MID YEAR THOUGHTS

[apaladin]

We wait and wait and then the season goes by soooo fast. Already more than half-over. Here are a few of my thoughts:
Game by game:
North Greenville-some thought NG would be tough. They weren’t. It was over by the second quarter. Offense looked like it was really going to be fun to watch. Defense was dominant.
Clempson-Results were about as good as could be hoped for but it could have been a little better if we could have cashed in a couple more scoring oppotunitues. Going into the game did anyone think FU would outgain CU? Again the offense looked realky good and the defense held it’s own. Optimism was gaining speed.
ETSU- Good conference win, offense kinda took a step back and the defense played well again but gave up another huge play. Optimism still high.
CSU- Struggle is an understatement against a not so good team. Offense just coukdn’t get it together but did enough at the end to eek out the win. Defense played very well but proved once again it was vulnerable to the big play regardless the opponent. Optimism took a hit in this one.
Samford-A golden opportunity missed in this one. A very beatable ranked team we let get off the hook. Yes the call but good teams suck it up and we didn’t. For some unexplainable reason the defense went AWOL for the middle 2 quarters. Long enough to cost us the game. Offense played well enough to win but D did not. When it is all said and done the “Call” and subsequent disappearance of the D may cost a playoff bid.
Citadel-Always good to beat the dogs and its tough to do at their place. Offense struggled again putting points on the board but the defense was lights out except for giving up more big plays.
Mid-season grades:
Offense: C The reason is we’re just not scoring enough. Averaging just under 25 points again against FCS teams. Leaving a lot of points on the field. Still have not scored 30 points in a D1 game this year. The lack of big play capability is another negative as are the turnovers.
Defense-B this could have been a B+ or even A- except for the middle 2 quaters of the Samford game and the tendency to give up the big play. Defense has been solid against the run, even CU struggled to run the ball.
Overall-C+ the grade has dropped the last 3 games or at least 2 of the last 3. The CSU game should not have been such a struggle and I feel like we just blew the Samford game. I really believe Furman wins if they played again. Just wasn’t that impressed with SU.
Summary-So far the best word I can thnk of is potential. I believe like CCH said this team has not played it’s best football so far. Offense needs to put more points on the board and the defense needs to quit giving up big plays. Who knows if this team can reach it’s potential? A good place to start would be this Saturday. See y’all Saturday! Go ‘dins!

[The Jackal]

We've played some good football. We've also had some head scratching moments.

Our offense looks better and more consistent than it has the past few years. There is still a lot of potential there and it feels like we have a lot more to see in terms of explosiveness. It was good to see Roberto start to really take over the game Saturday. He's got that potential every week.

Hendrix has mentioned a few times that even though he's a grad student, Huff hasn't played a lot the last two seasons. It's still a new offensive system. Listening to his press conference, he is taking ownership of some of his recent turnovers and I think is a guy we will continue to see get better every week.

Defensively, I think we are solid. It is a solid unit on that side - we've got run stuffers, depth at all three levels, pass rushers, and a deep backfield. We limit the run, which is always a key component. Like you, the penchant for surrendering big plays in the passing game is the one major area of concern.

The schedule hasn't been easy to this point. Played 4 of 6 games on the road. Have already played in arguably two of the toughest SoCon road venues (Citadel and ETSU).

These next two games are critical for Furman and will probably make or break playoff aspirations.

[AstroDin]

Apaladin- CCH said pretty much the same thing.
Furman's best ball should be ahead.
I feel we're closer to a B minus than a C plus, but I can't argue with your grade.

Taking a more constructive approach—how does Furman raise its grade?

Maybe this is wishful thinking; my take is that the deeper this season goes, the better our offense will play. We're at the mid-season mark within Roper's first season at OC. Our players are also getting his system under their feet. One thing I hadn't thought about—Clay mentioned that this was Roper's first game plan against playing an option team in The Citadel. Clay also mentioned that Tyler has only played four and a half games in two years.

Furman's already been hit with the injury bug—we've worked through it. Not sure any other SoCon team has faced the injury-hit Furman had going into the Samford game.

Maybe the biggest positive of the Citadel game moving forward—is the running of Dominic Roberto. The punishing runs of Roberto against a stout defensive front are noteworthy.

[Paul C]

First 3 games: A-
Last 3 games: C-

So I guess I agree w Astro’s avg grade of B-

[The Jackal]

Apaladin- CCH said pretty much the same thing.
Furman's best ball should be ahead.
I feel we're closer to a B minus than a C plus, but I can't argue with your grade.

Taking a more constructive approach—how does Furman raise its grade?

