So proud of this coach and team

[Tommy Gadberry]

That was a HUGE win last night on the road!

[Glory to the Green]

Completely agree!  5 point road underdogs that end up winning by 14!  If we can stay healthy, going bowling would be the floor. GMG!

[emmitt01]

[MeanGreen22]

Went on the road to start the season with 70+ new players and brought home a W. That’s big time. 

[GMoney]

A very good win.  To go on the road, new roster, good opponent and get the win is fantastic.  The offense might be better than last year.  The passing game looks solid, good protection, but would like to see a little more from the running game.

On the D side of ball, there were still some worries.  I don't know what we really have given the players who missed (suspended).  We gave up a ton of yards and USA missed some open plays (thank goodness).  The D is still and wait and see.

[emmitt01]

I think after next week there will be a lot more tempered optimism.   SFA didn't play anyone that I have heard of this week, but they put up 77 points and most of that was through the air.   Our DB's weren't in the same zip code as South Alabama's receivers on MULTIPLE plays...so I think you will see a lot of frustration from fans when watching this defense.  

I also was discouraged by how often our running backs were met at or behind the line of scrimmage.   We can chalk it up to injuries on the o-line, but we should have got to get a lot better push up front.  Teams will naturally start to try to take away the throwing lanes and dare us to prove we can run...I hope we can do that.  

Edited September 1 by emmitt01

[NT80]

1 hour ago, emmitt01 said:

I think after next week there will be a lot more tempered optimism.   SFA didn't play anyone that I have heard of this week, but they put up 77 points and most of that was through the air.   Our DB's weren't in the same zip code as South Alabama's receivers on MULTIPLE plays...so I think you will see a lot of frustration from fans when watching this defense.  

I also was discouraged by how often our running backs were met at or behind the line of scrimmage.   We can chalk it up to injuries on the o-line, but we should have got to get a lot better push up front.  Teams will naturally start to try to take away the throwing lanes and dare us to prove we can run...I hope we can do that.  

The USA QB was making only his second start, and poorly underthrew 4 potential TD passes.  He still set a team record and torched us for 432 passing yards.   Where were our safeties?   Hope for lots of film work this week, or a new DC, lol.

Our running game was basically stagnant.  Ragsdale is more of a fullback type runner, big and physical, but not darting nor shifty.  We need a change of pace (quicker) back.

[Glory to the Green]

19 hours ago, NT80 said:

The USA QB was making only his second start, and poorly underthrew 4 potential TD passes.  He still set a team record and torched us for 432 passing yards.   Where were our safeties?   Hope for lots of film work this week, or a new DC, lol.

Our running game was basically stagnant.  Ragsdale is more of a fullback type runner, big and physical, but not darting nor shifty.  We need a change of pace (quicker) back.

Rod Brown mentioned in a postgame interview that the goal was to stop the run. Cal ran for 400 yards last season, while USA ran for 150 on Saturday. I think our lack of pressure on the QB was the largest concern. When he was pressured, our secondary looked better.  When he had time, we struggled. 

I don’t share the same concerns regarding our running game.  I wish we had run the ball better, but I think we’ll get better next week. I don’t view Ragsdale as a FB at all.  He’s not shown to be the homerun threat that Adeyi was, but he’s a very good RB. 

[MeanGreenMat]

22 hours ago, emmitt01 said:

I think after next week there will be a lot more tempered optimism.   SFA didn't play anyone that I have heard of this week, but they put up 77 points and most of that was through the air.   Our DB's weren't in the same zip code as South Alabama's receivers on MULTIPLE plays...so I think you will see a lot of frustration from fans when watching this defense.  

21 hours ago, NT80 said:

The USA QB was making only his second start, and poorly underthrew 4 potential TD passes.  He still set a team record and torched us for 432 passing yards.   Where were our safeties?   Hope for lots of film work this week, or a new DC, …

1 hour ago, Glory to the Green said:

Rod Brown mentioned in a postgame interview that the goal was to stop the run. Cal ran for 400 yards last season, while USA ran for 150 on Saturday. I think our lack of pressure on the QB was the largest concern. When he was pressured, our secondary looked better.  When he had time, we struggled. 

I know that the 3 man front is how we want to run the program, but I believe we saw continued growing pains. The D line has gotten big and stopping the run, but this USA game shows that we shifted risk from on the line to further out of the field. We are straining the bandwidth of the line to put pressure, contain, stop the run, and effectively read the play. Our backs have to execute at a higher level that makes 3-3-5 worth investing in. Did we get the talent in back positions from the portal? I saw too many explosive plays from an inexperienced QB that make me continue to question a scheme that asks a lot from players. If we continue to ask player to try to be good at everything on the defensive side, we will continue to be not good enough to compete. 
 

Offense is good. 👍 

[Side.Show.Joe]

It's nice to start the season with a "W" on the road. The passing game looks down right insane. The running game was respectable, but could be better. Defense was much better in the second half. And I have hope that with the return of starters in the secondary, we might see even more improvement in the coming games. 

Also, I watched Texas Tech and Wyoming Saturday night, and both look very beatable. 

 

[GMG_Dallas]

7 hours ago, Glory to the Green said:

I think our lack of pressure on the QB was the largest concern. When he was pressured, our secondary looked better.  When he had time, we struggled. 

There's not a secondary in the world that can consistently cover with no pressure. You see the same issue on NFL teams that have no pass rush.

[SUMG]

1 hour ago, GMG_Dallas said:

There's not a secondary in the world that can consistently cover with no pressure. You see the same issue on NFL teams that have no pass rush.

That's why I thought with the 3-3-5....you need to blitz on every down....because you've got to get some pressure on the QB. But it doesn't seem like we do. 

Edited September 2 by SUMG

[GMG_Dallas]

22 minutes ago, SUMG said:

That's why I thought with the 3-3-5....you need to blitz on every down....because you've go to get some pressure on the QB. But it doesn't seem like we do. 

I thought so too. What I'd read is the beauty of the 3-3-5 is you're supposed to be able to blitz from any of the 8 who aren't on the line which allows you to bring pressure from all over the field and keep the QB guessing. I don't know if we're not doing that because we don't have the athletes for it or if the playcaller just isn't aggressive enough. 

[SUMG]

9 minutes ago, GMG_Dallas said:

I thought so too. What I'd read is the beauty of the 3-3-5 is you're supposed to be able to blitz from any of the 8 who aren't on the line which allows you to bring pressure from all over the field and keep the QB guessing. I don't know if we're not doing that because we don't have the athletes for it or if the playcaller just isn't aggressive enough. 

I also noticed the other night........on short yardage plays.....we don't even pack everyone in tight. 

Edited September 2 by SUMG

[GMG_Dallas]

22 minutes ago, SUMG said:

I also noticed the other night........on short yardage plays.....we don't even pack everyone in tight. 

No we don't. Wonder if we're too scared of getting beat deep on a play-action so we don't bring the extra personnel to the line.

Edited September 3 by GMG_Dallas