This Year Vs. Last Year Analysis

[Got5onIt]

So he bolts after his soph season & goes to prison ?

if he can do for NT what Mike Vick did for VT then HELL YEAH!!!!!!

[Quoner]

if he can do for NT what Mike Vick did for VT then HELL YEAH!!!!!!

I'd settle for Marcus. We already have a McDonald's near the stadium.

[TheTastyGreek]

Excuse me, but a quarterback really doesn't make a difference in the offense? Especially in a passing offense? Maybe the tight end will get us a few more wins.

I agree that the quarterback was not the foremost reason for our poor record last year. Defense and special teams took that honor. But Gio, for the second straight year, had more interceptions than touchdowns and that's not winning football. He had the poorest rating of the eight teams in last year's SBC. Quarterback may not have been the primary reason for our demise but it sure didn't help the situation.

I know you were disappointed with Vizza's sophomore season. I didn't think it was great statistically, but in my opinion the offensive struggles weren't due to him. You've already said he was good, but disappointing ("sophomore jinx").

The question isn't whether the quarterback makes a difference in the offense. The question is whether the NEW quarterback will be a differencemaker compared to the LAST quarterback. Given that the last QB was good, performed well, and was a pretty damn good leader... How much of a difference can Riley make EVEN IF he comes in and plays lights out from the very first game? We're hoping for an incremental step up at a position of relative strength, not a dramatic infusion of talent and ability at one of our weak spots.

Put another way... Let's say that Riley is so much better and more effective at running this offense that he dramatically increases our point totals. Last year, we averaged about 20 points per game. Let's say that Riley is so much better than Vizza, from day one, that he comes in and singlehandedly bumps up our scoring by 50% per game. Hell, make it eleven points, because Riley hypothetically turns a dead drive into a touchdown and a red zone field goal into a TD. Net gain, 11 points in every game last year.

What does that do for us? It gets us one more win, against Arkansas State in the final game of the year. Super Riley turns us into a 2-10 team again.

Or hey, let's say that Riley is so much better than Vizza that he singlehandedly DOUBLES our scoring average. In every single game, we score 20 more points. Now, we're AVERAGING 40 ppg because Riley is such a phenom. Last year, this would put us in the top 8 in the NCAA, less than a point per game behind Texas Tech.

Adding 20 points to each game would have transformed last year's team into... A 3-9 team.

That's my point. Even if Riley, as a freshman, comes in this year and dramatically outshines Vizza (and I'm not personally holding the poor kid to those sort of expectations, and certainly not at the beginning of the year) to the point where he doubles what a Vizza led offense generated... Even if the kid is so amazing as a redshirt freshman that he could outshine our already talented (remember the accolades Vizza earned?) quarterback to the point where he makes us a top 8 scoring offense... We're still only a 3 win team.

But I do agree that using a tight end, maybe even a fullback and a snap-under-center in the red zone, would help this team score more.

[TIgreen01]

I know you were disappointed with Vizza's sophomore season. I didn't think it was great statistically, but in my opinion the offensive struggles weren't due to him. You've already said he was good, but disappointing ("sophomore jinx").

The question isn't whether the quarterback makes a difference in the offense. The question is whether the NEW quarterback will be a differencemaker compared to the LAST quarterback. Given that the last QB was good, performed well, and was a pretty damn good leader... How much of a difference can Riley make EVEN IF he comes in and plays lights out from the very first game? We're hoping for an incremental step up at a position of relative strength, not a dramatic infusion of talent and ability at one of our weak spots.

Put another way... Let's say that Riley is so much better and more effective at running this offense that he dramatically increases our point totals. Last year, we averaged about 20 points per game. Let's say that Riley is so much better than Vizza, from day one, that he comes in and singlehandedly bumps up our scoring by 50% per game. Hell, make it eleven points, because Riley hypothetically turns a dead drive into a touchdown and a red zone field goal into a TD. Net gain, 11 points in every game last year.

What does that do for us? It gets us one more win, against Arkansas State in the final game of the year. Super Riley turns us into a 2-10 team again.

Or hey, let's say that Riley is so much better than Vizza that he singlehandedly DOUBLES our scoring average. In every single game, we score 20 more points. Now, we're AVERAGING 40 ppg because Riley is such a phenom. Last year, this would put us in the top 8 in the NCAA, less than a point per game behind Texas Tech.

Adding 20 points to each game would have transformed last year's team into... A 3-9 team.

