(09-29-2019 02:04 AM)ruowls Wrote: I have been saying this for a few weeks.
You have to throw the ball to help the run. La Tech changed the front/gap responsibilities and choked off the run game. Rice went with Stewart to add an extra back in the run game by having direct QB runs. It was the game plan. It was a scripted plan. Goes back to following a plan and not changing based on the unfolding events of the game. The passing game is rudimentary at best. It has no concept of separation. For example, on the INT, 2 Rice receivers were next to each other at the back of the end zone. That clustered the coverage and Stewart three into it not accounting for the backside safety. The RB was actually covered as a defender was sitting in the flat eyeing him up. The throw to the EZ was 10 yards to short. It was a potential disaster. The one drag that they defender knocked down was due to dynamics of passing lanes and not being underthrown. Once a receiver crosses the QB and is running flat across the field, the defender becomes more within the throwing lane the further away from QB. Simply put, there is no window. How they try to use their receivers is just plain bad.
We have seen this pattern over and over. First game, stuff a 4th down and get the ball deep in opposing territory and 3 conservative plays. Get the ball on a TO deep in Baylor territory and go all conservative and play for FG. La Tech, go conservative and play for FG. You have to attack on offense at some point. Seize momentum and go for the jugular.
I have tried to point out some of these flaws. Waiting for these players to mature and better players to come in won’t fix the glaring problems that were seen tonight. It is the timidness in play calling coupled with poor play design and a lack of talent utilization that is dragging Rice down. I hope it gets better soon.
Looking forward to the explanation on the play calling...what we think is conservative, Bloom thinks it’s imposing your will on your opponent. When it doesn’t work, for the 100th time, our OL is charged with not being athletic enough to hold their assignments
Yep hank you are correct. It’s his way and only his way. Told the team before UTEP loss last year the coaches weren’t the reason they were losing it was the players. And then they lost to UTEP. Way to motivate your locker room. Dude is an egoistical jerk that I’m almost certain wears a little eye makeup or at least mascara from time time. Just looks like it on his interviews sometimes
Despite being 0-5, we remain #1 in the nation at penalty yards per game, nearly 10 ypg ahead of #2 Iowa, who is 4-0. #3 is Wake Forest (5-0) and #4 is New Mexico State (0-5). I'm beginning to think this stat may not correlate with wins...
The pass defense stats came up a little bit. We went from 128th in the nation to 121st in completion percentage allowed, and improved from 124th to 116th in yards per attempt allowed.
On offense, we are now T-124th in the nation in yards per play at 4.55. We finished last season T-122nd. Counting games against G5 opponents only, our yppl last year was 4.88, which was 7th from last in G5; this year so far, we are averaging 4.92 yppl. Basically, so far, the offense has not materially improved from year 1 to year 2 of the Bloomgren Era, and it is decidedly worse than in the last 2 years of the Bailiff Era (2017: 5.63 yppl vs. G5 opponents; 2016: 5.12).
The good news is NMSU may not be able to win a game this year so we wouldn’t be winless alone. If the defense could score(and hats off to coach smith on his defense) the owls could possibly get a win. Playing UTSA and UTEP both on the road historically has been difficult for the owls.
[quote='RiceOwls2019' pid='16333943' dateline='1569732413']
I keep harping on it, but the decision to be stubborn/rigid and “stick with the plan” of going to Stewart after the first two drives resulted in TDs was just unforgivable.
Had a chance to seize momentum and go up by two scores early with our D playing well..and our coaches instead shot our team in the foot. We never recovered momentum offensively. (Should add that it’s not about the players involved specifically...I’d feel the exact same way if it had been Stewart that had started, led 2 TD drives, and then been pulled).
D was mostly excellent. D line and LBs got after it again. Thornton may be the best corner in the league. Nyakwol and Smith were very good too./quote]
(09-29-2019 08:04 PM)owl40 Wrote: Give Skip and staff credit. La Tech in-game adjustments > Rice's in-game. That was difference in outcome against evenly matched teams.
Being evenly-matched with La Tech is a major step forward. But it's now time for those steps to produce wins.
(09-29-2019 08:04 PM)owl40 Wrote: Give Skip and staff credit. La Tech in-game adjustments > Rice's in-game. That was difference in outcome against evenly matched teams.
Being evenly-matched with La Tech is a major step forward. But it's now time for those steps to produce wins.
(09-29-2019 08:04 PM)owl40 Wrote: Give Skip and staff credit. La Tech in-game adjustments > Rice's in-game. That was difference in outcome against evenly matched teams.
Being evenly-matched with La Tech is a major step forward. But it's now time for those steps to produce wins.
agree on both of these
We were more than evenly matched. La Tech was on the ropes in the 2nd quarter. In-game coaching needs to improve. Bloomgren et. al. are relatively inexperienced in their current roles. I haven't seen any evidence of learning from mistakes yet. Hope to.
