Being a nondescript forgotten O lineman myself (nobody except yo mudda and yo fadda know you're down on the field playing), I was looking at the starting lineups for the dragons vs the owls on the O line.

The dragons from LT to RT were 6'8" 330, 6'3" 310, 6'2 305, 6'4" 320, and 6'4" 330. Three of these five were 5th year seniors from Junior Colleges, one was a senior (JC also) and the center was a reshirt junior (i.e. a senior). Second string line was younger, but only a few pounds lighter per man.

Such is the luxury of our opponents. ONE GUY (the center) entered as a freshman at UAB. No wonder they're so tough year in and out.

Another JC advantage is that you play every game, from the minute you arrive there as a freshman. No such thing as a redshirt. So you have two yrs playing experience as a starter, before you even transfer to a 4 yr college.

To their credit, it looks like the dragon second string O-line all came in as freshmen, except for one. Next yr there'll be 1 RS soph, 3 RS juniors, one RS senior (read that one junior, three seniors, one fifth yr, maturity wise). That's a mature O-line.

Kudos to our offense/defense on Saturday !!!! Dare I say we might have turned the corner in the Bloomgren era ? I thought we looked like a tough, capable team that refused to fold after being down 10 points. And still fairly young !

(10-03-2022 05:47 PM)Bigoldtackle Wrote:  Kudos to our offense/defense on Saturday !!!! Dare I say we might have turned the corner in the Bloomgren era ?

I'm going to have to see some consistency week in and week out before I'm willing to go that far. But it was at the very least encouraging.

(10-03-2022 04:30 PM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(10-03-2022 04:02 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  

(10-02-2022 12:54 PM)markbrindley Wrote:  I've been googling for posts of video of that play, and I can't find any. Usually if video proves the refs were wrong on a controversial call, that video goes up on Twitter etc, even for a non-marquee game.

https://www.espn.com/college-football/vi...=401426577

Bottom right video is the TD, but it's a terrible angle. Around the 25 second mark of the video is when Broussard is trying to extend the ball and it pops out. But two guys are in the way and it's tough to see if Broussard is down, and if he got the ball across the pylon.

My guess is no, but they didn't have the evidence to overturn the call (which was done by an official after the fact who really wasn't in position to see the play to begin with).

I agree it was a gift, but once the call was made the way it was, it's tough to overturn.

He was definitely not down. He was leaping. The only question is exactly when the ball came loose, and the camera view is no better than that of the refs. I don't see that as a "gift" unless the rules say benefit of the doubt goes to the defense.

We were both on the field in that end zone. David had the view down the goal line, and I was standing behind the in-line. David said he definitely did not part company with the ball until after the leap, and he believes that the leap crossed the plane. He said the only question to him was whether or not there was a knee down at such time as the ball crossed the plane, but that it did cross the plane, and it was in possession at such time. From my vantage pointI really couldn’t tell.

(10-03-2022 06:25 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(10-03-2022 05:47 PM)Bigoldtackle Wrote:  Kudos to our offense/defense on Saturday !!!! Dare I say we might have turned the corner in the Bloomgren era ?

I'm going to have to see some consistency week in and week out before I'm willing to go that far. But it was at the very least encouraging.

What I find somewhat reassuring about this team is that its current performance can't be explained by a fluke-y turnover or two, a huge overperformance by a player or two, one lucky play call, or some highly unusual talent that ended up in South Main for 1 year. This is pretty much the same personnel we had last year, and we're getting more unlucky than lucky on the fluke-y turnovers.

(10-03-2022 07:27 PM)Intellectual_Brutality Wrote:  

(10-03-2022 06:25 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(10-03-2022 05:47 PM)Bigoldtackle Wrote:  Kudos to our offense/defense on Saturday !!!! Dare I say we might have turned the corner in the Bloomgren era ?

I'm going to have to see some consistency week in and week out before I'm willing to go that far. But it was at the very least encouraging.

What I find somewhat reassuring about this team is that its current performance can't be explained by a fluke-y turnover or two, a huge overperformance by a player or two, one lucky play call, or some highly unusual talent that ended up in South Main for 1 year. This is pretty much the same personnel we had last year, and we're getting more unlucky than lucky on the fluke-y turnovers.

Agree. I think this yr we're playing much better. Still early, but it looks like we have some real talent developing on our (fairly young) team.

Obviously maturity is a BIG deal at the college level - from my own personal experience I can certainly vouch for that. That's why these colleges that raid the juco schools then redshirt the players when they come in - like UAB - wind up fielding a predominantly senior/5th yr squad. No wonder they have a competitive program year in and out. Beating them with our younger lineup was VERY encouraging !

