(09-01-2018 08:57 PM)nightowl24 Wrote:  My analysis for whatever its worth by position and by unit:
Qb: neither are world beaters, I think we all know that. Both have the same problem, they both don't have field vision. They lock onto a wr and that's where they're throwing. Many times the middle of the field was open but they either didn't see it or just wouldn't throw it. Stank has a weak arm, maybe that's why he doesn't risk throwing the seam route. Tyner threw a great deep ball, but then his lack of mid range accuracy cost us. Some form of an upgrade is needed here. We'll never be any good if we can't push the ball downfield.
Rb: very impressed. They run hard. They see the hole they make the cut. They know when to shake and when to lower the hat. They did all they could do.
Wr: we have a lack of athletes here. Speed is marginal with most of them. They lack quickness to create separation. They aren't very good off the jam either. Their release off the line is bad, no stem, no setup one way to go another. Very predictable where they are going. They get open too late. Many times they were open but 3.5 sec has passed and the QB got happy feet/pressure arrived.
Ol: they did well. They aren't nasty enough for me but they aren't bad imo. They also don't get a push. Everything was stalemates from what I saw. The rbs ran past tacklers more so than the ol opening holes. They actually held up in pass pro as well. I expected oliver to have a field day, imo he didn't. He looked pedestrian to be such a good player. Good job limiting his effect on the game.
Offense: bloom brought Stanford with him. Old school run with a very basic passing scheme. I thoroughly dislike the toss to the rb play. They are neither going down hill nor getting wide. They wait 6yds back get the ball and everyone runs at them, poorly designed play. Either the players are running it wrong or the play just sucks. Got very frustrated in the 2nd half with the mass subs. They bring in a heavy package with no wr and then we run. EVERYONE knows they are running and we get zero yds. Then we bring in 3 wrs and EVERYONE knows we're passing. Seeing how we are really basic with our routes this is a bad game plan imo. When we had the wr we at least had the threat of a pass(even if it was minimal). With a better defense and better athletes this offense is capable and could cause some problems. Play calling wasn't horrible but there were times I would've like to see a more aggressive approach. I saw a "let's look good losing"/ "let's see if they mess up and give it to us" approach instead of "let's take it from them" approach. Again not bad but imo could be a little more aggressive. Taking into account the lack of athletes at certain positions and limitations of certain players the play calling makes sense.
Lb: they're good. Not great but good. They did fill nicely. The ran to the ball well. Pass drops weren't very good but I put that on the dbs to cover better. All in all wr can win with this group. I'd like to see how they are blitzing.
Dl: I liked them. They got off the ball, ran to the ball, disrupted things. I like them. They need to do a better job of staying in their rush lanes to contain the qb but that's an easy fix. The problems I saw here were things that can be easily coached. They do need to get more pressure but with only three and very few blitzes or stunts they did a decent job.
S: they fill on run well. The diagnose run plays well and they know their fit. Pass wise they need help. They aren't fast and they don't keep leverage properly. In space they weren't good. That's bad for a safety. Hips weren't smooth, change of direction on pass plays was bad as well. We need help.
Cb: I hate dogging kids but bickham isn't very good. Hips are very bad. Doesn't read keys well. Slow of foot. No closing speed, no make up speed. Thornton can play. He did well when they put him out there, but he got hurt. Left the game then was in a ball cap rest of the game. Concussion maybe? The cb on the other side wasn't bad, as far as I could see. We need A LOT of help here. Every bit of our recruiting should go into finding the best CBS we can convince to come here. I know ellis can play but he's hurt as well. I could go on and on with this position but I'll just say it's by and far our worst position as it is now. Tyrae and the other cb could possibly hold it down. I'd like to see these two start.
Defense: I don't like a 3-4, AT ALL. If you have studs like the steelers then run a 3-4. We don't have that. The beautiful thing about the 34 is that you can bring heat from anywhere at anytime. We sat in base way too much for my liking. Now with that said or dbs aren't good so I get it. I feel that if we bring well timed heat we can help our dbs to not have to cover as much. Again we need more aggressiveness play calling wise imo. Line stunts, line shifts, bring some lbs SOMETHING. they held up well most of the game but our dbs let us down.
St: punter was good. Ko were in the endzone most of the time. Fg left a lot to be desired. Yeah they were long but this is where you make your money. Couple of fgs changes the psyche of the team. I like trammel we need to find a way to use him more on offense. He has a good burst and good vision.
Overall: it was a good game. We shouldn't have won this one. We didn't play well enough to win. Our db play was poor in critical situations and we couldn't complete passes or move the ball when we needed to. We had three drives(maybe 4) stall in their territory. That's 21pts we left on the field. We have to find a way to score. Uh didn't stop our offense consistently. They rose to the challenge when the field got condensed. That's either play calling, goes back to that aggressive play calling I was talking about, or it's due to our lack of playmakers. I'm happy with the fight I saw. I like what the coaches are selling. I'm buying it. He needs some more jimmies and joes. I currently feel good that the football is in a good place coaching wise. What i'm waiting to see if they can get the players to be contenders. This is where we are. It's a first for rice. Really good coaching lack of players in key positions. Their success will reside directly on their ability to recruit these key spots.
Check recruiting I identified a CB here in houston we should check into.