The problem with the sequence before the half is that the pass play can't be the third down play. The sequence you want is 1st down running play, if you don't score timeout, 2nd down pass play, score or incomplete, 3rd down running play, if you don't score run clock down to 0:04 and call time out. The problem with the pass play on third down is that if it is incomplete you can't run the clock down. If you can get a TD take it and worry about the clock later. If you have to take a FG, you want it to be the last play of the half. The only way to ensure that is to have a timeout left and run a running play on 3rd down. Actually the pass play can come on 1st or 2nd down, or even both. But the 3rd down play needs to be a run, if you have a timeout left. And the two things you can't do on the pass is get sacked or get picked.
The objective is to score more points than they do in the last 65 seconds of the half. That sequence is the best way to do that.
(This post was last modified: 09-29-2019 09:15 PM by Owl 69/70/75.)
Sorry for the lateness of this but this is my annual video nod to Rice football in the month of September. Cool video and amazing song (Green Day's Wake Me Up When September Ends). The two young actors in the video have gone on to become big stars too (Jamie Bell was Bernie Taupin in Rocketman this year, and Evan Rachel Wood is in a ton of stuff but is one of the featured new voices in Frozen 2 this winter).
She says at the end of the video that 'I'm never going to leave you.' Which is probably (hopefully) what most Rice fans feel about Rice football. But it would be nice if one year we could just skip straight to October to begin the season.
(This post was last modified: 09-29-2019 09:33 PM by Fort Bend Owl.)
(09-29-2019 09:12 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote: The problem with the sequence before the half is that the pass play can't be the third down play. The sequence you want is 1st down running play, if you don't score timeout, 2nd down pass play, score or incomplete, 3rd down running play, if you don't score run clock down to 0:04 and call time out. The problem with the pass play on third down is that if it is incomplete you can't run the clock down. If you can get a TD take it and worry about the clock later. If you have to take a FG, you want it to be the last play of the half. The only way to ensure that is to have a timeout left and run a running play on 3rd down. Actually the pass play can come on 1st or 2nd down, or even both. But the 3rd down play needs to be a run, if you have a timeout left. And the two things you can't do on the pass is get sacked or get picked.
The objective is to score more points than they do in the last 65 seconds of the half. That sequence is the best way to do that.
The problem with the sequence is that it resulted in no points. You can bleed time many ways but you have to score.
(09-29-2019 02:04 AM)ruowls Wrote: I have been saying this for a few weeks.
You have to throw the ball to help the run. La Tech changed the front/gap responsibilities and choked off the run game. Rice went with Stewart to add an extra back in the run game by having direct QB runs. It was the game plan. It was a scripted plan. Goes back to following a plan and not changing based on the unfolding events of the game. The passing game is rudimentary at best. It has no concept of separation. For example, on the INT, 2 Rice receivers were next to each other at the back of the end zone. That clustered the coverage and Stewart three into it not accounting for the backside safety. The RB was actually covered as a defender was sitting in the flat eyeing him up. The throw to the EZ was 10 yards to short. It was a potential disaster. The one drag that they defender knocked down was due to dynamics of passing lanes and not being underthrown. Once a receiver crosses the QB and is running flat across the field, the defender becomes more within the throwing lane the further away from QB. Simply put, there is no window. How they try to use their receivers is just plain bad.
We have seen this pattern over and over. First game, stuff a 4th down and get the ball deep in opposing territory and 3 conservative plays. Get the ball on a TO deep in Baylor territory and go all conservative and play for FG. La Tech, go conservative and play for FG. You have to attack on offense at some point. Seize momentum and go for the jugular.
I have tried to point out some of these flaws. Waiting for these players to mature and better players to come in won’t fix the glaring problems that were seen tonight. It is the timidness in play calling coupled with poor play design and a lack of talent utilization that is dragging Rice down. I hope it gets better soon.
Looking forward to the explanation on the play calling...what we think is conservative, Bloom thinks it’s imposing your will on your opponent. When it doesn’t work, for the 100th time, our OL is charged with not being athletic enough to hold their assignments
Yep hank you are correct. It’s his way and only his way. Told the team before UTEP loss last year the coaches weren’t the reason they were losing it was the players. And then they lost to UTEP. Way to motivate your locker room. Dude is an egoistical jerk that I’m almost certain wears a little eye makeup or at least mascara from time time. Just looks like it on his interviews sometimes
That kind of talk before an winnable game is really bad if true!
