Agree that QB is the most disappointing aspect of what I saw on Saturday. Neither guy is starting QB material, unfortunately. I'm not expecting major improvement from either. At least we have a scheme that allows them to be more of a game manager, but at this stage, we're worse off than we were last year at QB (yes, Miko Smalls was a true freshman who made mistakes but he was a better playmaker and passer than what we have now IMO). I do like the potential we have at WR and TE though, so hopefully we can use the ground game to set up a modest but effective passing game.

As to the run game, we can't even say we're basically an option team because this offense will be more predictable and easier to stop than an option offense if the passing game doesn't work. Stank showed decent mobility but not good enough to be an effective running QB. Will need to be more aggressive by passing in non-passing downs vs better defenses.

My expectation after one game is that we'll win one more. Right now, I don't think this team gets to 4 wins. But they say the biggest improvement comes from game 1 to game 2, and we're 1-0, so there is still hope.

We will live and die on the ground this season. And even PVAMU knew that by the 2nd Q. If we are going to win 4 or more games, we will have to develop some sort of passing game. Not NFL or Baylor passing game, but enough to keep everybody from stacking the box.

I'm kind of a villain on this QB deal... but... If the position is "two-headed", and you lack confidence in either to "shoulder" the team... Why not run them and make them a threat... I can't imagine a ton of LB's in Conference USA wanting to square Tyner up on Power Read (btw: Bloomgren likes the power)... I don't know that there is any more "physical down hill attack" than Esupka and Tyner on Read option... BTW: If Stank isn't going to be a thrower, run him until his wobbly wheels go out...

(08-27-2018 12:46 PM)Buho00 Wrote:  Agree that QB is the most disappointing aspect of what I saw on Saturday. Neither guy is starting QB material, unfortunately. I'm not expecting major improvement from either. At least we have a scheme that allows them to be more of a game manager, but at this stage, we're worse off than we were last year at QB (yes, Miko Smalls was a true freshman who made mistakes but he was a better playmaker and passer than what we have now IMO). I do like the potential we have at WR and TE though, so hopefully we can use the ground game to set up a modest but effective passing game.

As to the run game, we can't even say we're basically an option team because this offense will be more predictable and easier to stop than an option offense if the passing game doesn't work. Stank showed decent mobility but not good enough to be an effective running QB. Will need to be more aggressive by passing in non-passing downs vs better defenses.

My expectation after one game is that we'll win one more. Right now, I don't think this team gets to 4 wins. But they say the biggest improvement comes from game 1 to game 2, and we're 1-0, so there is still hope.

Agreed, thought a couple of times that M. Smalls would have been ideal when PV started stacking the box. Will be interesting to see whether S or T can fill that role as the season progresses. See more upside in T based on Sat, but he just didn't look comfortable.

(08-27-2018 01:37 PM)ausowl Wrote:  

(08-27-2018 12:46 PM)Buho00 Wrote:  Agree that QB is the most disappointing aspect of what I saw on Saturday. Neither guy is starting QB material, unfortunately. I'm not expecting major improvement from either. At least we have a scheme that allows them to be more of a game manager, but at this stage, we're worse off than we were last year at QB (yes, Miko Smalls was a true freshman who made mistakes but he was a better playmaker and passer than what we have now IMO). I do like the potential we have at WR and TE though, so hopefully we can use the ground game to set up a modest but effective passing game.

As to the run game, we can't even say we're basically an option team because this offense will be more predictable and easier to stop than an option offense if the passing game doesn't work. Stank showed decent mobility but not good enough to be an effective running QB. Will need to be more aggressive by passing in non-passing downs vs better defenses.

My expectation after one game is that we'll win one more. Right now, I don't think this team gets to 4 wins. But they say the biggest improvement comes from game 1 to game 2, and we're 1-0, so there is still hope.

Agreed, thought a couple of times that M. Smalls would have been ideal when PV started stacking the box. Will be interesting to see whether S or T can fill that role as the season progresses. See more upside in T based on Sat, but he just didn't look comfortable.

What? You like unprovoked fumbles?

All the speed in the world does you no good if you leave the ball on the ground. Neither Stankavage nor Tyner did that on Saturday.

