When I watched JMU's offense compared to LU's, I wanted to put my head down in shame. The fast-tempo, no-huddle didn't do us anything because we ran the same plays over and over. Although I think our offense has improved since last year, I still feel like JMU has no consistency. It's either Vad rushing or another RB rushing . . . or a short toss, or screen to the side.
When I was watching LU's offense, I saw a lot of composure in the QB and O-line. They destroyed us in TOP and that's what kills a defense. Our defense played hard, but they kept on going for a blitz and barely any pressure aside from a few sacks was the result.
Not only that, but JMU ALWAYS seems to get too comfortable with a lead, and then before its too late, the game is already gone.
I hope next year JMU's offense focuses on a much more concise & balanced attack instead of this "fast-pace style". Not all of our players can keep up with a recruit like vad who is used to playing FBS style play with FBS-par recruits.
I honestly don't feel like we can compete in the FBS from an offensive standpoint or a fanbase one at the moment.

Great game nevertheless, as always, Go dukes!

(11-30-2014 09:53 PM)JMUDDOG Wrote:  When I watched JMU's offense compared to LU's, I wanted to put my head down in shame. The fast-tempo, no-huddle didn't do us anything because we ran the same plays over and over. Although I think our offense has improved since last year, I still feel like JMU has no consistency. It's either Vad rushing or another RB rushing . . . or a short toss, or screen to the side.
When I was watching LU's offense, I saw a lot of composure in the QB and O-line. They destroyed us in TOP and that's what kills a defense. Our defense played hard, but they kept on going for a blitz and barely any pressure aside from a few sacks was the result.
Not only that, but JMU ALWAYS seems to get too comfortable with a lead, and then before its too late, the game is already gone.
I hope next year JMU's offense focuses on a much more concise & balanced attack instead of this "fast-pace style". Not all of our players can keep up with a recruit like vad who is used to playing FBS style play with FBS-par recruits.
I honestly don't feel like we can compete in the FBS from an offensive standpoint or a fanbase one at the moment.

Great game nevertheless, as always, Go dukes!

Better get used to fast and faster. JMU is not going to slow down the pace of the O next year.

I like the 'fast-break' style offense ----- I just think the play-calling particularly in the 2nd half was poor. Instead of being aggressive it almost seemed like for the first time all year JMU was playing not too lose in the second half on offense and it cost them. The majority of all plays in the 2nd half rushing/passing were to the outside. In the 2nd half JMU very rarely attacked the middle of the field which was open. Also Vad should have tucked and ran it more in that game.

(12-01-2014 09:49 AM)ShadyP Wrote:  I like the 'fast-break' style offense ----- I just think the play-calling particularly in the 2nd half was poor. Instead of being aggressive it almost seemed like for the first time all year JMU was playing not too lose in the second half on offense and it cost them. The majority of all plays in the 2nd half rushing/passing were to the outside. In the 2nd half JMU very rarely attacked the middle of the field which was open. Also Vad should have tucked and ran it more in that game.

exactly.

don't know what happened. as I said in another thread, it's almost like our coaches panicked and got afraid of running the O. whatever it was, that was NOT the offense we have seen all year in the 2nd half. And I'm not talking about the play, but the play calling. it was just strange.

(12-01-2014 09:53 AM)Duke Dawg Wrote:  

(12-01-2014 09:49 AM)ShadyP Wrote:  I like the 'fast-break' style offense ----- I just think the play-calling particularly in the 2nd half was poor. Instead of being aggressive it almost seemed like for the first time all year JMU was playing not too lose in the second half on offense and it cost them. The majority of all plays in the 2nd half rushing/passing were to the outside. In the 2nd half JMU very rarely attacked the middle of the field which was open. Also Vad should have tucked and ran it more in that game.

exactly.

don't know what happened. as I said in another thread, it's almost like our coaches panicked and got afraid of running the O. whatever it was, that was NOT the offense we have seen all year in the 2nd half. And I'm not talking about the play, but the play calling. it was just strange.

