Colgate game thread, because somebody had to do it. - Lafayette Sports Fan Forum



Lafayette Sports Fan Forum Forum Index


Lafayette Sports Fan Forum > Football > 
--- Colgate game thread, because somebody had to do it.

Reply to topic

Must be logged in to watch topics

Posted: Sat Nov 12, 2016 6:56 pm

flyfisherView user's profile






Joined: 11 Dec 2012
Posts: 1306







we need to end this D3 talk. We have D1 facilities and structure. No excuse to go backwards. Plus, you don't save that much money, especially for what you would lose.

I realize this is a football conversation and I know I am stating the obvious, but it's not just a football problem. Every single team we have is a losing team. it goes beyond   Frank.

 Reply with quote
  
Posted: Sun Nov 13, 2016 7:13 am

bethlehempardView user's profile






Joined: 28 Sep 2011
Posts: 2131







Massey ratings
1-NDSU
21-Villanova*
25-Lehigh*
36-Princeton*
50-Fordham*
55-Colgate*
58-Delaware*
75-Bucknell*
85-Holy Cross*
89-Incarnate Word
94-Yale
95-Lafayette
96-Elon
97-Columbia
100-Georgetown*
104-CCSU*
122-Davidson
125th and last, Arkansas Pine Bluff

*2016 opponent

At 100 and below: Georgetown, CCSU, Robert Morris and Austin Peay. The rest in triple digits are from the PFL, SWAC and MEAC.

Army* is No. 96 in the FBS.


Last edited by bethlehempard on Sun Nov 13, 2016 7:27 am; edited 1 time in total

Reply with quote
  
Posted: Sun Nov 13, 2016 7:20 am

LafalumView user's profile






Joined: 06 Mar 2007
Posts: 3916







flyfisher wrote:
we need to end this D3 talk. We have D1 facilities and structure. No excuse to go backwards. Plus, you don't save that much money, especially for what you would lose.

I realize this is a football conversation and I know I am stating the obvious, but it's not just a football problem. Every single team we have is a losing team. it goes beyond   Frank.


That is the main point and what the study should concentrate on!!

Reply with quote
  
Posted: Sun Nov 13, 2016 8:34 am

bethlehempardView user's profile






Joined: 28 Sep 2011
Posts: 2131







The Hamilton perspective:

http://gocolgateraiders.com/news/...afayette-38-17.aspx?path=football

• Colgate defensive lineman Victor Steffen: (On the seven sacks) "We didn't try to dress it up with any kind of fancy blitzes. We just had four experienced linemen out there and we rushed four. Very vanilla, but we ended up doing pretty well with it."

Vanilla, yes, but against Lafayette.

Reply with quote
  
Posted: Sun Nov 13, 2016 9:27 am

NE LeopardView user's profile






Joined: 02 Sep 2014
Posts: 178







bethlehempard wrote:
Massey ratings
1-NDSU
21-Villanova*
25-Lehigh*
36-Princeton*
50-Fordham*
55-Colgate*
58-Delaware*
75-Bucknell*
85-Holy Cross*
89-Incarnate Word
94-Yale
95-Lafayette
96-Elon
97-Columbia
100-Georgetown*
104-CCSU*
122-Davidson
125th and last, Arkansas Pine Bluff

*2016 opponent

At 100 and below: Georgetown, CCSU, Robert Morris and Austin Peay. The rest in triple digits are from the PFL, SWAC and MEAC.

Army* is No. 96 in the FBS.


At least we beat the 2 ranked below us Very Happy

Reply with quote
  
Posted: Sun Nov 13, 2016 1:40 pm

ed65View user's profile






Joined: 04 Sep 2013
Posts: 889


Location: New York City





Two weeks to prepare for Jake and the read option, and the team could not stop it. The defensive players are too slow maybe - I really don't know.  When you look at how ND stopped Army and how 'Gate lost 6 games, I have the feeling we just don't have the players on D or the defensive coach doesn't know what to do. Disappointing to say the least.  