That's my point. Even if Riley, as a freshman, comes in this year and dramatically outshines Vizza (and I'm not personally holding the poor kid to those sort of expectations, and certainly not at the beginning of the year) to the point where he doubles what a Vizza led offense generated... Even if the kid is so amazing as a redshirt freshman that he could outshine our already talented (remember the accolades Vizza earned?) quarterback to the point where he makes us a top 8 scoring offense... We're still only a 3 win team.

But I do agree that using a tight end, maybe even a fullback and a snap-under-center in the red zone, would help this team score more.

Sorry, dude, but if Riley comes in and throws 10 fewer INTs than Vizza did in either of his 2 seasons as the starter.....that's a HUGE improvement. I'm not saying that Riley will accomplish that, but turning the ball over less has a DRAMATIC effect on the outcome of games. He's got to come in and put points on the board, but the single biggest improvement he can make (or any QB) is simply NOT turning the ball over.

[Quoner]

Sorry, dude, but if Riley comes in and throws 10 fewer INTs than Vizza did in either of his 2 seasons as the starter.....that's a HUGE improvement. I'm not saying that Riley will accomplish that, but turning the ball over less has a DRAMATIC effect on the outcome of games. He's got to come in and put points on the board, but the single biggest improvement he can make (or any QB) is simply NOT turning the ball over.

The dogs were called off on us in so many games last year that you can't perfectly make that argument, but let's say 10 of those picks led to TDs by the other team. The margin of victory was so great that even then, except for the ASU game, removing 7 from there score and even giving us a score for the same drive doesn't make a difference.

I'm not down-playing the importance of ball control, but the defense was so over matched last year, that even great QB play won't make a difference unless we either create 7-9 minute drives dinking and dunking to perfection or improve our defense. The good news is that the defense has to get better.

[TheTastyGreek]

Sorry, dude, but if Riley comes in and throws 10 fewer INTs than Vizza did in either of his 2 seasons as the starter.....that's a HUGE improvement. I'm not saying that Riley will accomplish that, but turning the ball over less has a DRAMATIC effect on the outcome of games. He's got to come in and put points on the board, but the single biggest improvement he can make (or any QB) is simply NOT turning the ball over.

Vizza threw 16 INTs last year. He threw 17 the year before.

If Riley throws ten less than either of those years, he'll throw fewer than Sam Bradford, Graham Harrell, Colt McCoy, Nate Davis, Matt Stafford... You name the top QB, it'll be fewer than they threw for in 2008.

Again, let's try to be reasonable in our expectations of Riley here.

And while we're at it, let's talk about Vizza's interceptions from last season.

None: LSU, K-State, MTSU, Tulsa, ULM

Rice:

Down 63-20, 3rd quarter

Down 70-20, 3rd quarter

Down 77-20, 3rd quarter

FIU:

Down 14-0, 1st quarter

Down 21-0, 2nd quarter

Down 28-0, 3rd quarter

ASU:

0-0, 1st quarter

Down 7-0, 1st quarter

Down 33-28, 4th quarter

ULL:

Down 38-27, 3rd quarter

Troy:

Down 9-0, 1st quarter

Down 32-7, 3rd quarter

Down 45-17, 4th quarter

WKU:

Down 40-39, 4th quarter

FAU:

Down 6-0, 1st quarter

Down 25-6, 3rd quarter

Of Vizza's 16 INTs, 8 came when down by double digits in the second half. 7 of them came when down by 3 touchdowns or more. Perhaps he wouldn't have thrown as many if he weren't constantly forced to play catchup, with the offense in obvious passing situations.

The only game you can reasonably say we might have won if not for a Vizza interception would be Arkansas State.

So... If Riley comes in and solves Vizza's interception "problem"... Congrats, we're a 2-10 team. Start planning the parade.

Vizza wasn't the problem. Even if Riley is a world beater, he can't solve things for us. QB play and interceptions weren't even in the top 10 things we need to be different than last season for significant improvement.

[meanrob]

wow, an actual on the field football thread.

sweet.

i can't see riley making a big impact this year. too many questions on offense/coaching to think he will have a huge impact.

i just wanna see that he's the future. set the foundation for a career.

then again, i'm not predicting much for the team this season. we lost all but one conference game by double digits or more......way more. just don't see how a team improves that much in one year.

[TheTastyGreek]

wow, an actual on the field football thread.

sweet.

i can't see riley making a big impact this year. too many questions on offense/coaching to think he will have a huge impact.

i just wanna see that he's the future. set the foundation for a career.

then again, i'm not predicting much for the team this season. we lost all but one conference game by double digits or more......way more. just don't see how a team improves that much in one year.

