Inaugural SEBO blowout

[Schadenfreude]

There are going to be some long Saturday afternoons and evenings without a second dimension to the offense. BC will eat BG alive if all we try to do is pass.

I think we will scare the hell out of Boston College, and possibly win.

Part of the reason is that they won't see us coming. This next game, against Western Kentucky, isn't a slam dunk. The Falcons need to do more that show up.

And I tend to think Boston College is at least a bit overrated and will be even more so when the Falcons head to Boston.

As far as the Falcon running game -- it would be nice to have it, but some of this stuff we hear television announcers say about the importance of an effective ground game strikes me as a bit cliche.

I didn't like the Falcons throwing deep twice on third and 1. I didn't mind throwing, but I didn't see the need to go for 15 cents when we only needed a penny.

[bgsufalcon24]

I almost get the feeling from watching the 4th quarter today, that we are able to run the ball well, we just choose not to for the most part. The coaching staff, and GB especially, like to throw the ball and get big chunks of yardage at once as opposed to grinding it out on the ground. We led the MAC in rushing last year, but that was mostly due to the fact that Anthony Turner wasn't a great passer. Tyler Sheehan has been so far this year, so we're passing instead of rushing.

[hammb]

I almost get the feeling from watching the 4th quarter today, that we are able to run the ball well, we just choose not to for the most part. The coaching staff, and GB especially, like to throw the ball and get big chunks of yardage at once as opposed to grinding it out on the ground. We led the MAC in rushing last year, but that was mostly due to the fact that Anthony Turner wasn't a great passer. Tyler Sheehan has been so far this year, so we're passing instead of rushing.

I agree that we have the talent on board to run, and we just refuse to do it.

It's asinine. Passing the ball on 3rd & 1 (the second was closer to a foot than a yard) against a soft rush defense is generally a bad idea. You invite the possibility of an errant throw, a dropped pass, etc when it need not be there. Tuck the ball in the gut of your halfback (or even Winovich) and let the line push for a freaking yard. You've got the best center in the MAC, and one of the best in the nation...get behind him and follow him for that freaking yard.

Passing consistently on 3rd & 1 (especially against a team like Temple) is a recipe for disaster. You're essentially giving the team a chance when they shouldn't have one.

I don't expect to run the ball much against BC, and I'm not sure we should try. When going against teams that have you out talented, the gimmick of our offense has a chance to be an equalizer. Against our conference foes, however, we should be running the ball when the situation warrants it, and we don't even do that. This, "We're a passing team, we don't like to run" nonsense is blatant stupidity. It can, has, and likely will again cost us games that we shouldn't lose.

[Flipper]

I just want us to get the fricking yard...you have a higher percentage on that if you just snap it count to one and throw a slant or if you just give it to Bullock and tell him to get behind Kory. Throwing 15 yards downfield is a tactical mistake....I guess I can see the logic if you''re thinking that you want defenses to think you're a threat to go downfield in any situation....but doing it twices seems like overkill when you consider the value it brings...heck, doing it once is overkill if all your trying to do is make a liitle point along with the first down.

But really...I don't want to turn this into some kind of rant...not after we finally played a home game like a home team should, with confidence and a bit of swagger

[hammb]

See, in both cases I don't think the 15 yarder was the first read. I'm pretty sure both plays had a short receiver that was the primary, but they were covered both times. The secondary ready was the deeper throw.

The second time I'm positive, and I think the first time it was the case as well, that Sheehan could've actually kept the ball and picked up the yard himself on the ground.

I just want to pick up the yard too, and when you're going against a mediocre run defense rushing it up the gut is generally the higher percentage play.

In the case of the play they ran I think they need to redesign it so the #2 read is Tyler tucking it himself, then the #3 read can be the deeper receiver if he doesn't think the run is there for him.

[BGGrad01]

Coach Brandon had a comment in the post game conference that Tyler missed Freddie underneath on the 3rd and 1 that was intercepted. Not sure if someone was missed on the first 3rd and 1 pass.

Either way, I would have liked to see us man up and run it down their throats.

[mmisbg]

The lack of rushing stats does not concern me. If we are a pass first team, I can handle that. What concerns me is that our passing game is spreading the ball around enough to keep teams honest, and yet our rushing plays are getting shut down. If we need to pass on 3rd and 1 to win, then we should do it. But, I'm not sure that our rushing plays are drawn up correctly. I don't think it is personell. I think it is X's and O's. I think that we are sweeping out too much, and not letting our RB's run through our offensive line. Of course, I think we would need to see a lot more of Bullock for that to happen.

Back to Temple. Their O-line is huge. They were pusing our defensive front around the entire first half. But, despite the size advantage, I think they were out of shape. You could see them with their hands on their hips huffing and puffing by the end of the 1st half, and they didn't recover in the locker room. Our defensive front was clearly better conditioned, and I think that helped us as much as any halftime adjustments that were made.

