Fugly....

orangeandbrown · Post by **orangeandbrown** » Sat Oct 15, 2005 8:51 pm

Tricky_Falcon wrote:
TG1996 wrote: Before we all go writing off games down the road (and some of you in the chat room had already marked Miami(OH) off as a loss)
Yeah that's why I only spent 2 min. in the room. It was a sky is falling moment when I was in there. Does anyone remember that Miami has more losses in the MAC than BG?

Yet, with our road record over the past four seasons and this year, we're going to have to bring our very best game to win it.

Jacobs4Heisman · Post by **Jacobs4Heisman** » Sat Oct 15, 2005 9:08 pm

Losing to Miami and still winning the MAC is a very real possibility.

cowboyjoe · Post by **cowboyjoe** » Sat Oct 15, 2005 9:49 pm

"187 yards passing by Omar......
Yikes!!!! We gotta get that straightend out big time."

Yeah-- God for bid we run the ball like Wisconsin and Boise did against us...what are we thinking? Playing defense and running the ball at will? How dare us use that recipe for winning championships.

It's the Journey... · Post by **It's the Journey...** » Sat Oct 15, 2005 9:53 pm

According to the website we had 200 yards rushing and it was a season high. So I would say that is pretty good. 4-2 and 3-0 in the MAC, and the fewest anyone else in the east has is 2 losses. I will take that every day of the week and twice on sunday. GO FALCONS!!!!!

PGY Tiercel · Post by **PGY Tiercel** » Sat Oct 15, 2005 10:45 pm

Yes, BG had 200 yards rushing (when was the last time we rushed for more yards?). BJ Lane, had 141yds rushing himself. This is could be where falconboy's confusion came from.

Jacobs4Heisman · Post by **Jacobs4Heisman** » Sat Oct 15, 2005 10:48 pm

PGY Tiercel wrote:Yes, BG had 200 yards rushing (when was the last time we rushed for more yards?). BJ Lane, had 141yds rushing himself. This is could be where falconboy's confusion came from.

I think falconboy's confusion is more deep-seeded than that

HoustonFalcon · Post by **HoustonFalcon** » Sun Oct 16, 2005 12:00 am

A win is a win no matter how you cook it at the end of the day. We didn't play Miami or Toledo today, we played Buffalo, and we did what we had to do to win. Sometimes you are not going to bring your A game, and as long as you get a win, that's all that matters. It's not going to be possible to get 18-22 yr. old kids to play their best each and every game. Trust me, I know first hand it's not possible. The best you can do is try to get them to perform to a level on their off day that they are not doing more to hurt than help, and trust in your other players to pick up the slack. That happened today, that is all that matters. The sky is not falling, and we are well within the drivers seat for the East Championship. Let's calm down and just look at this as a victory, plain and simple. I'm sure that the coaching staff probably isn't happy with the performance, and they will work on those things this week in practice. Not too long ago everyone was complaining about the defense, and they obviously have gotten some wrinkles ironed out, just trust in the coaching staff to do their job this week.

orangeandbrown · Post by **orangeandbrown** » Sun Oct 16, 2005 9:34 am

Fair enough, Houston. On the other hand, the defense has been "excelling" against some weaker opposition.

Falconboy · Post by **Falconboy** » Sun Oct 16, 2005 12:47 pm

PGY Tiercel wrote:Yes, BG had 200 yards rushing (when was the last time we rushed for more yards?). BJ Lane, had 141yds rushing himself. This is could be where falconboy's confusion came from.

Yes, I did forget Bobby Thomas was in there a few times as well. Us getting 200 yards rushing is good and we need more of it for sure. One thing that frustates me out of my mind is the predictable playcalling. One play we'll get 23 yards the next play is a loss for 3. What gives. This has been a constant through out the season.

Jacobs4Heisman · Post by **Jacobs4Heisman** » Sun Oct 16, 2005 1:01 pm

falconboy wrote:
PGY Tiercel wrote:Yes, BG had 200 yards rushing (when was the last time we rushed for more yards?). BJ Lane, had 141yds rushing himself. This is could be where falconboy's confusion came from.
Yes, I did forget Bobby Thomas was in there a few times as well. Us getting 200 yards rushing is good and we need more of it for sure. One thing that frustates me out of my mind is the predictable playcalling. One play we'll get 23 yards the next play is a loss for 3. What gives. This has been a constant through out the season.

I'll actually agree with you on this one -- the play-calling the last couple years strikes me as almost arrogant. When you have the horses wisconsin does, you can be arrogant and call 5 straight stretch plays. When your running game relies on deception and speed, the same trap play 3 straight times isn't often going to continue to net positive results.