Not to forget, we got the score to 24-17 in the 3rd Quarter and simply died as the team has done all season.

Reply with quote
  
Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2016 8:32 am

leopard88View user's profile






Joined: 17 May 2012
Posts: 375







ed65 wrote:
Not to forget, we got the score to 24-17 in the 3rd Quarter and simply died as the team has done all season.


The game was carried live on MASN this week.  It was one of the rare times when I could watch the game on TV without having to worry about streaming it and using Chromecast.

I was disappointed that our boys couldn't score when they got to within 24-17.  That said, I was actually impressed to see that the team fought back after the score reached 24-0.  They could have very easily rolled over at that point.

Reply with quote
  
Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2016 11:25 am

edge29View user's profile






Joined: 20 Nov 2010
Posts: 767







ed65 wrote:
Two weeks to prepare for Jake and the read option, and the team could not stop it. The defensive players are too slow maybe - I really don't know.  When you look at how ND stopped Army and how 'Gate lost 6 games, I have the feeling we just don't have the players on D or the defensive coach doesn't know what to do. Disappointing to say the least.  

Not to forget, we got the score to 24-17 in the 3rd Quarter and simply died as the team has done all season.


I completely disagree.  We DO have the players.  For some reason, our players are not motivated enough to play their hardest.  There were players out there on Sat who made play after play a year or 2 ago.  You wouldn't even know are on the field against CU.  Is that completely their fault?  In the end, they're still kids who would respond to "leaders" when motivated.  We obviously don't have that person/people.

Reply with quote
  
Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2016 12:05 pm

SixtyEighterView user's profile






Joined: 28 Oct 2013
Posts: 504







Five sacks in the fourth quarter and a totally senseless personal foul penalty plus everything Frank said to the papers indicts the coaches.All the excuses Frank alludes to are directly attributable to coaching. This team doesn't commit a lot of penalties but when they do they are killers.The offensive line play has been totally subpar all season. On average I would say the team plays competently for about a quarter of the game even when it wins and slips into its malaise the rest of the time. Usually they are climbing back into the game after being bludgeoned at the start.This week may stir the somnolent because it will be a another blowout but in front the season's biggest crowd.

Reply with quote
  
Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2016 2:13 pm

LeopardBall10View user's profile






Joined: 23 Oct 2009
Posts: 291







ed65 wrote:
Two weeks to prepare for Jake and the read option, and the team could not stop it. The defensive players are too slow maybe - I really don't know.  When you look at how ND stopped Army and how 'Gate lost 6 games, I have the feeling we just don't have the players on D or the defensive coach doesn't know what to do. Disappointing to say the least.  

Not to forget, we got the score to 24-17 in the 3rd Quarter and simply died as the team has done all season.


Army is a tooooootally different offense than 'Gate. Literally no one out there is running the 'Gate offense. Dan Hunt took the Auburn/Gus Malzhan/Nevada offenses combined with the old school Gate run game and added some wrinkles. Truly innovative.

I think we have the players (some of them), but definitely not the motivation to play hard, sound, gap control defense.  We have seen Loose and Link both try to stop it to no avail. I honestly don't think PL school has had success stopping it. Gate scored more than 20 pts in every loss this year outside of the Orangmen. Not trying to validade the effort, just pointing out that this is a different animal that has not been figured out yet. The true triple option, or flex option teams have a set formula to beat. If you follow the formula and the players execute you win.
_________________
"Pride, Purpose, Passion!"

Reply with quote
  
Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2016 6:37 pm

ed65View user's profile






Joined: 04 Sep 2013
Posts: 889


Location: New York City





edge29 wrote:
ed65 wrote:
Two weeks to prepare for Jake and the read option, and the team could not stop it. The defensive players are too slow maybe - I really don't know.  When you look at how ND stopped Army and how 'Gate lost 6 games, I have the feeling we just don't have the players on D or the defensive coach doesn't know what to do. Disappointing to say the least.  

