defense was spirited and able in first half, but as Brian Billick says rushing the passer is one of most taxing things to do in football and its true. You can't expect the same handful of guys to bring the mustard for 4 quarters. Rutgers doesn't have the depth (and has ten freshman on the 2 deep). You knew RU would gas out in second half.

Then you have fact that a first game is an unknown prep wise. By second half Washington figured RU out and made beating defense look easy.

"I guess they realized that we were running a lot of man coverage, so they wanted to look for mismatches in the passing game," cornerback Blessuan Austin said. "When you play Division I football against the No. (8)-ranked team in the country, they are ranked (8) for a reason. Their coaches are also smart. They realized things and they adjusted. Compliments to them."

Yes and soon enough every team on RU schedule will know how to go about playing RU. First few games of a season are often fool's gold. People thought RU beating Arkansas was a big turnaround but I knew Flood sucked even then (and...Nova). People were fooled again when RU beat an obviously rotten Michigan team in 2014. People thought Flood was an emerging Ara Parseghian. I knew it was a lackluster win and Flood was a mirage and people were mad I said so.

Sorry but I know what I'm looking at and don't need the rah-rah glasses. Football teams like Ash inherited from Flood don't turn around big in one season. If you know football you know how to take such things in stride and not get silly. RU has little depth and lacks experience. An injury or two to key players and the dustpan comes out. Give B1G coaches some RU video of new players/plays and those lopsided beatings aren't extinct yet. Having some flashy players and having a good team are different. RU has some flashy players but there are a lot of weaknesses. Reality was in the second half of Washington game and not the first .

http://www.nj.com/rutgersfootball/i...ok_washington_exploited_mismatch_rutgers.html
 
Last edited:
ADVERTISEMENT