(10-11-2014 02:29 PM)Philoso-Owl Wrote:  On the whole, a good performance and an earned win on the road. Good job guys. A few little improvements in execution, keeping the defense focused at the end of halves, and time management to work on for next week. I feel better after this game than Hawaii. It's a long way to go, but there's no good reason not to be a 10-3 CUSA champ going into a bowl game if we can play (and coach) up to our potential.

(10-11-2014 04:05 PM)owl40 Wrote:  Fortunate to be at the game at Michie Stadium today.. Very intimate place. Parking is horrible but the fall foilage, West Point, good crowd, etc. was really nice. Really feel like you are on the field.

Takeaways..
- After Taylor's TD in the 3Q, great to see DB yelling at the team...'more'..'we need more'. Had not seen him that fired-up ensuring guys don't get complacent when it went up 31-17.. Some here criticize him for being soft but he was not in that instance.

- Covington was a beast. Just dominated the guys on other side which allowed not only him to make plays but open up opportunities for other guys to get in backfield.

- Still suspect in secondary. Lots of open guys. Difference this week was a bad throwing QB and our DL pressure. If it would have been any of the teams we played earlier that could protect and throw...would have given up some deep balls.

- Listened to postgame interview with Army coach and very complementary of the Rice team, talent, and coaching. Said we were a very underrated football team. Said Covington was best DL he had seen all year (including Stanford)

- Great to see Hamilton, Wright, Hull, etc. get the touches. Hamilton is a beast on special teams (not just returning...also made a nice tackle).

Bottom line is that team is improving. Still can't figure-out how to take December to the next August but we sure know how to improve w/in the season. Team is coming together. Complete victory. Congrats to the guys.....Feeling very optimistic as we go into C-USA play..

(10-11-2014 04:19 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  I was also going to add that the only disappointing thing to me about the game today was that we didn't play a 2nd string QB on our final possession. Playing at Army is just a neat experience that it's a shame Stehling or German didn't get to do it near the end.

But if that's the only complaint, it must have been a good game.

Good overall effort.

Offense - Seemed like Rice took the foot off the gas on offense a bit in the 2nd half, and don't see as much Dillard in the 2nd half. Driphus was very good in 1st half and not quite as sharp in 2nd. Rice seems to like the draw on 3rd-and-long when deep in our own territory, maybe a bit too predictable.

Defense - Army did have a few open receivers, but remember that Rice's secondary was in man-to-man on almost every play. I feel like pass coverage has definitely improved with Hill back at safety and Banks getting snaps. Army busted a few long runs and it would have been nice to hold them under 20, but wow were there to a of Rice defenders in the backfield. Seemed very prepared and very disciplined. Quite a few guys with great games, including Radcliffe, Lyons, Covington.

13 TFLs

One thing I didn't like was that we slowed on third down conversions in the second half, from 5/7 to 2/7.

I can't believe that this was my first game watching in person in 10 years since I'd graduated. The experience at West Point is unlike anything you'll ever see with the march of cadets, their band playing our fight song as a welcome (a bit slow, but I dare say better than the MOB) and all of the military traditions. The only downside was the weather prevented the delivery of the game ball by sky divers.

The difference in size, speed and skill was as evident as I've ever seen. Each team had breakdowns on each side of the ball. There were a lot of busted plays on each side of the ball resulting in many long and negative plays. Turnovers seemed to be the key difference in the game. Special teams was also a factor as our kickoffs after the first two were all deep and the punting was stellar. Army, not so much.

On offense, it seemed like the play calling got predictable by the end with the swing passes out wide and inside draws. Jordan Taylor was a consistent mis-match that was not exploited as much as it could have been. Still, overall execution was good.

On defense, Lyons and Covington were beasts in the middle and the DB's made some good plays. We seemed very susceptible to traps and other mis-direction running plays. Our LB and DB play when the runner broke through the first level was not very good, but we hit them hard. The goal line stand at the end of the game by the second string when Army was trying for time to punch one in late and it had no impact except for the score was really impressive.