Maybe this is wishful thinking; my take is that the deeper this season goes, the better our offense will play. We're at the mid-season mark within Roper's first season at OC. Our players are also getting his system under their feet. One thing I hadn't thought about—Clay mentioned that this was Roper's first game plan against playing an option team in The Citadel. Clay also mentioned that Tyler has only played four and a half games in two years.

Furman's already been hit with the injury bug—we've worked through it. Not sure any other SoCon team has faced the injury-hit Furman had going into the Samford game.

Maybe the biggest positive of the Citadel game moving forward—is the running of Dominic Roberto. The punishing runs of Roberto against a stout defensive front are noteworthy.

Hendrix's comments on the Citadel were interesting.

He said opponents average 54 plays against them. That's what Furman had on Saturday.

The playbook was condensed largely because the offense just isn't going to get that many plays. That's the nature of the opponent - a team focused heavily on possessing the ball.

It seemed like Huff's lack of running wasn't really to protect him, but more that the offense didn't seem like they needed it. We were having success running the ball with Roberto and Abrams against a stacked box with a 3 score lead. If you can run against that look, you don't necessarily need to get too creative offensively.

Even with a relative conservative game plan the second half, I thought you saw some creativity in the offensive play calling - the third down pass to Gissinger, the third down inside pitch, the "heavy" goal line package, the fake bubble/slip screen to Dean, etc.

Even limited in play calling options Saturday, I thought we showed more creativity in just a handful of plays than we did most of the last few seasons where it seemed like every pass was a slant, crossing route, or trying to find Ryan Miller.

[Furmanoid]

I imagine the OC was still figuring out what sets of plays work best when the season started. Then guys get hurt and those same plays no longer work, so you have to adjust and figure out what does. I hope we accept the fact that we can run the ball down people’s throats and just do it. We could throw 20 times a game and still win.

[AllTimeFU]

Apaladin- CCH said pretty much the same thing.
Furman's best ball should be ahead.
I feel we're closer to a B minus than a C plus, but I can't argue with your grade.

Taking a more constructive approach—how does Furman raise its grade?

Maybe this is wishful thinking; my take is that the deeper this season goes, the better our offense will play. We're at the mid-season mark within Roper's first season at OC. Our players are also getting his system under their feet. One thing I hadn't thought about—Clay mentioned that this was Roper's first game plan against playing an option team in The Citadel. Clay also mentioned that Tyler has only played four and a half games in two years.

Furman's already been hit with the injury bug—we've worked through it. Not sure any other SoCon team has faced the injury-hit Furman had going into the Samford game.

Maybe the biggest positive of the Citadel game moving forward—is the running of Dominic Roberto. The punishing runs of Roberto against a stout defensive front are noteworthy.

Hendrix's comments on the Citadel were interesting.

He said opponents average 54 plays against them. That's what Furman had on Saturday.

The playbook was condensed largely because the offense just isn't going to get that many plays. That's the nature of the opponent - a team focused heavily on possessing the ball.

It seemed like Huff's lack of running wasn't really to protect him, but more that the offense didn't seem like they needed it. We were having success running the ball with Roberto and Abrams against a stacked box with a 3 score lead. If you can run against that look, you don't necessarily need to get too creative offensively.

Even with a relative conservative game plan the second half, I thought you saw some creativity in the offensive play calling - the third down pass to Gissinger, the third down inside pitch, the "heavy" goal line package, the fake bubble/slip screen to Dean, etc.

Even limited in play calling options Saturday, I thought we showed more creativity in just a handful of plays than we did most of the last few seasons where it seemed like every pass was a slant, crossing route, or trying to find Ryan Miller.

Great points Jackal. Each one of the 4 plays you mentioned above made be go, "wow" when they were called and executed. All 4 of those were wrinkles we hadn't seen. By CCH comments it also sounded like we might have stayed in that heavy / wildcat look had we not scored on the first try.

You know the saying, "peak at the right time." I'm hopeful that's the track this team is on. They all agreed they haven't played their best football YET. As long as the yet doesn't result in an L in a game we should W then we may just peak at the right time! That's where my hope is at.

[Davemeister]

Taking a more constructive approach—how does Furman raise its grade?

Short answers:

Offense: Score more points. If you throw out our FBS and DII games, we are averaging about 26 points per game. We may need more to beat WCU this Saturday.

How do we do it? By becoming more aggressive. Throw the ball down the field. Stop settling for FG's when we need TD's. Stop punting on 4th & 1 in Enemy Territory or when we are behind in the 4th Quarter.

Defense: Tighten up.