A big plus this year is we have a kicking game and a consistent field gold kicker. Last year it was hit or miss when we try to kick a field gold.

(10-05-2022 07:51 PM)Bigoldtackle Wrote:  

(10-03-2022 07:27 PM)Intellectual_Brutality Wrote:  

(10-03-2022 06:25 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(10-03-2022 05:47 PM)Bigoldtackle Wrote:  Kudos to our offense/defense on Saturday !!!! Dare I say we might have turned the corner in the Bloomgren era ?

I'm going to have to see some consistency week in and week out before I'm willing to go that far. But it was at the very least encouraging.

What I find somewhat reassuring about this team is that its current performance can't be explained by a fluke-y turnover or two, a huge overperformance by a player or two, one lucky play call, or some highly unusual talent that ended up in South Main for 1 year. This is pretty much the same personnel we had last year, and we're getting more unlucky than lucky on the fluke-y turnovers.

Agree. I think this yr we're playing much better. Still early, but it looks like we have some real talent developing on our (fairly young) team.

Obviously maturity is a BIG deal at the college level - from my own personal experience I can certainly vouch for that. That's why these colleges that raid the juco schools then redshirt the players when they come in - like UAB - wind up fielding a predominantly senior/5th yr squad. No wonder they have a competitive program year in and out. Beating them with our younger lineup was VERY encouraging !

(10-05-2022 08:37 PM)Texasowl Wrote:  A big plus this year is we have a kicking game and a consistent field gold kicker. Last year it was hit or miss when we try to kick a field gold.

(10-05-2022 07:51 PM)Bigoldtackle Wrote:  

(10-03-2022 07:27 PM)Intellectual_Brutality Wrote:  

(10-03-2022 06:25 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(10-03-2022 05:47 PM)Bigoldtackle Wrote:  Kudos to our offense/defense on Saturday !!!! Dare I say we might have turned the corner in the Bloomgren era ?

I'm going to have to see some consistency week in and week out before I'm willing to go that far. But it was at the very least encouraging.

What I find somewhat reassuring about this team is that its current performance can't be explained by a fluke-y turnover or two, a huge overperformance by a player or two, one lucky play call, or some highly unusual talent that ended up in South Main for 1 year. This is pretty much the same personnel we had last year, and we're getting more unlucky than lucky on the fluke-y turnovers.

Agree. I think this yr we're playing much better. Still early, but it looks like we have some real talent developing on our (fairly young) team.

Obviously maturity is a BIG deal at the college level - from my own personal experience I can certainly vouch for that. That's why these colleges that raid the juco schools then redshirt the players when they come in - like UAB - wind up fielding a predominantly senior/5th yr squad. No wonder they have a competitive program year in and out. Beating them with our younger lineup was VERY encouraging !

Or two years ago when it was hit,hit,hit,hit, and miss
#QuadrupleDoink

(10-03-2022 07:27 PM)Intellectual_Brutality Wrote:  

(10-03-2022 06:25 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(10-03-2022 05:47 PM)Bigoldtackle Wrote:  Kudos to our offense/defense on Saturday !!!! Dare I say we might have turned the corner in the Bloomgren era ?

I'm going to have to see some consistency week in and week out before I'm willing to go that far. But it was at the very least encouraging.

What I find somewhat reassuring about this team is that its current performance can't be explained by a fluke-y turnover or two, a huge overperformance by a player or two, one lucky play call, or some highly unusual talent that ended up in South Main for 1 year. This is pretty much the same personnel we had last year, and we're getting more unlucky than lucky on the fluke-y turnovers.

It's a combination of a few things.

This is the deepest team Rice has had in a while, partly thanks to extra year of eligibility and grad transfers. The emergence of graduate transfer pipeline has been pleasantly decent for Rice under Bloomgren.

The OC is now in his second year and has finally been allowed to be more aggressive. While the intellectual brutality has not produced good results, we are physical and play hard. Once they found a dynamic QB and went with a more aggressive scheme featuring (or because of) good playmakers, being able to switch back to fullback sets became more fun and had a better success rate. The toss back run up the middle is no longer our feature play. UAB had an extra week to prep and contained us but I expect better in all remaining games.

QB is the most important position. McMahon hasn't been perfect but he's been really good at times. Seen him flash as much big/clutch play ability as Collins, Driphus, or McHargue. It makes a huge difference. Even if Green played well, he was still in a more limited offense as a more conservative, less durable, less mobile QB. The other not so small difference in personnel from last couple of years is the return of Rozner combined with the McCaffrey switch to WR. Any QB will benefit from our as deep as ever WR group.

