(09-11-2013 12:44 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(09-11-2013 11:45 AM)JMUDuke25 Wrote:  

(09-11-2013 11:06 AM)Purplehazed Wrote:  FWIW - I recently heard, with my own two ears, a former JMU president say "no playoffs this year, no MM next year."

Good luck Mickey, quit the ******* sideline staring on offense now!

Why are people hung up on this? Is it just another case of finding something petty to ***** about just to *****? They are communicating a play to the QB/team one way or another. This method prevents the defense from subbing so it has at least one advantage. It also allows us to control the tempo and go at our speed.

Yea, I really don't get this either. We go to a conventional huddle, have the play run in from the side, permitting the D to make their subs. We burn 30 seconds getting the play called and breaking the huddle no one says a peep.
Instead we line up, take a read on what the D is calling, don't allow them the time or opportunity to sub, perhaps change the play call at the line on either an audible or another call from the sideline, and run it at the 20 second mark and everyone is having a melt down.

This one I don't get AT ALL. We ran 90+ plays in this game, how much faster do any of you think this could go?

Agree. This is the least of my concerns from a coaching perspective. Hard to find fault in the cadence of the offense when we ran 90+ plays for 500+ yards of offense and 300+ passing yards.

Going for 2 after a TD, wasted timeouts, pooch kicks, etc on the other hand......

(09-11-2013 07:40 AM)JMUDuke25 Wrote:  Has anyone confirmed that MM called the two point play after the first score or is it a situation where the players can run it if they see something in the defense they like?

I haven't heard anything this season, but I believe it came up last year and MM said the players had to option to go for two based upon the defensive formation.

(09-08-2013 06:01 AM)Duke Dawg Wrote:  hard to believe we lost that game, but it really came down to 3 things....well, really 1 thing, because #'s 2 & 3 below are pretty much related to #1

1) Coaching - whether it's Mickey making calls are not, our coaching continues to be extremely underwhelming. Too many poor coaching decisions to list.

2) 3rd downs - as in the past few years, we simply cannot stop anyone on 3rd down. it's inexcusable to give up so many big plays on 3rd and longs. I blame it squarely on coaching. we are too freakin passive in these situations. rush 3 or 4. sit in a zone. play 10 yards off the ball. The scheme is all designed to avoid the big play. problem is, when you don't pressure the QB and he has all day to throw, big plays are EXACTLY what you are going to get. horrible coaching

3) Penalties - three, in particular. the offside the negated a fumble recovery by us would have given us the ball up 13-0 on their 40. instead, they convert a long 3rd down pass (shocker, eh?) and go down and score. At least a 10 point swing their if not more. the second penalty was after they scored. we were driving at will once again and lambert broke off an 18-19 yard run on 1st down that would have given us the ball on their 40 or so. instead, a holding call negated this run and made it 1st and 20 on our 40. we failed to move the ball after this and punted which indirectly led to our fumble instead our 10. without the hold, i feel we would have scored some points easily. third, the penalty on scott. on TV, sure looks like he shoved the guy in the face. that penalty killed time and pushed us back 10 yards. we could have used those extra 10 yards and extra 10 seconds. too many boneheaded penalties are a result of coaching when it happens all the time. and for us, the last few years, we have made way too many penalties in general, and specifically way too many boneheaded penalties. That falls back on coaching.

Agree 100%!

(09-08-2013 08:02 AM)JMUETC Wrote:  I really can't get over the waste of timeouts. Who calls a timeout before a FG try? Oh that's right, the opposing team. Mickey has got to be the only coach who freezes his own kicker. Also, how many 2 point conversion plays do you have. A handful, right? When the TD is scored you call one of the plays and run it. It's not that hard. Paralysis by analysis is a sign of a weak coach and last night it cost JMU the game. I don't blame Mickey for Scott's penalty on the final drive, but I do blame him for not having a time out which would have allowed JMU to win the game and made Scott's penalty a foot note.

Obviously Mickey can not manage the strategy of the game while at the same time micro-managing the play calling. (Same story different OC). I believe JMU had better players last night and would have won that game with even vanilla play calling and basic game management. The adults cost the players the game.

I see a 7-5 season with no playoffs and a new head coach in a new conference (i hope) next year.