(08-27-2018 02:03 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  

(08-27-2018 01:37 PM)ausowl Wrote:  

(08-27-2018 12:46 PM)Buho00 Wrote:  Agree that QB is the most disappointing aspect of what I saw on Saturday. Neither guy is starting QB material, unfortunately. I'm not expecting major improvement from either. At least we have a scheme that allows them to be more of a game manager, but at this stage, we're worse off than we were last year at QB (yes, Miko Smalls was a true freshman who made mistakes but he was a better playmaker and passer than what we have now IMO). I do like the potential we have at WR and TE though, so hopefully we can use the ground game to set up a modest but effective passing game.

As to the run game, we can't even say we're basically an option team because this offense will be more predictable and easier to stop than an option offense if the passing game doesn't work. Stank showed decent mobility but not good enough to be an effective running QB. Will need to be more aggressive by passing in non-passing downs vs better defenses.

My expectation after one game is that we'll win one more. Right now, I don't think this team gets to 4 wins. But they say the biggest improvement comes from game 1 to game 2, and we're 1-0, so there is still hope.

Agreed, thought a couple of times that M. Smalls would have been ideal when PV started stacking the box. Will be interesting to see whether S or T can fill that role as the season progresses. See more upside in T based on Sat, but he just didn't look comfortable.

What? You like unprovoked fumbles?

All the speed in the world does you no good if you leave the ball on the ground. Neither Stankavage nor Tyner did that on Saturday.

A--- freakin----men. Miklo was a circus act...

(08-27-2018 02:05 PM)Neelys Ghost Wrote:  

(08-27-2018 02:03 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  

(08-27-2018 01:37 PM)ausowl Wrote:  

(08-27-2018 12:46 PM)Buho00 Wrote:  Agree that QB is the most disappointing aspect of what I saw on Saturday. Neither guy is starting QB material, unfortunately. I'm not expecting major improvement from either. At least we have a scheme that allows them to be more of a game manager, but at this stage, we're worse off than we were last year at QB (yes, Miko Smalls was a true freshman who made mistakes but he was a better playmaker and passer than what we have now IMO). I do like the potential we have at WR and TE though, so hopefully we can use the ground game to set up a modest but effective passing game.

As to the run game, we can't even say we're basically an option team because this offense will be more predictable and easier to stop than an option offense if the passing game doesn't work. Stank showed decent mobility but not good enough to be an effective running QB. Will need to be more aggressive by passing in non-passing downs vs better defenses.

My expectation after one game is that we'll win one more. Right now, I don't think this team gets to 4 wins. But they say the biggest improvement comes from game 1 to game 2, and we're 1-0, so there is still hope.

Agreed, thought a couple of times that M. Smalls would have been ideal when PV started stacking the box. Will be interesting to see whether S or T can fill that role as the season progresses. See more upside in T based on Sat, but he just didn't look comfortable.

What? You like unprovoked fumbles?

All the speed in the world does you no good if you leave the ball on the ground. Neither Stankavage nor Tyner did that on Saturday.

A--- freakin----men. Miklo was a circus act...

+1 Miklo was more like a toad in a water dish than lightning in a bottle.

(08-27-2018 12:37 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  

(08-27-2018 09:58 AM)mrbig Wrote:  I'm a little more concerned about the QB play than I was heading into the season. If Rice can consistently play like the team did in the 1st and 4th quarters, I can squint and be optimistic. If Rice either stays inconsistent or consistently plays like they did in the 2nd and 3rd quarters, then it will be a long season (literally since Rice's 1st game was in week zero!).

From what I saw Saturday night, we have two QBs with very different issues. Stankavage does not have a strong arm, but was relatively accurate, at least in his 1st series - 3 for 3, each good for 8 yards. Tyner has a much stronger arm, but is not at all accurate when using that strength - see the overthrow to a wide open receiver in the end zone. Both QBs did a good job with ball security and managing the game within the constraints of the game plan. I do expect to see more play action against the UHs, regardless of who the QB is.

Not hoping for a blowout loss, but if things get away from us against UH on Saturday, I would love to see Tyner and Marshman split the reps. Or, try out the two true freshmen and see if they have some moxy.

(08-27-2018 02:05 PM)Neelys Ghost Wrote:  

(08-27-2018 02:03 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  

(08-27-2018 01:37 PM)ausowl Wrote:  

(08-27-2018 12:46 PM)Buho00 Wrote:  Agree that QB is the most disappointing aspect of what I saw on Saturday. Neither guy is starting QB material, unfortunately. I'm not expecting major improvement from either. At least we have a scheme that allows them to be more of a game manager, but at this stage, we're worse off than we were last year at QB (yes, Miko Smalls was a true freshman who made mistakes but he was a better playmaker and passer than what we have now IMO). I do like the potential we have at WR and TE though, so hopefully we can use the ground game to set up a modest but effective passing game.