Thanks for the analysis.

I don't like the toss play either. As 40 says, it doesn't get you anywhere quickly and doesn't get you running downhill. I suppose if you have a dominating offensive line it gives the RB an opportunity to pick the best hole, but I don't think we have a line that can block that. Maybe this staff has a bit of square peg into round hole mentality, too, although not as bad as the last one. I think WR's could really use ruowls' vector techniques. They've got to get off the line better and separate faster. My favorite offensive scheme is still what Paul Johnson did at Georgia Southern and Hawaii--flexbone option running with run-and-shoot passing. I still think we could make that work.

What is it that you don't like about the 3-4? I get that we don't really have the personnel to execute it, but we really don't have the personnel to execute any scheme. We just don't have enough speed defensively. I hope we can recruit that speed. I would use whatever scheme lets me get as much speed as I can on the field. You can do some things with technique, and I hope to see progress there. But at least they seem to play with physicality. Bryant liked to say, "Defense is movement and hitting people. If you will hit people but can't move, we can work on that. If you can move but won't hit people, there's nothing we can do." Do you see any signs of improvement in the secondary? What really struck me about the Bailiff defenses was how slowly they read and reacted. That was the most striking difference to me between the way TCU played the 4-2-5 and the way we did; their safeties would run 20 yards before ours took a step. I recall situations where our safeties were still standing flat footed reading their backfield keys and the vertical route had run by them and the ball was in the air. You seemed to see some of that Saturday. I was watching on TV and it's hard to tell what the secondary is doing on TV. Old habits die hard, but I hope we can coach or scheme or do something to get them to read and react quicker.

What steps would you take to get this team better?

The game -time experience yesterday was great. Good crowd for UH "traveling" and more Rice fans than last weekend, I think. The Rice students showed up in decent number and were pretty vocal. Looks like they were razzing the Cougar players on the bench pretty good... which is always fun to watch.
The weather was intermittently miserable. I think both teams .. and the refs... suffered a bit. A couple of the players referenced it in the post-game interviews. Looked like there was a concerted effort to keep everybody hydrated and even then there seemed to be a lot of cramping issues.
Again, it seemed like we escaped without serious injuries. A real plus going forward.
UH had some timid play calling and first game jitters that we took advantage of. I was really proud of our team going in to the half. It's difficult to remember the last time I saw Rice fans smiling, applauding and high-fiving each other..but there we were. I think the Cougars are pretty talented and well-coached. On the road to a probable winning season and a bowl game and having the potential to win 9-10 games.
I think our former Vandy player is the guy. Tyner is going to get some reps and he should, but the coaches seem to have more confidence in Stank. Our RB's did pretty well against a good defense that pretty much knew our game plan a week ago. Kudos to the OC for showing us that our passing game actually has a pulse.
Best defense I've seen the Owls play in several seasons. Even the pass defense was better in the first half. Obviously, we still have considerable work to do with defending the deep pass, but there were plenty of times that our guys were at least in a position to make a play. Something that wasn't true the past 2 years.
I'm still sticking with a 4 win prediction, but I think 5 or 6 wins is possible. These young men have good coaches and great attitude. I was pretty happy with their performance yesterday.