I agree. And the shame of it is we have a very talented football team this year. We just need some decent game coaching to go with it. I see us losing several close games on the road in our conference schedule for the very same reason, poor game coaching.

(09-08-2013 10:41 AM)Duke Dawg Wrote:  

(09-08-2013 10:35 AM)JMUETC Wrote:  

(09-08-2013 09:41 AM)JMU2004 Wrote:  A lot of excellent points made in this thread. The mistakes made last night were a microcosm of our issues in the last 5 years.

This drive really encapsulated things for me.

James Madison at 8:37 JMU AKR
1st and 10 at JMU 23 Jainard Lambert rush for 7 yards to the JMads 30, tackled by Jatavis Brown.
2nd and 3 at JMU 30 Jainard Lambert rush for 7 yards to the JMads 37, tackled by Johnny Robinson for a 1ST down.
1st and 10 at JMU 37 Jainard Lambert rush for 5 yards to the JMads 42, tackled by Johnny Robinson.
2nd and 5 at JMU 42 Jainard Lambert rush for 18 yards to the Akron 40, tackled by Nick Rossi and Anthony Holmes for a 1ST down.
1st and 10 at AKR 40 JMU penalty 10 yard holding accepted, no play.
1st and 20 at AKR 50 DeAndre' Smith rush for 2 yards to the Akron 48, tackled by Emmanuel Lartey.
2nd and 18 at AKR 48 Michael Birdsong pass complete to Dae'Quan Scott for 4 yards to the Akron 44, tackled by Cody Grice and DeAndre Scott.
3rd and 14 at AKR 44 Michael Birdsong pass incomplete to Brandon Ravenel, broken up by C.J. James.
4th and 14 at AKR 44 Timeout AKRON, clock 05:08.
4th and 14 at AKR 44 Michael Birdsong punt for 44 yards for a touchback.

4 runs up the middle by Lambert averaging 9 yards per play. Take out lambert and run a sweep. Tackle or WR gets caught holding on the stretch play, costing 10 yards. Going away from the quick hitting plays makes it tough on the linemen sometimes. Next play, another sweep for 2 yards and the drive is dead. The announcer made a comment about why go away from the up the middle runs when they are working. Pooch punt by birdsong was okay, but went for a touch back. Why not let the punter try to pin them inside the 10. That's what he practices all week.

That was the head scratching drive which could have had JMU extend the lead with a FG or TD.

I don't think I can let last nights game go. I guess I just thought things would be different this year. Shame on me I guess.

i think the problem is, how many times has a game like last night happened in recent years?

how many times have we heard after the game "that was a game we really should have won"? problem is, we AREN'T winning those games we should have won.

when you consistently outplay teams, out yardage them, etc , yet come up on the short end, the problem with that completely lies at the top. obviously the players are good enough, so why are we always saying " that was a game we really should have won"? WIN THE DAMN THING ALREADY!

EXACTLY!!!! That is why I am so fuqqing frustrated. We jam the ball down a team's throat, then for some mysterious reason, switch gears and start running some other crap. RUN IT 'TIL THEY STOP IT, DAMMIT!! If I'm getting five yards per play on an up-the-gut, then I'm running that same play until they stop us. I am SOOOOOOO sick and tired of seeing us dominate teams who wind up beating us.

(09-12-2013 04:12 AM)bulldogg Wrote:  I am SOOOOOOO sick and tired of seeing us dominate teams who wind up beating us.

I'm curious...I'll give you the Akron game, and then I go all the way back to 2007 and the ASU game where we should have won, but lost. What other games are you suggesting we "dominated" but instead lost?

One the other hand, I can think of a number of games we won, but perhaps shouldn't have...the 2004 UD game, the game over the then #1 ranked W&M game, the VT win...

(09-12-2013 06:54 AM)Longhorn Wrote:  

(09-12-2013 04:12 AM)bulldogg Wrote:  I am SOOOOOOO sick and tired of seeing us dominate teams who wind up beating us.

I'm curious...I'll give you the Akron game, and then I go all the way back to 2007 and the ASU game where we should have won, but lost. What other games are you suggesting we "dominated" but instead lost?