As to the run game, we can't even say we're basically an option team because this offense will be more predictable and easier to stop than an option offense if the passing game doesn't work. Stank showed decent mobility but not good enough to be an effective running QB. Will need to be more aggressive by passing in non-passing downs vs better defenses.

My expectation after one game is that we'll win one more. Right now, I don't think this team gets to 4 wins. But they say the biggest improvement comes from game 1 to game 2, and we're 1-0, so there is still hope.

Agreed, thought a couple of times that M. Smalls would have been ideal when PV started stacking the box. Will be interesting to see whether S or T can fill that role as the season progresses. See more upside in T based on Sat, but he just didn't look comfortable.

What? You like unprovoked fumbles?

All the speed in the world does you no good if you leave the ball on the ground. Neither Stankavage nor Tyner did that on Saturday.

A--- freakin----men. Miklo was a circus act...

I’d be happy with our QBs if they can complete 55%+ of their passes this year with no turnovers. I don’t care if they aren’t throwing dimes down the sideline as long as they aren’t making stupid mistakes. When we get a QB that Bloomgren recruited for his system I’ll expect more but until then I don’t think we need that to be successful. Our run game looked brilliant for periods during game 1. Yes it was a weak opponent, but our offensive line had 4 starts combined outside RT so I’m pretty impressed there.

Defensive line needs to get better pressure in my opinion. I know we probably were running some sort of “contain” but that’s not going to work with our secondary. We won’t get many coverage sacks this year. Our defensive coordinator is all about attacking so I expect to see that. Remember Dline is mostly seniors and supposed to be our deepest unit.

(08-27-2018 02:14 PM)RiceOL83 Wrote:  

(08-27-2018 02:05 PM)Neelys Ghost Wrote:  

(08-27-2018 02:03 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  

(08-27-2018 01:37 PM)ausowl Wrote:  

(08-27-2018 12:46 PM)Buho00 Wrote:  Agree that QB is the most disappointing aspect of what I saw on Saturday. Neither guy is starting QB material, unfortunately. I'm not expecting major improvement from either. At least we have a scheme that allows them to be more of a game manager, but at this stage, we're worse off than we were last year at QB (yes, Miko Smalls was a true freshman who made mistakes but he was a better playmaker and passer than what we have now IMO). I do like the potential we have at WR and TE though, so hopefully we can use the ground game to set up a modest but effective passing game.

As to the run game, we can't even say we're basically an option team because this offense will be more predictable and easier to stop than an option offense if the passing game doesn't work. Stank showed decent mobility but not good enough to be an effective running QB. Will need to be more aggressive by passing in non-passing downs vs better defenses.

My expectation after one game is that we'll win one more. Right now, I don't think this team gets to 4 wins. But they say the biggest improvement comes from game 1 to game 2, and we're 1-0, so there is still hope.

Agreed, thought a couple of times that M. Smalls would have been ideal when PV started stacking the box. Will be interesting to see whether S or T can fill that role as the season progresses. See more upside in T based on Sat, but he just didn't look comfortable.

What? You like unprovoked fumbles?

All the speed in the world does you no good if you leave the ball on the ground. Neither Stankavage nor Tyner did that on Saturday.

A--- freakin----men. Miklo was a circus act...

+1 Miklo was more like a toad in a water dish than lightning in a bottle.

Let’s just hope they gloss over him on Last chance U. We don’t need that sort of attention. Bad enough Edwards was already on this season after getting kicked out.

(08-27-2018 02:22 PM)cr11owl Wrote:  

(08-27-2018 02:14 PM)RiceOL83 Wrote:  

(08-27-2018 02:05 PM)Neelys Ghost Wrote:  

(08-27-2018 02:03 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  

(08-27-2018 01:37 PM)ausowl Wrote:  Agreed, thought a couple of times that M. Smalls would have been ideal when PV started stacking the box. Will be interesting to see whether S or T can fill that role as the season progresses. See more upside in T based on Sat, but he just didn't look comfortable.

What? You like unprovoked fumbles?

All the speed in the world does you no good if you leave the ball on the ground. Neither Stankavage nor Tyner did that on Saturday.

