(09-30-2019 09:11 AM)Gilesfan Wrote: Lets win this 13-7
Lol
I see us losing a lot of games the way we have lost the last three. The other team scores 21-24 (because even with a solid defense it is hard to hold teams below that) and we score less because we aren't a good enough team on offense to score more than that against anybody.
Also, I would be interested in seeing one of your famous statistical analyses on how our defense really compares to last year when you factor in the number of plays that our opponents are running. Visually the defense looks a lot better to me, but it is coming at the expense of the offense to an extent, and I wonder if the improvement is worth the sacrifice.
(This post was last modified: 09-30-2019 09:35 AM by Monarchblue.)
(09-30-2019 09:11 AM)Gilesfan Wrote: Lets win this 13-7
Lol
I see us losing a lot of games the way we have lost the last three. The other team scores 21-24 (because even with a solid defense it is hard to hold teams below that) and we score less because we aren't a good enough team on offense to score more than that against anybody.
Also, I would be interested in seeing one of your famous statistical analyses on how our defense really compares to last year when you factor in the number of plays that our opponents are running. Visually the defense looks a lot better to me, but it is coming at the expense of the offense to an extent, and I wonder if the improvement is worth the sacrifice.
I will take a look. I would guess the defense is much improved but the slow tempo is helping some.
I certainly let my emotions get the best of me on Saturday and said I would not be watching/following odu football until something changes. Sadly I am already looking forward to watching Saturday. Again getting my hopes up that we can win this game. Hopefully we get Lala and kumah back.
(09-30-2019 09:11 AM)Gilesfan Wrote: Lets win this 13-7
Lol
I see us losing a lot of games the way we have lost the last three. The other team scores 21-24 (because even with a solid defense it is hard to hold teams below that) and we score less because we aren't a good enough team on offense to score more than that against anybody.
Also, I would be interested in seeing one of your famous statistical analyses on how our defense really compares to last year when you factor in the number of plays that our opponents are running. Visually the defense looks a lot better to me, but it is coming at the expense of the offense to an extent, and I wonder if the improvement is worth the sacrifice.
The last time we gave up 7 points or fewer was in 2017 playing UMass, we won 17-7. That same year we also beat Charlotte 6-0. I think there was a rain that day or something weird. Both opponents were pretty bad.
My question is why are we saying the improvement in the defense is at the expense pd the offense? I dont think its that at all. I think we have a fairly crappy offense and are lucky to have a good defense. I dont think the defense is taking anything from the offense.
We also need Lala and Kumah to have anything remotely close to a competent offense.
(09-30-2019 09:54 AM)ODU2011 Wrote: I certainly let my emotions get the best of me on Saturday and said I would not be watching/following odu football until something changes. Sadly I am already looking forward to watching Saturday. Again getting my hopes up that we can win this game. Hopefully we get Lala and kumah back.
LOL you were well with in your frustration limits and some of us have been there and done it. In the end if you are a true fan/alum its not that easy to let go, after all you have blue in your DNA now. #ODU4Life
(09-30-2019 10:17 AM)Gilesfan Wrote: My question is why are we saying the improvement in the defense is at the expense pd the offense? I dont think its that at all. I think we have a fairly crappy offense and are lucky to have a good defense. I dont think the defense is taking anything from the offense.
We also need Lala and Kumah to have anything remotely close to a competent offense.
I say it is at the expense of the offense because I believe that the change to this new ball control offense is, at least in part, in place to help the defense. I think the risk averse nature of the offense is also helping the defense. I also believe after discussing the qb situation with someone close to the team that the choice to go with Smartt was made in conjunction with the decision to run a ball control, run heavy offense. I was told that their are absolutely QBs that can throw the ball a lot better than Smartt, but they can't run.
I don't think there is any doubt that TOP and risk aversion on the offensive side of the ball is yielding better results on the defensive side of the ball. I also think that to some extent, fewer possessions in the game are making the opposing offense's stats look less impressive. I don't, however, think fewer possessions accounts for all or even most of the defensive "improvement"
So I think there are three things at play:
1. The defense is much improved
2. The defense is benefiting from not being on the field for the vast majority of the game like they have been prior to this season, which is linked to the change in offensive scheme, which I think hurts the offensive production.
3. Opposing offensive stats are diminished due to fewer possessions/plays. Also due to the change in offensive scheme which I believe hurts offensive production.
(09-30-2019 10:17 AM)Gilesfan Wrote: My question is why are we saying the improvement in the defense is at the expense pd the offense? I dont think its that at all. I think we have a fairly crappy offense and are lucky to have a good defense. I dont think the defense is taking anything from the offense.
We also need Lala and Kumah to have anything remotely close to a competent offense.
I say it is at the expense of the offense because I believe that the change to this new ball control offense is, at least in part, in place to help the defense. I think the risk averse nature of the offense is also helping the defense. I also believe after discussing the qb situation with someone close to the team that the choice to go with Smartt was made in conjunction with the decision to run a ball control, run heavy offense. I was told that their are absolutely QBs that can throw the ball a lot better than Smartt, but they can't run.
I don't think there is any doubt that TOP and risk aversion on the offensive side of the ball is yielding better results on the defensive side of the ball. I also think that to some extent, fewer possessions in the game are making the opposing offense's stats look less impressive. I don't, however, think fewer possessions accounts for all or even most of the defensive "improvement"
So I think there are three things at play:
1. The defense is much improved
2. The defense is benefiting from not being on the field for the vast majority of the game like they have been prior to this season, which is linked to the change in offensive scheme, which I think hurts the offensive production.
3. Opposing offensive stats are diminished due to fewer possessions/plays. Also due to the change in offensive scheme which I believe hurts offensive production.
I don't know what game you were watching Saturday, but a less mobile, elusive QB than Smartt would have been sacked a dozen times. As it was, he went down 5. So it doesn't matter whether there are guys who are better throwers; until they get the OL fixed, you've got to go with Smartt. And, frankly, we don't know how much ability he has overall as a passer because the protection isn't there and the WRs have been inadequate.
(09-30-2019 10:17 AM)Gilesfan Wrote: My question is why are we saying the improvement in the defense is at the expense pd the offense? I dont think its that at all. I think we have a fairly crappy offense and are lucky to have a good defense. I dont think the defense is taking anything from the offense.
We also need Lala and Kumah to have anything remotely close to a competent offense.
I say it is at the expense of the offense because I believe that the change to this new ball control offense is, at least in part, in place to help the defense. I think the risk averse nature of the offense is also helping the defense. I also believe after discussing the qb situation with someone close to the team that the choice to go with Smartt was made in conjunction with the decision to run a ball control, run heavy offense. I was told that their are absolutely QBs that can throw the ball a lot better than Smartt, but they can't run.
I don't think there is any doubt that TOP and risk aversion on the offensive side of the ball is yielding better results on the defensive side of the ball. I also think that to some extent, fewer possessions in the game are making the opposing offense's stats look less impressive. I don't, however, think fewer possessions accounts for all or even most of the defensive "improvement"
So I think there are three things at play:
1. The defense is much improved
2. The defense is benefiting from not being on the field for the vast majority of the game like they have been prior to this season, which is linked to the change in offensive scheme, which I think hurts the offensive production.
3. Opposing offensive stats are diminished due to fewer possessions/plays. Also due to the change in offensive scheme which I believe hurts offensive production.
I don't know what game you were watching Saturday, but a less mobile, elusive QB than Smartt would have been sacked a dozen times. As it was, he went down 5. So it doesn't matter whether there are guys who are better throwers; until they get the OL fixed, you've got to go with Smartt. And, frankly, we don't know how much ability he has overall as a passer because the protection isn't there and the WRs have been inadequate.
I would argue that scheme, lack of pre-snap reads and slow progression lead to Smartt being pressured more than a more proficient passing QB in a more balanced or pass heavy scheme. The unwillingness to throw the ball more than 10 yards downfield, and the demonstrated lack of commitment to a passing game also allow the defense to pin its ears back on nearly every play. They aren't scared of the deep ball at all, so why not come after him?
We have seen this movie before. Last year everyone said we had to stick with SW because Larussa would get killed with our "terrible pass protection". As it turned out, Larussa was fine.
(09-30-2019 11:44 AM)bench jockey Wrote: That was with last year's line (no bargain but better than this one) and two NFL-worthy WRs. Apples, meet oranges.
I would say most likely without a throwing QB Fulgham wouldn't have got drafted. His junior year and the first 3 games of 2018 before switching QB were not good for him.
(09-30-2019 11:44 AM)bench jockey Wrote: That was with last year's line (no bargain but better than this one) and two NFL-worthy WRs. Apples, meet oranges.
So you are telling me that for the first 10 years of the program's existence we were able to perform at least adequately, and often much better, through the air, but this year all of a sudden we just ended up having a team full of players that can only be effective in a ground and pound offense? What the hell happened? Frankly, I'm not buying it. We may not have receivers that measure up to what we had last year, but last year was one out of 10. I have no doubt that if this team was committed to throwing the ball, the offense would be significantly better than it currently is, which is one of the worst offenses in the nation.
would not be shocked if we do not see Kumah take another snap as a monarch... I hear slight possibility of getting a red shirt and getting the hell out of Norfolk.. and i dont blame him
(09-30-2019 12:20 PM)Bean.O Wrote: would not be shocked if we do not see Kumah take another snap as a monarch... I hear slight possibility of getting a red shirt and getting the hell out of Norfolk.. and i dont blame him
I guess I really don't understand these new redshirt rules then. He's a grad transfer from tech, making him a senior this year and his last eligible year. So if he redshirts this year and transfers, he wouldn't have to sit out a year at his new destination?
(09-30-2019 12:20 PM)Bean.O Wrote: would not be shocked if we do not see Kumah take another snap as a monarch... I hear slight possibility of getting a red shirt and getting the hell out of Norfolk.. and i dont blame him
I guess I really don't understand these new redshirt rules then. He's a grad transfer from tech, making him a senior this year and his last eligible year. So if he redshirts this year and transfers, he wouldn't have to sit out a year at his new destination?
Very confusing. If i am being informed correctly, would most likely be a medical redshirt? Not too sure of the plausibility.. just what i have heard
(09-30-2019 12:20 PM)Bean.O Wrote: would not be shocked if we do not see Kumah take another snap as a monarch... I hear slight possibility of getting a red shirt and getting the hell out of Norfolk.. and i dont blame him
I guess I really don't understand these new redshirt rules then. He's a grad transfer from tech, making him a senior this year and his last eligible year. So if he redshirts this year and transfers, he wouldn't have to sit out a year at his new destination?
Very confusing. If i am being informed correctly, would most likely be a medical redshirt? Not too sure of the plausibility.. just what i have heard
Think he'd have to go FCS regardless of it being a redshirt or medical redshirt.
(This post was last modified: 09-30-2019 12:43 PM by Monarchist13.)
/
ODU vs WKU 10/5 FINAL: ODU 3, WKU 20
