When we let penza kick the ball, he gets off 50 yard boomers...but when we were around our 20 yard line last night we went to that awful rugby kick on 2 or 3 occasions, and gave up huge field position, as the kicks barely went 30 yards and we gave up tons of field position. i know one of those resulted in a turnover as it hit one of kents players, but that's just flukey luck.

just don't understand why we don't let the kid boom it away every time...he changes field position in a good way for us, and our kick coverage has been good.

I think it had everything to do with the wind. We did the rugby kick early on in the game while kicking into the wind (coming from the South). The wind died down completely by 4th qtr and he hit a couple of nice punts kicking from North to South. I don't believe we had any rugby style punts going from South to North.

I was impressed with the field goals from Claus. Showed a lot of accuracy if not that much distance on them. Still hit a 38 yarder into the wind.

They weren't putting anyone back to receive- he booted two into the endzone when we needed the ball at the ten or inside. When they dropped no one back I think we went to the rugby to keep the ball on the field.

I actually saw Kent putting 2 guys back on most of the punts. One looked like a fullback (number 37 or 38) and the other was small receiver/RB. They were split - so it wasn't even like the big guy was out there blocking for the little guy. It looked to me like they were anticipating the rugby kick, because they were only about 25 yards behind the line of scrimmage.

situational

(10-17-2010 01:05 PM)MotoRocket Wrote:  I actually saw Kent putting 2 guys back on most of the punts. One looked like a fullback (number 37 or 38) and the other was small receiver/RB. They were split - so it wasn't even like the big guy was out there blocking for the little guy. It looked to me like they were anticipating the rugby kick, because they were only about 25 yards behind the line of scrimmage.

They did drop two back some for sure. I remember just the one punt where they dropped no one back but I thought that was whe we went to the rugby kick. The "fumble" kick looked like the Kent guy's leg was a magnet and the ball was a chunk of iron-

(10-17-2010 11:36 AM)adunifon Wrote:  When we let penza kick the ball, he gets off 50 yard boomers...but when we were around our 20 yard line last night we went to that awful rugby kick on 2 or 3 occasions,

the one that got us the fumble recovery? That was the only one that I noticed the major adjustments on the blocking scheme (from three to two) and Adonis running down the line and up-field at the hike. At first I thought they were actually going to fake the punt from the 20, yikes.

Then when the ball seemed to follow Thomas, I wondered if they were intentionally trying to hit a defensive player with it and to have Thomas in position to recover. That would be a risky play I could respect. Ballsy if true.

(10-17-2010 01:26 PM)H2Oville Rocket Wrote:  

(10-17-2010 01:05 PM)MotoRocket Wrote:  I actually saw Kent putting 2 guys back on most of the punts. One looked like a fullback (number 37 or 38) and the other was small receiver/RB. They were split - so it wasn't even like the big guy was out there blocking for the little guy. It looked to me like they were anticipating the rugby kick, because they were only about 25 yards behind the line of scrimmage.

They did drop two back some for sure. I remember just the one punt where they dropped no one back but I thought that was whe we went to the rugby kick. The "fumble" kick looked like the Kent guy's leg was a magnet and the ball was a chunk of iron-

several kicks kent st didn't put any punt returner back
noticed that as well
could have effected the kicking strategy