|
Must be logged in to watch topics
|
| Posted: |
Please Register and Login to this forum to stop seeing this advertsing.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 3:10 pm |
Pard94
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 762
Location: Weare, NH
|
| |
Didn't play our best game but escaped with a win. We'll need a better effort against Colgate and Holy Cross.
Our O-line has to play better going forward. Curely looked good today as did the receivers. On to Bucknell. Hopefully we don't step into any sort of trap. We could use a little breather before going against the other elites.
_________________
Pard94 |
|
| |
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 6:53 pm |
Newleopardfan
Joined: 24 Aug 2009
Posts: 45
|
| |
Agreed. My quick read: big differences from past weeks were: 1) O-line couldn't open any holes inside and often our RBs were met 1-2 yards deep in our backfield and had to fight to the LOS; 2) D looked slow in lateral pursuit and weak in open field tackles -- maybe this is just what happens when you play off someone with Skelton's size, speed and arm. Still, we made some huge stops when we needed to, and one impressive 90 yard drive. And McGovern played really well. I think we could really use a bye week about now. |
|
| |
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 7:56 pm |
DaveR
Joined: 25 Feb 2007
Posts: 70
|
| |
Why the hell are we not punting on 4th and 2 on the FU 34 at the end of the game? I know if we make it it's 'game over' but even if we punt it into the end zone, it's 14 extra yards that they have to cover on the last drive. Too close for comfort...
_________________
BEAT LEHIGH!!! |
|
| |
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 8:05 pm |
Pard94
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 762
Location: Weare, NH
|
| |
| DaveR wrote: | | Why the hell are we not punting on 4th and 2 on the FU 34 at the end of the game? I know if we make it it's 'game over' but even if we punt it into the end zone, it's 14 extra yards that they have to cover on the last drive. Too close for comfort... |
I agree...that was a head scratcher. If disaster unfolds (and it damn near did) and we lose that game Tavani would have been skewered and rightly so. Hopefully that's his only screw up now that we're in the homestretch.
_________________
Pard94 |
|
| |
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 8:54 pm |
The Maroon
Joined: 23 Feb 2007
Posts: 459
Location: Bethlehem, PA
|
| |
Missed way too much of the game to say much....but that 4th and 2 call had me livid. Didn't like it at all...but Tavani's got a lot more riding on things than I do.
Judging purely by the numbers it looks like Fordham...like a lot of other teams...decided they were going to force Curley to beat us. Looks like it was a bad gamble. 305 yards...He's now on pace to pass for 2,700 yards and 20 TD's with over 60% of his passes completed. These are "Baueresque" numbers from his 1988 season--I realize not as gaudy as Glavic but I think we can safely agree it's a whole different dynamic out there.
We've always talked about Curley in terms of "managing the game" and he got yanked last season inexplicably (the decision is looking dumber by the minute). There's a LOT of season to be played, but #5, the "functional, manage the game" QB could leave College Hill as one of the all time best.
Let's get ready for the Bison.
_________________
I bleed Maroon |
|
| |
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 25, 2009 9:16 am |
Andy
Joined: 23 Feb 2007
Posts: 859
|
| |
| The Maroon wrote: | Missed way too much of the game to say much....but that 4th and 2 call had me livid. Didn't like it at all...but Tavani's got a lot more riding on things than I do.
Judging purely by the numbers it looks like Fordham...like a lot of other teams...decided they were going to force Curley to beat us. Looks like it was a bad gamble. 305 yards...He's now on pace to pass for 2,700 yards and 20 TD's with over 60% of his passes completed. These are "Baueresque" numbers from his 1988 season--I realize not as gaudy as Glavic but I think we can safely agree it's a whole different dynamic out there.
We've always talked about Curley in terms of "managing the game" and he got yanked last season inexplicably (the decision is looking dumber by the minute). There's a LOT of season to be played, but #5, the "functional, manage the game" QB could leave College Hill as one of the all time best.
Let's get ready for the Bison. |
I didnt mind going for it 4th and two late in the game, I just wasnt crazy about the call to run it up the middle, which had to be exactly what Fordham would have wanted us to do. There have to be some options that lie between the "sideline fade" that we threw on 3rd and short and the dive play. IMO one is too risky and the other too basic. Another questionable call would have been decision not to go for 2 pt conversion at 19.
Amazing that FU D was considered "weak". They werent weak yesterday, very difficult up front, and were very physical. As Maroon pointed out, they decided to take away the run and force us to throw into the weather. The weak part is apparently the pass coverage. Like no other Tavani team that I recall, we just have so many offensive weapons. Bennett is showing us a lot and Layton is a one ring circus. Rob made good decisions yesterday and threw some perfect passes--the corner of the endzone pass to Layton was awesome.
That FU RB #32 was a horse, 6-3 225 or so. From the same HS as our Ty Coon. It seemed like Massella made concessions to the weather offensively, hardly throwing downfield at all first half. Much of Skelton"s yardage came from passes into the flat, minimizing risk, where their athletic receivers made hay. Strategy almost paid off. Good effort form Rams and a great sign that we were able to prevail.
DeAndre so important on kick coverage. Tremendous. McGovern all over the field.
Hopefully can give Schmidlien's shoulder this week off.
As 94 said, a lot of fun. GO PARDS! |
|
| |
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 25, 2009 9:18 am |
Pard94
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 762
Location: Weare, NH
|
| |
| carney2 wrote: | | The Maroon wrote: | | We've always talked about Curley in terms of "managing the game" and he got yanked last season inexplicably (the decision is looking dumber by the minute). There's a LOT of season to be played, but #5, the "functional, manage the game" QB could leave College Hill as one of the all time best. |
When the injury bug hits - and it will - he's the one guy we cannot lose. |
I am afraid it may have hit already. Anybody have the latest on Schmidlein? I know the orginal his was classified as a stinger. Did he exhaserbate (sp?) on the play that took him out in the 4th? I hope it wasn't a seperated shoulder. They may want to rest him this week even if he can go. He's one gun we need ready for the final three games.
_________________
Pard94 |
|
| |
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 25, 2009 2:33 pm |
DaveR
Joined: 25 Feb 2007
Posts: 70
|
| |
| Andy wrote: | | I didnt mind going for it 4th and two late in the game, I just wasnt crazy about the call to run it up the middle, which had to be exactly what Fordham would have wanted us to do. There have to be some options that lie between the "sideline fade" that we threw on 3rd and short and the dive play. IMO one is too risky and the other too basic. |
Andy, I agree. I wouldn't have been as pi$$ed if the call had been less predictable, even a play action screen pass. I don't even think we had any wide receivers on the field for that play. Good thing it didn't come back to bite us.
_________________
BEAT LEHIGH!!! |
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
Page 1 of 1
|
| Posting Rules |
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
| | |
|
All times are GMT - 5 HoursThe time now is Fri Dec 18, 2009 5:44 pm
|
