Ay-Ziggy-Zoomba.com

The last three years we’ve opened MAC play, all at home, and we’ve suffered three very tough losses, all by one score with a chance to win or tie it at the end. In 2008, Eastern Michigan scored a TD with :36 left and BG missed a long FG on the last play and lost 24-21 at home. In 2009, BG lost by 7 to Ohio (44-37) in game where we dropped a total of three would-be TD passes (two by Freddie Barnes) on drives that resulted in only 3 points instead of 14, with the final drop (that was at least a contested pass instead of the two where Barnes and Chris Wright were wide open and dropped them) coming on our last drive were we started 1st & 10 at the Ohio 22 with 1:40 left and went four & out when our 4th & 2 pass to Barnes fell incomplete. In that game we battled back from down 37-23 in the 4th quarter. Then this year, in a game where we fell behind 28-13 only to somehow storm back (thanks in part to Buffalo), we had a chance to win it on the last play with a centered FG with the wind at our back and missed it.

We’re now 2-6 in games decided by one score or less under Clawson, so obviously we’re “in” games but we’ve come up short in most of them. Also, in the last two seasons, we’ve played a “heavyweight” game right before our MAC opener (which has also been our MAC home opener) against Boise State in ’09 and Michigan in ’10. Could these games be falling at a bad time for us as we head into our “real” season? A quick look at our non-conference schedule for 2011 next year and we could see more of the same as we play at Idaho (9/3), then host Morgan State (9/10) & Wyoming (10/17) before traveling to West Virginia (10/1). It’s yet to be seen if 10/24 will be a bye week or our MAC opener.

I don't blame Clawson for the scheduling, as most of that was in place before he got here. I do find it a little alarming that we do have such a poor record in close games though.

I noticed that last season. We seem to struggle to make plays when we have opportunities to take control of games. Sometimes its excution and sometimes its bad play calling. Bottom line, there have been very winnable games that we come up short on. My other concern is the tackling on defense. I understand tackling is a physical tool dealing with size and strength, but it is also technique and mental focus. I just haven't seen any improvement on that end. I haven't been all that impressed with the team since the Troy game last year. That was an impressive performance. Since then we have beaten the really bad teams, but I haven't seen anything to indicate we are improving much.

BG has lost 3 in a row on homecoming. They have lost 5 straight on parent/family weekend as well. Those are both, sad, sad statistics.

We face Kent State on family weekend this year, the last time that happened they beat us 38-3, in 2006. If history repeats itself...well I don't even want to think about that.

Anybody know what our home record is since we installed the FieldTurf?

Warthog wrote:Anybody know what our home record is since we installed the FieldTurf?

9-9 at home since 2007. For comparison's sake, we were 4-5 at the Doyt in 2005-2006, and our only home losses in 2001 - 2004 were 2001 and 2003 to Miami.

Thanks MarkL.

I was trying to see if there was any correlation between the turf and our home record. After seeing Todd's aerial pics with the team practicing on the field something struck me.

When you have a real grass field, you don't practice on it. The field is like a special, sacred place reserved for use only during games. As a player, you develop this mental correlation about walking out and playing on that sacred ground as meaning something special.

With the turf, you are out there everyday practicing on it inside the stadium. Maybe you lose a little of that mental edge you have on game day as it feels just like every other day of practice.

Warthog wrote:Thanks MarkL.

I was trying to see if there was any correlation between the turf and our home record. After seeing Todd's aerial pics with the team practicing on the field something struck me.

When you have a real grass field, you don't practice on it. The field is like a special, sacred place reserved for use only during games. As a player, you develop this mental correlation about walking out and playing on that sacred ground as meaning something special.

With the turf, you are out there everyday practicing on it inside the stadium. Maybe you lose a little of that mental edge you have on game day as it feels just like every other day of practice.

Believe it or not, we are one of many schools that actually play and practice on different surfaces. There are numerous schools out there whose playing surface doesn’t match the main practice surface. I was down at Georgia, Auburn and Troy last month and even at those three, Georgia plays on grass and its practice fields are turf, Auburn plays on grass and it has both grass & turf practice field, and Troy plays on turf and practices on grass. I worked at Virginia and there they play on grass and practice on turf. As for the MAC, the entire conference plays on turf except for Temple. The thing is, with FieldTurf (and other replica-type brands), it really is a quality playing surface and it is MUCH different than the old AstroTurf surface such as what is in BG’s fieldhouse. AstroTurf was a great idea, just a bad product. FieldTurf was a better idea, and a far superior product.

