The Unofficial Furman Football Page

Well many of us early and throughout year lamented 4 things. Then a plus one. Soo.. merits a review

Penalties. Improved …we were running at 8/9 penalties a game early in year. Just horrible. By year end At ETSU and Mercer it was 4 penalties and 3. Much better. Strong improvement here.

TURNOVERS. Hmm. We do seem to finally create some. Vs CSU it was negative 4. Being 4 for us. None for them. Lately we create some and get some. 3 vs ETSU. 4 today. But we still give it away too much on our side. Must improve at eliminating our mistakes. Listened to 97.7 some and they were big in this as offseason emphasis

ABILITY TO RUN. we never really found a run game. Just strange for me - and tough - as a Furman fan. I love tough Furman running. And the resulting play action! A glimpse of promise with Gavin Hall at times. But even today (I know Mercer is probably best front 7 in conference ) we ran 27 times for 73 yards. A 2.7 yard average. Compare that to Mercer. They went 48 rushes for 213. 4.8 per carry. That’s a playoff stat right there

Ability to stop the run. Never really got this. Last three opponents - including a weak offense Wofford team - all ran for more than 4 yards per carry throughout the game.

Snaps improved. How could they not. That’s good.

Gotta stop giving the ball away and start winning more LOS battles. Just can’t win long term getting 1.8 yards per carry and allowing 4.7 yards per carry

—————

Passing game was good. Interesting theme. In all of our last three games we did well and passed for over 200 yards but just got whipped in the run game.

FU failed to get to 1,000 yds rushing on the season for the first time ever as a scholarship program. Final tally was 990 so almost. Fu failed to have a single game where they rushed for 200 yds. VMI game was close at 195. Used to 200 yds was a low water mark for a FU team. 5 of 7 SoCon games FU rushed for under 75 yds. 3 under 55 yds. FU had ONE run all year that went for 20 or more yards, Hall’s 46 yarder against VMI.

apaladin wrote: ↑

Sat Nov 23, 2024 9:12 pm

FU failed to get to 1,000 yds rushing on the season for the first time ever as a scholarship program. Final tally was 990 so almost. Fu failed to have a single where they rushed for 200 yds. VMI was close at 195. Used to 200 yds was a low water mark for a FU team. 5 of 7 SoCon games FU rushed for under 75 yds. 3 under 55 yds.
had ONE run all year that went for 20 or more yards, Hall’s 46 yarder against VMI.

Just. WOW. That’s HORRIBLE

"FU failed to get to 1,000 yds rushing on the season for the first time ever as a scholarship program."

No question this year was probably the worst ground game most have witnessed, but I suspect if they'd had a chance to play an 11th game they may well have picked up another 10 yards or so rushing.

Stosh wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 24, 2024 4:53 am

"FU failed to get to 1,000 yds rushing on the season for the first time ever as a scholarship program."

No question this year was probably the worst ground game most have witnessed, but I suspect if they'd had a chance to play an 11th game they may well have picked up another 10 yards or so rushing.

“…but I suspect if they’d had a chance to play an 11th game …”? Please be aware that they did play 11 games this season. Yesterday WAS the 11th. We would have had 12 were it not for Helene.

2024 Epitaph: We couldn't run and we couldn't stop the run.

Davemeister wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 24, 2024 11:06 am

2024 Epitaph: We couldn't run and we couldn't stop the run.

2024 Epitaph 2- we didn’t pass well and we couldn’t stop the pass.

One of the most disappointing things this year was not seemingly developing OL depth. There were many games we were truly out of that our 3 freshmen linemen could have gotten some reps in. I'm not sure if there is some sort of CCH loyalty to the older guys they asked to come back or what. But, this was definitely a year to get more reps for the second team OL. I haven't looked it up, but I would bet the 3 freshmen linemen didn't get 20 snaps combined in the entire season. This was a bit of an unusual season in that we made it through the year, thankfully, without significant injuries on the OL which in normal seasons does help develop depth.

Additionally, why did we flounder with making a move at C to someone that could reliably snap? We suffered through at least 3 games of snap issues. You saw on Saturday 2 centers come in with snaps on the money.

Here's to 2025!

I suspect that the coaching staff had zero reason not to play the best available player at a position.

The only caveat to that being the need to redshirt players, especially those that play the critical spots on both sides of the line.

