HorseGlue Wrote:This is the program's worst loss by far since Florida. I'm not going to rant and rave, but it's clear that :puke:Butch Jones has no control over this team. That was the sloppiest play I've seen out of CMU since I've followed the program and it only got worse as the game progressed. That is a sure sign of poor coaching.

Don't let the big wins over schools like Army and NIU fool you. We have to accept that we are not good against quality competition and Butch Jones is not that good of a coach.

The only silver lining is that we are still undefeated in a very down MAC and may still win it. However, it is clear the Butch and crew do not have what it takes to lead us to the Top 25.

We made three or four crucial mistakes but the game wasn't sloppy at all. Our offensive line looks like the best in the country. Just because our players get beat doesn't mean we are playing sloppy. You try accounting for two world class runningbacks and a few world class recievers if you are our secondary.

Dan Lefevour was perfect all game except for one pick, its just when Clemson discoverd we couldn't run the ball and they played cover two that we lost. He stormed down the field many times against the #1 pass defense in the country.

Butch Jones needs to recruit to improve our defense, but our offense was great execpt for the running game.

The idea is to storm into the end zone.
Our special team play was absolutely horrible, putting the defense in poor field position on more than one occasion.
This was a very poor performance by us, and it was very disappointing considering the way we looked the past couple of weeks. We should have at least been able to keep it some what respectable.

[/quote]
Dan Lefevour was perfect all game except for one pick, its just when Clemson discoverd we couldn't run the ball and they played cover two that we lost.
[/quote]

Please someone at least provide some reason for not throwing more than one pass to the TE.

Isn't that one way to counter a cover two?

I am actually starting to question if I am seeing the same game as everone else or if I really know anything about football.

Am I losing my mind?

One throw with a significant gain then only one other play with a TE on the field for the entire first half.

I need desperatly to understand! I can't take it any more and I feel so sorry for the kids playing that postion.

Honest, I'm open to being educated.

I played a long time ago and was just a defensive end.

I know it's just a game but I am losing sleep over this because I just can't figure it out.

I listened to the game on the radio, so I am not sure how we were aligned all the time, but in the spread if you have two backs in you are probably going without a TE. Clearly, the TE position seems to be way under utilized in BJ's offensive scheme. Since our OL seemed to be playing pretty well it is also hard to understand why we didn't try airing it out a bit, especially with Brown as he is a burner.
I hate getting stomped in our OCC games, it Sucks, to not even have been any of our games against BCS teams this year.

The "why not throw to the TE" question has been asked all season by many fans. Watt usually gets one pass thrown his way per game, that's it.

The TE under Kelly's spread was under-utilized last year as well, but I think that was because the poor kid couldn't catch a cold in a rainstorm and they just stopped throwing to him.

But this year...the middle of the field seems open, especially when the dbs and lbs get sucked in looking for the flat passes and screens.

Kelly'sBathwater Wrote:But this year...the middle of the field seems open, especially when the dbs and lbs get sucked in looking for the flat passes and screens.

I'm so glad I'm not losing my mind and other people are seeing the same thing.

Every game it's been open and it was today and if they went cover two, a little play action pass to a TE on the off side would have been a great way to

1. gain some yards
2. make the backers think twice the next time they tried to seal a crossing wide out or jump a run play.

My next question is WHY DON'T THE COACHES see it.

Are we all missing something?

Thanks for putting up with me people. I'm off to bed to try and figure this out.

Lets see,

one sheep, two sheep, three sheep, four sheep,..........................................

J.J. Watt looked great, (when he was thrown the ball... not enough, in my opinion.)

He's going to be the real deal for us, good hands, can run, and is big. He can run over some DBs. Hopefully he is utilized more in the remaining games.

Pitt-e-Wa Wrote:

HorseGlue Wrote:This is the program's worst loss by far since Florida. I'm not going to rant and rave, but it's clear that :puke:Butch Jones has no control over this team. That was the sloppiest play I've seen out of CMU since I've followed the program and it only got worse as the game progressed. That is a sure sign of poor coaching.

Don't let the big wins over schools like Army and NIU fool you. We have to accept that we are not good against quality competition and Butch Jones is not that good of a coach.