One the other hand, I can think of a number of games we won, but perhaps shouldn't have...the 2004 UD game, the game over the then #1 ranked W&M game, the VT win...

I would put Richmond 2010 and Delaware 2010 in this category where every time we got into a rhythm on offense we switched QBs up until DD got injured against UR while meanwhile our defense stifled the opponents and then we let UD run the clock down big time on that last drive to the last play

(09-12-2013 07:02 AM)JMUBarry Wrote:  I would put Richmond 2010 and Delaware 2010 in this category where every time we got into a rhythm on offense we switched QBs up until DD got injured against UR while meanwhile our defense stifled the opponents and then we let UD run the clock down big time on that last drive to the last play

Those were definitively frustrating losses, but if we're talking about the same game, I don't recall the Dukes dominating the #1 ranked Richmond...nor do I recall MM switching QBs "just because" in that game. MM had awarded the starting QB job to Thorpe, who began the game against UR but was ineffective. So, (finally) out of frustration, MM pulls Thorpe and DD enters the game, and immediately energizes the whole stadium by throwing a long TD in his first series. Then DD breaks (or re-injures) his foot and leaves the game, forcing MM to put Thorpe back in. Then Thorpe leads the team on a long drive, and on a 1st and goal with time running down, fumbles the ball (and game) away. Again...terrible frustrating...but JMU didn't dominate the stats against the then #1 ranked team.

The UD loss was also painful...a game where our D had dominated UD from the get-go, but our O was about as weak as it ever was. Again, a painful and frustrating loss, but not one where you could say the Dukes dominated the offensive stats and yet still lost.

Fans always ***** about coaches that lose games they should have won. They never give credit when we win games we should have lost though. Is there a coach out there that doesn't lose games they should win?

(09-12-2013 07:19 AM)Longhorn Wrote:  

(09-12-2013 07:02 AM)JMUBarry Wrote:  I would put Richmond 2010 and Delaware 2010 in this category where every time we got into a rhythm on offense we switched QBs up until DD got injured against UR while meanwhile our defense stifled the opponents and then we let UD run the clock down big time on that last drive to the last play

Those were definitively frustrating losses, but if we're talking about the same game, I don't recall the Dukes dominating the #1 ranked Richmond...nor do I recall MM switching QBs "just because" in that game. MM had awarded the starting QB job to Thorpe, who began the game against UR but was ineffective. So, (finally) out of frustration, MM pulls Thorpe and DD enters the game, and immediately energizes the whole stadium by throwing a long TD in his first series. Then DD breaks (or re-injures) his foot and leaves the game, forcing MM to put Thorpe back in. Then Thorpe leads the team on a long drive, and on a 1st and goal with time running down, fumbles the ball (and game) away. Again...terrible frustrating...but JMU didn't dominate the stats against the then #1 ranked team.

The UD loss was also painful...a game where our D had dominated UD from the get-go, but our O was about as weak as it ever was. Again, a painful and frustrating loss, but not one where you could say the Dukes dominated the offensive stats and yet still lost.

Longhorn, the game you are referring to was in 2009. The 2010 game was the first game we played at the Robins bread box and lost in OT.

(09-12-2013 09:08 AM)JMU_71 Wrote:  

(09-12-2013 07:19 AM)Longhorn Wrote:  

(09-12-2013 07:02 AM)JMUBarry Wrote:  I would put Richmond 2010 and Delaware 2010 in this category where every time we got into a rhythm on offense we switched QBs up until DD got injured against UR while meanwhile our defense stifled the opponents and then we let UD run the clock down big time on that last drive to the last play

Those were definitively frustrating losses, but if we're talking about the same game, I don't recall the Dukes dominating the #1 ranked Richmond...nor do I recall MM switching QBs "just because" in that game. MM had awarded the starting QB job to Thorpe, who began the game against UR but was ineffective. So, (finally) out of frustration, MM pulls Thorpe and DD enters the game, and immediately energizes the whole stadium by throwing a long TD in his first series. Then DD breaks (or re-injures) his foot and leaves the game, forcing MM to put Thorpe back in. Then Thorpe leads the team on a long drive, and on a 1st and goal with time running down, fumbles the ball (and game) away. Again...terrible frustrating...but JMU didn't dominate the stats against the then #1 ranked team.