The defense is allowing few of the usually common for Rice big plays or blown coverages. Brian Smith has coached several great defensive performances. This is his deepest squad. Being there for some time has brought continuity and improvement. I've posted about extending or keeping Smith before - I can see him getting offered a good NFL gig or a P5 DC job. No idea about his personality but he's somebody that's impressed me more than the HC. Same for the OC. We have 2 interesting candidates on staff, should Bloomgren have to be replaced for any reason.

The special teams has been quite solid, if unspectacular. I don't know what to criticize - think we botched a punt return or kickoff but kicker and punter have been reliable. The kick off returns have been the weakness, but not too terrible. Fresch may break a punt return soon. Return coverage is about as good as I've seen at Rice.

(10-06-2022 10:49 PM)Buho00 Wrote:  

(10-03-2022 07:27 PM)Intellectual_Brutality Wrote:  

(10-03-2022 06:25 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(10-03-2022 05:47 PM)Bigoldtackle Wrote:  Kudos to our offense/defense on Saturday !!!! Dare I say we might have turned the corner in the Bloomgren era ?

I'm going to have to see some consistency week in and week out before I'm willing to go that far. But it was at the very least encouraging.

What I find somewhat reassuring about this team is that its current performance can't be explained by a fluke-y turnover or two, a huge overperformance by a player or two, one lucky play call, or some highly unusual talent that ended up in South Main for 1 year. This is pretty much the same personnel we had last year, and we're getting more unlucky than lucky on the fluke-y turnovers.

It's a combination of a few things.

This is the deepest team Rice has had in a while, partly thanks to extra year of eligibility and grad transfers. The emergence of graduate transfer pipeline has been pleasantly decent for Rice under Bloomgren.

The OC is now in his second year and has finally been allowed to be more aggressive. While the intellectual brutality has not produced good results, we are physical and play hard. Once they found a dynamic QB and went with a more aggressive scheme featuring (or because of) good playmakers, being able to switch back to fullback sets became more fun and had a better success rate. The toss back run up the middle is no longer our feature play. UAB had an extra week to prep and contained us but I expect better in all remaining games.

QB is the most important position. McMahon hasn't been perfect but he's been really good at times. Seen him flash as much big/clutch play ability as Collins, Driphus, or McHargue. It makes a huge difference. Even if Green played well, he was still in a more limited offense as a more conservative, less durable, less mobile QB. The other not so small difference in personnel from last couple of years is the return of Rozner combined with the McCaffrey switch to WR. Any QB will benefit from our as deep as ever WR group.

The defense is allowing few of the usually common for Rice big plays or blown coverages. Brian Smith has coached several great defensive performances. This is his deepest squad. Being there for some time has brought continuity and improvement. I've posted about extending or keeping Smith before - I can see him getting offered a good NFL gig or a P5 DC job. No idea about his personality but he's somebody that's impressed me more than the HC. Same for the OC. We have 2 interesting candidates on staff, should Bloomgren have to be replaced for any reason.

The special teams has been quite solid, if unspectacular. I don't know what to criticize - think we botched a punt return or kickoff but kicker and punter have been reliable. The kick off returns have been the weakness, but not too terrible. Fresch may break a punt return soon. Return coverage is about as good as I've seen at Rice.

Excellent analysis.

On defense, in the first half we reverted to the old Rice pattern of hold them on first and second, give up the big play on third. But overall, I like the way we are playing.

Statistically, through five games we are allowing the opponents to convert on third 42.59% of the time. No idea how either the SoCal or McNeese games skew this, but I sure would like to get it lower.

We beat a physically superior team that had two weeks to prepare for their 'revenge,' and we came from behind to do it. That's a very encouraging sign. We will crush BYE.

(10-07-2022 03:20 PM)Ourland Wrote:  We will crush BYE.

I predict a 0-0 tie.

(10-07-2022 03:50 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(10-07-2022 03:20 PM)Ourland Wrote:  We will crush BYE.

I predict a 0-0 tie.

Tieing?! Tieing?! There’s no Tieing in Football!

(10-07-2022 10:35 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Statistically, through five games we are allowing the opponents to convert on third 42.59% of the time. No idea how either the SoCal or McNeese games skew this, but I sure would like to get it lower.

Not sure about anomalies from those or other games, but looks like 42.59% would rank about 85th.

(10-07-2022 05:01 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(10-07-2022 10:35 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Statistically, through five games we are allowing the opponents to convert on third 42.59% of the time. No idea how either the SoCal or McNeese games skew this, but I sure would like to get it lower.

Not sure about anomalies from those or other games, but looks like 42.59% would rank about 85th.

SoCal was 5-7, McNeese 1-10, so 6-17 together., so about average together.