How? TACKLE, TACKLE, TACKLE! And don't leave recievers wide open down field. Our tackling was much better against Citadel than it was vs. Samford, but there is still room for improvement.

Easier said than done? Maybe, but doable. I think we can raise our grade from B- to B+, maybe even A- in time for UT-C.

[apaladin]

Taking a more constructive approach—how does Furman raise its grade?

Short answers:

Offense: Score more points. If you throw out our FBS and DII games, we are averaging about 26 points per game. We may need more to beat WCU this Saturday.

How do we do it? By becoming more aggressive. Throw the ball down the field. Stop settling for FG's when we need TD's. Stop punting on 4th & 1 in Enemy Territory or when we are behind in the 4th Quarter.

Defense: Tighten up.

How? TACKLE, TACKLE, TACKLE! And don't leave recievers wide open down field. Our tackling was much better against Citadel than it was vs. Samford, but there is still room for improvement.

Easier said than done? Maybe, but doable. I think we can raise our grade from B- to B+, maybe even A- in time for UT-C.

Excellent Davemeister-totally agree and it is doable.

[apaladin]

I hope we accept the fact that we can run the ball down people’s throats and just do it. We could throw 20 times a game and still win.

Furmanoid, have to disagree. We have not shown the ability to tun the ball down people’s throats. We are averaging 165 yds rushing against D1 teams. We have topped the 200 yds in a game once,(216) against a bad CSU team. Even Saturday we only had 167 yds rushing and ran every play in thr second half. Not just FU but anyone has to be able to throw the ball effectively these days. Hoping Huff can get back on track and the offense can really become good at both running and passing. That is what its going to take

[The Jackal]

Taking a more constructive approach—how does Furman raise its grade?

Short answers:

Offense: Score more points. If you throw out our FBS and DII games, we are averaging about 26 points per game. We may need more to beat WCU this Saturday.

How do we do it? By becoming more aggressive. Throw the ball down the field. Stop settling for FG's when we need TD's. Stop punting on 4th & 1 in Enemy Territory or when we are behind in the 4th Quarter.

Defense: Tighten up.

How? TACKLE, TACKLE, TACKLE! And don't leave recievers wide open down field. Our tackling was much better against Citadel than it was vs. Samford, but there is still room for improvement.

Easier said than done? Maybe, but doable. I think we can raise our grade from B- to B+, maybe even A- in time for UT-C.

I think you'll have to see some more aggressiveness against WCU.

It made sense to punt the Citadel deep and force them to drive the field. I don't think that strategy makes as much sense against the Catamounts.

[Furmanoid]

I hope we accept the fact that we can run the ball down people’s throats and just do it. We could throw 20 times a game and still win.

Furmanoid, have to disagree. We have not shown the ability to tun the ball down people’s throats. We are averaging 165 yds rushing against D1 teams. We have topped the 200 yds in a game once,(216) against a bad CSU team. Even Saturday we only had 167 yds rushing and ran every play in thr second half. Not just FU but anyone has to be able to throw the ball effectively these days. Hoping Huff can get back on track and the offense can really become good at both running and passing. That is what its going to take

I’m pretty simple minded. We have a guy who’s only job is 3 yards and a cloud of dust. But he averages >5 yards per carry. 4 downs x 5 yards = 20 yds. Only need 10. Throw now and again just to keep them honest. The knock on long, run-heavy drives is that you usually get a stupid penalty that kills the drive. But we’re supposed to be smart.

The last good many years have kinda convinced me that if we need to rely on really good passing, we will be screwed most of the time. If we get a really good qb, he generally gets hurt. And we seem to have trouble recruiting wr’s who can get much separation which makes it even worse.

It would be awesome if we could throw down the field and complete anything, but I see too many wasted plays.

[FUBeAR]

I hope we accept the fact that we can run the ball down people’s throats and just do it. We could throw 20 times a game and still win.

Furmanoid, have to disagree. We have not shown the ability to tun the ball down people’s throats. We are averaging 165 yds rushing against D1 teams. We have topped the 200 yds in a game once,(216) against a bad CSU team. Even Saturday we only had 167 yds rushing and ran every play in thr second half. Not just FU but anyone has to be able to throw the ball effectively these days. Hoping Huff can get back on track and the offense can really become good at both running and passing. That is what its going to take

I’m pretty simple minded. We have a guy who’s only job is 3 yards and a cloud of dust. But he averages >5 yards per carry. 4 downs x 5 yards = 20 yds. Only need 10. Throw now and again just to keep them honest. The knock on long, run-heavy drives is that you usually get a stupid penalty that kills the drive. But we’re supposed to be smart.

