Crazy times in the MAC East

[h2oville rocket]

Remember 2005 when about four teams needed to lose on the last day and we had to beat Toledo to win the East and we were the only team not to hold up the bargain?

Yes.

[AyZiggy97]

Yes, thank you for getting picky with my grammar.

As for Sheehan, I have not been impressed with him this season. He has had some impressive stats from time to time. However, he has not been doing a very good job of finding open receivers downfield.

For example, during the Marshall game, he set a school record for the most completions in a game. In that same game, we scored 10 points. How does that happen? I think it is mostly because he can't find open guys downfield...and there are usually guys open to be found.

Yesterday's game was another example of how Tyler has not been able to get this done. His reads have been terrible this year. It has been making Freddie Barnes look good, because there has been a bunch of short range passes to him this season. However, even Freddie has been invisible to Tyler when he has been running a streak. Right before our last punt of the game, Tyler checked down when Freddie was running down the sideline with no defenders anywhere near him.

Furthermore, Sheehan's inability to stretch the field is part of why our rushing attack struggles. Defenses know that it is unlikely Sheehan will complete passes beyond 15 yards, so they don't drop back.

What does BGSU owe Sheehan on his senior year? In my opinion: nothing. He has had plenty of chances, and has not been getting it done.

It IS all but over. I think we could possibly win out on our schedule. I never expect us to beat Miami, but maybe hell will freeze over this year. Problem is, a staggering list of things will have to happen in order for us to get the nod. It is time to accept that this is a rebuilding year for us, and proceed accordingly. In my mind, it is worth losing another game or two if we find a quaterback in the process.

If it is the case that Tyler Sheehan is not able to read coverages downfield then he should not be playing. If Dave Clawson continues to play him under these circumstances then he should be fired.

I'm not sure what "stretch the field" actually encompases. But taking a quick look at the games this year, Sheehan has 52 pass completions of 15 yards or more. That's 6.5 per game, 22.9% of his pass completions, and 14.8% of his pass attempts.

In 2003, Josh Harris had 62 completions of at least 15 yards over 13 games (couldn't find the WMU play-by-play). That's 4.7 per game, 20.8% of his pass completions, and 13.6% of pass attempts.

Granted, Harris was playing on a team loaded on both sides of the ball. But that makes what Sheehan has done even more impressive with a lack of talent and/or experience on defense, two wide receivers out, and an offensive line unable to consistantly run block. Imagine what he could do if he could read coverage!!!

That said, I'm all for going with Pankratz in the name of preparing for next year. Not because of some bogus and unfounded claim that Sheehan can't stretch the field.

[Jacobs4Heisman]

Now that's a good first post. Welcome.

I've never been enamored with Sheehan. I think he is and has been a relatively mediocre QB. He has put up good stats in an extremely pass-heavy system, but he seems to struggle when his first read isn't there. If his first read is open, and his pre-snap coverage reads are correct, he's a marvelous QB. If it isn't, he's not.

Having said that. You don't bench a guy like this at this point in his Senior year, especially when you have a new regime trying to establish some momentum. 3-4 games of experience for a freshman QB could be valuable, but it wouldn't come anywhere near offsetting the damage it could cause, both in wins and losses/possible bowl eligibility, and the signals it sends to everyone from potential recruits, to current players, to fans and potential fans. Also, it's important to remember that nobody in the world knows at this point who our starter is for game 1 next year. Go hold a gun to Dave Clawson's head and he still wouldn't have a legit answer for you. To give up the rest of the season for some nebulous experience for a guy who may never take another snap in a BG uniform seems outright dumb to me.

[hammb]

Now that's a good first post. Welcome.

I've never been enamored with Sheehan. I think he is and has been a relatively mediocre QB. He has put up good stats in an extremely pass-heavy system, but he seems to struggle when his first read isn't there. If his first read is open, and his pre-snap coverage reads are correct, he's a marvelous QB. If it isn't, he's not.

Having said that. You don't bench a guy like this at this point in his Senior year, especially when you have a new regime trying to establish some momentum. 3-4 games of experience for a freshman QB could be valuable, but it wouldn't come anywhere near offsetting the damage it could cause, both in wins and losses/possible bowl eligibility, and the signals it sends to everyone from potential recruits, to current players, to fans and potential fans. Also, it's important to remember that nobody in the world knows at this point who our starter is for game 1 next year. Go hold a gun to Dave Clawson's head and he still wouldn't have a legit answer for you. To give up the rest of the season for some nebulous experience for a guy who may never take another snap in a BG uniform seems outright dumb to me.

Agreed 100%

Sheehan just doesn't see the field well, and doesn't anticipate when guys are going to come open, he's often late with this reads. That said, when he makes the correct read he delivers a pretty damn good ball, and that includes the deep throws. He's never going to be a star, even in the MAC, but he's a serviceable QB, and I doubt very seriously if any inexperienced RS FR is going to be an immediate improvement.

I also pretty much agree with your last paragraph. In college football (unlike the NFL) I think you've always got an obligation to try and win for your seniors. Throwing in the towel on a season can cause more harm than good. Especially when the guy you'd be giving the late season snaps to isn't necessarily the surefire starter next year. With the caliber of QB recruits that we've got coming in next year I would not be surprised at all to see a true freshman as the starter, or at least get a lot of snaps next season.

I've been pretty vocal that I'm not a huge Sheehan fan for years here, but I don't think that benching him at this point accomplishes much. Let's just ride him, try to win out, and see where it takes us. Remember, that there are so many bowls now that almost every eligible team will go to one. Gaining bowl eligibility could be pretty valuable for this team, regardless of our standings in the MAC.

