BobcatAttack.com - For Fans of Ohio University Sports

Welcome Guest!
Create an Account

site search

where to watch

about us

advertise with us

help

BobcatAttack.com Message Board

Ohio Football

Topic: Compelling?

Topic: Compelling?

Author

Message

Monroe Slavin
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Oxnard, CA
Post Count: 9,121

Status: Offline

Compelling?

Posted: 11/1/2012 11:35:09 PM

Sorry. I was not impressed with tonight's EMU. 17-14 lead at half against that team? EMU was terrible but could've easily been tied (missed FG) or led at the half.

If we keep playing the seemingly uninspired ball that I've seen for themost of the last five games, it's not going to be pretty.

Random thoughts:

We don't put any stress on the opposition at all. We're totally passive--offense and defense--playing some kind of contain/same old stuff. No blitzes, no hurry-up offense, linebackers and d-linemen not particularly dynamic.

No passion, no excitement. I definitely like that we aren't emotion driven. But to show no fire at all is not good. Save for Daz, I see about no emotion on the field. We are boring. We lose the in person audience, the tv audience and the webcast audience. Boring. No fire shown.

Last Edited: 11/1/2012 11:41:39 PM by Monroe Slavin

Where's the band?!
WHERE"S THE BAND?!

DesignspiritUSA.com
The Pets On The Go Collection of pet gear travel bags
The Holiday Tote Bigg Bagg Collection--over-sized, reversible, extra pockets; now love carrying packages as much as you love shopping!

Monroe Slavin
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Oxnard, CA
Post Count: 9,121

Status: Offline

RE: Compelling?

Posted: 11/1/2012 11:47:58 PM

Donte Foster--yes!!

Do we really totally lack any standout talent at all or is it just our approach to offense and defense? Yeah, we are absoluely going to have some punts blocked. We can't keep just getting them off.

What do you call it when the opposition has a 3rd and long against us? The play before their next first down. (29 yard gain on EMU's first 3rd down of game on first drive of game, their qb running for firsts.)

Could we just once run a two back set. And, hey, do ya think the oppo's defense knows when the ball is gonna be snapped--like a count after our guard taps the center?!

L.C.
General User

Member Since: 8/31/2005
Location: United States
Post Count: 10,064

Status: Offline

RE: Compelling?

Posted: 11/1/2012 11:52:06 PM

Ohio had over 300 yards in the first half, and I'm sorry if that wasn't enough. While the lead was "only" 24-14, keep in mind that Ohio had 2 turnovers in the fist half to no takeaways, and also had an exchange of punts where they lost 25 yards, which was about like a half turnover. When you are -2 or 2.5 in turnovers, you are usually behind, not ahead. Besides the 300 yards, they also wore down EMU, with the expected result - the score got out of hand late in the game.

It's an odd day when a 45-14 win isn't good enough to satisfy people anymore.

Last Edited: 11/2/2012 12:16:56 AM by L.C.

�We have two ears and one mouth so that we can listen twice as much as we speak.� ― Epictetus

Monroe Slavin
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Oxnard, CA
Post Count: 9,121

Status: Offline

RE: Compelling?

Posted: 11/1/2012 11:54:15 PM

Will someone please fake a fair catch so that the oppo's cover team can't down the ball at our one yard line. redhawk did it to us last week--result was ball into end zone and they got it at 20 (25?) instead of we covered it inside their 20.

I don't get it. EMU is worst in the conference--the nation?--vs the run, yet we didn't really establish a running game for the 2nd week in a row.

Could we fake the run before we pass more, to slow down the defense? Could we pump fake from the qb once in a while?

We just don't play with any urgency. Not dynamic at all. Maybe we are playing to the best of our ability. If so, the next few weeks may be painful.

RSBobcat
General User

Member Since: 8/22/2010
Location: Columbus, OH
Post Count: 4,401

Status: Offline

RE: Compelling?