Agree on everything.

I just hope that if things don't go well this year, Riley sticks around and actually has a career here.

[Quoner]

Agree on everything.

I just hope that if things don't go well this year, Riley sticks around and actually has a career here.

Figures - I click on this thread for football analysis and get...wait, what the f***?

Well, they should still ban you anyway.

[The Fake Lonnie Finch]

Vizza threw 16 INTs last year. He threw 17 the year before.

If Riley throws ten less than either of those years, he'll throw fewer than Sam Bradford, Graham Harrell, Colt McCoy, Nate Davis, Matt Stafford... You name the top QB, it'll be fewer than they threw for in 2008.

Again, let's try to be reasonable in our expectations of Riley here.

And while we're at it, let's talk about Vizza's interceptions from last season.

Of Vizza's 16 INTs, 8 came when down by double digits in the second half. 7 of them came when down by 3 touchdowns or more. Perhaps he wouldn't have thrown as many if he weren't constantly forced to play catchup, with the offense in obvious passing situations.

The only game you can reasonably say we might have won if not for a Vizza interception would be Arkansas State.

So... If Riley comes in and solves Vizza's interception "problem"... Congrats, we're a 2-10 team. Start planning the parade.

Vizza wasn't the problem. Even if Riley is a world beater, he can't solve things for us. QB play and interceptions weren't even in the top 10 things we need to be different than last season for significant improvement.

Gee, you think? As badly as we were beaten, it's amazing he didn't throw more than 16. In 2008, Vizza threw only 16 interceptions in 493 pass attempts. He was intercepted 3.25% of the time.

Let's stack that up to the other FBS QBs who had worse interception ratios than Vizza in 2008:

Inoke Funkai, Hawaii - 6.94% - Bowl qualifer

Robert Marve, Miami - 6.10% - Bowl qualifier

Jarrett Lee, LSU - 5.95% - Bowl qualifier

Bo Levi Mitchell, SMU - 5.61%

Tavita Pritchard, Stanford - 5.12%

Nathan Enderle, Idaho - 5.01%

Chris Smelley, South Carolina - 4.97% - Bowl qualifier

Joe Webb, UAB - 4.53%

Marc Verica, Virgina - 4.53%

David Johnson, Tulsa - 4.5% - Bowl qualifier

Michael Desmoreaux, Louisiana-Lafayette, 4.45%

Chandler Harnish, Northern Illinois - 4.27% - Bowl qualifier

Hunter Cantwell, Louisville - 4.24%

Mark Cann, Marshall - 4.23%

Juice Williams, Illinois - 4.20%

Kellen Lewis, Indiana - 4.15%

Diondre Borel, Utah State - 4.13%

Chris Ponder, Florida State - 4.09% - Bowl qualifier

Kevin Moore, Tulane - 4.02%

Julian Edelman, Kent State - 4%

Jevan Snead, Mississippi - 3.98% - Bowl qualifier

Casey Dick, Arkansas - 3.92%

Boo Jackson, Ohio - 3.92%

Cullen Harper, Clemson - 3.89% - Bowl qualifier

Jimmy Clausen, Notre Dame - 3.86% - Bowl qualifier

C.J. Batcher, Northwestern - 3.68% - Bowl qualifier

Matt Grothe, South Florida - 3.68% - Bowl qualifer

Lyle Moevao, Oregon State - 3.6% - Bowl qualifier

Richard Stanzi, Iowa - 3.54%

Chris Jacquemain, Akron - 3.51%

Steven Threet, Michigan - 3.50%

Billy Farris, Colorado State - 3.43% - Bowl qualifier

Chase Daniel, Missouri - 3.41% - Bowl qualifier

Tony Pike, Cincinnati - 3.4% - Bowl qualifier

-16 QBs who threw INTs more often than Vizza played on squads who still made bowl games, including the Top 3. Those with worse interception ratios than Vizza included Heisman candidate Chase Daniels, and 2009 Heisman candidate Jevan Snead. Vizza had a higher completion percentage than Snead as well.

-Among the 24 teams who played in bowl games on or after January 1st, five had worse interception ratios than Vizza.

-31 QBs who had better interception ratios than Vizza did not play on bowl qualifying teams.

-Of the 100 Top QBs listed by completion percentage, Vizza was 29th. He ranked 35th in yards passing per game. Giovanni Vizza did his job under extraordinarily bad circumstances.

What does it all mean?

