Stats: Howard scored 24 pts on 384 total yards of offense. 172 of those yards and 21 pts came on 3 long plays. That's 44% of their total yards on 3 plays. Without those plays EMU held HU to a respectable 212 yards and a FG.

Not tying to suger coat it. EMU needs to eliminate the big plays, but it's not like HU was moving up and down the field.

You cannot discount those plays. The fact is that they did surrender those plays and they surrendered them to the weakest team on the schedule. This is a horrid defense by all measures.

I forgot that w'eagle is a UM fan so he knows far more about football than the rest of us.

(09-01-2013 06:27 PM)wolverineeagle Wrote:  You cannot discount those plays. The fact is that they did surrender those plays and they surrendered them to the weakest team on the schedule. This is a horrid defense by all measures.

wolverineeagle,

Why so you sometime seems a little bitter at some of people here on this board.. I am sure you are a great person who loves his UOfM team but please don't ripe us for believing in this team..

I am not saying we will beat BAMA but I will say we are better then last year team.. What you think UofM will do against them this year?

I will believe in this team until they show me otherwise..

Let kindly agree to disagree about this team..

I still believe we will compete in a well play game...

(09-01-2013 06:41 PM)TheWoodenNickle Wrote:  I forgot that w'eagle is a UM fan so he knows far more about football than the rest of us.

I forgot that you are a person who doesn’t brook dissenting opinion.

If UM gave up these plays to CMU I would have said the same thing. In fact, I did say the same things when UM gave up such plays to Appy State another game in which a Ron English-coached defense was gouged. Oh and then there was Ball State of the year as well when his defense gave up numerous big plays.

Big plays is Ron English’s speciality going to back to his Michigan days. This is what his defenses do.

(09-01-2013 06:46 PM)NUPudge Wrote:  

(09-01-2013 06:27 PM)wolverineeagle Wrote:  You cannot discount those plays. The fact is that they did surrender those plays and they surrendered them to the weakest team on the schedule. This is a horrid defense by all measures.

wolverineeagle,

Why so you sometime seems a little bitter at some of people here on this board.. I am sure you are a great person who loves his UOfM team but please don't ripe us for believing in this team..

I am not saying we will beat BAMA but I will say we are better then last year team.. What you think UofM will do against them this year?

I will believe in this team until they show me otherwise..

Let kindly agree to disagree about this team..

I still believe we will compete in a well play game...

Noting terrible defense is not displaying bitterness towards anyone. It is simply noting that EMU is playing crappy defense.

If you want to see Eastern win then you should care how each side of the ball performs. If EMU’s is getting gouged by Howard then I can only imagine what NIU and Toledo will do. I’m not going to judge EMU in these next two games because Eastern is clearly overmatched. But Howard was good test to see where the program is at. It doesn’t appear to be much better and that is a bitter pill to swallow. 5 years under a DC should bring better results than what we saw Saturday.

It's disconcerting that we were outgained by Howard at home. No other way to spin it.

With the exception of the fourth quarter Howard moved the ball consistently thanks to our lack of fundemental tackling and I might add the number of dropped passes by Howard receivers when they were wide open in the flat.

If EMU can improve its tackling and avoid giving up the big play we may be an average MAC defense. Our hope for winning this year rests with our ability to outscore teams. As one poster alluded we may be playing a contain defense.

(09-02-2013 06:35 PM)emu79 Wrote:  Our hope for winning this year rests with our ability to outscore teams.

This is certainly my view.

I'm going to make a point I only make tangently, namely, MAC defenses do not tend to be good. MAC teams beat non-MAC teams by out scoring them.

As I (and NuPudge) have been saying the hardest position to recruit today is not QB or RB or WR, but DT (and DE).

There is some logic to it:

It is better to be a MAC starting QB than a B1G 2nd string QB. Get PT and a lot of face time on television, etc. etc. Second stringers carry the clipboard.

For the DT, he can go to a B1G school and be in the rotation and get the PT, face time on television, etc. even as 2nd stringer.

There isn't a compelling reason to bypass a B1G program(as a 2nd stringer) for a MAC school (as a starter) for a DT.

MAC recruits QBs very well and has for the last say 15 years.

(09-02-2013 06:56 PM)emu steve Wrote:  

(09-02-2013 06:35 PM)emu79 Wrote:  Our hope for winning this year rests with our ability to outscore teams.

This is certainly my view.

I'm going to make a point I only make tangently, namely, MAC defenses do not tend to be good. MAC teams beat non-MAC teams by out scoring them.

As I (and NuPudge) have been saying the hardest position to recruit today is not QB or RB or WR, but DT (and DE).

There is some logic to it:

It is better to be a MAC starting QB than a B1G 2nd string QB. Get PT and a lot of face time on television, etc. etc. Second stringers carry the clipboard.

For the DT, he can go to a B1G school and be in the rotation and get the PT, face time on television, etc. even as 2nd stringer.

There isn't a compelling reason to bypass a B1G program(as a 2nd stringer) for a MAC school (as a starter) for a DT.

MAC recruits QBs very well and has for the last say 15 years.

I'd like to know what conference wins games without out-scoring the other team.

(09-02-2013 08:12 PM)timxlydon Wrote:  

(09-02-2013 06:56 PM)emu steve Wrote:  

(09-02-2013 06:35 PM)emu79 Wrote:  Our hope for winning this year rests with our ability to outscore teams.

This is certainly my view.

I'm going to make a point I only make tangently, namely, MAC defenses do not tend to be good. MAC teams beat non-MAC teams by out scoring them.

As I (and NuPudge) have been saying the hardest position to recruit today is not QB or RB or WR, but DT (and DE).

There is some logic to it:

It is better to be a MAC starting QB than a B1G 2nd string QB. Get PT and a lot of face time on television, etc. etc. Second stringers carry the clipboard.

For the DT, he can go to a B1G school and be in the rotation and get the PT, face time on television, etc. even as 2nd stringer.

There isn't a compelling reason to bypass a B1G program(as a 2nd stringer) for a MAC school (as a starter) for a DT.

MAC recruits QBs very well and has for the last say 15 years.

I'd like to know what conference wins games without out-scoring the other team.

There are shootout conferences and their are defensive conferences.

BG is the only MAC team with a stout defense, in my opinion.

UT tries to out score teams. They do not have a stout defense.

EMU, under Genyk, tried to outscore teams and didn't have a stout defense.