Good win. Nice to be back to .500 and rolling

We were driving back to Fishkill via Storm King Hwy (rte 218) and went past a house in Cornwall that had a big Rice flag hanging in front of their garage. Is that someone who is on this Board?

Good game day experience outside of the driving/parking issus. Thank goodness they don't have a 50+K stadium.

Is it just me, or has Parks been pretty much a non-factor lately?

(10-11-2014 06:04 PM)mrbig Wrote:  Is it just me, or has Parks been pretty much a non-factor lately?

He was not impressive today

He didn't play at all against Hawai'i.

he was a target for a pass, which if thrown better, would probably go for a TD

Funny how short these post game threads are after a win. Here's hoping we have nothing but short post game threads the rest of the year.

strategy question for the experts: Tie game, 1:20 left, 4th and 3 at the opponent 45.

go for it, or punt?

I was without internet most of the day, so I'll put all my comments here:
Probably most complete game of the year for the Owls>the defensive ends lived in the Army backfield, Radcliffe was everywhere, and Covington finally looked fully healthy and is simply a beast.
Offensively Driphus made good reads and had a great completion ratio. The young running backs continue to impress. Great to see Taylor looking like his old self.
Always room for improvement, but against an offense like the triple option, the defense played pretty well.
Only negative might be that the wide receivers got blown up trying to block a few times on the outside.
Loved the comment that it looked like DB playing Hatfield. lol
Easy to see how much better we are with a healthy Covington and Taylor.
Can we start a "One More Year" campaign for Christian??? The D would really be good if we still had Mouch also.

(10-11-2014 07:57 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Funny how short these post game threads are after a win. Here's hoping we have nothing but short post game threads the rest of the year.

Couldn't agree more, OO. (Both on the snarky insight, and the earnest hope.)

What was the deal with the passing game going mostly to passes out in the flat through most of the 4th Q? We had great success going downfield and running receivers underneath and Driphus was 12 for 14. Going to the sideline we threw a number of passes that could have been picked off and those we did complete went for little or no gain.

Tiki- could not agree more w/ the parking comment. Over an hour from freeway to stadium. Tough work to get there but once you are there, was great...

Posted my postgame comments on other thread but a couple things I missed..

- Really like DJ throwing to spots vs. directly to receivers today. Saw a few throws to Hull and Wright that were timing and location. Had not seen that much of that from him until today.

- On Parks, I think it is a case of too many guys and only one ball to get touches to people. Expect to see him more of a factor as season goes on.

- Still very nervous when we do play a good QB who can throw or extend plays. Secondary is suspect. We have seen last two weeks what happens when you get pressure combined with a bad QB. Don't know if you could see from TV but lots of pass plays w/ wide open guys in space.

- Don't we wish we could have ODU back? UTEP beating them. NT really down. They lost by 35 to UAB? UTSA at home in a 10-10 game with FIU? Wow.. West is there if we want it..

- Have to feel good

(10-11-2014 08:48 PM)Tiki Owl Wrote:  What was the deal with the passing game going mostly to passes out in the flat through most of the 4th Q? We had great success going downfield and running receivers underneath and Driphus was 12 for 14. Going to the sideline we threw a number of passes that could have been picked off and those we did complete went for little or no gain.

Ah, Tiki-- but you know the answer to that. We tend to go away from what's working. We did the same thing last year when we'd have great success the first 2 - 3 series thowing quick hooks to our wideouts and short, underneath throws to Cella, and then inexplicably abandon those plays the remainder of the game.

Jordan Taylor was open on virtually every down-- they had absolutely no one who could even remotely cover him...and after the first quarter, the one man they had on him was giving him 10 yards off the line of scrimmage. Hull was in a similar situation on most downs.

I agree this was probably our most complete game with my game balls going to Covington (totally dominant throughout today, but turned the game around almost single handedly in the 3Q), Radcliff and Taylor. Hamilton is quickly proving to be our best return man in not so recent memory. And as others have pointed out, we outmanned and outtalented Army at virtually every position. Bigger, faster and better athletes all around. It was akin to us going up against a Top 25 team...and had we tried, this could have been a 40-point blowout.

However, still some concerns and points of frustration (would you expect anything less?)...

