Win-loss

[FUBeAR]

If we can win the first one, we win them all.

CAN we win the first one?? It is NOT 100% impossible, so, yes, we can. It will be tough. It will be against the odds. But it IS possible.

Jackal, what does "RPO" stand for?

RPO = Illegal Receivers Downfield

I’ll let Jackal provide the real answer, but mine is true.

[PaladinDad]

Ive always been a big fan of RPO's. Even if you hand it off the wideouts have run the db's 10-15 yds down field so they give little to no run support. I also like the Sission kid alot. I think he has a chance to be the guy in 2019 for sure.

[apaladin]

If we can win the first one, we win them all.

CAN we win the first one?? It is NOT 100% impossible, so, yes, we can. It will be tough. It will be against the odds. But it IS possible.

Jackal, what does "RPO" stand for?

It's a band. You never heard of RPO Speedwagon?

[The Jackal]

If we can win the first one, we win them all.

CAN we win the first one?? It is NOT 100% impossible, so, yes, we can. It will be tough. It will be against the odds. But it IS possible.

Jackal, what does "RPO" stand for?

Run-Pass-Option

This is above my pay grade, but effectively it is a type of play where an offense will isolate a single defender and then either run or pass depending on that player's reaction. QB will turn to make a handoff, read the defender, and then either pull it and throw behind him or let the RB take it. The QB essentially forces the defense to "be wrong" in whatever they decide to do.

A good number of college teams have implemented a lot of it into their playbooks. It was also a heavy part of the Philadelphia Eagles offense this past season. This is actually a pretty good crash course recently posted by Doug Pederson by NFL Films (

There is sort of a cutting edge aspect of this type of play where teams are implementing these concepts into "pitch option" looks. I cannot be certain, but I believe Furman was implementing elements of this, especially late in the season. On the long TD play to Schumpert against Elon in the playoffs, it certainly looks like Blazejowski had the option of either running it himself, pitching to Morehead, or throwing it to Schumpert based on what the isolated safety decided to do. I'm not saying that play is indefensible, but it isn't going to be easy to stop.

[fufanatic]

Hard to make much of a prediction without knowing how the QB play will be, but assuming it's at least adequate and improved play elsewhere helps offset any loss at the position in experience or talent from Blaze graduating, I would think somewhere between 7-4 and 9-2 and playoffs seem fair and certainly realistic. Really think we need to win that Elon game ... while we proved last year you can start rough and still have a successful season, I don't want to risk it two seasons in a row. 0-2 puts you in a tough spot to start the year. @ Citadel and @ Mercer look challenging on the road. Would be disappointing to lose a home game, but tough slate so you never know. Western, Wofford and Samford back-to-back is no picnic.

Personal opinion here.

This offense deemphasizes the QB significantly more than other offenses. Samford, for instance, runs their entire offense through Devlin Hodges. Furman really needs more of a "game manager" type and not a guy out there making highlight reel plays every day.

Just look at the maturation of Blazejowski in a single season under this new coaching staff. He went from an athletic and gifted QB who was often very careless with the ball to playing a mobile-yet-controlled style where he was asked to protect the ball, make high percentage throws, and do his job (which often includes carrying out fakes).

I saw this on Twitter yesterday, actually. It purports to be Hamp Sisson, working on RPO throws this summer. That's what, a 25 yard flat footed throw on a dime? The fact that he is working on RPOs also suggests that you may see some new wrinkles in a George Quarles offense, as he relied heavily on RPO at Maryville.

Long story short, good OL play and a strong running game is going to make most QBs look pretty good. I expect we will have the former, which will by default help the running game, and subsequently the QB. You have two veteran options this season that have been in the "system" now for two years. You have a couple of really talented freshmen that could compete. If we ran Samford's offense, I'd be a little concerned. With our offense, I think there is going to be plenty of talent surrounding whomever is QB we shouldn't notice too much of a hiccup.

I understand what you're saying and agree for the most part, but at the end of the day a championship team is going to have to have a QB that can make plays at some point. Even if that's just knowing when to pitch and when to keep. Or hitting that receiver down the field in crunch time. Not every player can do that. They just can't. So while I think we can be successful (7-4ish) with an average QB, if we want to be 9-2 and heading to the playoffs as a high seed, average at the QB position isn't going to get it done in my opinion. Unless the defense turns into the Ravens or Bucs from the early 2000s. We could very well have that QB on the roster. I like the bios of a lot of the guys so I'm certainly hopeful. I just have no clue and I don't think anyone knows except for maybe the coaches.

[Jasper]

Hard to make much of a prediction without knowing how the QB play will be, but assuming it's at least adequate and improved play elsewhere helps offset any loss at the position in experience or talent from Blaze graduating, I would think somewhere between 7-4 and 9-2 and playoffs seem fair and certainly realistic. Really think we need to win that Elon game ... while we proved last year you can start rough and still have a successful season, I don't want to risk it two seasons in a row. 0-2 puts you in a tough spot to start the year. @ Citadel and @ Mercer look challenging on the road. Would be disappointing to lose a home game, but tough slate so you never know. Western, Wofford and Samford back-to-back is no picnic.