It means that college football teams don't necessarily live and die with their QB's play. For the circumstances given, Vizza did an excellent job for us. He had a higher completion percentage and lower interception ratio than 2009 Heisman candidate Jevan Snead.

So, what's the difference? Snead is coached by bona fide college football coaches. He didn't have to carry his team all the way, every single time out. Vizza was saddled with high school coaches calling the shots. The difference is always coaching. Dodge and Ford's one trick pony offense is a drag on the team as a whole.

For the past two seasons, Vizza and North Texas never had the edge of having the team prepared by college football coaches running the show on both sides of the ball and the special teams. With only one win over FBS competition in 24 games, the inability of the coaching staff to prepare to this level of play was grossly on display in every unit of the team.

Poor quarterback play alone doesn't explain away getting run out of your own stadium by the likes of FIU. It's doesn't explain having Rice hang 77 on you in three quarters of play. The rank inability of the coaching staff to prepare a credible, coherent gameplan or to adjust when things aren't working is the only explanation there can be.

The players don't game plan, the coaches do. To get your butt handed to you by FIU at home is an incredible microscope on the abilities of the guys calling the shots on UNT's sidelines the past two seasons.

Giovanni Vizza gave everything he had to this team while he was here. He's a good quarterback. People who scoff at the notion of him challenging for the Texas A&M job are simply bitter. Even if he doesn't win the job there, A&M will have a backup that could start at many colleges around the country. But, the truth is, he's got the tools and talent to push anyone on the A&M roster - especially with an NFL-grade QB coach leading him.

We lost when Giovanni Vizza left.

Edited July 28, 2009 by The Fake Lonnie Finch

[Mean Green 93-98]

We lost when Giovanni Vizza left.

No argument here. If he would have stayed, he probably would have broken almost every UNT career passing record.

[meanrob]

Gee, you think? As badly as we were beaten, it's amazing he didn't throw more than 16. In 2008, Vizza threw only 16 interceptions in 493 pass attempts. He was intercepted 3.25% of the time.

Let's stack that up to the other FBS QBs who had worse interception ratios than Vizza in 2008:

Inoke Funkai, Hawaii - 6.94% - Bowl qualifer

Robert Marve, Miami - 6.10% - Bowl qualifier

Jarrett Lee, LSU - 5.95% - Bowl qualifier

Bo Levi Mitchell, SMU - 5.61%

Tavita Pritchard, Stanford - 5.12%

Nathan Enderle, Idaho - 5.01%

Chris Smelley, South Carolina - 4.97% - Bowl qualifier

Joe Webb, UAB - 4.53%

Marc Verica, Virgina - 4.53%

David Johnson, Tulsa - 4.5% - Bowl qualifier

Michael Desmoreaux, Louisiana-Lafayette, 4.45%

Chandler Harnish, Northern Illinois - 4.27% - Bowl qualifier

Hunter Cantwell, Louisville - 4.24%

Mark Cann, Marshall - 4.23%

Juice Williams, Illinois - 4.20%

Kellen Lewis, Indiana - 4.15%

Diondre Borel, Utah State - 4.13%

Chris Ponder, Florida State - 4.09% - Bowl qualifier

Kevin Moore, Tulane - 4.02%

Julian Edelman, Kent State - 4%

Jevan Snead, Mississippi - 3.98% - Bowl qualifier

Casey Dick, Arkansas - 3.92%

Boo Jackson, Ohio - 3.92%

Cullen Harper, Clemson - 3.89% - Bowl qualifier

Jimmy Clausen, Notre Dame - 3.86% - Bowl qualifier

C.J. Batcher, Northwestern - 3.68% - Bowl qualifier

Matt Grothe, South Florida - 3.68% - Bowl qualifer

Lyle Moevao, Oregon State - 3.6% - Bowl qualifier

Richard Stanzi, Iowa - 3.54%

Chris Jacquemain, Akron - 3.51%

Steven Threet, Michigan - 3.50%

Billy Farris, Colorado State - 3.43% - Bowl qualifier

Chase Daniel, Missouri - 3.41% - Bowl qualifier

Tony Pike, Cincinnati - 3.4% - Bowl qualifier

-16 QBs who threw INTs more often than Vizza played on squads who still made bowl games, including the Top 3. Those with worse interception ratios than Vizza included Heisman candidate Chase Daniels, and 2009 Heisman candidate Jevan Snead. Vizza had a higher completion percentage than Snead as well.

