(11-18-2014 05:09 PM)BleedingPurple Wrote:  

(11-18-2014 02:35 PM)JMU_Newbill Wrote:  

(11-18-2014 02:14 PM)BleedingPurple Wrote:  

(11-18-2014 02:06 PM)Dukie95 Wrote:  What about Maglio? That looked like a serious injury (thought not serious enough to be "roughing the kicker")

Yes, I've been meaning to ask the same question. He did come back in, so it couldn't have been too bad. Yet he missed a 29 yard FG. I was wondering if he was out there despite being a little hurt.

He missed the field goal before the roughing, sorry, running into the kicker if I recall correctly.

He looked fine afterwards. No visible limp, kicks were fine, I think he was just trying to sell the call.

I'm going to "BDK" you. (I know that it really doesn't make any difference in the scheme of things. I just thought you may like to see for yourself)

Reference: http://jmusports.com/boxscore.aspx?path=...ll&id=8964

"QUARTER #3"
"JAMES MADISON drive start at 14:09."
"MAGLIO,R. field goal attempt from 35 GOOD, clock 09:31, PENALTY RICHMOND roughing the kicker declined."

This JAMES MADISON drive started at 03:16 of the 3rd Quarter, continued into the 4th quarter and stopped after the missed field goal.

"QUARTER #4"
"MAGLIO,R. field goal attempt from 29 MISSED - wide left, spot at RICHMOND20, clock 11:27"

It was a running into the kicker penalty, not roughing. It would not have resulted in a first down which is why it was declined. I think that was the case.

Hill is just not very good and is liable to fumble.......so no playing time.

(11-18-2014 05:23 PM)SQZJMU Wrote:  

(11-18-2014 05:09 PM)BleedingPurple Wrote:  

(11-18-2014 02:35 PM)JMU_Newbill Wrote:  

(11-18-2014 02:14 PM)BleedingPurple Wrote:  

(11-18-2014 02:06 PM)Dukie95 Wrote:  What about Maglio? That looked like a serious injury (thought not serious enough to be "roughing the kicker")

Yes, I've been meaning to ask the same question. He did come back in, so it couldn't have been too bad. Yet he missed a 29 yard FG. I was wondering if he was out there despite being a little hurt.

He missed the field goal before the roughing, sorry, running into the kicker if I recall correctly.

He looked fine afterwards. No visible limp, kicks were fine, I think he was just trying to sell the call.

I'm going to "BDK" you. (I know that it really doesn't make any difference in the scheme of things. I just thought you may like to see for yourself)

Reference: http://jmusports.com/boxscore.aspx?path=...ll&id=8964

"QUARTER #3"
"JAMES MADISON drive start at 14:09."
"MAGLIO,R. field goal attempt from 35 GOOD, clock 09:31, PENALTY RICHMOND roughing the kicker declined."

This JAMES MADISON drive started at 03:16 of the 3rd Quarter, continued into the 4th quarter and stopped after the missed field goal.

"QUARTER #4"
"MAGLIO,R. field goal attempt from 29 MISSED - wide left, spot at RICHMOND20, clock 11:27"

It was a running into the kicker penalty, not roughing. It would not have resulted in a first down which is why it was declined. I think that was the case.

I copied and pasted that information right from the game's play-by-play as referenced above, but I agree with you as it was running into the kicker.

(11-18-2014 05:37 PM)BleedingPurple Wrote:  

(11-18-2014 05:23 PM)SQZJMU Wrote:  

(11-18-2014 05:09 PM)BleedingPurple Wrote:  

(11-18-2014 02:35 PM)JMU_Newbill Wrote:  [quote='BleedingPurple' pid='11397552' dateline='1416338055']

Yes, I've been meaning to ask the same question. He did come back in, so it couldn't have been too bad. Yet he missed a 29 yard FG. I was wondering if he was out there despite being a little hurt.

He missed the field goal before the roughing, sorry, running into the kicker if I recall correctly.

He looked fine afterwards. No visible limp, kicks were fine, I think he was just trying to sell the call.
[/quote

I'm going to "BDK" you. (I know that it really doesn't make any difference in the scheme of things. I just thought you may like to see for yourself)

Reference: http://jmusports.com/boxscore.aspx?path=...ll&id=8964

"QUARTER #3"
"JAMES MADISON drive start at 14:09."
"MAGLIO,R. field goal attempt from 35 GOOD, clock 09:31, PENALTY RICHMOND roughing the kicker declined."

This JAMES MADISON drive started at 03:16 of the 3rd Quarter, continued into the 4th quarter and stopped after the missed field goal.

"QUARTER #4"
"MAGLIO,R. field goal attempt from 29 MISSED - wide left, spot at RICHMOND20, clock 11:27"

It was a running into the kicker penalty, not roughing. It would not have resulted in a first down which is why it was declined. I think that was the case.

I copied and pasted that information right from the game's play-by-play as referenced above, but I agree with you as it was running into the kicker.

He attempted the kick after he got hurt. I watched him on the sideline and he took a while to recover. After a while, he started to tee it up and kick into his net. I think he missed the FG because it was on the left hash-making it an across the body type of kick, or because he was still a bit hurt, or because he is human and hadn't missed in a while or a combination of the three.

I stand corrected

For whatever it's worth, I thought declining the roughing/running into penalty was simply a decision not to take the points off the board. Therefore, it didn't matter whether we'd have a first down if we'd accepted the penalty.

@MattJones36: TB John Miller also sat out with a bruised elbow. He'll also probably play Saturday, Withers said.

(11-18-2014 05:26 PM)Hotrod829 Wrote:  Hill is just not very good and is liable to fumble.......so no playing time.

What exactly do you mean by "not very good"? I only ask because the guy has a good pedigree just looking at his HS career and the interest he got from other schools. Granted, he has not done much yet on game day at JMU, but the guy didn't just all of a sudden go from being highly touted and heavily recruited to "not very good." He was offered by Michigan, Virginian, Pitt, Tennessee, and a boat load of others. I would love to hear very specifically why you make that statement. I have not been to practices or talked to the coaches about him, so I don't know. Please enlighten

(11-19-2014 09:53 AM)jmutoml757 Wrote:  

(11-18-2014 05:26 PM)Hotrod829 Wrote:  Hill is just not very good and is liable to fumble.......so no playing time.

What exactly do you mean by "not very good"? I only ask because the guy has a good pedigree just looking at his HS career and the interest he got from other schools. Granted, he has not done much yet on game day at JMU, but the guy didn't just all of a sudden go from being highly touted and heavily recruited to "not very good." He was offered by Michigan, Virginian, Pitt, Tennessee, and a boat load of others. I would love to hear very specifically why you make that statement. I have not been to practices or talked to the coaches about him, so I don't know. Please enlighten

Lateral movement is not as good as the the other backs. He tends to run high and that causes him to expose himself to big hits. Doesnt have very good vision and has had injury problems. Fumbling has been a issue for him in practice also. Now is he big , strong and fast .........yes.

(11-19-2014 09:53 AM)jmutoml757 Wrote:  

(11-18-2014 05:26 PM)Hotrod829 Wrote:  Hill is just not very good and is liable to fumble.......so no playing time.

What exactly do you mean by "not very good"? I only ask because the guy has a good pedigree just looking at his HS career and the interest he got from other schools. Granted, he has not done much yet on game day at JMU, but the guy didn't just all of a sudden go from being highly touted and heavily recruited to "not very good." He was offered by Michigan, Virginian, Pitt, Tennessee, and a boat load of others. I would love to hear very specifically why you make that statement. I have not been to practices or talked to the coaches about him, so I don't know. Please enlighten

i'm not going to argue that he's "not very good", but i will say that he certainly doesn't appear to have the explosion of our other backs (any of them). looks to me like he'd thrive as a FB in a triple option offense where he would get a lot of straight ahead runs (like Dane Romero from Wofford, if any remember the 2008 playoff game). he could potentially be a good short yardage back, based solely on size, but i would say that he's clearly not as explosive as our other backs.

(11-19-2014 10:06 AM)Hotrod829 Wrote:  

(11-19-2014 09:53 AM)jmutoml757 Wrote:  

(11-18-2014 05:26 PM)Hotrod829 Wrote:  Hill is just not very good and is liable to fumble.......so no playing time.

What exactly do you mean by "not very good"? I only ask because the guy has a good pedigree just looking at his HS career and the interest he got from other schools. Granted, he has not done much yet on game day at JMU, but the guy didn't just all of a sudden go from being highly touted and heavily recruited to "not very good." He was offered by Michigan, Virginian, Pitt, Tennessee, and a boat load of others. I would love to hear very specifically why you make that statement. I have not been to practices or talked to the coaches about him, so I don't know. Please enlighten

Lateral movement is not as good as the the other backs. He tends to run high and that causes him to expose himself to big hits. Doesnt have very good vision and has had injury problems. Fumbling has been a issue for him in practice also. Now is he big , strong and fast .........yes.

Got you. Thanks for the explanation. Another question then, do those with whom you speak think he can improve in these areas and make an impact? In other words, is he basically relegated to the bench? Is he open to coaching and making improvement- ie what is his attitude?

(11-19-2014 09:53 AM)jmutoml757 Wrote:  

(11-18-2014 05:26 PM)Hotrod829 Wrote:  Hill is just not very good and is liable to fumble.......so no playing time.

What exactly do you mean by "not very good"? I only ask because the guy has a good pedigree just looking at his HS career and the interest he got from other schools. Granted, he has not done much yet on game day at JMU, but the guy didn't just all of a sudden go from being highly touted and heavily recruited to "not very good." He was offered by Michigan, Virginian, Pitt, Tennessee, and a boat load of others. I would love to hear very specifically why you make that statement. I have not been to practices or talked to the coaches about him, so I don't know. Please enlighten

And Thourogood had a boat load of BCS offers too, and look what happened. That happens all the time around the country. Recruiting is a crapshoot.

(11-18-2014 09:38 PM)Harrisonburger Wrote:  For whatever it's worth, I thought declining the roughing/running into penalty was simply a decision not to take the points off the board. Therefore, it didn't matter whether we'd have a first down if we'd accepted the penalty.

I just went back to the play-by-play and it was 4th down and goal on with the ball on the 18 yard line. We were 10 yards behind the original line of scrimmage. Had we not taken the points, it would have been 4th and goal on the 13 yard line with a hurting kicker. Had it been roughing the kicker, we very well may have taken the penalty. I know the play-by-play said it was roughing, but Newbill and I both remember that it was running into the kicker which is a 5 yard'er and no automatic first down. In either case, we were in control of the game, which factored into the decision as well. That kick put us up 34 - 20.

(11-19-2014 10:07 AM)Jay M. Youix Wrote:  

(11-19-2014 09:53 AM)jmutoml757 Wrote:  

(11-18-2014 05:26 PM)Hotrod829 Wrote:  Hill is just not very good and is liable to fumble.......so no playing time.

What exactly do you mean by "not very good"? I only ask because the guy has a good pedigree just looking at his HS career and the interest he got from other schools. Granted, he has not done much yet on game day at JMU, but the guy didn't just all of a sudden go from being highly touted and heavily recruited to "not very good." He was offered by Michigan, Virginian, Pitt, Tennessee, and a boat load of others. I would love to hear very specifically why you make that statement. I have not been to practices or talked to the coaches about him, so I don't know. Please enlighten

i'm not going to argue that he's "not very good", but i will say that he certainly doesn't appear to have the explosion of our other backs (any of them). looks to me like he'd thrive as a FB in a triple option offense where he would get a lot of straight ahead runs (like Dane Romero from Wofford, if any remember the 2008 playoff game). he could potentially be a good short yardage back, based solely on size, but i would say that he's clearly not as explosive as our other backs.

As a player , if you have two freshman getting more time than you at the running back spot , is speaks a lot of your talent. And these are players that didnt have the offers he had. A senior told me my freshman year " Don't ever let a freshman take your spot , its the worst feeling ever."

(11-19-2014 10:33 AM)jmutoml757 Wrote:  

(11-19-2014 10:06 AM)Hotrod829 Wrote:  

(11-19-2014 09:53 AM)jmutoml757 Wrote:  

(11-18-2014 05:26 PM)Hotrod829 Wrote:  Hill is just not very good and is liable to fumble.......so no playing time.

What exactly do you mean by "not very good"? I only ask because the guy has a good pedigree just looking at his HS career and the interest he got from other schools. Granted, he has not done much yet on game day at JMU, but the guy didn't just all of a sudden go from being highly touted and heavily recruited to "not very good." He was offered by Michigan, Virginian, Pitt, Tennessee, and a boat load of others. I would love to hear very specifically why you make that statement. I have not been to practices or talked to the coaches about him, so I don't know. Please enlighten

Lateral movement is not as good as the the other backs. He tends to run high and that causes him to expose himself to big hits. Doesnt have very good vision and has had injury problems. Fumbling has been a issue for him in practice also. Now is he big , strong and fast .........yes.

Got you. Thanks for the explanation. Another question then, do those with whom you speak think he can improve in these areas and make an impact? In other words, is he basically relegated to the bench? Is he open to coaching and making improvement- ie what is his attitude?

He wants to be good and wants to play , he just didnt come and make the splash like the other backs. We will see this spring where his head is at , because a player with his physical tools shouldnt be on the bench.

(11-19-2014 02:47 PM)jmutoml757 Wrote:  

(11-19-2014 11:03 AM)BDKJMU Wrote:  

(11-19-2014 09:53 AM)jmutoml757 Wrote:  

(11-18-2014 05:26 PM)Hotrod829 Wrote:  Hill is just not very good and is liable to fumble.......so no playing time.

What exactly do you mean by "not very good"? I only ask because the guy has a good pedigree just looking at his HS career and the interest he got from other schools. Granted, he has not done much yet on game day at JMU, but the guy didn't just all of a sudden go from being highly touted and heavily recruited to "not very good." He was offered by Michigan, Virginian, Pitt, Tennessee, and a boat load of others. I would love to hear very specifically why you make that statement. I have not been to practices or talked to the coaches about him, so I don't know. Please enlighten

And Thourogood had a boat load of BCS offers too, and look what happened. That happens all the time around the country. Recruiting is a crapshoot.

Duh. But I assume our coaches did their research and due diligence before bringing him in- so, what happened?

He never had any significant playing time at UT , so he was still kind of a mystery. We have had plenty of transfers that dont get starting playing time.

Based on what I saw of Hill, he ran upright which others have mentioned and he also ran to contact as opposed to away from it. Not a great combo.

With john miller a little banged up (bad elbow), would be a good game to break out Hill against Elon and let him get some touches. Let's make it happen- bruising backs will wear on a defense and then bam- a quick scat back to change the pace.

(11-19-2014 03:39 PM)jmu-fan-1981 Wrote:  With john miller a little banged up (bad elbow), would be a good game to break out Hill against Elon and let him get some touches. Let's make it happen- bruising backs will wear on a defense and then bam- a quick scat back to change the pace.

Easiest way to keep an over matched team in the game is turnovers. If we're up 21, go for it. Otherwise, we have a stable of backs who aren't known for fumbles.

This thread peaked my interest to look back at the 2014 signings to see just who has and has not played this season. I noticed there are 2 players not currently listed on the roster. Kapri Doucet who I know is currently playing at Lackawanna College and may still come to JMU. But what happened to Tyler Thrasher-Walker? I can't find any info on him after he signed with JMU.