A--- freakin----men. Miklo was a circus act...

+1 Miklo was more like a toad in a water dish than lightning in a bottle.

Let’s just hope they gloss over him on Last chance U. We don’t need that sort of attention. Bad enough Edwards was already on this season after getting kicked out.

Damn, no love for Smalls. You're killin' me.

Thought he had some moments last year. Perhaps I've repressed the circus/toad like aspects . . .

(08-27-2018 02:16 PM)Pan95 Wrote:  

(08-27-2018 12:37 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  From what I saw Saturday night, we have two QBs with very different issues. Stankavage does not have a strong arm, but was relatively accurate, at least in his 1st series - 3 for 3, each good for 8 yards. Tyner has a much stronger arm, but is not at all accurate when using that strength - see the overthrow to a wide open receiver in the end zone. Both QBs did a good job with ball security and managing the game within the constraints of the game plan. I do expect to see more play action against the UHs, regardless of who the QB is.

Not hoping for a blowout loss, but if things get away from us against UH on Saturday, I would love to see Tyner and Marshman split the reps. Or, try out the two true freshmen and see if they have some moxy.

Beat me to it. I know that Bloomgren and staff are looking to develop a prototypically tall, in-the-pocket pro-style QB that can make perfect reads.
But at this stage our offense appears to be so limited/bland as to make the mental aspect less important.
And ultimately the single most critical skill that a QB must provide is passing accuracy....

Bloomgren said before the game they would run their base offense and defense. He did not say they would run it all season. Can we give them more games before we declare the offense incompetent.

After watching the game I was pleased that the Shawn Stankavage was successful with his first real action after 4 years of riding the pine and battling injuries in the SEC. I would expect him to be very "rusty" with his passing touch and I was impressed with a few of his play action moves in the first quarter. This forum's collective observations about his arm strength seems to be on point but I am hoping some of it can be attributed to the lack of real experience in game action. It may be difficult to judge effectively this week since I expect both he and Jackson Tyner may be running for their lives while being chased by Ed Oliver.

I was surprised that the Owls ended up with 7 penalties for 54 yards vs. PVAMU. It felt like this team was more disciplined during the game and was less penalized than last year, but when I looked it up, Rice averaged 4.8 penalties a game for an average of 38.3 yards in 2017. It was so infuriating to watch the delay of game penalties over the last couple of years, so having 2 in the first game was concerning to me. Hopefully that dissipates with more experience by the QB. I would expect that the number of penalties should reduce significantly over the next few games.

I am still saying that anything over 3 wins will be a significant achievement for this team

Given the paucity of skill level and talent --- I think 3 wins *will* be a great step forward for this team.

As I noted before, one could not discern between 'skill set', 'talent', and 'Chinese fire drill coaching' as the root of last year's (and the year before's) dumpster fire.

Against PVAM, for the first time in the time I have been back in Texas, a Rice football team showed signs of being properly coached. They seemed sharper, and synced. But that just highlights the lack of skill and talent in the Rice cupboard presently, which *is* significant imo.

I am going to back off my expectation of 4 wins, and go to 3. But at that three, I will say I think that is a big step forward for the desolate landscape of Rice FB for the last three seasons that I have seen.

(08-28-2018 12:08 PM)Kayjay Wrote:  After watching the game I was pleased that the Shawn Stankavage was successful with his first real action after 4 years of riding the pine and battling injuries in the SEC. I would expect him to be very "rusty" with his passing touch and I was impressed with a few of his play action moves in the first quarter. This forum's collective observations about his arm strength seems to be on point but I am hoping some of it can be attributed to the lack of real experience in game action. It may be difficult to judge effectively this week since I expect both he and Jackson Tyner may be running for their lives while being chased by Ed Oliver.

I was surprised that the Owls ended up with 7 penalties for 54 yards vs. PVAMU. It felt like this team was more disciplined during the game and was less penalized than last year, but when I looked it up, Rice averaged 4.8 penalties a game for an average of 38.3 yards in 2017. It was so infuriating to watch the delay of game penalties over the last couple of years, so having 2 in the first game was concerning to me. Hopefully that dissipates with more experience by the QB. I would expect that the number of penalties should reduce significantly over the next few games.

I am still saying that anything over 3 wins will be a significant achievement for this team

Based on the fact that at least 1/3 of CUSA talent level is below the 100 mark, I think good coaching can eke out some wins. I look for 4-5, which certainly would help recruiting . Not sure 2-3 is enough of a bump.