The UD loss was also painful...a game where our D had dominated UD from the get-go, but our O was about as weak as it ever was. Again, a painful and frustrating loss, but not one where you could say the Dukes dominated the offensive stats and yet still lost.

Longhorn, the game you are referring to was in 2009. The 2010 game was the first game we played at the Robins bread box and lost in OT.

Thanks 71! Just too many frustrating losses to UR to keep straight for me...

(09-12-2013 09:11 AM)Longhorn Wrote:  

(09-12-2013 09:08 AM)JMU_71 Wrote:  

(09-12-2013 07:19 AM)Longhorn Wrote:  

(09-12-2013 07:02 AM)JMUBarry Wrote:  I would put Richmond 2010 and Delaware 2010 in this category where every time we got into a rhythm on offense we switched QBs up until DD got injured against UR while meanwhile our defense stifled the opponents and then we let UD run the clock down big time on that last drive to the last play

Those were definitively frustrating losses, but if we're talking about the same game, I don't recall the Dukes dominating the #1 ranked Richmond...nor do I recall MM switching QBs "just because" in that game. MM had awarded the starting QB job to Thorpe, who began the game against UR but was ineffective. So, (finally) out of frustration, MM pulls Thorpe and DD enters the game, and immediately energizes the whole stadium by throwing a long TD in his first series. Then DD breaks (or re-injures) his foot and leaves the game, forcing MM to put Thorpe back in. Then Thorpe leads the team on a long drive, and on a 1st and goal with time running down, fumbles the ball (and game) away. Again...terrible frustrating...but JMU didn't dominate the stats against the then #1 ranked team.

The UD loss was also painful...a game where our D had dominated UD from the get-go, but our O was about as weak as it ever was. Again, a painful and frustrating loss, but not one where you could say the Dukes dominated the offensive stats and yet still lost.

Longhorn, the game you are referring to was in 2009. The 2010 game was the first game we played at the Robins bread box and lost in OT.

Thanks 71! Just too many frustrating losses to UR to keep straight for me...

I know! I hate those dadgum Ticks!

(09-12-2013 09:11 AM)Longhorn Wrote:  

(09-12-2013 09:08 AM)JMU_71 Wrote:  

(09-12-2013 07:19 AM)Longhorn Wrote:  

(09-12-2013 07:02 AM)JMUBarry Wrote:  I would put Richmond 2010 and Delaware 2010 in this category where every time we got into a rhythm on offense we switched QBs up until DD got injured against UR while meanwhile our defense stifled the opponents and then we let UD run the clock down big time on that last drive to the last play

Those were definitively frustrating losses, but if we're talking about the same game, I don't recall the Dukes dominating the #1 ranked Richmond...nor do I recall MM switching QBs "just because" in that game. MM had awarded the starting QB job to Thorpe, who began the game against UR but was ineffective. So, (finally) out of frustration, MM pulls Thorpe and DD enters the game, and immediately energizes the whole stadium by throwing a long TD in his first series. Then DD breaks (or re-injures) his foot and leaves the game, forcing MM to put Thorpe back in. Then Thorpe leads the team on a long drive, and on a 1st and goal with time running down, fumbles the ball (and game) away. Again...terrible frustrating...but JMU didn't dominate the stats against the then #1 ranked team.

The UD loss was also painful...a game where our D had dominated UD from the get-go, but our O was about as weak as it ever was. Again, a painful and frustrating loss, but not one where you could say the Dukes dominated the offensive stats and yet still lost.

Longhorn, the game you are referring to was in 2009. The 2010 game was the first game we played at the Robins bread box and lost in OT.

Thanks 71! Just too many frustrating losses to UR to keep straight for me...

Funny thing is - I had my year wrong. Longhorn had the right game I was referencing.

