Quote from: TrainsEqualCrowdNoise on September 28, 2008, 11:37:12 PMQuote from: ShowMe on September 28, 2008, 11:15:03 PM
I'm not sure what you consider mistakes in the passing game. We went 3 games (89 passes) without an interception, we missed some opportunities passing and catching the ball in those 89 passes. We were passing from multiple sets which may have had a major impact. This is the first game we turned the ball over on picks. This is also the first time we went exclusively with the spread against one of the best defense in the conference. Cornell moved the ball very effectively running and passing the against Wartburg. It was a balanced attack 187 running and 229 passing) and I would consider Saturday a dual threat game. It was an accomplishment for the team. Now what makes Wartburg a good team is they have players that can make plays. Two of the interceptions where good catches by the Wartburg defense. The two picks for points went straight to the defense and mostly due to pressure first and then the execution under pressure.
What I mean by mistakes in the passing game, is a lack of consistency, and from what I watched over the internet, some really poor decisions when throwing the football. Yes, there wasn't an interception thrown in the first 3 games. However, in the first game we were 5-20 for 49 yards, followed by a better performance of 20-33 for 186. In the third game it appears that a 16-36 for 148 is a alright day but most of those completions came when Coe had the game well in hand and was basically playing a run the clock out defense and thats still less than 50% completion percentage. From the game I watched against Wartburg, it seemed to me that we were at times to willing to just chuck it up for grabs instead of going through a progression and finding the open receiver, or even taking the ball and running for positive yards. These are the things I consider "mistakes" as they are either turnovers or no gains when there was a possibility of positive yards and keep drives moving.
I don't want it too seem like I am being overly critical, because I think there have been made great strides just by opening up the offense and using our QB's legs to an advantage. We just need to see more consistency out of the passing game and then teams will really have to choose between trying to contain the run threat or trying to limit the passing game.
I believe you are a bit overly critical because your perspective does not consider the issues leading up to throwing the ball. In a logical sequence of events, you have to correct the problems in order and too often people look to the obvious answer. You question the progression but did not acknowledge the effect of defensive pressure on the progression. You also did not mention whether there were receivers available to throw to when poor decisions were made? Something else that wasn't mentioned in your analysis was the impact of running routes. Our receivers need to run better routes, run the routes consistently, faster and must be conscious of the blitz on the quarterback. There were a number of occasions when the quarterback was ready to throw the ball and the receivers had their backs to the quarterback, had to wait or just rid of the ball. I hope the Cornell receivers read this perspective
Again, you seem more focused on the quarterback which is normally the obvious answer. I agree, we have some opportunity for improvement with the quarterback.
In the first game, I believe the problems with the passing game started with the coaching strategy. Again, the stats are only cold facts, they don't tell a human story. There was an obvious difference in the passing game strategy the second game. If we have that strategy the first game, we win. The line was dominated in the third game, in the first half the coach tried several different formations, sets, etc, that did not work, the defense shut down the run, we faced too many 3rd and longs and we did not have any rhythm in the passing game but was forced to pass. In the second half of the third game, Cornell went to the spread and started to move the ball. It wasn't because of the score, it was the first strategy that worked. Which, IMHO, lead to the decision to move to the spread. In the previous games, we did not catch too many routine passes. Too many because we are not a good team and cannot afford to miss when all things leading up to hitting the receiver works. Our receivers are too timid too, they must be more aggressive trying to catch the ball. Look at the news articles of Cornell's opponent, you will see receivers and defenders diving for the ball. I saw the Coe receivers twist in mid air to catch an imperfect pass. Our receivers seem to want a perfect pass and are missing too many of the good passes, for us 2 is too many. We have had good passes thrown for touchdowns but missed, the stats don't show it. I know you will consider it the QB fault but I'm trying to get you to see the impact of other mistakes and understand how those mistakes impact the direction of the game.
Again, I hope the Cornell receivers consider my comments feedback and serious work to improve because I believe the receivers are a key aspect of the game that must improve on offense. We need the other receivers to step up and make plays. The receivers did makes more plays in the Wartburg game, the most they have made this season in a game. With a young line/QB, pressure on the quarterback, it's not a perfect world. You cannot be critical of the skill positions until there is enough time for the quarterback and receivers to do their thing.
I believe for us to analyze this further, we will need to discuss it at a detailed level, not just at the results level.