Looking at last year's stats.... where is Nashon Ellerbe? I knew he got hurt last year, but is he planning to come back this year? Still rehabbing?

I'm not trying to rub any salt in wounds here, but here is the break down of the UH offense by quarter.

Q1 - 23 plays, 72 yards, 1 FG
Q2 - 17 plays, 181 yards, 2 TDs
Q3 - 6 plays, 145 yards, 2 TDs
Q4 - 17 plays, 179 yards, 2 TDs

If you exclude the first quarter, that's 505 yards and 42 points on 40 plays. Probably everyone for both Rice and Houston are hoping that this is a sign that Houston will have a top 15 offense, and is not necessarily an indicator or the Rice defense. Furthermore, FAU was blanked in the first half by OU and only put up 324 yards all day. That's a pretty big drop off from last year, another indicator that the OC change for Houston should greatly improve the offense.

Here is the breakdown of the Rice offense by quarter

Q1 - 15 plays, 92 yards, 1 TD
Q2 - 26 plays, 117 yards, 1TD 1 FG
Q3 - 23 plays, 153 yards, 1 FG 1 missed FG
Q4 - 23 plays, 88 yards, 2 missed FGs.

Rice had more plays and more yards, but significantly less points in the second half.

In the first half
Rice ran the ball 24 times for 105 yards
Rice was 10/17 passing for 104 yards

In the second half
Rice ran the ball 19 times for 53 yards
Rice was 14/24 passing for 188 yards

(09-02-2018 10:24 AM)greyowl72 Wrote:  Looking at last year's stats.... where is Nashon Ellerbe? I knew he got hurt last year, but is he planning to come back this year? Still rehabbing?

I believe he is still hurt/recovering.

(09-02-2018 10:25 AM)sacoog06 Wrote:  I'm not trying to rub any salt in wounds here, but here is the break down of the UH offense by quarter.

Q1 - 23 plays, 72 yards, 1 FG
Q2 - 17 plays, 181 yards, 2 TDs
Q3 - 6 plays, 145 yards, 2 TDs
Q4 - 17 plays, 179 yards, 2 TDs

If you exclude the first quarter, that's 505 yards and 42 points on 40 plays. Probably everyone for both Rice and Houston are hoping that this is a sign that Houston will have a top 15 offense, and is not necessarily an indicator or the Rice defense. Furthermore, FAU was blanked in the first half by OU and only put up 324 yards all day. That's a pretty big drop off from last year, another indicator that the OC change for Houston should greatly improve the offense.

Here is the breakdown of the Rice offense by quarter

Q1 - 15 plays, 92 yards, 1 TD
Q2 - 26 plays, 117 yards, 1TD 1 FG
Q3 - 23 plays, 153 yards, 1 FG 1 missed FG
Q4 - 23 plays, 88 yards, 2 missed FGs.

Rice had more plays and more yards, but significantly less points in the second half.

In the first half
Rice ran the ball 24 times for 105 yards
Rice was 10/17 passing for 104 yards

In the second half
Rice ran the ball 19 times for 53 yards
Rice was 14/24 passing for 188 yards

Hey, don't shortchange the Owls. Rice had 2 TDs & 1 FG in the 2Q, not 1 and 1.

(09-02-2018 10:49 AM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  

(09-02-2018 10:25 AM)sacoog06 Wrote:  I'm not trying to rub any salt in wounds here, but here is the break down of the UH offense by quarter.

Q1 - 23 plays, 72 yards, 1 FG
Q2 - 17 plays, 181 yards, 2 TDs
Q3 - 6 plays, 145 yards, 2 TDs
Q4 - 17 plays, 179 yards, 2 TDs

If you exclude the first quarter, that's 505 yards and 42 points on 40 plays. Probably everyone for both Rice and Houston are hoping that this is a sign that Houston will have a top 15 offense, and is not necessarily an indicator or the Rice defense. Furthermore, FAU was blanked in the first half by OU and only put up 324 yards all day. That's a pretty big drop off from last year, another indicator that the OC change for Houston should greatly improve the offense.