Not to forget, we got the score to 24-17 in the 3rd Quarter and simply died as the team has done all season.


I completely disagree.  We DO have the players.  For some reason, our players are not motivated enough to play their hardest.  There were players out there on Sat who made play after play a year or 2 ago.  You wouldn't even know are on the field against CU.  Is that completely their fault?  In the end, they're still kids who would respond to "leaders" when motivated.  We obviously don't have that person/people.


Edge: you are quite right to disagree.  I wish I could disagree with myself - I was just discouraged that with two weeks to prepare for the read option, we couldn't stop it.  It is symbolic of my frustration with LC Althletics and I may be more frustrated than some of you bec. I have been watching this so long -but I hang in there.  I did suggest coaching may be a fault as well - which is probably the real issue.


Last edited by ed65 on Tue Nov 15, 2016 2:27 pm; edited 1 time in total

Reply with quote
  
Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2016 6:40 pm

ed65View user's profile






Joined: 04 Sep 2013
Posts: 889


Location: New York City





LeopardBall10 wrote:
ed65 wrote:
Two weeks to prepare for Jake and the read option, and the team could not stop it. The defensive players are too slow maybe - I really don't know.  When you look at how ND stopped Army and how 'Gate lost 6 games, I have the feeling we just don't have the players on D or the defensive coach doesn't know what to do. Disappointing to say the least.  

Not to forget, we got the score to 24-17 in the 3rd Quarter and simply died as the team has done all season.


Army is a tooooootally different offense than 'Gate. Literally no one out there is running the 'Gate offense. Dan Hunt took the Auburn/Gus Malzhan/Nevada offenses combined with the old school Gate run game and added some wrinkles. Truly innovative.

I think we have the players (some of them), but definitely not the motivation to play hard, sound, gap control defense.  We have seen Loose and Link both try to stop it to no avail. I honestly don't think PL school has had success stopping it. Gate scored more than 20 pts in every loss this year outside of the Orangmen. Not trying to validade the effort, just pointing out that this is a different animal that has not been figured out yet. The true triple option, or flex option teams have a set formula to beat. If you follow the formula and the players execute you win.


Leopard ball: I REALIZE the Army offense is different but your talk of "sound, gap control defense" somehow doesn't get through to our players.  Perhaps you can tell us why not.

Reply with quote
  
Posted: Tue Nov 15, 2016 10:39 am

LeopardBall10View user's profile






Joined: 23 Oct 2009
Posts: 291







ed65 wrote:
your talk of "sound, gap control defense" somehow doesn't get through to our players.  Perhaps you can tell us why not.


Here's my opinion (not that it matters since I've traded in my clipboard for a calculator). The issue everyone has with the Colgate offense is that it is designed to always have the right play call. No matter what the defense does, the Gate offense should have a right answer, because they are reading a defender and making decisions based on that read. This also causes major headaches with gap control defense, because every time the QB carries the ball they gain an extra blocker that didn't exists in the "old school" blocking schemes.

So, what do you do when your opponent is reading you and making the correct decision based on that read? For decades, when playing the triple option, the rule of thumb has always been to tell the person being read to sit or "feather the play" to slow the read down, make the read harder, and allow the rest of the defense to catch up to the play. This method of defensive play is being applied to the Gate offense even though they schemes are so different. IMO the Gate offense hopes the defense sits and waits. By waiting you allow the Gate offense to dictate the play based on your decision so you are always wrong. What if you decided, as a defense that you were going to dictate to them? You know someone is going to be read on every play. So, what if, instead of waiting that player attacked and eliminated the read? If you eliminate the read you as a defense now know what decision is going to be made and how to attack it. By taking this approach you also create a faster defense who is not sitting on their heels waiting to be read each play, and you could force the QB into making bad reads and bad decisions to make the negative plays the Gate offense so rarely makes.
_________________
"Pride, Purpose, Passion!"