(09-29-2019 09:12 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote: The problem with the sequence before the half is that the pass play can't be the third down play. The sequence you want is 1st down running play, if you don't score timeout, 2nd down pass play, score or incomplete, 3rd down running play, if you don't score run clock down to 0:04 and call time out. The problem with the pass play on third down is that if it is incomplete you can't run the clock down. If you can get a TD take it and worry about the clock later. If you have to take a FG, you want it to be the last play of the half. The only way to ensure that is to have a timeout left and run a running play on 3rd down. Actually the pass play can come on 1st or 2nd down, or even both. But the 3rd down play needs to be a run, if you have a timeout left. And the two things you can't do on the pass is get sacked or get picked.
The objective is to score more points than they do in the last 65 seconds of the half. That sequence is the best way to do that.
The problem with the sequence is that it resulted in no points. You can bleed time many ways but you have to score.
But it scored no points because of the pick on third down, not because of the clock management.
Although if we truly had 2 timeouts left, then the sequencing was wrong. Third down is not the passing down in that sequence, first down and/or second down are.
(09-29-2019 08:17 AM)Hank16 Wrote: Looking forward to the explanation on the play calling...what we think is conservative, Bloom thinks it’s imposing your will on your opponent. When it doesn’t work, for the 100th time, our OL is charged with not being athletic enough to hold their assignments
Yep hank you are correct. It’s his way and only his way. Told the team before UTEP loss last year the coaches weren’t the reason they were losing it was the players. And then they lost to UTEP. Way to motivate your locker room. Dude is an egoistical jerk that I’m almost certain wears a little eye makeup or at least mascara from time time. Just looks like it on his interviews sometimes
That kind of talk before an winnable game is really bad if true!
If true is the operative part of that statement. I doubt he actually said that, but he probably said something that the Bloom-haters can conjure up as that.
If the problem is that our OL can't hold their blocks long enough, then the plays are developing too slowly. The solutions are recruit OL men who can or change the system. I don't think we can do the former, which is one reason why I don't think a power running game is the right approach for Rice.
(09-29-2019 08:17 AM)Hank16 Wrote: Looking forward to the explanation on the play calling...what we think is conservative, Bloom thinks it’s imposing your will on your opponent. When it doesn’t work, for the 100th time, our OL is charged with not being athletic enough to hold their assignments
Yep hank you are correct. It’s his way and only his way. Told the team before UTEP loss last year the coaches weren’t the reason they were losing it was the players. And then they lost to UTEP. Way to motivate your locker room. Dude is an egoistical jerk that I’m almost certain wears a little eye makeup or at least mascara from time time. Just looks like it on his interviews sometimes
That kind of talk before an winnable game is really bad if true!
If true is the operative part of that statement. I doubt he actually said that, but he probably said something that the Bloom-haters can conjure up as that.
Agreed that it's doubtful he said that.
Bloom says that and his team quits on him for sure. And if there is one thing that this team hasn't done, is quit.
I think you can see that by our play on the defensive side of the ball. While being ranked 86 in PPG against isn't good, when you look at who we've played I think it is a good indicator of effort being put forth by the team (especially since we
re a G5 school). Offenses faced are ranked: Army (72), Wake Forest (34), Texas (13), Baylor (16), and La Tech (84). I expect to see our defense improve as we play more CUSA teams.
What's infuriating is we're ranked almost dead last at 14.8 ppg (Georgia Tech is holding down #130 at 13.5 ppg), and we've not played any stellar defenses.
(09-29-2019 08:17 AM)Hank16 Wrote: Looking forward to the explanation on the play calling...what we think is conservative, Bloom thinks it’s imposing your will on your opponent. When it doesn’t work, for the 100th time, our OL is charged with not being athletic enough to hold their assignments
Yep hank you are correct. It’s his way and only his way. Told the team before UTEP loss last year the coaches weren’t the reason they were losing it was the players. And then they lost to UTEP. Way to motivate your locker room. Dude is an egoistical jerk that I’m almost certain wears a little eye makeup or at least mascara from time time. Just looks like it on his interviews sometimes
That kind of talk before an winnable game is really bad if true!
If true is the operative part of that statement. I doubt he actually said that, but he probably said something that the Bloom-haters can conjure up as that.
Agreed that it's doubtful he said that.
Bloom says that and his team quits on him for sure. And if there is one thing that this team hasn't done, is quit.
I think you can see that by our play on the defensive side of the ball. While being ranked 86 in PPG against isn't good, when you look at who we've played I think it is a good indicator of effort being put forth by the team (especially since we
re a G5 school). Offenses faced are ranked: Army (72), Wake Forest (34), Texas (13), Baylor (16), and La Tech (84). I expect to see our defense improve as we play more CUSA teams.
What's infuriating is we're ranked almost dead last at 14.8 ppg (Georgia Tech is holding down #130 at 13.5 ppg), and we've not played any stellar defenses.
That and much more has been said. Dude is an a$&. It’s all about him.
(09-29-2019 11:56 AM)RiceOL83 Wrote: Yep hank you are correct. It’s his way and only his way. Told the team before UTEP loss last year the coaches weren’t the reason they were losing it was the players. And then they lost to UTEP. Way to motivate your locker room. Dude is an egoistical jerk that I’m almost certain wears a little eye makeup or at least mascara from time time. Just looks like it on his interviews sometimes
That kind of talk before an winnable game is really bad if true!
If true is the operative part of that statement. I doubt he actually said that, but he probably said something that the Bloom-haters can conjure up as that.
Agreed that it's doubtful he said that.
Bloom says that and his team quits on him for sure. And if there is one thing that this team hasn't done, is quit.
I think you can see that by our play on the defensive side of the ball. While being ranked 86 in PPG against isn't good, when you look at who we've played I think it is a good indicator of effort being put forth by the team (especially since we
re a G5 school). Offenses faced are ranked: Army (72), Wake Forest (34), Texas (13), Baylor (16), and La Tech (84). I expect to see our defense improve as we play more CUSA teams.
What's infuriating is we're ranked almost dead last at 14.8 ppg (Georgia Tech is holding down #130 at 13.5 ppg), and we've not played any stellar defenses.
That and much more has been said. Dude is an a$&. It’s all about him.
Then why haven't we seen the team quit? I get that there's personal pride and what not, but the coaches seem to be doing something right in terms of discipline (penalties and mental errors are way down) and defensive execution and effort.
(09-29-2019 11:56 AM)RiceOL83 Wrote: Yep hank you are correct. It’s his way and only his way. Told the team before UTEP loss last year the coaches weren’t the reason they were losing it was the players. And then they lost to UTEP. Way to motivate your locker room. Dude is an egoistical jerk that I’m almost certain wears a little eye makeup or at least mascara from time time. Just looks like it on his interviews sometimes
That kind of talk before an winnable game is really bad if true!
If true is the operative part of that statement. I doubt he actually said that, but he probably said something that the Bloom-haters can conjure up as that.
Agreed that it's doubtful he said that.
Bloom says that and his team quits on him for sure. And if there is one thing that this team hasn't done, is quit.
I think you can see that by our play on the defensive side of the ball. While being ranked 86 in PPG against isn't good, when you look at who we've played I think it is a good indicator of effort being put forth by the team (especially since we
re a G5 school). Offenses faced are ranked: Army (72), Wake Forest (34), Texas (13), Baylor (16), and La Tech (84). I expect to see our defense improve as we play more CUSA teams.
What's infuriating is we're ranked almost dead last at 14.8 ppg (Georgia Tech is holding down #130 at 13.5 ppg), and we've not played any stellar defenses.
That and much more has been said. Dude is an a$&. It’s all about him.
Seriously- why are you still posting here? It's a free country, but does this give you pleasure?
This happens during every coaching change- your situation is not unique. Read about the overhaul that Bronco Mendenhall did when he got to Virginia- I'm sure those existing players were not all lazy losers, but the program was in the tank and needed an overhaul (and our situation was even worse)- and he completely threw the old players and staff under the bus.
Part of a new culture unfortunately includes some myth-making about how bad the last staff was and how terrible the situation was the new coach inherited (please take a minute and look up some news articles surrounding any coaching change where the previous coach was fired for poor performance). Think about Bailiff and his "we only had 50 players our first spring"- and every new staff says the previous one was undisciplned and out of shape (everyone's new strength coach is the greatest and always amazed and how small/slow the existing players are). This happens everywhere. There is nothing personal against your guy. If Bloomgren thought he gave them a better chance to win he would have played him more. If he thought he was not as good- or even equal to- someone he recruited then he wouldn't.
I understand the schaudenfreud of watching Bloomgren go 0-5 probably makes you feel good/ justified, but his personnel decisions- whether you or I agree with them or not- are intended to create a stronger program today and in the future. Unfortunately, most of the time the corollary to "we are building something great here" as a recruiting pitch is it was not great before.
I wish we could have held onto some of the guys that transferred, but 1) that is life in college football today, and 2) it is always expected during a coaching change. The bottom line is that we were god-awful the last two years. It remains to be seen if Bloomgren can change that in the next year or two, but is is completely unsurprising how he is going about it from a personnel standpoint. I'm sorry you got caught in the transition. It has happened to many of us
(This post was last modified: 09-30-2019 11:13 AM by Middle Ages.)
(09-30-2019 11:14 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: Looks like you guys were not wrong to put all your eggs in the 2020 basket.
BUT...
I think we can win a lot of the remaining seven, including a tiny chance at being bowl eligible.
Saint Todd was 1-5 in 2006, ended up 7-5.
IF he changes his ultra-conservative offensive philosophy, Rice has an opportunity to win some games. But, from what I've seen for 18 games (2-16 for you Bailiff haters), I seriously doubt it.
