Watching on YouTube now because I just refuse to pay for ESPN+ and be effectively triple dipped by Fuhrer Mickey every month. You have my condolences for both being shoved onto ESPN+ and then having ESPN's own announcers back a dump truck of salt into that wound by crapping on your offense from last season after you ran it down the field to score to begin the game.

(08-26-2018 08:18 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(08-26-2018 07:53 AM)DFW Owl Wrote:  

Quote:Rice should have been able to EASILY kick the field goal from the 10 yd line where they were on third down. That running play could have been strung out and taken ALL of the 10 seconds left on the clock, resulting in overtime. It WAS a DUMB call that no experienced head coach would make.

What I thought was dumb was that PV didn't use their final timeout on our last drive. We could have scored a TD and they would have had at least some time to work with.

I wondered the same thing. But in the end it didn't matter. We would have just run the clock down on the play before the FG. But they should have, although it's not entirely clear when would have been the proper time.

Before our final 3rd down play would have been time to use it. Instead they let the clock run down. Besides us maybe scoring a TD on 3rd down we could have done something dumb like call a timeout too early or throw an incompletion. Not a big deal.. probably would not have mattered.

Edit: Or per Westside we could have kicked the FG on 3rd down.

(08-26-2018 07:53 AM)loki_the_bubba Wrote:  

(08-26-2018 06:54 AM)greyowl72 Wrote:  It's been said before in this board's analysis, but it bears repeating... Fox won the game for us. Unbelievable punting and KO's. He deserves the game ball. And a steak dinner for him and his girlfriend. In a limo.

I need an explanation about one thing in the kicking game. We opened the game with a fine kick to the back corner of the end zone. One the next two kicks he took a three step approach and kicked it high and short. Then he went back to the long run-up and kicked it deep the rest of the game. Why?

My guess is that Lembo wanted to practice the pooch kick in a game situation.

(08-26-2018 08:43 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(08-26-2018 07:53 AM)loki_the_bubba Wrote:  

(08-26-2018 06:54 AM)greyowl72 Wrote:  It's been said before in this board's analysis, but it bears repeating... Fox won the game for us. Unbelievable punting and KO's. He deserves the game ball. And a steak dinner for him and his girlfriend. In a limo.

I need an explanation about one thing in the kicking game. We opened the game with a fine kick to the back corner of the end zone. One the next two kicks he took a three step approach and kicked it high and short. Then he went back to the long run-up and kicked it deep the rest of the game. Why?

My guess is that Lembo wanted to practice the pooch kick in a game situation.

A lot of good things can happen for the kicking team with a well-executed pooch kick. Especially if they have their guard down because you’ve been putting it deep all game. Take the touchbacks but mix it up a little bit and sometimes we can get a favorable bounce.

Some footage for those that could not attend or catch the game on the tube:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6OZX1otntws

Also, the complete halftime show:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LjgPv9KqPCA

(08-26-2018 09:34 AM)Traveler413 Wrote:  Some footage for those that could not attend or catch the game on the tube:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6OZX1otntws

Also, the complete halftime show:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LjgPv9KqPCA

You can also watch the full game in the “Recent Replays” section of ESPN+ if you have a subscription. Game was posted this morning and I am watching it again now.

(08-26-2018 07:48 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(08-26-2018 06:23 AM)ArmChairOwl Wrote:  

(08-26-2018 12:00 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  Positives:
- Special teams play, especially Fox, but the return game now has a pulse.
- OL blocking-- some really nice holes on interior runs
- RB group
- Dramatically reduced number of penalties
- No turnovers
- Only one relatively minor injury?
- Played to win; not to avoid losing (DB would never have taken the risk on that 4th and 3 play deep into the 4th quarter)
Negatives:
- Defensive secondary-- no signs of improvement over the past 2 seasons of hell
- Invisible linebacking play
- Passing attack is on life support. A team like UH is going to stack the box against us with more physical players and dare us to pass (especially with Oliver providing the pass rush)

I think this (playing to win) can be applied to the pass plays right before halftime, though obviously it did not work and lead to a PVAM score. In hindsight we should have been conservative there. But, I like the aggression. Play to win.

The pass plays just before the half were probably the worst calls of the game. The most important consideration at that point is to run the clock so that only one team (Rice) has a chance to score. That is playing to win in that situation.