The last good many years have kinda convinced me that if we need to rely on really good passing, we will be screwed most of the time. If we get a really good qb, he generally gets hurt. And we seem to have trouble recruiting wr’s who can get much separation which makes it even worse.

It would be awesome if we could throw down the field and complete anything, but I see too many wasted plays.

FUBeAR, also being exceptionally simple-minded, as a Coach, would not have enough creativity to come up with his own innovative ways of conducting his program, so he would copy, as nearly as possible, everything NDSU does.

Not too long ago - but long ago enough that he won’t be able to find it - FUBeAR did an analysis of NDSU’s run/pass mix.

Don’t remember exactly, but seem to recall that the Bison were usually above 70/30 Run/Pass…even while having 2 NFL 1st round QB’s manning that spot for them. Just checked…72/28 this year so far.

FU is currently 54/46.
FU is averaging 4.7 yds/attempt.
4.7 x 3 (downs) = 14.1 (FIRST DOWN PALADINS!)
Passing Yds/Attempt is higher…but netted 0 on the 63 incompletions…which brings additional “X and long” challenges, as we know
All this is compromised by Sacks counting as negative rushing yards…so we could do the math…but FUBeAR doesn’t feel like it.

Bottom Line …. Be like the Bison … RUN THE DANG BALL! … but, as the Bison also do to their opponents…cut their heart out with timely passes just as soon as they ‘commit’ to stopping the run.

[soconjohn]

I’ve been pleased with the defense...they have been solid all year except for the Samford game...but overall I’d have to give them an A-...The offense has been better than last year and the potential to do even more this season is higher this year than it was last year...the ceiling for last year was probably the Samford game, but every game this year the offense has been better...the thing that is troublesome, but something that I think is coming are lack of big plays...obviously the first two games were the best in terms of getting big plays, but since they have been hard to come by...I’ll give the offense a solid B so far through midway point of the season because they have been good for the most part...as far as the team goes, I’ll say B+...this team is very confident, too, which is also different from last year...most of all, I’ve enjoyed watching them play this year..,I am looking forward to see where this team ends up this season!

[The Jackal]

I hope we accept the fact that we can run the ball down people’s throats and just do it. We could throw 20 times a game and still win.

Furmanoid, have to disagree. We have not shown the ability to tun the ball down people’s throats. We are averaging 165 yds rushing against D1 teams. We have topped the 200 yds in a game once,(216) against a bad CSU team. Even Saturday we only had 167 yds rushing and ran every play in thr second half. Not just FU but anyone has to be able to throw the ball effectively these days. Hoping Huff can get back on track and the offense can really become good at both running and passing. That is what its going to take

I’m pretty simple minded. We have a guy who’s only job is 3 yards and a cloud of dust. But he averages >5 yards per carry. 4 downs x 5 yards = 20 yds. Only need 10. Throw now and again just to keep them honest. The knock on long, run-heavy drives is that you usually get a stupid penalty that kills the drive. But we’re supposed to be smart.

The last good many years have kinda convinced me that if we need to rely on really good passing, we will be screwed most of the time. If we get a really good qb, he generally gets hurt. And we seem to have trouble recruiting wr’s who can get much separation which makes it even worse.

It would be awesome if we could throw down the field and complete anything, but I see too many wasted plays.

FUBeAR, also being exceptionally simple-minded, as a Coach, would not have enough creativity to come up with his own innovative ways of conducting his program, so he would copy, as nearly as possible, everything NDSU does.

Not too long ago - but long ago enough that he won’t be able to find it - FUBeAR did an analysis of NDSU’s run/pass mix.

Don’t remember exactly, but seem to recall that the Bison were usually above 70/30 Run/Pass…even while having 2 NFL 1st round QB’s manning that spot for them. Just checked…72/28 this year so far.

FU is currently 54/46.
FU is averaging 4.7 yds/attempt.
4.7 x 3 (downs) = 14.1 (FIRST DOWN PALADINS!)
Passing Yds/Attempt is higher…but netted 0 on the 63 incompletions…which brings additional “X and long” challenges, as we know
All this is compromised by Sacks counting as negative rushing yards…so we could do the math…but FUBeAR doesn’t feel like it.

Bottom Line …. Be like the Bison … RUN THE DANG BALL! … but, as the Bison also do to their opponents…cut their heart out with timely passes just as soon as they ‘commit’ to stopping the run.

Furman, very Bison-esque, scored TD Saturday with three TEs on the field.

I've got no issue with the run game Saturday. Over half of Furman's plays were carries to Abrams and Roberto. That is, most of the game Furman was essentially running big backs between the tackles.

The Citadel knew it. Struggled to stop it.