The only silver lining is that we are still undefeated in a very down MAC and may still win it. However, it is clear the Butch and crew do not have what it takes to lead us to the Top 25.

We made three or four crucial mistakes but the game wasn't sloppy at all. Our offensive line looks like the best in the country. Just because our players get beat doesn't mean we are playing sloppy. You try accounting for two world class runningbacks and a few world class recievers if you are our secondary.

Dan Lefevour was perfect all game except for one pick, its just when Clemson discoverd we couldn't run the ball and they played cover two that we lost. He stormed down the field many times against the #1 pass defense in the country.

Butch Jones needs to recruit to improve our defense, but our offense was great execpt for the running game.

I will agree, the Offense looked good except for some drive killing penatilies, especially the holding.

The Defense had repeated blown assingments leaving the Clemson wide receivers wide open. We also saw this against Army, but they didn't have the talent to make us pay. It wasn't just getting burnt by a superior player. Many times their players came to a nearly a complete stop and caught the ball with no DB's within 5 yards. That's sloppy.

Special teams was very bad. I can't think of a of a better word than sloppy for letting the ball hit you in the back on a punt giving the other team the ball on your 2 yard line.

I do agree that our Defense needs a recruiting boost big time. I think the MAC is down lately because all of our coaches are recruiting Offense and putting their best players on Offense at the expense of Defense.

The 24 hours are up, and I'm not going to dwell on this 1st rate spanking any longer. We've got a long way to go if we want to start talking about cracking the Top 25 and I'll leave it at that.

Let's talk about Kent State.

After watching CMU the past 3 games I wouldn't be the least bit suprised if all the TE's on the team do bail out ASAP after the season. The starter looked very good but where did he go after the first drive. When your starting TE is not a part of the Offense what does that say for the rest of the backup guys. What do they have to aspire to. Work hard and become No. 1 and you too can play 10 plays a game and get one pass. No chance of ever acheiving any goals, unless your only goal is to get on the field at all. If you ask me it is a HUGE waste of talent! Saw the Clemson game on TV and can't believe they didn't throw that TE pass they used in the first drive any more that game. As good and safe as any running play.
The quarterback looks very good and seems very mobile. Maybe the coaches were just trying to save him but it seems if he had rolled out more he may have been even more effective against Clemson.
Defensively, there seems to be some work to be done.
Good luck the rest of the year!

michmaster Wrote:Good thing we only have one more home game. EMU doesnt really draw the crowd anyway. That being said if we are going to either lose to Clemson on the road or BC at home I think I would rather take the paycheck. This isn't really even the point though. We should be able to compete against Kent, WMU, EMU, and Akron.

I get more comments about that Boston College game. I think that game put CMU on the map and had people take notice and follow the Chips a little bit. I for one would prefer to look forward to a big name school to play at home, the atmosphere for the BC game set the tone for the rest of the season. Winning the conference is great but if you want to be taken seriously, you have to win out of conference. As far as a paycheck goes I understand the reality of our underfunded athletic dept. But to get the program where you want it to be I would prefer to get some wins against the Indianas, Northwesterns, Mississippi States, and Cincinnattis of the world.

Fire Up,

"This is a major reason why attendance at K/S is not going to improve."

When you say not improve...are you talking about the 15K we averaged in 2005 compared to the 21K we averaged in 2006 and we are pretty much on pace to average 20-21k this year without a BC coming into K/S? I'm just wondering what you mean by attendance is not improving.

Right now the average attendance over 4 games is 19,508. I suspect that EMU on a Friday night in November might not help to increase that number.

Lets make the best of it.

My guess is it will all depend on what the EMU game means...a MAC West title could be on the line...that should bring 20K plus (I would hope).

CMUMAN95 Wrote:"This is a major reason why attendance at K/S is not going to improve."

When you say not improve...are you talking about the 15K we averaged in 2005 compared to the 21K we averaged in 2006 and we are pretty much on pace to average 20-21k this year without a BC coming into K/S? I'm just wondering what you mean by attendance is not improving.

It was meant in the context that if you can't even deliver a reasonably competitive game against BCS opponents, people will automatically assume that this league is bush, rightly or wrongly.