One disturbing trend...

hammb · Post by **hammb** » Sun Oct 10, 2004 9:14 pm

I'm not going to harp on scheme or players here or players there. That's not what I want to talk about here.

However, even in the victory against CMU we gave up > 200 yards rushing on 41 carries for almost 5 ypc. My question is was this another methodical gashing like NIU & OU were able to do to us? Or did they just hit a couple big runs to skew the stats? I couldn't pick up the game down in Columbus, so I didn't hear it at all.

I just know that CMU does have a pretty good running game and, statistically, it doesn't look like we did a good job controlling it. Of course we won by 3 TDs, so we couldn't have done too awful against it

I'm just worried, because it can get difficult to win football games if you cannot stop the run, and it appears so far this year that we cannot stop the run. That could really haunt us throughout the season if we don't get it shored up.

orangeandbrown · Post by **orangeandbrown** » Sun Oct 10, 2004 9:17 pm

Others have certainly noticed that. Coach says its "bend but don't break," but I worry about playing better teams unable to stop the run. The difference with CMU (or a difference) was that they don't have a QB who can go over the top to a guy like Dan Shelton.

Warthog · Post by **Warthog** » Sun Oct 10, 2004 9:22 pm

It was more of the methodical type. The only long run I can remember was the 25 yard reverse for a TD. Actually, I never realized that CMU had that many yards and I listened to the whole game. It definitely was not like the OU or NIU contests. In those games, I was afraid every time they handed it off because it felt like they could go all the way at any time. Never felt like that yesterday. it felt more like we were playing the spread offense so we played for the pass. That allows them to pick up "cheap" rushing yards, but not yards that feel like that are putting a whooping on you. Kinda like we do on offense I guess.

Now here is where I try to put my positive spin of the defense. CMU was averaging like 410 yards of offense per game. We held them under their average, but a little. It's not a lot, but it does give me a little to be positive about.

bgmaggot00 · Post by **bgmaggot00** » Sun Oct 10, 2004 9:36 pm

I was at the game yesterday, and I have to agree that our run defense was just plain bad. There were a few key points where we made our stops on D, but they could pretty much run whenever, and wherever they wanted.

I believe that it is important to note that the score could have easily been much closer than it was. Both of our interceptions were on our near their endzone while they were driving, and they missed a FG as well. Factor in those potential 17 points, and all of a sudden its BG 38, CMU 31. Jeff

Falconfreak90 · Post by **Falconfreak90** » Sun Oct 10, 2004 9:47 pm

Basically, CMU's whole offense revolves around Seymour and I gotta tell ya...that kid can flat out run the ball. He is only about 5'7" but has such quickness that its hard to get a hand on him. He made some cuts yesterday that were Barry Sanderish...And CMU's O line is much better than I expected. Seymour doesn't lead the MAC in rushing by accident.

All I know is the D only gave up 14 points. Sure we picked off a pass in the end zone but Omar missed a wide open Steve Sanders on a sure TD pass as well. I don't buy the whole "If they would have done this it would have been much closer.....ect" stuff. Bottom line is keeping the opponent out of the endzone. CMU is a team with renewed vigor and Kelly will have them humming in no time. And it was their homecoming so the Chips were jacked up. Our D had some bad moments but allowed 14 points...and only 30 total in the last 2 games. Anyone else see Pitt beat Temple 27-22? They kept announcing the score at the game and for the longest time Temple led Pitt 16-6! Makes our 70-16 rout look even better.

BG took care of biz and did what I expected them to do...
Bring on the Cards!
GO FALCONS!!