Posted: 11/2/2012 12:03:45 AM

Boykin showed some passion tonight - stretching a few of those up the middle runs for 4-5 extra yds after contact.

I liked that we got a stop and actually drove for a score at the end of the 1st half instead of just getting conservative and running the clock out.

The passing game just has not been "sharp" - passes bit off target, and too many drops - hopefully that just sharpens up a bit. I think playing "looser" could help that, and maybe tonight's win lets them loosen up a bit.

Yeah - that "tap" - 100% predictable snap timing.

Tackling? Ongoing "fundamental" lapses.

I will say this about OUr Q back pressure - I saw more "holds" tonight than the last World Series of Poker episode I watched. I was surprised OUr D line still had any jersey's left at the end of the game.

Last Edited: 11/2/2012 12:09:16 AM by RSBobcat

RS Bobcat

L.C.
General User

Member Since: 8/31/2005
Location: United States
Post Count: 10,064

Status: Offline

RE: Compelling?

Posted: 11/2/2012 12:03:51 AM

Monroe Slavin wrote:

...I don't get it. EMU is worst in the conference--the nation?--vs the run, yet we didn't really establish a running game for the 2nd week in a row....

Against EMU, Ohio had 304 yards rushing, which is well over their average of 210 yards. They averaged 7.2 yards a carry, nearly twice their YTD average of 4.4 yards a carry, and also well in excess of the horrible 6.3 yards a carry EMU normally gives up.

In both total rushing yardage, and in yardage per carry, this was the high game for the year for Ohio. In the case of yards/carry, it was the best by a very wide margin. The average yards per carry by game:

Penn State - 3.7
NMSU - 5.7
Marshall - 3.8
Norfolk State - 3.7
U. Mass - 5.3
Buffalo - 4.1
Akron - 5.1
Miami - 3.8
EMU - 7.2

Last Edited: 11/2/2012 12:13:33 AM by L.C.

�We have two ears and one mouth so that we can listen twice as much as we speak.� ― Epictetus

Buster
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2007
Post Count: 405

Status: Offline

RE: Compelling?

Posted: 11/2/2012 12:04:02 AM

Monroe Slavin wrote:

Let's be honest with ourselves. Did you expect better after having 4 days to prepare for EMU, after such a moral defeating loss? We started off slow (nothing new), but got back to doing the things that got us wins all season. Keep grinding until the opponent's defense has nothing left in the 4th qtr. We are not an explosive team that is going to blow teams apart.

I don't really see uninspired football. I saw the OLine making big holes. Ryan Boykin trucking through piles of defenders. I'll admit, our defense is still very soft and can look uninspired sometimes. There's much to improve still if we are going to win a MAC Championship.

I'll tell ya where we'll go. Someplace warm. A place where the beer flows like wine. Where beautiful women instinctively flock like the salmon of Capistrano. I'm talkin' bout a little place called... ATHENS.

bostonbobcat
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: East Bridgewater, MA
Post Count: 268

Status: Offline

RE: Compelling?

Posted: 11/2/2012 12:04:06 AM

This is the first time in my life I've seen someone disappointed about only running for 304 yards. I know it wasn't quite as good as the 612 from 1997, but they didn't throw the ball that day.

And getting the halftime score wrong.

You've outdone yourself this time.

bostonbobcat
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: East Bridgewater, MA
Post Count: 268

Status: Offline

RE: Compelling?

Posted: 11/2/2012 12:08:36 AM

And the defense, while unable to set the edge against EMU's running game, did manage four sacks and forced the QB to pull the ball down and take off.

Tackling needs to improve big time.

anorris
General User

Member Since: 7/6/2010
Location: Bristol, CT
Post Count: 2,262

Status: Offline

RE: Compelling?

Posted: 11/2/2012 12:21:41 AM

bostonbobcat wrote:

This times eleventy billion.

L.C.
General User

Member Since: 8/31/2005
Location: United States
Post Count: 10,064

Status: Offline

RE: Compelling?

Posted: 11/2/2012 12:31:26 AM

In summary:
1. The defense also held EMU under their season averages for yardages
2. The defense held EMU to 2/3 of their season average for points
3. The offense had the most rushing yardage of any game this season
4. The offense had vastly more yards per rush than any game this season
5. The team completely dominated the line of scrimmage, and totally wore EMU down, more so than any game this year
6. The team won by the biggest margin yet this year
7. EMU was handed their second worst defeat of the year
8. ...all this despite losing the battle of turnovers for the first time this year
9. ...all this with countless starters out
10. ...all this on a short week

...and it's not good enough? Say what??????

I am more than a little shocked at the response of people on this board. I think some people overdosed on the green koolaid, and literally got to thinking that Ohio could play with the likes of Alabama. Ohio has a nice, solid team. They play fundamentally sound football, but not perfect football. Especially after the injuries, Ohio does not have a ton of NFL-ready talent on the field. In fact, after the injuries, at best Ohio has average MAC-level talent. Ohio may win every remaining game, or they may lose them, but they won't win them automatically. If they win it will be because of hard work, because of being more relentless than the foes, not because they are automatically "better".

Enjoy the wins. Be proud of the effort that Ohio put in. Ohio won today's game because they have worked harder, but make no mistake, EMU's level of talent is not that far below Ohio's level. It is not automatic that Ohio "should" win. Drink the green koolaid, but in moderation.

�We have two ears and one mouth so that we can listen twice as much as we speak.� ― Epictetus

Ozcat
General User

Member Since: 1/4/2005
Location: Gahanna, OH
Post Count: 818

Status: Offline

RE: Compelling?

Posted: 11/2/2012 12:41:44 AM

bostonbobcat wrote:

You've outdone yourself this time.

Haha. It'll get worse too! Basketball starts in 8 days . . .

RSBobcat
General User

Member Since: 8/22/2010
Location: Columbus, OH
Post Count: 4,401

Status: Offline

RE: Compelling?

Posted: 11/2/2012 12:44:22 AM

anorris wrote:

bostonbobcat wrote:

This times eleventy billion.

Uh - so by a factor of 110,000,000,000? Any potential margin of error there?

RS Bobcat

bostonbobcat
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: East Bridgewater, MA
Post Count: 268

Status: Offline

RE: Compelling?

Posted: 11/2/2012 12:47:34 AM

Ozcat wrote:

bostonbobcat wrote:

You've outdone yourself this time.

Haha. It'll get worse too! Basketball starts in 8 days . . .

I give it the second media timeout, we aren't winning by double digits and someone calls for Christian's head.

Ryan Carey
Site Programmer

Member Since: 11/11/2004
Post Count: 948

Status: Offline

RE: Compelling?

Posted: 11/2/2012 12:50:13 AM

L.C. wrote:

I think some people overdosed on the green koolaid, and literally got to thinking that Ohio could play with the likes of Alabama.

I was thinking some people are drinking something a bit stronger than Kool-Aid after reading these posts, especially when they don't even get the halftime score right. Uninspired? Defense was hitting them hard all night and had lots of pressure on the QB.

Can we give the whole hurry up offense thing a rest. It's obvious the coaching staff would rather limit the defensive substitutions but still wants to control the clock, survey the field, and call the plays based on what they see from the defense. For somebody always preaching to people to get their "MO" you seem to be a few credit hours short based on these rants tonight.

Ryan M. Carey
BBA 2001

Monroe Slavin
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Oxnard, CA
Post Count: 9,121

Status: Offline

RE: Compelling?

Posted: 11/2/2012 12:57:00 AM

Boykin ran well. Didn't he have a run of about 50 yards? And Vick and the back-ups gained about 50 or so on the ground at the very end. Now, I know that you can't discount Boykin's long run. But absent that and the scrub time yards, we didn't run that well consistently.

Also, TT must have picked up about 40 or so yards on runs on third downs on what started on passing plays.

Sorry. We didn't run that well.

We lack urgency and emotion--haven't shown much of either over the last five weeks.

Yes, we wore down a pretty lousy EMU starting late--very late--in the third quarter. Maybe it's okay because of 3 games in 12 days. But I am not so confident for the upoming games.

bostonbobcat
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: East Bridgewater, MA
Post Count: 268

Status: Offline

RE: Compelling?

Posted: 11/2/2012 1:10:21 AM

Rushing              No Gain Loss  Net TD Lg  Avg -------------------------------------------------
Boykin, Ryan         18  131    3  128  1 57  7.1
Blankenship, Beau    11   73    1   72  1 23  6.5
Patterson, Daz'mond   2   37    0   37  1 29 18.5
Tettleton, Tyler      7   36    4   32  0 10  4.6
Vick, Derrius         3   32    0   32  0 13 10.7
Hammonds, Kyle        1    3    0    3  0  3  3.0
Totals...            42  312    8  304  3 57  7.2

Take away the 57-yard run (don't ask me why some people play this game, because the object of the game is to have runs like that) but 17-71 is still better than 4/carry.
The 2s put a drive together and scored, this wasn't like 25 empty yards like the end of the first half vs. PSU. Those yards had a meaning.
You ask any football coach, from the NFL on down to flag football for preschoolers, they'd be thrilled to have the box score pasted above.

bostonbobcat
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: East Bridgewater, MA
Post Count: 268

Status: Offline

RE: Compelling?

Posted: 11/2/2012 1:18:39 AM

Monroe Slavin wrote:

Well it was obvious that you missed the drive before halftime because you thought it was 17-14, there was urgency there. Then got the ball to start the second half and scored to go from 3 points to 17 points without EMU running a play that didn't involve taking a knee.

Why are you so insistent on a hurry-up offense. The last thing this team needs is for the defense to be on the field any longer than need be. And as it was, EMU 33-27 in terms of time of possession.

The running yardage for Tettleton, hey, the other team is trying to make plays too. And today the QB had the smarts to know when to scramble and when to cut his losses. TT is pretty good outside the pocket, him running is a good thing.

You might have the game on, but do you watch the game?

Monroe Slavin
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Oxnard, CA
Post Count: 9,121

Status: Offline

RE: Compelling?

Posted: 11/2/2012 1:22:20 AM

bostonbobcat wrote:

Rushing              No Gain Loss  Net TD Lg  Avg -------------------------------------------------
Boykin, Ryan         18  131    3  128  1 57  7.1
Blankenship, Beau    11   73    1   72  1 23  6.5
Patterson, Daz'mond   2   37    0   37  1 29 18.5
Tettleton, Tyler      7   36    4   32  0 10  4.6
Vick, Derrius         3   32    0   32  0 13 10.7
Hammonds, Kyle        1    3    0    3  0  3  3.0
Totals...            42  312    8  304  3 57  7.2

Take away the 57-yard run (don't ask me why some people play this game, because the object of the game is to have runs like that) but 17-71 is still better than 4/carry.
The 2s put a drive together and scored, this wasn't like 25 empty yards like the end of the first half vs. PSU. Those yards had a meaning.
You ask any football coach, from the NFL on down to flag football for preschoolers, they'd be thrilled to have the box score pasted above.

So, Daz, Vick and Hammonds get 72 during pure scrub time and TT gets 36 (I think that most of those were on scrambles), leaving our mainstays during prime time with 29 carries for 204. That's an average of about 7. And you can't discount the 57 yarder. But without it, we're at 28 for 147, about 5 per.

Again, EMU's stats on defending the run were horrible. I don't feel that we estabished the run in the way that a) we need to and b) we've done pretty consistently until recently.

We got 13 first downs rushing. EMU got 10.

I hope that I eat my words. Maybe we're a little dinged on the O-line. Let's see what we do over the next games.

bostonbobcat
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: East Bridgewater, MA
Post Count: 268

Status: Offline

RE: Compelling?

Posted: 11/2/2012 1:26:31 AM

Monroe Slavin wrote:

bostonbobcat wrote:

Rushing              No Gain Loss  Net TD Lg  Avg -------------------------------------------------
Boykin, Ryan         18  131    3  128  1 57  7.1
Blankenship, Beau    11   73    1   72  1 23  6.5
Patterson, Daz'mond   2   37    0   37  1 29 18.5
Tettleton, Tyler      7   36    4   32  0 10  4.6
Vick, Derrius         3   32    0   32  0 13 10.7
Hammonds, Kyle        1    3    0    3  0  3  3.0
Totals...            42  312    8  304  3 57  7.2

Take away the 57-yard run (don't ask me why some people play this game, because the object of the game is to have runs like that) but 17-71 is still better than 4/carry.
The 2s put a drive together and scored, this wasn't like 25 empty yards like the end of the first half vs. PSU. Those yards had a meaning.
You ask any football coach, from the NFL on down to flag football for preschoolers, they'd be thrilled to have the box score pasted above.

And there is not one coach in football that would complain about averaging 5 yards/carry.

Monroe Slavin
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Oxnard, CA
Post Count: 9,121

Status: Offline

RE: Compelling?

Posted: 11/2/2012 1:31:30 AM

Sorry, boston, but we recd the 2nd half kick off, ran a few plays (did not score), then EMU had a drive (did not score) for about 8 minutes, then we scored first points of 2nd half very late 3rd qtr. I wasn't really worried after that but we had at least two prior such games somewhat similar to this which sorta came down to the last seconds against not very good teams.

I saw the same urgency tonight that I've seen in our last five games. We played about as we did against redhawk, just EMU is not good at all.

kents vs. emu: 332 yards on ground for 5.6 avg and led 38-7 after 3.
balls vs emu:349 yards, 6.0 avg, up 34-14 after 3.
rockets vs emu: 269 yds, avg 6.9, up 49-37 after 3.

Last Edited: 11/2/2012 1:37:30 AM by Monroe Slavin

bostonbobcat
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: East Bridgewater, MA
Post Count: 268

Status: Offline

RE: Compelling?

Posted: 11/2/2012 1:53:26 AM

Concede the start of the 3rd.

Bobcat36
General User

Member Since: 1/5/2005
Location: Delaware, OH
Post Count: 1,167

Status: Offline

RE: Compelling?

Posted: 11/2/2012 3:08:15 AM

Monroe Slavin wrote:

Do we really totally lack any standout talent at all or is it just our approach to offense and defense?

Beau is ranked 8th in the nation in rushing

Tyler has thrown 15 TD's to only 2 INT's (one of which was tipped at the line)...He is 1 of only 3 QB's in the Nation with 2 or less INT's and 10 or more TD's.

Donte Foster caught for 164 yards tonight

Keith Moore now has 76 tackles to date in 2012

GoBobcats!!!! Always have been and always will be... Ohio's First and Finest!

L.C.
General User

Member Since: 8/31/2005
Location: United States
Post Count: 10,064

Status: Offline

RE: Compelling?

Posted: 11/2/2012 4:06:21 AM

What some here do not seem to understand is what happens when two teams with nominally equal talent play, and one works harder, is better conditioned, is more relentless, and just wants it more, and when that team is winning the battle in the trenches. What you see is exactly what this game looked like. I've seen it a hundred times. This season alone we saw it tonight, and we saw it against Penn State. The teams play close in the first quarter, fairly close in the first half of the second quarter, but the better team begins to assert dominance in the last half of the second quarter. Then, along comes half time, and the worse team gets a chance to re-group, and they come out, and play tough in the beginning of the third quarter, but they can't sustain it. Somewhere in the middle of the third quarter the wheels fall off, and the game that seemed close becomes lopsided.