Here is the breakdown of the Rice offense by quarter

Q1 - 15 plays, 92 yards, 1 TD
Q2 - 26 plays, 117 yards, 1TD 1 FG
Q3 - 23 plays, 153 yards, 1 FG 1 missed FG
Q4 - 23 plays, 88 yards, 2 missed FGs.

Rice had more plays and more yards, but significantly less points in the second half.

In the first half
Rice ran the ball 24 times for 105 yards
Rice was 10/17 passing for 104 yards

In the second half
Rice ran the ball 19 times for 53 yards
Rice was 14/24 passing for 188 yards

Hey, don't shortchange the Owls. Rice had 2 TDs & 1 FG in the 2Q, not 1 and 1.

Whoops.

(09-02-2018 09:47 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Looking at stats this morning, it appears that it was the passing game that kept us close. Take out the the longest rushes for each of our three leaders, and we had 40rushes for 60 yards. I think we need better than 1.5ypc to stay in most games, especially if “pounding the rock”is our base.

Add my name to the rest of you who dislike the toss play.
For much of the first half, and throughout the game to a lesser degree, we actually ran plays between the tackles, with our freshman center taking on Oliver one-on-one. I'm pretty certain we averaged less than a yard on each of those, and suspect we lost yardage. Nothing against Baker -- I think he's doing a helluva job -- but these plays accomplished ONLY one thing -- running time off the clock. We could've thrown hail-marys on every one of those and come out better.
Indeed, ESPN pundits were showing video of Oliver today -- and were chuckling at the fact that we had one man trying to block him.

Coach Bloom comments

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yUIZk85Ven4

(09-01-2018 08:57 PM)nightowl24 Wrote:  My analysis for whatever its worth by position and by unit:......

I'm happy with the fight I saw. I like what the coaches are selling. I'm buying it. He needs some more jimmies and joes. I currently feel good that the football is in a good place coaching wise. What i'm waiting to see if they can get the players to be contenders. This is where we are. It's a first for rice. Really good coaching lack of players in key positions. Their success will reside directly on their ability to recruit these key spots.

Check recruiting I identified a CB here in houston we should check into.

Thanks for your thoughts NO. I'm no expert on X's and O's for sure, but during 2nd quarter yesterday I told my son that we have found a coach. I thought there was obvious and noticeable improvement on the field and especially with attitude. The guys kept clawing back until they were just beaten physically. Even the TV announcers praised them, even late in the 4th Q as having "asserted themselves".

(09-01-2018 11:37 PM)ruowls Wrote:  The qbs are opening their front shoulder to quick and are spinning out of their throws. Easy fix.
Team needs to learn vectors. Receivers need to give qbs better throwing lanes and qbs need to throw better. The offense is sound but can be a lot more consistent.
A couple plays stood out. Rice SS was covering middle under and ran to spot and was looking back to qb and wr ran a post right past deep and underneath coverage for TD. SS had no other threat and should have been looking at wr and not into backfield. Should have wheeled under the post and not worried about running to a spot and looking back to the LOS.
Receivers have the same lack of vision. Run routes to spots and create little separation (another way of saying throwing lanes aren’t helping the qbs).
Get this fixed and pass defense is better, pass offense is more consistent and running game maintains productivity.
There is enough potential on the field to be good now and elite in 2 years.

After years of playing zone it will take some time for DB's to really learn and understand man coverage, I think. They seem to be doing what they think they've been told to do, but at some point instincts need to be able to overrule training when situations change dynamically. I'm not too sure many teams have the speed to cover UH receivers effectively the entire game. With no pressure on the qb, it is impossible. I'm no expert, just paraphrasing Bloom.