- I saw no adjustments made defensively, despite the fact that Army's lone effective play was the QB zone read keeper off the right tackle. He gains 150+ yards on the ground on some 21 rushes. Would it really have been too difficult to have one of our LBs or safeties (given they hardly ever passed) mirror their QB whereever he went? Wasn't this a common sense adjustment?

- Though Driphus made better decisions than he did last week vs. Hawaii, on pass plays he continues to hold the ball too long....and given it became evident that one of our 4 receivers when lined up in the spread formation was going to be wide open (usually Taylor or Hull), he did throw several questionable balls into double coverage. I could be wrong on this, but he appears to lock into one receiver as opposed to going through his various options.

- Save for the opening play of the game, and the TD pass to a wide open Taylor on the first play after the fumble recovery, every other first down call all game long was a direct handoff right up the middle-- usually for a 2 - 4 yard loss. It was beyond predictable, and it wasn't working. As a result, we faced 2nd and 11+ yard situations at least 6 times during the game; something that is inexcusable, especially since Army was giving us yardage on almost every other play we ran (save for the flat pass, which as Tiki mentioned above, we continue to go to despite it never working)-- whether it be the option or off-tackle run, or pass down field.

- As others noted, Bailiff and Edmondson went totally conservative once we upped the lead to 38 - 21. It almost appeared as if they decided to call off the dogs and avoid at all cost the chance of running up the score (which was not reciprocated by the Army coaching staff, which insisted on going for a meaningless final second TD by using all of it's timeouts in the final minute of the game). I'm also growing tired of our giving up on 3rd and 8+ yards, and almost always calling the draw play in such situations. Again, we had the 5 - 10 yard pass play ALL game long, with our receivers often gaining significant yards after the catch on such plays. And they're quick release throws that greatly minimize the risk of a sack. I just don't understand why we refuse to exploit what the defense is giving us.

I only hope Connor Cella is not seriously hurt, as he is a key weapon and excellent blocker, and has already missed 4 games with injuries this year.

(10-11-2014 07:57 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Funny how short these post game threads are after a win. Here's hoping we have nothing but short post game threads the rest of the year.

strategy question for the experts: Tie game, 1:20 left, 4th and 3 at the opponent 45.

go for it, or punt?

Might depend on how well you've been running/defending, and who has how many timeouts, but I would probably go for it. Giving up possession there probably means you aren't getting it back. When you have possession you have control. 4th and 3 isn't too much of a challenge. If it failed they are still well out of FG range.

(10-11-2014 09:47 PM)Philoso-Owl Wrote:  

(10-11-2014 07:57 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Funny how short these post game threads are after a win. Here's hoping we have nothing but short post game threads the rest of the year.

strategy question for the experts: Tie game, 1:20 left, 4th and 3 at the opponent 45.

go for it, or punt?

Might depend on how well you've been running/defending, and who has how many timeouts, but I would probably go for it. Giving up possession there probably means you aren't getting it back. When you have possession you have control. 4th and 3 isn't too much of a challenge. If it failed they are still well out of FG range.

appreciate the answer, Walt. i leaned toward punting, and trying to get to OT. it's a togh choice.

In the actual situation, the coach dithered, ended up wasting two TOs, and in the end went for it, failing, and the opoonent drove for a game winning Fg on the last play of the game. Baylor 61, TCU 58.

The way TCU was defending at that point, I think they had to go for it. 1:20 was plenty of time for Baylor to move the ball the length of the field against a defense playing the way that TCU was. Field position means something when field position means something; when it doesn't, it doesn't.

(10-11-2014 09:28 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(10-11-2014 08:48 PM)Tiki Owl Wrote:  What was the deal with the passing game going mostly to passes out in the flat through most of the 4th Q? We had great success going downfield and running receivers underneath and Driphus was 12 for 14. Going to the sideline we threw a number of passes that could have been picked off and those we did complete went for little or no gain.

Ah, Tiki-- but you know the answer to that. We tend to go away from what's working. We did the same thing last year when we'd have great success the first 2 - 3 series thowing quick hooks to our wideouts and short, underneath throws to Cella, and then inexplicably abandon those plays the remainder of the game.