On the UD game - you are also right about not dominating on O but we did dominate on D and I recall (perhaps incorrectly) that UD was able to tun the clock down to 3 seconds before kicking the field goal on that last drive and run over 6 minutes off the clock on the way bc we had burned our TOs earlier - again I could just be remembering wrong. My buddy brought his UD brother in law and I jawwed in his ear for 59 minutes before I had to eat crow

(09-10-2013 12:39 PM)BDKJMU Wrote:  

(09-10-2013 08:06 AM)DirtyDukes Wrote:  

(09-10-2013 12:41 AM)johnjmu98 Wrote:  

(09-08-2013 09:28 AM)JMUBarry Wrote:  

(09-08-2013 08:48 AM)rufus Wrote:  In my opinion, 7-5 or 6-6 is a worst case scenario, because it's bad enough to discourage our fans and hurt recruiting, but I don't think it will be enough to get Mickey fired. I just can't see King or Bourne firing a coach with a winning or .500 record.

I'm hoping for playoffs this year, but if it becomes clear that we are not going to make the playoffs, then I want a losing record. I think we're going to need a couple consecutive losing seasons to get a coaching change.

Rufus, you are incorrect. 7-4 last year or comparable this year is not acceptable to the admin. With 2 years left in his contract its not enough to make a change, but if it happens again with 1 year left after this season it will be.

Personally, I would prefer it doesn't come to this and we have 8-9 regular season wins plus playoffs

I am ready for this MM crap to finally end. What idiot on the road against an FBS team goes for 2 after scoring first? Take me back to Boone when that fat ******* went for it on 4th down from our own 42... I pray for a 2-11 season. Is it basketball season yet?

That and the dufus thinks a 12 game schedule can have a record of 2-11.

oops my math was off one! fu!

(09-11-2013 12:44 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  Yea, I really don't get this either. We go to a conventional huddle, have the play run in from the side, permitting the D to make their subs. We burn 30 seconds getting the play called and breaking the huddle no one says a peep.
Instead we line up, take a read on what the D is calling, don't allow them the time or opportunity to sub, perhaps change the play call at the line on either an audible or another call from the sideline, and run it at the 20 second mark and everyone is having a melt down.

This one I don't get AT ALL. We ran 90+ plays in this game, how much faster do any of you think this could go?

Our offense is still not all that fast paced. We ran 94 plays, but we also held the ball for 38:20. On the other hand, Akron ran 57 plays in 21:40. Based on those numbers, we played at a slightly slower pace than Akron. Both teams seemed to play at a fairly average pace, by modern college football standards.

Don't get me wrong -- I'll certainly take it over our previous offensive pace, but it's not a case of, "how much faster do you think this could go?" How much faster? A hell of a lot faster. Oregon ran 69 plays in 21:25 against UVA. If Oregon held the ball for as long as we did, they would have run around 124 plays. Now I'm not saying that we're ever going to be Oregon, but I would certainly argue that we are not playing anywhere near top potential speed.

I'll post this thought here and it may have been posted elsewhere multiple times, but Matthews has only himself to blame for time running out at the end of the game when Harvey got stood up in the middle of the field, and as the referee reviewer correctly pointed out, short of a first down anyway. In that situation, smart teams run sideline patterns and get out of bounds. If you run a play to the middle of the field with no timeouts and fall short of the first down no less, that's what happens. Matthews should accept responsibility for the loss rather than laying blame at the foot of the referees.

The loss last Saturday was definitely the coaches fault. Fine to call 80 some plays if the players know what the plays are, but to have to call so many time outs that you are out of time outs when you really need one is poor coaching. A tight game like that, the coaches should have known that we were going to need one at the end.

(09-13-2013 06:07 AM)rufus Wrote:  

(09-11-2013 12:44 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  Yea, I really don't get this either. We go to a conventional huddle, have the play run in from the side, permitting the D to make their subs. We burn 30 seconds getting the play called and breaking the huddle no one says a peep.
Instead we line up, take a read on what the D is calling, don't allow them the time or opportunity to sub, perhaps change the play call at the line on either an audible or another call from the sideline, and run it at the 20 second mark and everyone is having a melt down.

This one I don't get AT ALL. We ran 90+ plays in this game, how much faster do any of you think this could go?

Our offense is still not all that fast paced. We ran 94 plays, but we also held the ball for 38:20. On the other hand, Akron ran 57 plays in 21:40. Based on those numbers, we played at a slightly slower pace than Akron. Both teams seemed to play at a fairly average pace, by modern college football standards.

we ran 15 plays in the last 1:30 of the game.

take that out and it's 79 plays in 37:00. not very fast at all.

There are some very insightful remarks on this thread.

Well done.