-Among the 24 teams who played in bowl games on or after January 1st, five had worse interception ratios than Vizza.

-31 QBs who had better interception ratios than Vizza did not play on bowl qualifying teams.

-Of the 100 Top QBs listed by completion percentage, Vizza was 29th. He ranked 35th in yards passing per game. Giovanni Vizza did his job under extraordinarily bad circumstances.

What does it all mean?

It means that college football teams don't necessarily live and die with their QB's play. For the circumstances given, Vizza did an excellent job for us. He had a higher completion percentage and lower interception ratio than 2009 Heisman candidate Jevan Snead.

So, what's the difference? Snead is coached by bona fide college football coaches. He didn't have to carry his team all the way, every single time out. Vizza was saddled with high school coaches calling the shots. The difference is always coaching. Dodge and Ford's one trick pony offense is a drag on the team as a whole.

For the past two seasons, Vizza and North Texas never had the edge of having the team prepared by college football coaches running the show on both sides of the ball and the special teams. With only one win over FBS competition in 24 games, the inability of the coaching staff to prepare to this level of play was grossly on display in every unit of the team.

Poor quarterback play alone doesn't explain away getting run out of your own stadium by the likes of FIU. It's doesn't explain having Rice hang 77 on you in three quarters of play. The rank inability of the coaching staff to prepare a credible, coherent gameplan or to adjust when things aren't working is the only explanation there can be.

The players don't game plan, the coaches do. To get your butt handed to you by FIU at home is an incredible microscope on the abilities of the guys calling the shots on UNT's sidelines the past two seasons.

Giovanni Vizza gave everything he had to this team while he was here. He's a good quarterback. People who scoff at the notion of him challenging for the Texas A&M job are simply bitter. Even if he doesn't win the job there, A&M will have a backup that could start at many colleges around the country. But, the truth is, he's got the tools and talent to push anyone on the A&M roster - especially with an NFL-grade QB coach leading him.

We lost when Giovanni Vizza left.

First off, stats can be used to prove all sorts of points but interceptions per attempt is about as worthless as it gets. Vizza was 102nd in yards per attempt (5.6) which means he better have a low INT percentage, he's barely throwing the ball down the field.

And i won't argue the point that Dodge is to blame for a lot of the failings of the team. Why? Because I just don't think it can be argued. The record speaks for itself.

However, Vizza a good quarterback? A Big 12 caliber quarterback? I'm not bitter. I saw it with my own two eyes. He had a below average year last year and he made too many bad decisions. Coaching aside, there were times when the team needed him to make a play and he didn't. Does that mean he won't get better? I don't know. I wish him the best of luck but he was a below average Sun Belt QB last year and I just can't see how it can be said now he's a legitimate Big 12 QB. How many big 12 teams recruited him? None that i remember.

Dodge has got to prove something this year, no doubt. But so do a lot of these players.

[GrandGreen]

NT was a very conservative last year despite being hammered in most games. I think Vizza was much more frustrated than even the fans with TD's offensive calls last year. TD's spread offense was a passing team's equivalent of DD's run up the middle game plans. The game plans last year stressed not turning over the ball and not beating yourself. A very faulty strategy when you have the worst defense in the nation. Yes, he limited interceptions but ended up with with one of the lowest average yards per catch in the NCAA. Which is an even more amazing statistic when you considered how many games, NT was basically playing against the subs in the third and fourth quarter. I personally preferred TD's go for broke offense of his first year to his kick a field goal no matter what the score approach last year.

I also think it time to forget about Vizza, he made a strange decision to quit but it was his to make.

Edited July 29, 2009 by GrandGreen

[TIgreen01]

Wow....didn't intend for my comment to stir a Vizza bashing debate. That was not my intent. I agree that UNT "lost" when Vizza transferred out---from a QB depth perspective. Also didn't imply that simply turning the ball over less was the miracle cure for this team. It is OBVIOUS that our defense and special teams have to get better. If it's not clear, I can start doing what Vito does and regurgitate it in every single post so that nobody mistakes that I have a clear picture of the entirety of UNT football.

Hey everybody, don't forget, we have the WORST defense AND special teams in the nation---and there really wasn't even a close second. We were high school bad on both units.

That said, you're going to argue that throwing fewer interceptions than 7th worst in the nation ISN'T going to help this team?! Not even a little?

Edited July 29, 2009 by TIgreen01

[mad dog]

I know you were disappointed with Vizza's sophomore season. I didn't think it was great statistically, but in my opinion the offensive struggles weren't due to him. You've already said he was good, but disappointing ("sophomore jinx").