Perhaps this is why we've seen our offense struggle at times this year. I think opposing coaches have definitely begun to pick out patterns in our offensive gameplan.

Hopefully we can start to mix-it-up more against the quality competition at the back end of our schedule.

Bleeding Orange · Post by **Bleeding Orange** » Sun Oct 16, 2005 6:15 pm

As I looked over the stats of this game and thought about the stats against Ohio, I am beginning to wonder if the coaching staff is starting to wise up a bit to the fact that if we don't need our entire offensive package on the field, we shouldn't use it. What I mean is that if it only takes three or four touchdowns to beat a team, why throw the entire package on the field to do it and be put on film for future opponents when the same handful of plays combined throughout the game could get the job done?

Yeah, huge stats are fun, but why give a Miami(OH) or Toledo extra film resources when we have no reason to? Now, mind you I have not seen the past two games (I only listened to OU on the radio and Buffalo not at all (stupid work)), but this would seem to make some sense to me. I wonder if PJ being out may have forced the coaching staff to make this decision in a way. This isn't to say anything bad about Lane (150 yds. rushing?!?!?), but what is the sense in forcing passes to someone who isn't as used to it as BJ?

As I think back on it, I kind of wonder why we haven't done this in the past. We have a phenomenally complex offensive system, but if you lay it all on the line to score 70 against a Buffalo or Ball State, what is it worth when everyone can study every aspect of it in the film room?

Just a thought, I suppose.

Schadenfreude · Post by **Schadenfreude** » Sun Oct 16, 2005 7:03 pm

And I do agree with others who wonder if coaches might be setting up play-calling tendencies that they will break in big games.

Hard to know, but it's possible.

Jacobs4Heisman · Post by **Jacobs4Heisman** » Sun Oct 16, 2005 7:23 pm

Schadenfreude wrote:And I do agree with others who wonder if coaches might be setting up play-calling tendencies that they will break in big games.

Hard to know, but it's possible.

We'll know in a month or so.

All I can hope for is that the staff, and players for that matter, learn from the big-game mistakes of the past and use the knowledge to whoop up on everybody left in front of us.

I still don't have a very good feeling about the Miami game, but I'm not about to discount this team. We've got three games to take care of business against (hopefully) lesser competition. If we can win those three, we just need to win one of the last two to play for a championship and go to a bowl. I'll take that scenario all day long.

Falconfreak90 · Post by **Falconfreak90** » Sun Oct 16, 2005 11:16 pm

Bleeding Orange wrote:As I looked over the stats of this game and thought about the stats against Ohio, I am beginning to wonder if the coaching staff is starting to wise up a bit to the fact that if we don't need our entire offensive package on the field, we shouldn't use it. What I mean is that if it only takes three or four touchdowns to beat a team, why throw the entire package on the field to do it and be put on film for future opponents when the same handful of plays combined throughout the game could get the job done?

Yeah, huge stats are fun, but why give a Miami(OH) or Toledo extra film resources when we have no reason to? Now, mind you I have not seen the past two games (I only listened to OU on the radio and Buffalo not at all (stupid work)), but this would seem to make some sense to me. I wonder if PJ being out may have forced the coaching staff to make this decision in a way. This isn't to say anything bad about Lane (150 yds. rushing?!?!?), but what is the sense in forcing passes to someone who isn't as used to it as BJ?

As I think back on it, I kind of wonder why we haven't done this in the past. We have a phenomenally complex offensive system, but if you lay it all on the line to score 70 against a Buffalo or Ball State, what is it worth when everyone can study every aspect of it in the film room?

Just a thought, I suppose.

BO,

I think you've nailed it here. I'll take a 3 TD MAC road win any day against any team. We didn't play our best but we got the job done.
The D has given up a total of 21 points the last 3 weeks! Kudos!
We were able to run the ball for 200 yards against the MAC's 3rd best D...and we had almost 200 yards last week as well. Take some pressure off Omar and the passing game and run the ball. With Pope and Partridge out we are missing two parts to the machine. Pope lines up as a WR so we are missing his pass catching abilities as well as his rushing. Corey gives us that 3rd excellent WR.

But in the end, doesn't matter with the stats...what does the scoreboard say?
And why give future opponents the extra film study? That is an excellent point!
The team has travelled a lot of miles in 6 weeks...Wisky, Boise, BSU and UB....4 outta 6 games on the road. They are a bit tired and banged up but still winning games. We are sitting in a great postition....I'll worry about Miami when the time comes.

JUST KEEP WINNING!!!

BUST THE BRONCOS!