[Flipper]

"Ride it out" is my theme for the year. I think it would be a huge benefit to the program if we finished it out at 7-5. It'd be great to get the extra practice time a bowl bid entails...it'd really put us in a position to get the spring rolling with the two kids battling it out at QB with (hopefully) more of Clawson's system getting installed.

I wonder if eiher of he two *** QB's commits we have plans to be a January enrolee?

[VDub26Falcon]

When talking about Sheehan's completions that are 15+ yard plays, wouldn't this include passes that are caught 1 or 2 yards past the line of scrimmage and then carried for another 15+ yards? How many of Sheehan's balls get CAUGHT 15 yards past the line of scrimmage? That is how you stretch the field. Not bubble screens and the like.

[Redwingtom]

"Ride it out" is my theme for the year. I think it would be a huge benefit to the program if we finished it out at 7-5. It'd be great to get the extra practice time a bowl bid entails...it'd really put us in a position to get the spring rolling with the two kids battling it out at QB with (hopefully) more of Clawson's system getting installed.

I wonder if eiher of he two *** QB's commits we have plans to be a January enrolee?

More importantly, WE NEED A TRUE RUNNING BACK! We can have Joe Montana back there, but this team will never be successful until we return to the balanced offense we had when PJ was here!

[hammb]

"Ride it out" is my theme for the year. I think it would be a huge benefit to the program if we finished it out at 7-5. It'd be great to get the extra practice time a bowl bid entails...it'd really put us in a position to get the spring rolling with the two kids battling it out at QB with (hopefully) more of Clawson's system getting installed.

I wonder if eiher of he two *** QB's commits we have plans to be a January enrolee?

More importantly, WE NEED A TRUE RUNNING BACK! We can have Joe Montana back there, but this team will never be successful until we return to the balanced offense we had when PJ was here!

Geter is fine. Give him an OL that can actually run block and he'd be a good runner.

I can count on one hand how many times there has actually been a legit hole for our runners to go through this year. Most of the rushing yards we've gained are off cutbacks and great plays by the ball carrier. This front 5 has been very poor in run blocking.

[mmisbg]

When talking about Sheehan's completions that are 15+ yard plays, wouldn't this include passes that are caught 1 or 2 yards past the line of scrimmage and then carried for another 15+ yards? How many of Sheehan's balls get CAUGHT 15 yards past the line of scrimmage? That is how you stretch the field. Not bubble screens and the like.

Exactly. I have no problem with the occasional screen. They serve their purpose, and are very effective in the right dosage. However, Sheehan has not been able to connect downfield with any consistency.

I am not trying to say that we throw in the towel for the rest of this year. I do believe that we have four beatable opponents remaining this season. If our offense puts up more than 10 points a game, it might actually happen. Sheehan has already failed to accomplish this against two opponents that gave us little excuse. At this point, I've started to wonder if Pankratz is the better option. Furthermore, I'd be willing to lose a few games (that we'd probably lose anyway, if we can't score more than 10 points, no matter how many completions we have) in order to find out.

[AyZiggy97]

When talking about Sheehan's completions that are 15+ yard plays, wouldn't this include passes that are caught 1 or 2 yards past the line of scrimmage and then carried for another 15+ yards? How many of Sheehan's balls get CAUGHT 15 yards past the line of scrimmage? That is how you stretch the field. Not bubble screens and the like.

That's correct. Those passes are included in the totals- for both Sheehan and Harris. But how many bubble screens have there been this year? A few have been called, but not nearly in the amount we saw over the last couple of seasons. And not many of them have gone for 15 yards.

It's just amazing that a guy with an outside, but still possible, chance of becoming the school's all-time leader in every statistical passing category receives so much criticism.

I'm not an apologist: Sheehan's interception against CMU was a very ill-advised throw. But his TD pass to Barnes (24-yarder) was in exactly the right spot.

Futhermore, the contention that defenses crowd the line of scrimmage against BG is not entirely accurate. I'll admit not seeing the road games. But most recently against CMU, they were beating the BG linemen with four rushers. BG had plenty of opportunity to run the ball, if it was possible. We knew the line might be problematic coming into the year. Unfortunately it has been.

[hammb]

Futhermore, the contention that defenses crowd the line of scrimmage against BG is not entirely accurate. I'll admit not seeing the road games. But most recently against CMU, they were beating the BG linemen with four rushers. BG had plenty of opportunity to run the ball, if it was possible. We knew the line might be problematic coming into the year. Unfortunately it has been.

This is very true. CMU beat us with their front 4 consistently all day long. This OL is just NOT good enough to be a great offense. Maybe they'll develop, but they have been the weakest link on offense all year long.

[1987alum]

I don't get that. How did our O line become such a liability so quickly?

[transfer2BGSU]

I don't get that. How did our O line become such a liability so quickly?

Injuries to Boijic and Minturn that took them out of the lineup.

[hammb]

I'm curious to the blocking schemes that this coaching staff wants to run as well. Prior to Saturday's game (missing 2 starters), I thought the unit had done a good job in pass blocking, but really struggled in run blocking.

I'm just wondering if the previous regime wanted more of a zone blocking system in the run game whereas the current staff wants more drive blocking? I'm no expert in OL play, and I really haven't heard anything from anybody to make me know one way or the other. I just know from watching the games that there have not been lanes for our RBs all season long.

[1987alum]

hammb:

In the spread option - actually, most any option attack - relies a lot on zone blocking. I haven't seen Clawson's offense, but if his scheme has a focus on drive blocking, that's a pretty big switch and it would explain some of the struggles.