Once the 2nd half started, our defensive front had their running game shut down, and they were flushing Temple's QB out of the pocket. He's fairly mobile, but I don't think he throws well on the run.

Bottom line, it is a win against an east opponent, and it was not nearly as close as it looked. If this team can keep this up, I think we have a shot at a MAC title. I'd like them to beat BC, but I really don't care about that right now. It is time for that MAC title to come back to BG.

Go Falcons!

[Falconboy]

As I was sitting behind big ole Markray today at the game, I couldn't help but think it be nice to have huge mammoth at both LG/RG positions. I don't know if this is true or not but it has seemed that our O-line is the lightest it has ever been that I can remember. Our RG only goes 285 and the rest of them barely go 300lbs. I'm wondering if GB & Hillman are trying to get smaller lineman that can pass protect well but arn't big enough to really pound out the run like we need at times.

Then again the pass protection for Sheehan has been somewhat hit and miss these past 2 games.

[TG1996]

I wait all day to catch the game on DVR, watch a BG win, come on here for my first thread in 2 days and it's still not enough.

Even if we SHOULD run the ball more, can't you guys at least wait until Monday to bitch about it?

Roll along BG... win another while I'm gone, no matter what it takes.

[Jacobs4Heisman]

I'm not terribly concerned about the run/pass mix in general yet. A lot of our swing passes are basically runs. I'm concerned about not running the ball on consecutive 3rd and 1s. Just run the ball and get the yard. QB sneak it for all I care. Tyler's a big boy and Kory will get him the yard nine times out of 10.

Geter and Bullock ould be deadly if we mixed them in more on the QB read option. Sheehan has shown enough running ability to keep defenses honest on that play as well. It's been a staple of our offense ever since Brandon got here. Even Omar ran it 5-10 times a game. I'm not sure why it's been completely abandoned until junk time. Passing 50+ times a game is not going to be good when re run into a game like the mud bowl from last year. At some point, you're going to need to run the ball. I hope our staff realizes that before it's the third quarter of said game and we're down three scores.....

[bobio]

i agree that sheehan could have run for the yard had he thought of it. However, we shouldn't even be calling consistent pass plays on 3rd & 1, at least not against Temple. All in all a good offensive performance and a great second half for the D.

[Flipper]

On the INT I was right behind the play...it looked like h e locked onto the deeper route pretty quickly...I the safety broke so hard because he saw it like that....I missed the first thorw...my wife was pointing out some aspect of the Sebo Center...I don't remeber what...our conversations have begun to all run togehter...

Whatever...I think we can run, I think we will run...I laugh when I think back to last year when we all complained because all we did was run...

[JoeFalcon]

I don't expect to run the ball much against BC, and I'm not sure we should try. When going against teams that have you out talented, the gimmick of our offense has a chance to be an equalizer. Against our conference foes, however, we should be running the ball when the situation warrants it, and we don't even do that. This, "We're a passing team, we don't like to run" nonsense is blatant stupidity. It can, has, and likely will again cost us games that we shouldn't lose.

Exactly, it's not like this is LSU or even Michigan State. If we're not willing to run the ball against a weaker conference opponent, we never will.

Maybe they had Geter's early fumble on their mind, but you've still got your power back in Bullock and a Lombardi candidate at center like Flipper said.

[Rollo83]

What concerns me is that we line-up in an empty backfield 95% of the time. Every once in a while we bring Geter in motion and he stops in the backfield and stands next to Tyler and takes the handoff. How hard is that to defense when you know that the only time we run is from that formation?

We ran the spread with PJ Pope in the backfield on most plays. Couple of things must be happening:

* Geter must not be able to be used in pass protection like PJ was.

* When we go with an empty backfield Geter is split out as a reciver, TE is in for pass protecting, or five WR set is used.

* Bullock must not be able to catch the ball like PJ. Brandon must see him strickly as a between the tackles back.

[BGGrad01]

* Geter must not be able to be used in pass protection like PJ was.

* Bullock must not be able to catch the ball like PJ. Brandon must see him strickly as a between the tackles back.

PJ was fantastic in both of these areas. There was a game during his senior season where he didn't run the ball very often and he didn't catch many passes, but I thought he was the player of the game. I don't remember which game it was, but every single time the other team blitzed someone, PJ stopped them in their tracks, giving Omar time to get the ball to Chuck, Steve, and the others. It was awesome to watch him stuff the bigger D-linemen and LBs.

I think the article this past week in the Blade about Bullock confirms your suspicions about him not being comfortable running routes and catching the ball. This is only his second year, though. I am sure that he will grow into an effective blocker and pass catcher to go along with his ball carrying skills.