BG #6 - (not in a good way)

BelieveNBG · Post by **BelieveNBG** » Wed Oct 19, 2005 10:28 am

http://msn.foxsports.com/cfb/story/5004116

mk455 · Post by **mk455** » Wed Oct 19, 2005 10:49 am

yeah... but hes right.

BGSUFootballFan · Post by **BGSUFootballFan** » Wed Oct 19, 2005 10:58 am

so... look at Purdue!!!! hahaha im so glad i became a BG fan!

MACMAN · Post by **MACMAN** » Wed Oct 19, 2005 11:59 am

We are wining games and that is all that counts. i do love it though when the machine is oiled up and we have 30 pts on the board at the half though.

hammb · Post by **hammb** » Wed Oct 19, 2005 12:16 pm

My only problem right now is what is gonna happen when we start playing better competition. The past few weeks our defense has played pretty well and we haven't needed many points to win, and win easily by the end of the game.

We all remember the defense at the beginning of the year. What happens if that was our real defense and our recent success is only a byproduct of our opponents. Will the offense be there when we need it again?

I'm not sure what the issue has been the past couple weeks, but in the OU game Omar was clearly not the Omar of old. Our guys were lighting up OU's secondary, and he was not seeing them or missing them at times...much more erratic than normal.

I really hope that we get things figured out, because I liked beating teams by 50

kdog27 · Post by **kdog27** » Wed Oct 19, 2005 12:48 pm

hammb wrote:I really hope that we get things figured out, because I liked beating teams by 50

I thought you like games that end with scores like 10-6.

Redwingtom · Post by **Redwingtom** » Wed Oct 19, 2005 12:49 pm

We will be fine as we seem to play to the level of our competition...just a little too much at times.

As far as Omar...I think that the coaches are coaching him a little too much. I am starting to see some Harris trait's coming out in him with the floating of the ball and his release point. They just need to let him throw.

I still maintain that we changed our offensive philosophy to help out our D and that is why we are not running our plays so quickly which I believe hurts their overall performance.

Bottom line, just win baby!!

BelieveNBG · Post by **BelieveNBG** » Wed Oct 19, 2005 1:20 pm

I still maintain that we changed our offensive philosophy to help out our D and that is why we are not running our plays so quickly which I believe hurts their overall performance.

I believe we have changed our offensive philosophy to help out our running game. We had absolutely no running game early in the year and I believe we recognize that we need to establish one before we get to the tough games. We will not win th MAC if we depend solely on the pass (Boise). Teams will drop back 7 in coverage. If we continue to show that we are a running team getting 200 yds. on the ground, teams are going to have to respect the run and it will open up things for our explosive air attack. Also, when we get a lead, we need to be able to run the ball successfully to eat up clock, but to also continue scoring.

Warthog · Post by **Warthog** » Wed Oct 19, 2005 3:12 pm

BelieveNBG wrote:
We will not win th MAC if we depend solely on the pass

Just to point out, Texas Tech is 6-0 and ranked in the top ten. Their yardage breakdown so far this season: 2,834 passsing, 642 rushing. In their last game against Kansas State, they won 53-20 while having 65 yards rushing and 669 through the air.

Conventional wisdom says that we can not win without a balanced attack. But if you are outstanding in one facet of the game and mediocre in the other, it is stupid to purposely try to do the one your mediocre at while sacrificing the one you are outstanding at.

BGSUFootballFan · Post by **BGSUFootballFan** » Wed Oct 19, 2005 3:16 pm

i agree warthog, dont run the ball if the pass is that much better. basically do whatever you have to do to move the ball, score points and win. balance is overrated.. see Purdue.

Falconfreak90 · Post by **Falconfreak90** » Wed Oct 19, 2005 3:24 pm

So what....are we in first in the MAC East? That's my concern.

We all knew the O would be explosive again this year, just not as explosive as 2004. We are averaging 39 pts a game.

Nobody thought PJ Pope would be out with injuries this year. Corey Partridge has been troubled by injuries since the opener. Those are 2 key components to our O.

BelieveNBG · Post by **BelieveNBG** » Wed Oct 19, 2005 3:34 pm

But if you are outstanding in one facet of the game and mediocre in the other, it is stupid to purposely try to do the one your mediocre at while sacrificing the one you are outstanding at.

No one's saying abandon the pass, but we certainly need to work out the kinks in running game to be prepared to run when we need to. It was quite obvious that Boise was laying back waiting on us to pass and we had no problem giving 'em what they wanted. A solid running attack could have been what was needed to bring them back to a more conventional style of defense and then we coulda ate 'em alive with the pass. Unfortunately, we showed them nothing to pull them out of that defense. If fixing the running game means only scoring 27 pts. and beating a team like Buffalo by only 20 pts., I am all for it.

BGSU-Ph.D. · Post by **BGSU-Ph.D.** » Wed Oct 19, 2005 3:51 pm

Warthog wrote:
BelieveNBG wrote:
We will not win th MAC if we depend solely on the pass
Just to point out, Texas Tech is 6-0 and ranked in the top ten. Their yardage breakdown so far this season: 2,834 passsing, 642 rushing. In their last game against Kansas State, they won 53-20 while having 65 yards rushing and 669 through the air.

Conventional wisdom says that we can not win without a balanced attack. But if you are outstanding in one facet of the game and mediocre in the other, it is stupid to purposely try to do the one your mediocre at while sacrificing the one you are outstanding at.

-----------

I agree that Texas Tech does appear to be the exception, but, playing devil's advocate, I'll point out that Texas Tech's schedule has been very weak and, if it is stronger than BG's, it isn't by much.

TT's schedule/results to date:

9/10 FIU W 56-3
9/17 Sam Houston W 80-21
9/24 Indiana State W 63-7
10/1 Kansas W 30-17
10/8 at Nebraska W 34-31
10/15 Kansas St W 59-20

1-A newcomer FIU, two 1-AA schools, mediocre Kansas and KSU, and pretty good Nebraska. Of course, Wisconsin is better than all of those teams. Nebraska might be better than Boise, but I'd take Boise over both Kansas and KSU. Ball State and Ohio are both better than FIU (heck, I might even take Buffalo and Temple againt FIU), and Buffalo and Temple, while bad, are better than the two 1-AA schools.

I think Texas Tech will be exposed as a top 10 fraud this weekend against Texas.

Warthog · Post by **Warthog** » Wed Oct 19, 2005 3:52 pm

BelieveNBG wrote:
If fixing the running game means only scoring 27 pts. and beating a team like Buffalo by only 20 pts., I am all for it.

I don't think it was a matter of trying to fix our running game. If you were at the game or listened to the radio, I think you would agree that Omar was having an off day. That is why we ran the ball more often. Not because we made a concious effort to improve our run game.

MACMAN · Post by **MACMAN** » Wed Oct 19, 2005 3:56 pm

Redwingtom wrote:We will be fine as we seem to play to the level of our competition...just a little too much at times.

As far as Omar...I think that the coaches are coaching him a little too much. I am starting to see some Harris trait's coming out in him with the floating of the ball and his release point. They just need to let him throw.

I still maintain that we changed our offensive philosophy to help out our D and that is why we are not running our plays so quickly which I believe hurts their overall performance.

Bottom line, just win baby!!

I dont know if that was specific to allowing the D to rest. But I agree 100% that when our O plays thier game, which to me is a fast paced near 2 min drill O, other teams D's fall apart. We need the O to pick up the tempo again, I feel.