The question isn't whether the quarterback makes a difference in the offense. The question is whether the NEW quarterback will be a differencemaker compared to the LAST quarterback. Given that the last QB was good, performed well, and was a pretty damn good leader... How much of a difference can Riley make EVEN IF he comes in and plays lights out from the very first game? We're hoping for an incremental step up at a position of relative strength, not a dramatic infusion of talent and ability at one of our weak spots.

Put another way... Let's say that Riley is so much better and more effective at running this offense that he dramatically increases our point totals. Last year, we averaged about 20 points per game. Let's say that Riley is so much better than Vizza, from day one, that he comes in and singlehandedly bumps up our scoring by 50% per game. Hell, make it eleven points, because Riley hypothetically turns a dead drive into a touchdown and a red zone field goal into a TD. Net gain, 11 points in every game last year.

What does that do for us? It gets us one more win, against Arkansas State in the final game of the year. Super Riley turns us into a 2-10 team again.

Or hey, let's say that Riley is so much better than Vizza that he singlehandedly DOUBLES our scoring average. In every single game, we score 20 more points. Now, we're AVERAGING 40 ppg because Riley is such a phenom. Last year, this would put us in the top 8 in the NCAA, less than a point per game behind Texas Tech.

Adding 20 points to each game would have transformed last year's team into... A 3-9 team.

That's my point. Even if Riley, as a freshman, comes in this year and dramatically outshines Vizza (and I'm not personally holding the poor kid to those sort of expectations, and certainly not at the beginning of the year) to the point where he doubles what a Vizza led offense generated... Even if the kid is so amazing as a redshirt freshman that he could outshine our already talented (remember the accolades Vizza earned?) quarterback to the point where he makes us a top 8 scoring offense... We're still only a 3 win team.

But I do agree that using a tight end, maybe even a fullback and a snap-under-center in the red zone, would help this team score more.

Probably some of the best analysis I've seen in a year.

[GrandGreen]

Yes, if you start with the assumption that the defense does not substantially improve, what the offense does hardly matters. I think the likelihood of the defense substantially improving next year is better than the offense doing the same thing.

[GoMeanGreen1999]

Yes, if you start with the assumption that the defense does not substantially improve, what the offense does hardly matters. I think the likelihood of the defense substantially improving next year is better than the offense doing the same thing.

If this defense can go from giving up 45 points per game last season to 30 points this season, that would be a HUGE improvement. I think to expect the defense to be much better than that, is a little too high of an expectation. If Riley came in and improved our scoring offense of 19 points last season by 11 that would make it pretty much even and give us a very good shot at 5-6 wins. That being said, after watching what was called the Spring game I don't think we will see that much offensive improvement. I think defense will shed about 10 points per game to 35 and the offense might improve on its scoring to 25 and put us somewhere in the ballpark of 2-3 wins.

[mad dog]

Exactly. I'm not saying some aspects about next year won't be better than last year. Individually, there are elements to be excited about, but, taken as a whole, I can't bring myself to be optimistic about our chances for even a .500 season.

Start from the obvious: we were clearly the worst team in the FBS last year. Offense was inconsistent and struggled; defense was flat out terrible. For me to belive that our record will substantively improve next year would necessitate an overall net positive gain. The problem isn't that there aren't things that are going to be better; it is that there are several things that are going to be worse, as well.

Passing game:

Positive: Our offensive line is bigger, stronger, and more experienced than last year. Kelvin Drake returns. Tight end sets will give QB some added protection. Tyler Statford may be eligible.

Negative: Brand new quaterback whose inexperience at the college level cannot be discounted. Quaterback is small and, based on the past two years, somewhat fragile, and will require additional protection. Even assuming terrific pass protection (which is something of a leap at this time), he will still need to work harder to find passing lanes.

Overall: Push. An undersized, inexperienced QB, especially one in his first year, is almost always a liability in the passing game. Despite improved protection, it is still up to him to make plays. That remains to be seen if it can happen.

Running game:

Positive: See above with offensive line. Several different options at runner who offer widely varying skill sets. All are proven in game situations and can deliver if given the chance.

Negative: This will require committment from the coaching staff to truly contribute to the team. Through two seasons, there has been very limited offensive adjustment in a broad sense, and so there are questions if such a commitment is possible.

Overall: Push. All the talent in the world won't matter if they aren't properly used. I do not believe a coaching staff designed around the shotgun pass can suddenly and dramatically morph into a run first team, especially when the coach's son is under (several feet behind?) center.