(08-28-2018 02:15 PM)HawaiiOwl Wrote:  

(08-28-2018 12:08 PM)Kayjay Wrote:  After watching the game I was pleased that the Shawn Stankavage was successful with his first real action after 4 years of riding the pine and battling injuries in the SEC. I would expect him to be very "rusty" with his passing touch and I was impressed with a few of his play action moves in the first quarter. This forum's collective observations about his arm strength seems to be on point but I am hoping some of it can be attributed to the lack of real experience in game action. It may be difficult to judge effectively this week since I expect both he and Jackson Tyner may be running for their lives while being chased by Ed Oliver.

I was surprised that the Owls ended up with 7 penalties for 54 yards vs. PVAMU. It felt like this team was more disciplined during the game and was less penalized than last year, but when I looked it up, Rice averaged 4.8 penalties a game for an average of 38.3 yards in 2017. It was so infuriating to watch the delay of game penalties over the last couple of years, so having 2 in the first game was concerning to me. Hopefully that dissipates with more experience by the QB. I would expect that the number of penalties should reduce significantly over the next few games.

I am still saying that anything over 3 wins will be a significant achievement for this team

Based on the fact that at least 1/3 of CUSA talent level is below the 100 mark, I think good coaching can eke out some wins. I look for 4-5, which certainly would help recruiting . Not sure 2-3 is enough of a bump.

Agree 4 or 5 wins would help recruiting, but not sure if they are going to happen. I see UTEP and ODU as the best chances for additional victories. to get a 4th "W" means an upset somewhere. Perhaps UAB (heading backwards) or maybe a perfect storm at UTSA, but the rest is tough sledding. I hope you are right with your prediction.

(08-24-2018 09:47 PM)ExcitedOwl18 Wrote:  

(08-24-2018 02:58 PM)talon owl Wrote:  

(08-24-2018 01:53 PM)cr11owl Wrote:  

(08-24-2018 01:25 PM)talon owl Wrote:  Did we lose a couple players? Faaeteete and Akunebu no longer on the roster?

@theroost might be able to find out.

I tweeted at the Chron guy yesterday but no response yet.

Akenebu’s name I haven’t heard all fall so he might’ve left sometime before camp... But Faaeteete was definitely on the roster last week or so... That said, it wouldn’t surprise me if he was one our earliest departures...

Did we ever find anything out about these guys?

I expect Bloomgren to have a career CUSA record of .500 or better by the end of season 2, or else he gets the hot seat and launched if not there by the end of season 3. I don't think we'll ever come to "dominate" CUSA, but while that's a different conversation, by the same token I don't think there's ever really a valid excuse for being substantially under .500 over a sufficient sample of games with fairly equal talent and fairly equal resources on both sides, which describes all of CUSA. If he can't do that, then next man up. So anything less than 5 wins for this year (now that we have swallowed our cupcake after nearly choking on it) puts him in a hole for year 2 in my book.

(08-29-2018 12:20 PM)illiniowl Wrote:  I expect Bloomgren to have a career CUSA record of .500 or better by the end of season 2, or else he gets the hot seat and launched if not there by the end of season 3. I don't think we'll ever come to "dominate" CUSA, but while that's a different conversation, by the same token I don't think there's ever really a valid excuse for being substantially under .500 over a sufficient sample of games with fairly equal talent and fairly equal resources on both sides, which describes all of CUSA. If he can't do that, then next man up. So anything less than 5 wins for this year (now that we have swallowed our cupcake after nearly choking on it) puts him in a hole for year 2 in my book.

I generally agree with this, save for the 5 wins comment, just because I think Bloomgren gets three years at the least, barring some sort of off-the-field issue, no matter what (unless you meant something different by being "in a hole for year 2")

I guess I prefer to think about it in terms of bowls (although given our current and future non-conference schedules, a .500 C-USA record in any year probably leaves us right at bowl eligibility or just outside of a bowl game - so a relatively equivalent scenario to my opinion below):

I think Bloomgren absolutely has to make one bowl game in his first three years, or he needs to be fired. And if he does only make one bowl game in those three years (no matter whether it occurs in his second or third year), then he gets a fourth year, but needs to make a bowl in that year as well, or he's gone after that fourth year. If he makes two bowls or more in his first three years, I'd give him a two-year extension beyond the two years he would have remaining on his original deal.