The bottom line is, we aren’t losing anything because of our new playing surface now. In our last game on grass (or mud), we lost to Miami 9-7 in 2006 when our kicker missed a shot at a game-winning field goal when he ended up on his back after his plant foot slipped out. In our loss vs Buffalo in a similar situation, our kicker was still standing. FieldTurf at the Doyt was one of several great additions to the facility. While our grass looked good at times early in the season when we had it, there were games at the end up the year that we had sand out there. And that grass field had many, many uneven slopes and dips in it. If you ran on it from one end to the other, it was nothing like many other grass surfaces out there. Our field was more like a yard than a playing field. I'm not just talking about the crown, I couldn't believe how uneven it was in spots once you were on it. Now, it’s exactly up to speed with everyone else’s. While we my not have as nice of a stadium, we aren't behind anyone as far as a playing surface goes anymore.

BGSU33 wrote:

Warthog wrote:Thanks MarkL.

I was trying to see if there was any correlation between the turf and our home record. After seeing Todd's aerial pics with the team practicing on the field something struck me.

When you have a real grass field, you don't practice on it. The field is like a special, sacred place reserved for use only during games. As a player, you develop this mental correlation about walking out and playing on that sacred ground as meaning something special.

With the turf, you are out there everyday practicing on it inside the stadium. Maybe you lose a little of that mental edge you have on game day as it feels just like every other day of practice.

Believe it or not, we are one of many schools that actually play and practice on different surfaces. There are numerous schools out there whose playing surface doesn’t match the main practice surface. I was down at Georgia, Auburn and Troy last month and even at those three, Georgia plays on grass and its practice fields are turf, Auburn plays on grass and it has both grass & turf practice field, and Troy plays on turf and practices on grass. I worked at Virginia and there they play on grass and practice on turf. As for the MAC, the entire conference plays on turf except for Temple. The thing is, with FieldTurf (and other replica-type brands), it really is a quality playing surface and it is MUCH different than the old AstroTurf surface such as what is in BG’s fieldhouse. AstroTurf was a great idea, just a bad product. FieldTurf was a better idea, and a far superior product.

The bottom line is, we aren’t losing anything because of our new playing surface now. In our last game on grass (or mud), we lost to Miami 9-7 in 2006 when our kicker missed a shot at a game-winning field goal when he ended up on his back after his plant foot slipped out. In our loss vs Buffalo in a similar situation, our kicker was still standing. FieldTurf at the Doyt was one of several great additions to the facility. While our grass looked good at times early in the season when we had it, there were games at the end up the year that we had sand out there. And that grass field had many, many uneven slopes and dips in it. If you ran on it from one end to the other, it was nothing like many other grass surfaces out there. Our field was more like a yard than a playing field. I'm not just talking about the crown, I couldn't believe how uneven it was in spots once you were on it. Now, it’s exactly up to speed with everyone else’s. While we my not have as nice of a stadium, we aren't behind anyone as far as a playing surface goes anymore.

I believe the argument here isn't that turf is worse than grass, but rather that we now practice on this field all the time and it is perhaps more of a practice facility now than a game field. Clearly, the solution is to install this same surface outside as one of our practice fields. The others can remain grass. Then, the Doyt would just be a game stadium again.

footballguy51 wrote:I believe the argument here isn't that turf is worse than grass, but rather that we now practice on this field all the time and it is perhaps more of a practice facility now than a game field.

This is what I was trying to articulate. That practicing in Doyt Perry stadium takes away from the specialness of playing a game in Doyt Perry Stadium. Therefore you lose some of your mental edge and focus.

Warthog wrote:

footballguy51 wrote:I believe the argument here isn't that turf is worse than grass, but rather that we now practice on this field all the time and it is perhaps more of a practice facility now than a game field.

This is what I was trying to articulate. That practicing in Doyt Perry stadium takes away from the specialness of playing a game in Doyt Perry Stadium. Therefore you lose some of your mental edge and focus.

That thought had never crossed my mind but it does make complete sense. Though you would hope that the addition of fans in the stands would bring some of that "game day specialness" into the mix.

musicman2343 wrote:

Warthog wrote:

footballguy51 wrote:I believe the argument here isn't that turf is worse than grass, but rather that we now practice on this field all the time and it is perhaps more of a practice facility now than a game field.

This is what I was trying to articulate. That practicing in Doyt Perry stadium takes away from the specialness of playing a game in Doyt Perry Stadium. Therefore you lose some of your mental edge and focus.

That thought had never crossed my mind but it does make complete sense. Though you would hope that the addition of fans in the stands would bring some of that "game day specialness" into the mix.

In high school, we would have practice Monday-Thursday behind the school on the practice fields. On Fridays, we would hold our practice in the stadium and do a walk-through. The first game of the season, we FINALLY got to get inside that stadium. The coach gave us the speech about how our field was a sacred field, that setting foot on it was an honor, and that we needed to defend our home. It was exhilarating to finally get to play on that field. If we practiced there every day, I don't think we would have had the excitement to set foot out there, nor would we have felt as if it were truly a special place.