Special Teams:

Positive: New coach and "emphasis" on special teams.

Negative: Loss of a effective punter. No significant roster moves to address last year's woes.

Overall: Loss. Everything which can be said positively is based solely on conjecture. In this case, any substantive negative factor would swing this towards loss. Gandy might be the Hayden Fry of special teams: he'll need to be just to get a pulse out of a unit that is exactly the same as last year, minus your best special teams player.

Defense:

Positive: Addressed size concerns along the defensive line. Still a relatively young unit, but starting to get some multi-year lettermen. Secondary has some speed. Full year for DeLoach to put his stamp on the defense.

Negative: Starting a defense end at tackle, and a linebacker at defensive end. Secondary speed doesn't matter if you're going to bite on playaction or play out of position. Some question marks at OLB.

Overall: Push. There is undeniably some improvement on paper, and DeLoach definitely knows what he is doing. It is just a case of getting the horse to drink now that you've led it to water. Given the past few seasons, however, I think the horse is dehydrated and leaning towards death.

Coaching:

Positive: Dodge has implemented several new offensive wrinkles designed to adapt to the demands of college game. Has acknowledged special teams and will try to make that more of a priority. Brought in more experienced coaching staff and added a full time strength position. DeLoach is proven and will eventually whip his guys into shape.

Negative: All the potential in the world and a buck fifty will get you a cup of coffee. Now they must justify their potential with results.

Overall: Gain. I believe the coaching staff has learned its lessons. Whether or not they can adjust and improve remains to be seen. But all the factors are in place for me to believe coaching will be better in 09.

Overall, these five areas put the entire next season as a push. I do not expect them to be worse, but I do not expect them to be better, either.

[TheTastyGreek]

Passing game:

Positive: Our offensive line is bigger, stronger, and more experienced than last year. Kelvin Drake returns. Tight end sets will give QB some added protection. Tyler Statford may be eligible.

Negative: Brand new quaterback whose inexperience at the college level cannot be discounted. Quaterback is small and, based on the past two years, somewhat fragile, and will require additional protection. Even assuming terrific pass protection (which is something of a leap at this time), he will still need to work harder to find passing lanes.

Overall: Push. An undersized, inexperienced QB, especially one in his first year, is almost always a liability in the passing game. Despite improved protection, it is still up to him to make plays. That remains to be seen if it can happen.

Defense:

Positive: Addressed size concerns along the defensive line. Still a relatively young unit, but starting to get some multi-year lettermen. Secondary has some speed. Full year for DeLoach to put his stamp on the defense.

Negative: Starting a defense end at tackle, and a linebacker at defensive end. Secondary speed doesn't matter if you're going to bite on playaction or play out of position. Some question marks at OLB.

Overall: Push. There is undeniably some improvement on paper, and DeLoach definitely knows what he is doing. It is just a case of getting the horse to drink now that you've led it to water. Given the past few seasons, however, I think the horse is dehydrated and leaning towards death.

These are the only two mild disagreements I have with your writeup. I don't think you can discount the significant hit we took in the receiver corps. All we can rely on here is optimism and potential... I think calling the passing game a push, given the growing pains and risks associated with Riley and the total dependence on new or unproven talent... That's not realistic. I think that we'll see a drop in the passing game. Or at least that we need to expect it.

I also think you're being a little too pessimistic on defense. I believe we'll see a return to the Bleil level of performance this year. Adequate. But adequate is a pretty big gain.

[KRAM1]

Great stuff here folks...now that's what I talking about! FOOTBALL! Go Mean Green!

[TIgreen01]

Definitely a good branch to add to this thread.

Passing:

I think the passing game will be better than last year, but maybe not as good as 2007. Offensive line should be vastly improved from both seasons, while receiver has question marks (but receiver was a HUGE question mark going into 2007, nobody seems to remember this---Fitz, Jackson and Stickler really stepped it up that season). The thing about Riley vs. Vizza comparisons is that you really should expect 2009 Riley to be somewhere between 2007 and 2008 Vizza....not what Vizza would be in 2009. I think people, in this thread, keep marking our QB play DOWN b/c you are thinking what Vizza 2009 (as a junior) could be. I just don't think that's fair. Vizza played as a TRUE freshman in 2007 and as a TRUE Soph in 2008. Riley is coming into 2009 as a REDSHIRT Freshman (who got some game experience last year). QB play can be expected to be at least equal to what it has been in 2007 and 2008 (considering 2008 was really a step backwards for the position), not worse. The x-factor is lack of experienced depth at the position and this has to be a PUSH b/c of it.