I was talking about zone.
You have to understand what is going on around you. On the one play I referenced, there was slot to the left. There was a corner low and a safety high. The outside receiver ran a stop on the sideline which held the corner to the flat. The high safety had deep and shaded the sideline to help deep on the outside receiver. The slot ran a post. The off side SS slid over to cover the middle zone. Backside corner stayed low to cover backside receiver. They were playing zone. Rice didn’t work together. The 2 safeties could have done 2 things differently. The post was the immediate threat so the high low should have favored this route. The deep coverage could have shaded more to the post. The underneath safety could have adjusted to the immediate threat. Don’t need more speed to cover this if you bracket it right. In fact, the underneath could have acted like a robber and baited them into an interception. On another play, they had 2 stacked receivers to the right. They ran a post and trailing go. The safety was deep and went with the post. The corner was underneath so he hung momentarily to look for an underneath threat. Unfortunately, the trail receiver is the immediate underneath threat and the corner should have never hung to evaluate. Should have gone with the second vertical. What you see as just getting beat deep because we can’t hang I see as not understanding immediate threats and seeing the resultant failure.
I actually like odd fronts better than even fronts as it adjusts to strength and spread formations better.
The toss is just a delay. It usually it accompanied with a trap or pulling OL. It gives them time to pull. I don’t like it because you lose play action element off of it.
I think the coaches are doing a much better job. But, things can be better. It is a combination of technique, athleticism, scheme, desire, and global awareness. Being better in one or more elements can offset deficiencies in another (within reason of course).

(09-02-2018 10:25 AM)sacoog06 Wrote:  I'm not trying to rub any salt in wounds here, but here is the break down of the UH offense by quarter.

Q1 - 23 plays, 72 yards, 1 FG
Q2 - 17 plays, 181 yards, 2 TDs
Q3 - 6 plays, 145 yards, 2 TDs
Q4 - 17 plays, 179 yards, 2 TDs

If you exclude the first quarter, that's 505 yards and 42 points on 40 plays. Probably everyone for both Rice and Houston are hoping that this is a sign that Houston will have a top 15 offense, and is not necessarily an indicator or the Rice defense. Furthermore, FAU was blanked in the first half by OU and only put up 324 yards all day. That's a pretty big drop off from last year, another indicator that the OC change for Houston should greatly improve the offense.

Here is the breakdown of the Rice offense by quarter

Q1 - 15 plays, 92 yards, 1 TD
Q2 - 26 plays, 117 yards, 1TD 1 FG
Q3 - 23 plays, 153 yards, 1 FG 1 missed FG
Q4 - 23 plays, 88 yards, 2 missed FGs.

Rice had more plays and more yards, but significantly less points in the second half.

In the first half
Rice ran the ball 24 times for 105 yards
Rice was 10/17 passing for 104 yards

In the second half
Rice ran the ball 19 times for 53 yards
Rice was 14/24 passing for 188 yards

So to simply read stats and not understand what they mean you walk away with your view of things. Rice is a run offense. Old school I. We are going to run more plays we are going have less yds. THAT'S THE IDEA. Keep the ball away from you and hopefully the defense can make some plays. Based off the fact that until late in the game we were in the game, that philosophy works.

I'm happy with our performance on both sides of the ball. UH is very talented. It's the first time we got their attention in a long time. I'm encouraged.

Ruowls: I agree with all you said. They aren't reading keys properly. That post for a td had little to do with ability and more to do with safety technique. You went into more detail on the wr route running, but yes exactly. They give the qb bad lanes and run to spots. Possibly because of lack of qb throwing ability. I don't know.

69/70 owl: I dislike the 34 because there are too many uncovered linemen. I dislike giving linemen free runs. Allows to easily pull, they get to the 2nd level really easily as well. Unless your lb/dl Corp is legit this typically results in easy run yds. I also like having an extra dl to apply pressure. I can sit my backers and not blitz but still get pressure. Just not a fan of it. I get the idea of having more speed but that's why u like the 425. 4 man front I can adjust to everything plus it allows for combo coverage. A lot harder to combo the secondary with a 34. I like playing various coverages all over the field. I don't like the qb too be able to read one side of the field and know what's going on with the back side. When I coached sometimes we as coaches didn't even know what the players put us in on the backside. They saw things and made adjustments. It gives you so much more freedom to confuse a qb(that's not coached by ruowls lol).