Playing to win is doing what gives you the best chance to win in that situation. Playing to score is doing what gives you the best chance to score. The two are not the same.

I hear your point, and that's fine for you to think that way. And I also disagree. Simply running the clock out is the conservative thing to do of course. Being aggressive and heading downfield in an attempt to end the half with a Rice FG or TD: that is playing to win.

I need an explanation about one thing in the kicking game. We opened the game with a fine kick to the back corner of the end zone. One the next two kicks he took a three step approach and kicked it high and short. Then he went back to the long run-up and kicked it deep the rest of the game. Why?
[/quote]

Kicking the ball through the end zone lets the receiving team start at its own 25. Our special teams were better than theirs, so we weren't worried about them breaking off a big return ... the high and short kicks allowed us to pin them inside their own 25.

(08-26-2018 09:59 AM)ArmChairOwl Wrote:  

(08-26-2018 07:48 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(08-26-2018 06:23 AM)ArmChairOwl Wrote:  

(08-26-2018 12:00 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  Positives:
- Special teams play, especially Fox, but the return game now has a pulse.
- OL blocking-- some really nice holes on interior runs
- RB group
- Dramatically reduced number of penalties
- No turnovers
- Only one relatively minor injury?
- Played to win; not to avoid losing (DB would never have taken the risk on that 4th and 3 play deep into the 4th quarter)
Negatives:
- Defensive secondary-- no signs of improvement over the past 2 seasons of hell
- Invisible linebacking play
- Passing attack is on life support. A team like UH is going to stack the box against us with more physical players and dare us to pass (especially with Oliver providing the pass rush)

I think this (playing to win) can be applied to the pass plays right before halftime, though obviously it did not work and lead to a PVAM score. In hindsight we should have been conservative there. But, I like the aggression. Play to win.

The pass plays just before the half were probably the worst calls of the game. The most important consideration at that point is to run the clock so that only one team (Rice) has a chance to score. That is playing to win in that situation.

Playing to win is doing what gives you the best chance to win in that situation. Playing to score is doing what gives you the best chance to score. The two are not the same.

I hear your point, and that's fine for you to think that way. And I also disagree. Simply running the clock out is the conservative thing to do of course. Being aggressive and heading downfield in an attempt to end the half with a Rice FG or TD: that is playing to win.

I agree with Armchair on this one. PVAM had just scored 21 consecutive points on us, and our guys were suddenly looking flat deflated. Bloomgren was hoping to go into halftime with renewed momentum and confidence. Yes, it backfired on us, but I agree with the aggressive strategy.

(08-26-2018 09:34 AM)Traveler413 Wrote:  Some footage for those that could not attend or catch the game on the tube:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6OZX1otntws

Also, the complete halftime show:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LjgPv9KqPCA

Thanks!

Positives:
PV marching storm was great. Wish we had a band like that every week
Game day experience ran smoothly. Doesn’t feel like 5 years ago when it seemed like people didn’t know what was going on
Running game was great
Special teams
We came back and won. Last time I remember us doing something like that was Memphis 2012?
Ball security

Negatives:
Secondary is still bad
QB play didn’t impress. Missed some wide open receivers.
I thought our Dline would give a weaker team fits


I think we’ll upset someone this year. Until we have a more athletic secondary I don’t think we will consistently win. Too many teams in CUSA can take highly regarded athletes that even the P5 can’t stomach. Every team we play will have a Wallace out there that we just can’t cover.

Stanford eventually got 4 star corners to guard those guys and that’s why Stanford wins the PAC12 consistently now.

(08-26-2018 10:30 AM)cr11owl Wrote:  

(08-26-2018 09:34 AM)Traveler413 Wrote:  Some footage for those that could not attend or catch the game on the tube:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6OZX1otntws

Also, the complete halftime show:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LjgPv9KqPCA

Thanks!

Positives:
PV marching storm was great. Wish we had a band like that every week
Game day experience ran smoothly. Doesn’t feel like 5 years ago when it seemed like people didn’t know what was going on
Running game was great
Special teams
We came back and won. Last time I remember us doing something like that was Memphis 2012?
Ball security

Negatives:
Secondary is still bad
QB play didn’t impress. Missed some wide open receivers.
I thought our Dline would give a weaker team fits


I think we’ll upset someone this year. Until we have a more athletic secondary I don’t think we will consistently win. Too many teams in CUSA can take highly regarded athletes that even the P5 can’t stomach. Every team we play will have a Wallace out there that we just can’t cover.