Run:

I cannot see this area as anything short of a gain. You have an experience oline. You have a senior starting RB who has proven he can make plays in THIS offense. You have options behind the starting RB---quick, fast guys and bigger, straight ahead runners. Add Riley's running ability to this mix and this is a GAIN. Also, I see improvement here as a catalyst to opening up the passing game.

Special Teams:

Totally agree....can't be anything other than a LOSS until proven otherwise. Replacing Spencer will be critical.

Defense:

Considering the number of returning letterman here, the addition of the uber-experienced Dline coach, and the depth added on the dline this is a GAIN.

Coaching:

Agreed....GAIN.

Edited July 29, 2009 by TIgreen01

[The Fake Lonnie Finch]

The passing game will be a loss. FBS-level college football is leaps and bounds different than college ball. It doesn't matter what Riley "knows" or how "fast" people think he's going to be. He'll be facing defensive coordinators who have been running rings around his dad and Ford for two seasons. The speed of the game at this level will wear on him. His size will also be a factor in him wearing down. There's simply not enough there for a full season at this level of competition.

Vizza took a pounding, but he was built for it. Dodge will not be able to withstand the same kind of beating. In his final high school game, he broke a collarbone. In the small amount of time he saw the field in 2008, he absorbed a concussion. Due to Dodge and Ford's offense, he'll take a ton more hits than if his dad would use his brain and move him to defensive back or receiver where he belongs at this level.

Because it is doubtful that we'll have much of a passing game threat, the run game will also suffer. Opposing defenses will once again neutralize Dodge and Ford's pass-first offense, then clog the running lanes enough to build solid leads by halftime.

Special teams will be much better by default - Robert Drake is gone and has been replace by a proven college coach, Shelton Gandy. Gandy should be kept, or at the very least interviewed, by the new head coach when the wheels completely fall of the Dodge wagon. If anything keeps us in the games in the first half, it will be Gandy's charges on the special teams units.

The front seven will be the strength of the defense. Again, Robert Drake is gone and has been replaced with a guy whose experience dwarves all other coaches on the staff. The secondary is again young. Add to that, the safeties are again being coached by a guy who was a wide receivers coach, a quarterback coach, and then an offensive coordinator during the 17 seasons before he arrived here. In a totally sane alignment of the coaching staff, he'd be on the offensive side of the ball where he belongs. But...we're talking Coach Dodge here, so Petersen's learning curve - and our opponents' "bombs away" mentality - will continue in 2009

Overall, the defense should be much better. Any improvement we see over our one win 2008 will be due to Mike Nelson and Gary DeLoach.

As stated a couple of months ago, I'd consider 4-8, with all four wins coming in the Sun Belt, a successful season. As bad as I think the offense will be, the truest axiom in college football is that defense wins games. The Sun Belt may be "tougher" but it is still the Sun Belt. We're into Year Three of this experiment and should have the brain trust on the defensive side of the ball alone to keep two or three games close enough to steal. If we are not competitive in the Sun Belt this season, we will officially be spinning our wheels for however much longer Rick Villareal would continue to let the Dodge experiment play out.

[UNTLifer]

Yep, TFLF, Vizza put up crappy numbers his true freshman season without having the knowledge of the system Riley has and without a seasoned offensive line that Riley will play behind.

I think we all know you will criticize any and all areas that are led by coaches that didn't arrive at NT with college level experience, so Dodge and Ford will be in your crosshairs all year. Here's to Dodge and Ford proving you wrong.

[TheTastyGreek]

Riley is coming into 2009 as a REDSHIRT Freshman (who got some game experience last year).

I don't want to turn this into an argument, because I enjoyed reading your post... But Riley's game experience last year consisted of two interceptions and a season-ending concussion. I don't know that his game time was quite the same as being tested by fire and coming out ready to kick ass.

I'm not trying to tear the kid down, just keep the expectations realistic. We all need to be fair- he's a freshman, not a particularly large one, and he's having to take over a team with zero returning proven receivers. Riley's got lots of ability and a ton of potential, but it seems very, very unfair to expect him to come in and upgrade our offense immediately.

Again, not trying to fight with you. Just my perspective.

[TheTastyGreek]

Here's to Dodge and Ford proving you wrong.

Throw Clayton George in there, too.

And yes, here's to all of them proving the skeptics wrong. I hope it happens. It just damn sure hasn't happened yet.