I was curious was there any throws to the tight end? If not, maybe this will happen when Conference play starts. The tight ends are such an integral part of the West Coast offense. I guess recruiting will solve that problem in the future.

(09-02-2018 06:26 PM)OldOwl Wrote:  I was curious was there any throws to the tight end? If not, maybe this will happen when Conference play starts. The tight ends are such an integral part of the West Coast offense. I guess recruiting will solve that problem in the future.

\Myers and Bull each caught a TD.

(09-02-2018 05:55 PM)nightowl24 Wrote:  

(09-02-2018 10:25 AM)sacoog06 Wrote:  I'm not trying to rub any salt in wounds here, but here is the break down of the UH offense by quarter.

Q1 - 23 plays, 72 yards, 1 FG
Q2 - 17 plays, 181 yards, 2 TDs
Q3 - 6 plays, 145 yards, 2 TDs
Q4 - 17 plays, 179 yards, 2 TDs

If you exclude the first quarter, that's 505 yards and 42 points on 40 plays. Probably everyone for both Rice and Houston are hoping that this is a sign that Houston will have a top 15 offense, and is not necessarily an indicator or the Rice defense. Furthermore, FAU was blanked in the first half by OU and only put up 324 yards all day. That's a pretty big drop off from last year, another indicator that the OC change for Houston should greatly improve the offense.

Here is the breakdown of the Rice offense by quarter

Q1 - 15 plays, 92 yards, 1 TD
Q2 - 26 plays, 117 yards, 1TD 1 FG
Q3 - 23 plays, 153 yards, 1 FG 1 missed FG
Q4 - 23 plays, 88 yards, 2 missed FGs.

Rice had more plays and more yards, but significantly less points in the second half.

In the first half
Rice ran the ball 24 times for 105 yards
Rice was 10/17 passing for 104 yards

In the second half
Rice ran the ball 19 times for 53 yards
Rice was 14/24 passing for 188 yards

So to simply read stats and not understand what they mean you walk away with your view of things. Rice is a run offense. Old school I. We are going to run more plays we are going have less yds. THAT'S THE IDEA. Keep the ball away from you and hopefully the defense can make some plays. Based off the fact that until late in the game we were in the game, that philosophy works.

Well I wasn't really trying offer much analysis (or my view) as much as I was providing some stats for others to draw their own conclusions, but UH took the lead with 3:34 to go in the 3rd quarter and Rice had 4 of their 6 2nd half possessions trailing on the score board. So I'm not sure I buy that explanation between the disparity of plays/yards vs points in the first vs second halves for Rice especially since Rice passed 7 more times in the 2nd half compared to the 1st and had more passing attempts than rushing attempts in the 2nd half. Passing more is not keep away ball and describes trying to play catch up.

If I were to offer analysis, I would say that the passing game worked better when there was more space to run and as the field got shorter the passes were not getting completed and drives stalled resulting in FG attempts. This was coupled with lack of success in the run game (~2YPC), yet success on third down (don't have the 3rd down conversion % off hand).

Also one of Rice's TDs in the first half came off an very short field due to a fumble and they didn't need many plays or yards to score (the best type of TDs).

Finally, you mention Rice playing "old school" offense. Old school rushing offense is predicated on less plays and running the clock. Up tempo offenses want to run the most plays possible because it gives them the most attempts to score. I do understand that Rice is a power running offense that wants to run the ball about 60% of the time and pass about 40% give or take. However, Rice ran 87 plays, Houston ran 63 (Houston having an up tempo offense) and Rice only rushed 2 more times than passed for the whole game which again suggests Rice got away from their game plan

Two things stood out in Bloom’s post game comments that point out how much different this staff is. Regarding why he has used Tobola instead of Fox twice in the first two games. He said during their quality analysis it showed Tobola is more accurate from the right hash. The other comment was said in response to how did he prepare the defense for the uptempo Cougars. Bloom said that in practice they used two offensive squads huddling so they could snap the ball against the defense every 8 seconds after the ball was marked ready for play. Just two great examples of preparation and practicing situationals.

We got ourselves a coach and a staff.... now let's go win some games and keep him!

Sent from my SM-G935V using CSNbbs mobile app