Reply with quote
  
Posted: Tue Nov 15, 2016 2:26 pm

ed65View user's profile






Joined: 04 Sep 2013
Posts: 889


Location: New York City





flyfisher wrote:
we need to end this D3 talk. We have D1 facilities and structure. No excuse to go backwards. Plus, you don't save that much money, especially for what you would lose.

I realize this is a football conversation and I know I am stating the obvious, but it's not just a football problem. Every single team we have is a losing team. it goes beyond   Frank.


DIII talk is unnecessary: see Alison's webcast last night.

Reply with quote
  
Posted: Tue Nov 15, 2016 5:10 pm

zenatorView user's profile






Joined: 17 Dec 2015
Posts: 78







ed65 wrote:
flyfisher wrote:
we need to end this D3 talk. We have D1 facilities and structure. No excuse to go backwards. Plus, you don't save that much money, especially for what you would lose.

I realize this is a football conversation and I know I am stating the obvious, but it's not just a football problem. Every single team we have is a losing team. it goes beyond   Frank.


DIII talk is unnecessary: see Alison's webcast last night.


Edge:

Forgive me for being lazy, but do not want to listen to the 1 hour plus webcast. What did the pres. say?

Reply with quote
  
Posted: Tue Nov 15, 2016 5:29 pm

LafalumView user's profile






Joined: 06 Mar 2007
Posts: 3916







zenator wrote:
ed65 wrote:
flyfisher wrote:
we need to end this D3 talk. We have D1 facilities and structure. No excuse to go backwards. Plus, you don't save that much money, especially for what you would lose.

I realize this is a football conversation and I know I am stating the obvious, but it's not just a football problem. Every single team we have is a losing team. it goes beyond   Frank.


DIII talk is unnecessary: see Alison's webcast last night.


Edge:

Forgive me for being lazy, but do not want to listen to the 1 hour plus webcast. What did the pres. say?


1. We are committed to div one and the patriot league
2. She is personally unfamiliar with Div 1 since she came from a Div 3 school so hiring a consultant seemed to be the appropriate thing to do.
3. Two non bot alumni appointed to the committee
4. Other appointees from faculty, Bot, coaches and admin not disclosed
5. study had a target date for completion of April 15
6. Consultant not named

Her comments were in the last minutes of the webcast probably due to the number of questions! This webcast was probably designed as an infomercial for the plan and campaign.

Reply with quote
  
Posted: Tue Nov 15, 2016 5:32 pm

zenatorView user's profile






Joined: 17 Dec 2015
Posts: 78







Lafalum wrote:
zenator wrote:
ed65 wrote:
flyfisher wrote:
we need to end this D3 talk. We have D1 facilities and structure. No excuse to go backwards. Plus, you don't save that much money, especially for what you would lose.

I realize this is a football conversation and I know I am stating the obvious, but it's not just a football problem. Every single team we have is a losing team. it goes beyond   Frank.


DIII talk is unnecessary: see Alison's webcast last night.


Edge:

Forgive me for being lazy, but do not want to listen to the 1 hour plus webcast. What did the pres. say?


1. We are committed to div one and the patriot league
2. She is personally unfamiliar with Div 1 since she came from a Div 3 school so hiring a consultant seemed to be the appropriate thing to do.
3. Two non bot alumni appointed to the committee
4. Other appointees from faculty, Bot, coaches and admin not disclosed
5. study had a target date for completion of April 15
6. Consultant not named

Her comments were in the last minutes of the webcast probably due to the number of questions! This webcast was probably designed as an infomercial for the plan and campaign.


Laf:
Thanks. Big relief. Go Pards.

Reply with quote
  
Reply to topic Page 3 of 3
Page Previous  1, 2, 3
« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

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
Jump to:  
All times are GMT - 5 Hours

The time now is Sat Aug 19, 2017 3:28 pm

phpvBB - Lafayette Sports Fan Forum - Top - MODs

Card File  Gallery  Forum Archive
Visit Justinsanity.net for all your phpvBB needs.
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group.
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum