Positives and negatives

Football Insider Board
#1

Haven’t really looked in-depth at the stats, just going off what I saw.

Positives:

No drops that I know of by the receivers.

Big plays in the passing game. Something lacking in the past.

Good ball security by the RBs.

Overall good decisions by the QBs.

D-line got stronger as the game went on.

Turnovers by the D.

Tackling was good.

Fairly a clean game penalty wise.

Negatives:

Lack of running game. No push

Lack of sustain drives. Mostly big plays.

The CBs bit a few times.

Sure I missed a few but this is just off the top of my head.

#2

Yes I would agree with that and add 2 for 2 on FGA’s as a positive along with a blocked xtra point. Potential loss of Greenlaw a negative, play of Bumper Pool a huge positive. That guy is going to be special!

#3

Another positive was the running of Maleek (sp?) Williams… I have been championing him for a while now and think he will end up being a good back for us… Not an all conference player, but a good productive back… I like the way he runs full tilt all the time…

On the other side. a huge negative it is hard to believe you missed… Was our punting… Absolutely terrible…

#4

I thought the tackling was poor. I would expect Chavis to state this in his game analysis.

#5

I saw a different game when it came to tackling, that was not a positive.

#6

[quote=“RichardDavenport”]

Haven’t really looked in-depth at the stats, just going off what I saw.

Positives:

No drops that I know of by the receivers.

Big plays in the passing game. Something lacking in the past.

We emphasized the deep passing game. Been a long time! :smiley:

#7

[quote=“RichardDavenport”]

Haven’t really looked in-depth at the stats, just going off what I saw.

Positives:

No drops that I know of by the receivers.

Big plays in the passing game. Something lacking in the past. "

We emphasized the deep passing game. Been a long time! :smiley:

#8

Chuck and Quinn also mentioned the tackling as a positive. Not having seen it, can’t comment.

#9

Punting was atrocious,
EIU rolled up 357 offensively, even with all the turnovers. Hit us for a 4th down TD as well.
Have work to do on both sides.

#10

Tackling was not good. In fact, it was bad. Run game was non existent. The OL did much better at pass blocking than opening lanes for the RB. I like our passing game but if we can’t run we won’t win any conference games. We just don’t have enough SEC talent to be successful in the conference at this point in time. Hopefully this staff will have a couple of solid recruiting classes and close the talent gap between us and the majority of teams in this conference.

#11

I’d say tackling was inconsistent. There were some moments of very good tackling, and then there were a few whiffs. I think it has improved since last year, but in the words of CCM, “There’s still plenty of work to do” (paraphrased).

#12

-Chase Harrell is a huge positive-big strong, fast and the boy can catch!

-Bumper Pool is the real deal.

-Brian Wallace was very impressive and not just his new physique.

-Ty Story provided the spark, but we have two capable quarterbacks.

-Conner Limpert looked like an SEC kicker in every way! Much improved.

-Dorian Green, Armon Watts, and even Jamario Bell are going to be contributors.

-We have a coach with class and a plan!

#13

Guess I saw a different game. I thought tackling was good and got better as the game progressed . I saw a lot of people flying to the ball. I also did not see a quarterback run up the middle for 50 yards on us like in the past.

#14

Positives:

Ty Storey…he played so well…I would be surprised if he doesn’t start next week.
Defense is improved…

Negatives:

Offensive line is not good…we knew that.
Our punting is beyond pathetic.
Cornerback can’t cover deep. He needs safety help.
White helmets need to go the way of the red matte helmet. Ship em down to Austin to use for Longhorn practice helmets.

#15

Many positives as noted.

Negatives for me is no push from line in running game.

And it appears O line doesn’t like the third string qb as they appeared to have said “0lay” and let the D line run past them to kill our qb.

Giving up 350 yards to this team is not good and while we had some good tackling, we had some very poor tackling at time too.

As someone else noted, tackling seemed inconsistent.

The big hits by our O we’re great, but would like to have seen more sustained drives as well and that’s where we need work that running game.

In all to me even the negatives are acceptable game 1 as appears we can improve on those areas.

O line remains my biggest concern but keep improving there and this team can do itself well and change the culture and build.

#16

You speak the truth as far as I am concerned. I think the one issue we have to remember is that CCM is not a miracle worker. Saban couldn’t even fix this ahaha. CCM can fix it with recruiting and he has proven that he will be a difference maker in his first full recruiting season. Seriously, we don’t have SEC level talent along Oline when everyone is healthy, much less when we have multiple injuries to (Malone, Jackson, Wagner, etc). We started 2 RS FR at LG and LT!!! We have 1 solid NFL player at Center and one RT that LOOKS like an NFL player and now may be playing up to his potential in his SENIOR season.

Eastern Ill showed us what all the other teams are going to do to our Oline. Flood it with more than our 5 can block but more importantly force our new players to make decisions on who to block. This is the formula they used on Froholdt’s first year to focus on his inexperience/decision making. It is still so hard for fans to think the Oline talent could get bad with the marketing of the Oline by CBB. We were told it was going to become OLine U. It is atrocius how far the Oline recruiting slipped the last 3 years.

#17

It’s not hard for those fans that were watching closely rather than buying the river of BS that was flowing out of the football offices the last several years! :smiley:

#18

I deserved that…ahahaha

#19

I was nervous with the way the 1st quarter started. They were moving the ball and we were not. The turnovers kept this game from getting scary. But, it is a 60 minute game and the Hogs woke up and won easily. Our boys did seem in better physical condition to finish this game stronger than EIU. EIU got gassed.

The EIU plan was to stop our running game and force our inexperienced QBs to throw the ball. They did a good job, but got beat by 35 points.

WPS!!!

#20

I think 1 positive nobody has mentioned is I believe we only gave up 1 sack that I recall. To me that is a solid improvement from past 2 years and how atrocious protecting the QB was. I may have missed 1 but I think we only gave up 1 and with them committing to bring up the safeties to stop the run our QB’s made them pay over the top. I believe I have heard our OC and CCM talk many times about how a D is going to have to try and pick one or the other to try and stop. I have a feeling this is what most teams will do to see if our QB’s will make them pay. I am a firm believer that if the QB has a little bit of time you can pick apart the back end of D’s as they can only hold their coverage for so long. Just my two cents on that.

In comparing to the last regime and couple of years, I felt our D and tackling looked better. Yes, inconsistent at times but we really flew to the ball and looked to be in WAY better shape!

Lots of great stuff and great opinions on here from our AWESOME fans…love it!