Stanford eventually got 4 star corners to guard those guys and that’s why Stanford wins the PAC12 consistently now.

Actually, this year, Stanford is going to have to rely on their offense, which should , be one of the most prolific in the country-- with 9 starters returning, including Heisman favorite, Love, and their 2nd year QB. Their defense, however, will be almost a total rebuild, especially the secondary.

Esupka can't carry the ball 30+ times a game all season. While I love the smash mouth philosophy, without better talent your HC has got to come up with some trickery to keep other teams a little off balance. Recruiting, recruiting, recruiting. 3-5 year project, but I'm betting he'll get it done.

Can Ellerbee return any time soon? That would help the running game as well. I also wonder about the health of D'Angelo Ellis. The secondary really needs him. I hate to pick on one guy in particular but Brandon Douglas-Dotson was brutal yesterday.

(08-26-2018 10:34 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(08-26-2018 10:30 AM)cr11owl Wrote:  

(08-26-2018 09:34 AM)Traveler413 Wrote:  Some footage for those that could not attend or catch the game on the tube:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6OZX1otntws

Also, the complete halftime show:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LjgPv9KqPCA

Thanks!

Positives:
PV marching storm was great. Wish we had a band like that every week
Game day experience ran smoothly. Doesn’t feel like 5 years ago when it seemed like people didn’t know what was going on
Running game was great
Special teams
We came back and won. Last time I remember us doing something like that was Memphis 2012?
Ball security

Negatives:
Secondary is still bad
QB play didn’t impress. Missed some wide open receivers.
I thought our Dline would give a weaker team fits


I think we’ll upset someone this year. Until we have a more athletic secondary I don’t think we will consistently win. Too many teams in CUSA can take highly regarded athletes that even the P5 can’t stomach. Every team we play will have a Wallace out there that we just can’t cover.

Stanford eventually got 4 star corners to guard those guys and that’s why Stanford wins the PAC12 consistently now.

Actually, this year, Stanford is going to have to rely on their offense, which should , be one of the most prolific in the country-- with 9 starters returning, including Heisman favorite, Love, and their 2nd year QB. Their defense, however, will be almost a total rebuild, especially the secondary.

Yes and all the CBs are highly regarded 3 star or 4 star players out of HS who should at least have the athleticism to cover any college WR.

(08-26-2018 10:35 AM)Old Dominion Wrote:  Esupka can't carry the ball 30+ times a game all season. While I love the smash mouth philosophy, without better talent your HC has got to come up with some trickery to keep other teams a little off balance. Recruiting, recruiting, recruiting. 3-5 year project, but I'm betting he'll get it done.

Good point.

(08-26-2018 10:35 AM)Old Dominion Wrote:  Esupka can't carry the ball 30+ times a game all season. While I love the smash mouth philosophy, without better talent your HC has got to come up with some trickery to keep other teams a little off balance. Recruiting, recruiting, recruiting. 3-5 year project, but I'm betting he'll get it done.

I think he’ll carry it 20+ times a game. Ellerbee will come back and the Walters will take some carries but Bloomgren seems to think Esupka is the real deal and he showed it last night.

(08-26-2018 10:52 AM)cr11owl Wrote:  

(08-26-2018 10:35 AM)Old Dominion Wrote:  Esupka can't carry the ball 30+ times a game all season. While I love the smash mouth philosophy, without better talent your HC has got to come up with some trickery to keep other teams a little off balance. Recruiting, recruiting, recruiting. 3-5 year project, but I'm betting he'll get it done.

I think he’ll carry it 20+ times a game. Ellerbee will come back and the Walters will take some carries but Bloomgren seems to think Esupka is the real deal and he showed it last night.

The key will surely be if our OL can create as many holes against our future opponents as they did last night against Prairie View.

Esupka and both Walters twins demonstrated that they can run aggressively through the holes, break some tackles and exploit downfield blocks ... all very encouraging signs.

Esupka reminds me of Charles .. Sims was it? A huge, strong back who we used very heavily. But an RB can't take that kind of punishment for an entire season, and I think Sims was oft injured in the latter half of the season, IIRC

Ross.

I think was our first true “comeback” since 2015 FAU.