You can think of it like a boxing match. One fighter keeps going to the body. At first it doesn't seem to be doing any good, but over time, it takes a toll. Ohio's offensive and defensive lines were dominant, and they took a toll on EMU. EMU was guilty of a lot of penalties on the offensive line side, trying to stop Ohio, and on the defensive side, they had no sacks at all. But that's just the visible signs. If you were on the field, you probably would have heard them sucking wind as the game went on.

EMU has talent that isn't that much different from Ohio. They don't have the coaching, the conditioning, or the relentlessness. Therefore the longer the game went on, the more apparent those differences became.

As for saying "without the long runs" or "without the runs late in the game", why not say "without the few that got stuffed, they averaged over 9 yards, or "except for the first quarter...". If you are going to compare one game to another, you compare 60 minutes. Both games are the same length. Both games have a part where the teams are fresh, and a part where they are worn down. Even if you want to play that game, look at Beau. Most of the people in the chat felt Boykin was running better, even before Boykin's long run. Beau had no runs at the end, and no long runs. He still averaged 6.5 yards a carry, a great game.

However you slice it, this was the best rushing game for Ohio in quite some time. Were the Bobcats perfect? No, they had 2 turnovers, and they had a few dropped passes, and some plays where the didn't contain well, and some plays where they didn't tackle well. They can learn from those. But, on the whole, Ohio dominated at the point of attack all night, and the team that does that is going to win 99% of the time. Those that always watch the ball might miss that dominance, but it was there. You can see it in the fact that Ohio had a lot of sacks, and flushed their QB out of the pocket even more often, and the fact that Ohio didn't give up any sacks. You can see it in large average total yards per rush. You can see it in the number of times Ohio disrupted their runs before they got started. Yes, EMU had a number of runs that broke contain and went for good chunks, but for the entire game they only averaged 3.5 yards a carry, not good at all. The runs might have seemed bigger than that because they Ohio defense was moving the EMU offensive line backwards. On the other side of the ball, if you look at EMU's defensive stats, I'm sure you'll probably find an unusually high percentage of tackles made by DBs, because the EMU line was pancaked or moved out of the way. Maybe a game won by domination at the point of attack isn't your cup of tea, but it does happen to be mine, and I enjoyed this game a lot.

Last Edited: 11/2/2012 4:10:32 AM by L.C.

�We have two ears and one mouth so that we can listen twice as much as we speak.� ― Epictetus

Pataskala
General User

Member Since: 7/8/2010
Location: At least six feet away from anybody else
Post Count: 9,152

Status: Offline

RE: Compelling?

Posted: 11/2/2012 6:50:04 AM

I disagree that EMU and Ohio have about the same talent. Maybe among the starters, but they don't have any kind of depth. Once a front line player goes down, they're sunk. I do agree about their coaching, conditioning, etc. Seemed like every other play somebody for them was coming out with an injury. Plus, they just plain ran out of gas in the second half, which also speaks to their depth. And as I mentioned elsewhere, they lack fundamentals in nearly all aspects of the game.

The original post complained about the "poor" first half showing. Remember, Ohio NEVER TRAILED in this game. Yes, they almost got a FG on their first possession, but "almosts" don't count. We scored on our first possession and were never headed. It's been obvious all season long that this Ohio team starts slowly, maybe because the opposition is more jacked, or maybe because we need to get a feel for the game. Accept it.

We will get by.
We will get by.
We will get by.
We will survive.

Showing Replies:	1 - 25 of 43 Posts
Jump to Page:	1 \| 2 Next >

View Other 'Ohio Football' Topics

There are 222 Active Visitors on BobcatAttack.com

218 Guests
4 Registered Users:
	FJC31, shabamon, GoCats105, greencat

There are no other users looking at this page.