I love the fast paced offense, announcers made the comment that our regular offense was faster than libertys hurry up. The plays were the problem. Second quarter their d was gassed and confused. That was the fast pace working. Beats the hell out of staring at the sidelines for 60 sec each play which happened for the last 5 years

(12-01-2014 09:53 AM)Duke Dawg Wrote:  

(12-01-2014 09:49 AM)ShadyP Wrote:  I like the 'fast-break' style offense ----- I just think the play-calling particularly in the 2nd half was poor. Instead of being aggressive it almost seemed like for the first time all year JMU was playing not too lose in the second half on offense and it cost them. The majority of all plays in the 2nd half rushing/passing were to the outside. In the 2nd half JMU very rarely attacked the middle of the field which was open. Also Vad should have tucked and ran it more in that game.

exactly.

don't know what happened. as I said in another thread, it's almost like our coaches panicked and got afraid of running the O. whatever it was, that was NOT the offense we have seen all year in the 2nd half. And I'm not talking about the play, but the play calling. it was just strange.

Agreed, that is exactly what I thought and saw as well. If that is your offense/style keep doing it. The offense only got in sync in the 2nd quarter. I also give LU dbacks some credit ---- for whatever reason our WRs seemed to be unable to get any seperation all game long. Ravenal seemed like the only WR that could get open all night.

(12-01-2014 10:15 AM)ShadyP Wrote:  ...I also give LU dbacks some credit ---- for whatever reason our WRs seemed to be unable to get any seperation all game long. Ravenal seemed like the only WR that could get open all night.

I agree, the coverage from LU's secondary was very good. LU coaches seemed to do a much better job than our previous opponents of preparing their guys to take away Vad's first option time after time. Apparently, we need a more diversified or unpredictable passing attack.

(12-01-2014 09:53 AM)Duke Dawg Wrote:  

(12-01-2014 09:49 AM)ShadyP Wrote:  I like the 'fast-break' style offense ----- I just think the play-calling particularly in the 2nd half was poor. Instead of being aggressive it almost seemed like for the first time all year JMU was playing not too lose in the second half on offense and it cost them. The majority of all plays in the 2nd half rushing/passing were to the outside. In the 2nd half JMU very rarely attacked the middle of the field which was open. Also Vad should have tucked and ran it more in that game.

Well, that's what you get when you have Grad Assist with no experience as you "CO OFFENSIVE Coordinators". The young lads failed!

exactly.

don't know what happened. as I said in another thread, it's almost like our coaches panicked and got afraid of running the O. whatever it was, that was NOT the offense we have seen all year in the 2nd half. And I'm not talking about the play, but the play calling. it was just strange.

c'mon. it's a little harsh to say the young lads failed.

those same guys had us up 21-10 with LU completely gassed and on their heels. If Brown doesn't drop that ball from Lee, we likely go into halftime up 28-10 and the game is just about over.

they did not have a great second half calling the game. but to say they failed in such harsh terms is too much.

Dropping catches has nothing to do with tempo.

If you lose,...you fail.

Look these guys were brought along to get some experience and because they were "inexpensive". You get what you pay for in this world.
Now these coaches won the games where we were not challenged. Is that "exceeding expectations" in the JMU mindset?

If you believe that EW will be coaching JMU in 5 years from now, you are delusional.

i don't believe he will in 5 years either. but he's only moving on to another gig if he's successful at JMU. So how is that a bad thing?

Pointless to speculate on Withers 5 years from now. So many variables....if we keep winning, someone will come calling. It won't be a P5 school, and if we move FBS, I doubt he goes anywhere.

It's not a bad thing.

EW comes with his own degree of Ego and Arrogance. It is all about EW. I Feel that he came to JMU because he needed a JOB. But he also came with the idea that is probably similar to the D1 Transfers that we have. Each of them feel entitled and feel that this is going to be easier than it really is. Like I have stated before, "there's a reason why they are transferring".

If it is all about the nine wins, then hooray! Remember the Chokies are going to a BOWL because their wonderful product they put on the field.

Great success EW and reviving JMU football. To me, it was just a different degree of mediocrity.

(12-01-2014 12:13 PM)South Carolina Duke Wrote:  It's not a bad thing.

EW comes with his own degree of Ego and Arrogance. It is all about EW. I Feel that he came to JMU because he needed a JOB. But he also came with the idea that is probably similar to the D1 Transfers that we have. Each of them feel entitled and feel that this is going to be easier than it really is. Like I have stated before, "there's a reason why they are transferring".

If it is all about the nine wins, then hooray! Remember the Chokies are going to a BOWL because their wonderful product they put on the field.

Great success EW and reviving JMU football. To me, it was just a different degree of mediocrity.

One step at a time ---- this 9-3 playoff team that you term mediocre is the first JMU team to make the playoff's in 4 years. That is something for those seniors to reach the post-season before moving on.

Is that all we want as fans, I for one hope not but give them a little credit. It is hard to go from missing the playoffs for 4 straight seasons to winning a national title.....this is a process and getting back to the playoffs was the first step.

Now next season JMU will be relevant and will get respect going into the season. It will not take all season to get ranked.

I understand what you're saying SCDuke, but the results are better than the last few years, so I can't reasonably kill the coaching for this season as a whole. I felt like they showed tons of growth & made lots of smart adjustments to help put our players in position for success. Obviously, some of the 4th down calls etc... do not demonstrate this, but there are many instances of positive growth for the young staff.

Without trying to turn this thread OT, I'm honestly curious why there are so many people harping on the coaches based on "I don't like their ego". That just doesn't make sense to me. I mean, do you really think a Division 1 HFC isn't going to have an ego? The BEST head coaches have DISGUSTINGLY HUGE egos. That's the business. For what it's worth (not much, but here goes anyway), I've been VERY impressed with Withers' willingness to communicate with fans & media. Yes, he still has moments of coach-speak where he's not giving out info to press, but it seems less vindictive vs. how many other coaches treat the media.

It doesn't matter what type of offense you run as long as you win. At JMU anything less than 8-3/8-4 and a playoff win is unacceptable. Certainly met regular season expectations but didn't get the playoff win.

One thing to note is that a hurry up offense has never won an NC at the Div I level. This offense will sell tickets, but you're pro style, or old school smash mouth with solid defense are the types that win championships, esp if you're talking 4-5 playoff games in bad Dec weather..

(12-01-2014 05:32 PM)BDKJMU Wrote:  One thing to note is that a hurry up offense has never won an NC at the Div I level.

What did Vince Young run at Texas? I can't remember. What about Cam Newton @ Auburn? I think they ran fast.

(12-01-2014 07:36 PM)HyperDuke Wrote:  

(12-01-2014 05:32 PM)BDKJMU Wrote:  One thing to note is that a hurry up offense has never won an NC at the Div I level.

What did Vince Young run at Texas? I can't remember. What about Cam Newton @ Auburn? I think they ran fast.

Texas in their 05' NC season on a 13-0 team avg over 72 plays per game (941 in 13 games) Don't know if it was no huddle. Doesn't sound like primarily hurry up. A dominant undefeated team running a normal pace pro style is probably going to avg upper 60s/around 70 plays per game. ex- NDSU last season at 15-0 running a old school, huddle, QB under center, power I avg over 67 plays per game (1009 in 15 games).
http://stats.texassports.com/sports/m-fo...amcume.htm

Auburn in their 2010 NC season ran a no huddle with Newton, but on a 14-0 team they avg under 68 plays per game (948 in 14 games). That's not hurry up, at least not for the majority of the game.
http://www.auburntigers.com/sports/m-foo...mcume.html

JMU running a hurry up avg 82.5 plays per game. If JMU was more dominant throughout the season and was 11-2 or 12-1 now think it would be closer to 90 plays per game

Not saying a team that primarily runs hurry up won't ever win one. But don't think you'll ever see one win one that doesn't also have the ability switch to effectively running slow down old school smash mouth when the situation warrants it, like with a lead in the 4th qtr, in bad weather, esp late Nov-early Jan, or on 4th and inches with a big OL, QB, and RB the ability to bringing in a FB and put your QB under center..

didn't Oregon play for a title and almost win a few years ago running a hurry up?
wasn't Auburn 31 seconds away from a title last year?

yea, they haven't won a title. But teams have only been doing this about half a decade and have come damn close.

It's only a matter of time. maybe this year (Oregon)