Personal opinion here.

This offense deemphasizes the QB significantly more than other offenses. Samford, for instance, runs their entire offense through Devlin Hodges. Furman really needs more of a "game manager" type and not a guy out there making highlight reel plays every day.

Just look at the maturation of Blazejowski in a single season under this new coaching staff. He went from an athletic and gifted QB who was often very careless with the ball to playing a mobile-yet-controlled style where he was asked to protect the ball, make high percentage throws, and do his job (which often includes carrying out fakes).

I saw this on Twitter yesterday, actually. It purports to be Hamp Sisson, working on RPO throws this summer. That's what, a 25 yard flat footed throw on a dime? The fact that he is working on RPOs also suggests that you may see some new wrinkles in a George Quarles offense, as he relied heavily on RPO at Maryville.

Long story short, good OL play and a strong running game is going to make most QBs look pretty good. I expect we will have the former, which will by default help the running game, and subsequently the QB. You have two veteran options this season that have been in the "system" now for two years. You have a couple of really talented freshmen that could compete. If we ran Samford's offense, I'd be a little concerned. With our offense, I think there is going to be plenty of talent surrounding whomever is QB we shouldn't notice too much of a hiccup.

I understand what you're saying and agree for the most part, but at the end of the day a championship team is going to have to have a QB that can make plays at some point. Even if that's just knowing when to pitch and when to keep. Or hitting that receiver down the field in crunch time. Not every player can do that. They just can't. So while I think we can be successful (7-4ish) with an average QB, if we want to be 9-2 and heading to the playoffs as a high seed, average at the QB position isn't going to get it done in my opinion. Unless the defense turns into the Ravens or Bucs from the early 2000s. We could very well have that QB on the roster. I like the bios of a lot of the guys so I'm certainly hopeful. I just have no clue and I don't think anyone knows except for maybe the coaches.

I think there is a lot to be said for both points of view. I think Blaze did a great job as a game manager last season and as a result we had a very formidable offense. This offense can function very well with the kind of performance he turned in. However, I have the feeling that if the QB himself is much more of a threat - especially as a creative, illusive runner - the entire offense would move to a new level. CCH made it clear that just getting to the playoffs is not his goal. He wants FU to go deep into them and that will require more than good game management from the QB position. Nothing breaks a defense's heart like having a QB evade a great rush or coverage while scrambling around until a receiver breaks loose or even taking off on an ankle breaking run that gets to the house. Although I have no idea what his name is, I have a sense that kid may well be on the roster this year. I saw some good things from the 2 lead QB's in the spring game and am impressed with the athleticism of the QB's coming in. I don't believe we will suffer a drop off in the position at all and depending on whether the QB play is simply adequate or dynamic, I can see anywhere from 7-4 to 10-1.

[The Jackal]

Hard to make much of a prediction without knowing how the QB play will be, but assuming it's at least adequate and improved play elsewhere helps offset any loss at the position in experience or talent from Blaze graduating, I would think somewhere between 7-4 and 9-2 and playoffs seem fair and certainly realistic. Really think we need to win that Elon game ... while we proved last year you can start rough and still have a successful season, I don't want to risk it two seasons in a row. 0-2 puts you in a tough spot to start the year. @ Citadel and @ Mercer look challenging on the road. Would be disappointing to lose a home game, but tough slate so you never know. Western, Wofford and Samford back-to-back is no picnic.

Personal opinion here.

This offense deemphasizes the QB significantly more than other offenses. Samford, for instance, runs their entire offense through Devlin Hodges. Furman really needs more of a "game manager" type and not a guy out there making highlight reel plays every day.

Just look at the maturation of Blazejowski in a single season under this new coaching staff. He went from an athletic and gifted QB who was often very careless with the ball to playing a mobile-yet-controlled style where he was asked to protect the ball, make high percentage throws, and do his job (which often includes carrying out fakes).

I saw this on Twitter yesterday, actually. It purports to be Hamp Sisson, working on RPO throws this summer. That's what, a 25 yard flat footed throw on a dime? The fact that he is working on RPOs also suggests that you may see some new wrinkles in a George Quarles offense, as he relied heavily on RPO at Maryville.

Long story short, good OL play and a strong running game is going to make most QBs look pretty good. I expect we will have the former, which will by default help the running game, and subsequently the QB. You have two veteran options this season that have been in the "system" now for two years. You have a couple of really talented freshmen that could compete. If we ran Samford's offense, I'd be a little concerned. With our offense, I think there is going to be plenty of talent surrounding whomever is QB we shouldn't notice too much of a hiccup.

