MAC Power Rankings

MACReport · Post by **MACReport** » Tue Sep 25, 2007 10:05 am

MAC Report Online feature writer, Brian Golden, has a new weekly MAC power rankings feature, "The Golden Standards," where he gives his thoughts on who's up and who's down in the MAC each week.

Check out the first installment of Brian's new weekly column here:
http://www.macreportonline.com/index.ph ... KINGS.html

The Niz · Post by **The Niz** » Tue Sep 25, 2007 10:17 am

The douche is constantly referring to every team on the list having a monstrously bad loss. I don't seem to recall where ours was or who it was to.

moneymaker02 · Post by **moneymaker02** » Tue Sep 25, 2007 10:17 am

my how things have changed, 5-6 are in the east. when i was at school it was all about the powerhouse of the west.

Dayons_Den · Post by **Dayons_Den** » Tue Sep 25, 2007 10:25 am

The big question mark is the offensive line; BG has surrendered 9 sacks and isn’t opening holes for the backs (3.3 ypc).

Fifth year seniors, one of which has started every game in his collegiate career, dubbed "The Blocks of Granite" are definitely not a question mark at all.

This is an example of a "reporter" or more aptly a "writer" examining the stats and coming to a conclusion rather than realizing that many of the sacks were coverage sacks vs. MSU and the run game hasn't really been opened up do to our Big Ten opponents and the fact we are back to gunning the ball down the field.

I would say that BG's question mark would be can the defense continue to improve week to week and stay tough on limiting the run.

Schadenfreude · Post by **Schadenfreude** » Tue Sep 25, 2007 6:21 pm

Dayons_Den wrote:This is an example of a "reporter" or more aptly a "writer" examining the stats and coming to a conclusion rather than realizing that many of the sacks were coverage sacks vs. MSU and the run game hasn't really been opened up do to our Big Ten opponents and the fact we are back to gunning the ball down the field.

That said, Tyler Sheehan's scrambling against Temple probably prevented four or five sacks.

I find myself agreeing with the writer. Perhaps it is time to ask whether the O-line is as fabulous as it was supposed to be this season.

hammb · Post by **hammb** » Tue Sep 25, 2007 7:27 pm

Schadenfreude wrote:
Dayons_Den wrote:This is an example of a "reporter" or more aptly a "writer" examining the stats and coming to a conclusion rather than realizing that many of the sacks were coverage sacks vs. MSU and the run game hasn't really been opened up do to our Big Ten opponents and the fact we are back to gunning the ball down the field.
That said, Tyler Sheehan's scrambling against Temple probably prevented four or five sacks.

I find myself agreeing with the writer. Perhaps it is time to ask whether the O-line is as fabulous as it was supposed to be this season.

I actually have no problem with what the author said. Despite expecting it to be a perceived strength our OL has been very porous thus far in the year. The running game has not looked good, when we have gone to it. As Schad mentions Tyler's scrambling has been a big part of him getting the throws off too.

I know that MSU's DL is a good Big 10 unit, but there is also no denying the fact that our OL was completely manhandled in that 2nd half.

It's too early to call the OL a total disappointment, but there is no doubt that they've played below expectations up till this point in the season.

mmisbg · Post by **mmisbg** » Tue Sep 25, 2007 9:52 pm

I just find it ironic how my concerns with BGSU last year paralleled the Jacksonville Jaguars, and they seem to be doing so again this year....well, up until last Sunday.

I just wonder if BGSU hasn't spent so much time concerning themselves with revitalizing the passing attack that they forgot to spend time establishing the run in practice....or at least sacrificed needed time for that purpose.

Hopefully, they can make the adjustments. Once again, I really think it comes down X's and O's. I think the personell is there. We just need to make some adjustments in strategy. Our passing game is getting it done, and I'm happy for that. I just think that some adjustments to the playbook will make our running game just as potent.

Case and point, we made very few attempts to run up the middle unless AT was taking the snaps.....and at that, he did it himself. However, I think it proves that our Oline can make holes.

Given our recent hits at DL, our offense will definitely need to control the clock in order to take the pressure off of them. That means: establish the run.

Go Falcons!

Rollo83 · Post by **Rollo83** » Tue Sep 25, 2007 10:15 pm

I think the running game problems are not as much about the O-line as it is about our coaching, play calling, personel packages and schemes.

Because Brandon wants to run the spread and throw the ball around, it makes it hard to run out of that offense consistently.

Not that we can't run the ball, rather we have abandoned it altogether.