Jordan Taylor was open on virtually every down-- they had absolutely no one who could even remotely cover him...and after the first quarter, the one man they had on him was giving him 10 yards off the line of scrimmage. Hull was in a similar situation on most downs.

I agree this was probably our most complete game with my game balls going to Covington (totally dominant throughout today, but turned the game around almost single handedly in the 3Q), Radcliff and Taylor. Hamilton is quickly proving to be our best return man in not so recent memory. And as others have pointed out, we outmanned and outtalented Army at virtually every position. Bigger, faster and better athletes all around. It was akin to us going up against a Top 25 team...and had we tried, this could have been a 40-point blowout.

However, still some concerns and points of frustration (would you expect anything less?)...

- I saw no adjustments made defensively, despite the fact that Army's lone effective play was the QB zone read keeper off the right tackle. He gains 150+ yards on the ground on some 21 rushes. Would it really have been too difficult to have one of our LBs or safeties (given they hardly ever passed) mirror their QB whereever he went? Wasn't this a common sense adjustment?

- Though Driphus made better decisions than he did last week vs. Hawaii, on pass plays he continues to hold the ball too long....and given it became evident that one of our 4 receivers when lined up in the spread formation was going to be wide open (usually Taylor or Hull), he did throw several questionable balls into double coverage. I could be wrong on this, but he appears to lock into one receiver as opposed to going through his various options.

- Save for the opening play of the game, and the TD pass to a wide open Taylor on the first play after the fumble recovery, every other first down call all game long was a direct handoff right up the middle-- usually for a 2 - 4 yard loss. It was beyond predictable, and it wasn't working. As a result, we faced 2nd and 11+ yard situations at least 6 times during the game; something that is inexcusable, especially since Army was giving us yardage on almost every other play we ran (save for the flat pass, which as Tiki mentioned above, we continue to go to despite it never working)-- whether it be the option or off-tackle run, or pass down field.

- As others noted, Bailiff and Edmondson went totally conservative once we upped the lead to 38 - 21. It almost appeared as if they decided to call off the dogs and avoid at all cost the chance of running up the score (which was not reciprocated by the Army coaching staff, which insisted on going for a meaningless final second TD by using all of it's timeouts in the final minute of the game). I'm also growing tired of our giving up on 3rd and 8+ yards, and almost always calling the draw play in such situations. Again, we had the 5 - 10 yard pass play ALL game long, with our receivers often gaining significant yards after the catch on such plays. And they're quick release throws that greatly minimize the risk of a sack. I just don't understand why we refuse to exploit what the defense is giving us.

I only hope Connor Cella is not seriously hurt, as he is a key weapon and excellent blocker, and has already missed 4 games with injuries this year.

I heard Connor Cella broke his ankle.

(10-11-2014 09:28 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  - Save for the opening play of the game, and the TD pass to a wide open Taylor on the first play after the fumble recovery, every other first down call all game long was a direct handoff right up the middle-- usually for a 2 - 4 yard loss. It was beyond predictable, and it wasn't working. As a result, we faced 2nd and 11+ yard situations at least 6 times during the game; something that is inexcusable, especially since Army was giving us yardage on almost every other play we ran (save for the flat pass, which as Tiki mentioned above, we continue to go to despite it never working)-- whether it be the option or off-tackle run, or pass down field.

This simply isn't true, as a cursory examination of the play by play shows.

First Quarter: In addition to the first play of the game, there was also a first down pass and the Wild Owl at the goal line.

Second Quarter: There were three first down passes.

Third Quarter: Along with the Taylor touchdown, there were two other first down passes.

Fourth Quarter: There were three first down passes.

So there were at least 12 plays that weren't hand offs up the middle, not just the two you mentioned. Now I don't care enough to determine what type of run each was (and it's not always possible to tell), or how many yards they gained, but given how wrong you already are, I'm betting some of the runs weren't right up the middle. Like Dillard's 15 yard touchdown in the second quarter, listed as a rush right.

http://www.sportingnews.com/ncaa-footbal...ck-knights