I understand what you're saying and agree for the most part, but at the end of the day a championship team is going to have to have a QB that can make plays at some point. Even if that's just knowing when to pitch and when to keep. Or hitting that receiver down the field in crunch time. Not every player can do that. They just can't. So while I think we can be successful (7-4ish) with an average QB, if we want to be 9-2 and heading to the playoffs as a high seed, average at the QB position isn't going to get it done in my opinion. Unless the defense turns into the Ravens or Bucs from the early 2000s. We could very well have that QB on the roster. I like the bios of a lot of the guys so I'm certainly hopeful. I just have no clue and I don't think anyone knows except for maybe the coaches.

I think there is a lot to be said for both points of view. I think Blaze did a great job as a game manager last season and as a result we had a very formidable offense. This offense can function very well with the kind of performance he turned in. However, I have the feeling that if the QB himself is much more of a threat - especially as a creative, illusive runner - the entire offense would move to a new level. CCH made it clear that just getting to the playoffs is not his goal. He wants FU to go deep into them and that will require more than good game management from the QB position. Nothing breaks a defense's heart like having a QB evade a great rush or coverage while scrambling around until a receiver breaks loose or even taking off on an ankle breaking run that gets to the house. Although I have no idea what his name is, I have a sense that kid may well be on the roster this year. I saw some good things from the 2 lead QB's in the spring game and am impressed with the athleticism of the QB's coming in. I don't believe we will suffer a drop off in the position at all and depending on whether the QB play is simply adequate or dynamic, I can see anywhere from 7-4 to 10-1.

We know that the new QB is going to be relatively untested. Harris Roberts has some mop up duty, JeMar Lincoln has a year in the system and has been on the sidelines calling plays, and the other two guys aren't even on campus yet.

Going for them, though, is we know they are probably going to benefit from a good offensive line. We lost two good ones, but return a ton of depth up front. We know they'll have a strong running game led by Dirks and Morehead. We know they'll have guys to throw to and, perhaps, the most athletically gifted group of receivers we've had in a long while. I also think there will be some big and athletic options in the TE game as well.

So, there will be a lot of help there. Both returning guys looked good in spring practice and throw the ball well. It wouldn't really surprise me if we featured both of them. I mean, Hendrix in year 1 certainly showed he was willing to get creative with personnel and move guys around out there. While I do not normally like 2 QB systems, Furman is a team that could probably pull it off.

[apaladin]

FWIW I heard that season ticket sales are way ahead of expectations this year. Schmidt will be hard to replace. Who is the projected starter in this key position.

[The Jackal]

FWIW I heard that season ticket sales are way ahead of expectations this year. Schmidt will be hard to replace. Who is the projected starter in this key position.

Cole Neely was the primary backup to Schmidt last season, and played in 6 games as a true freshman. There are two other guys listed as centers on the roster: Breedlove and Bockhorst. I think Bockhorst missed last season with injury and Breedlove played as a reserve mostly at guard. Auer is going to play a bunch, but may be more of a "swing" player, deployed all across the line.

Probably also worth noting that Neely would have gotten the primary reps with the backup Qbs last year (this year's likely starter). That's not insignificant as he likely has the most work with the guys getting the snaps this season.

[The Jackal]

I may be reading this wrong, but it looks like Massey predicts us to be 9-2 with a squeaker loss to Elon.

https://www.masseyratings.com/team.php?t=2800&s=300937

[Flagman]

I may be reading this wrong, but it looks like Massey predicts us to be 9-2 with a squeaker loss to Elon.

https://www.masseyratings.com/team.php?t=2800&s=300937

If we're in a sqeeker with Elon, my money is on the Paladins.

[Jasper]

As usual, from my read, you have it right, Jackal. They have us opening 0-2 and then winning 9 straight. Will you take it? I think we beat Elon but I am concerned about Samford in a close one. But that is all contingent on a stable QB situation - which we will have a better handle on in a about a month. I expect a lot of maturity on both sides of the ball in the second year of the program.

[The Jackal]

As usual, from my read, you have it right, Jackal. They have us opening 0-2 and then winning 9 straight. Will you take it? I think we beat Elon but I am concerned about Samford in a close one. But that is all contingent on a stable QB situation - which we will have a better handle on in a about a month. I expect a lot of maturity on both sides of the ball in the second year of the program.

Samford is a hard team to predict. They return arguably the best player in the conference on both sides of the ball, but lost a lot of folks on defense. In years past, no big whoop because Samford doesn't play defense. Last year they did, though, and it made the difference between winning and losing a lot of close ball games.

They had a season a lot like Wofford's. Didn't blow many teams out, but consistently won close ball games.

[apaladin]

I may be reading this wrong, but it looks like Massey predicts us to be 9-2 with a squeaker loss to Elon.

https://www.masseyratings.com/team.php?t=2800&s=300937

I don't know if I could take this if he is right. Too many close down to the wire games.

[The Jackal]

I may be reading this wrong, but it looks like Massey predicts us to be 9-2 with a squeaker loss to Elon.

https://www.masseyratings.com/team.php?t=2800&s=300937

I don't know if I could take this if he is right. Too many close down to the wire games.

I expect we'll see a bunch of close games. If you like comfy wins, you might want to sit this season out.