I suspect that if the coaching staff was not constantly mixing up the offensive linemen this season, it may have been because the staff did not feel that the OL was the primary problem. Remember, we were young in the backfield, young at TE, young at receiver too.

The Jackal wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 25, 2024 2:11 pm

I suspect that the coaching staff had zero reason not to play the best available player at a position.

The only caveat to that being the need to redshirt players, especially those that play the critical spots on both sides of the line.

I suspect that if the coaching staff was not constantly mixing up the offensive linemen this season, it may have been because the staff did not feel that the OL was the primary problem. Remember, we were young in the backfield, young at TE, young at receiver too.

And QB. Look at that play that Mercer goes to house with when it was a 14-10 game. That play is perfectly designed and pefectly blocked and 8 just brain farts and ... 6 the other way.

The story of this season was the youth and the chaos it often wrought.

And on the "didn't pass it well" It was not great but it was not terrible. 8 also had the fourth best QBR i the SoCon, 2nd in the league in TD passes. completed over 60%, and did it with a pretty young set of WR. Something to build on there.

While some of the picks were catastrophic, it was more the QB fumbles on broken plays where he just should have taken the L and gone on to the next down. Arguably, those were the difference at VMI (fumble returned to 4 for easy TD) and Chas. So. (fumble on 1st and Goal). Those TWO PLAYS don't happen, we are probably 5-6 and while it is still a losing season the complexion of it is very different, as we have a winning record and finish in the top half of the league.

The Jackal wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 25, 2024 2:11 pm

I suspect that the coaching staff had zero reason not to play the best available player at a position.

The only caveat to that being the need to redshirt players, especially those that play the critical spots on both sides of the line.

I suspect that if the coaching staff was not constantly mixing up the offensive linemen this season, it may have been because the staff did not feel that the OL was the primary problem. Remember, we were young in the backfield, young at TE, young at receiver too.

I'm not sure I agree with the "zero reason not to player at a position." If we are a development program then you get guys in to develop. Especially, in games that allowed player development. We had quite a few of those.

Davemeister wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 24, 2024 11:06 am

2024 Epitaph: We couldn't run and we couldn't stop the run.

It’s that simple

FUATT wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 25, 2024 3:44 pm

The Jackal wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 25, 2024 2:11 pm

I suspect that the coaching staff had zero reason not to play the best available player at a position.

The only caveat to that being the need to redshirt players, especially those that play the critical spots on both sides of the line.

I suspect that if the coaching staff was not constantly mixing up the offensive linemen this season, it may have been because the staff did not feel that the OL was the primary problem. Remember, we were young in the backfield, young at TE, young at receiver too.

And QB. Look at that play that Mercer goes to house with when it was a 14-10 game. That play is perfectly designed and pefectly blocked and 8 just brain farts and ... 6 the other way.

The story of this season was the youth and the chaos it often wrought.

And on the "didn't pass it well" It was not great but it was not terrible. 8 also had the fourth best QBR i the SoCon, 2nd in the league in TD passes. completed over 60%, and did it with a pretty young set of WR. Something to build on there.

While some of the picks were catastrophic, it was more the QB fumbles on broken plays where he just should have taken the L and gone on to the next down. Arguably, those were the difference at VMI (fumble returned to 4 for easy TD) and Chas. So. (fumble on 1st and Goal). Those TWO PLAYS don't happen, we are probably 5-6 and while it is still a losing season the complexion of it is very different, as we have a winning record and finish in the top half of the league.

Taking care of the football cost us dearly in a number of games.

In my view, we probably should have ended up about a .500 team with a bit more luck. We won three. We should have won the Charleston Southern and VMI games. Not great, but we probably weren't quite as bad as the record suggested.

The Jackal wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 26, 2024 11:39 am

[Taking care of the football cost us dearly in a number of games.

Clemson Legend Coach Danny Ford used to say: "The best thing a QB can do is NOT lose the game for you." He was talking about turnovers.

Davemeister wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 26, 2024 1:42 pm

The Jackal wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 26, 2024 11:39 am

[Taking care of the football cost us dearly in a number of games.

Clemson Legend Coach Danny Ford used to say: "The best thing a QB can do is NOT lose the game for you." He was talking about turnovers.

That works when you have a great running game and an elite defense!