I know hindsight is 20/20 but I want to pose a question and see what you all think....

Does UCF win this one if they started Holman?


Also...UCF had virtually no running game in this one. What are your thoughts on your backs, oline etc?



And...GREAT game. You guys have nothing to hang your head about. It was a gutsy performance and you gotta be proud of how you took the late in the game and build from there.

(08-30-2014 03:23 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  I know hindsight is 20/20 but I want to pose a question and see what you all think....

Does UCF win this one if they started Holman?


Also...UCF had virtually no running game in this one. What are your thoughts on your backs, oline etc?



And...GREAT game. You guys have nothing to hang your head about. It was a gutsy performance and you gotta be proud of how you took the late in the game and build from there.

I think we win if Holman starts. Our RBs seem like Stanback is for real, then everyone else is average. OL will be better when they have a couple of games together. Talent is there, chemistry is still being created. I think the real positive to take away is that we found our replacement for Bortles. DiNovo isn't done, but at least he's had real game experience to work from, for improving. But for now, Holman is the guy, imo.

(08-30-2014 03:23 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  I know hindsight is 20/20 but I want to pose a question and see what you all think....

Does UCF win this one if they started Holman?


Also...UCF had virtually no running game in this one. What are your thoughts on your backs, oline etc?



And...GREAT game. You guys have nothing to hang your head about. It was a gutsy performance and you gotta be proud of how you took the late in the game and build from there.

Good question, I think the answer is probably but still very close. Stanback was out this game with an injury so our marquee back was gone and it looks like the team had no identity with DiNovo. It's unfortunate, but the D couldn't get off the field so it may have been different. I took away from the game that ucf's defense is solid but they can't be on the field 2/3 of the game. We still could've won the game if we had chewed more clock on 1st and goal our last drive.

1. No one really knows with "what if" questions. Obviously if he played half as good as he did in the 2nd half, you would think we would win.

2. I wont blame our backup rb Wilson too much, I think our oline got worked because Penn State stacked the box once they saw Pete couldnt throw to save his life. But I will say every time I saw Wilson play, he seemed very average.

For the future I expect the O-line to improve, they are being broke in. And I expect once Stanback returns, a solid running game. I think with Stanback we would have rushed in a TD in the first quarter instead of losing on downs.

I really think we win with Holman in the entire game but you can't really fault the coaches for going with DiNovo. DiNovo was the best game manager at practice and Holman was making some silly mistakes despite having been the only QB in practice with game experience.

That's why we play the games and I'm glad we were able to find our starter sooner rather than later. It's why most teams schedule a cupcake for the opener.

Stanback should be solid at RB and Dontravius Floyd showed sparks of great vision. Winning teams run the ball and stop the run and although we stopped Penn State's running game (held them to 57 yards rushing) our running game was non-existent (24 yards rushing).

When you have no passing game, your opponent will zone in on the rush. Who wouldn't? They knew DiNovo wasn't going to air it out so they set up for running plays 90% of the time in the first half. Thankfully we found some resemblance of a passing game in the second half which allowed our RBs to breathe a little. Our newly found passing game should allow for a balance attack.

We did enough to win this game. Had the coach's only kicked the field goal on the fourth and goal. As I said before. You always take the points in a tight game. Yes I think we would have won big with Holman because we were completely one dimensional. The oline will be fine. They have only been playing this way for two weeks and constantly were getting the box stacked. Wilson had no chance due to the play calling. Dinovo looked lost. I think we have a good shot at mizzou. We will need it to move up because our ranking will plummet. I believe we would have waxed them had we started Holman


Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

I saw a ton of PENN St. people saying that Corso should retire because UCF didn't wax us. I said, the score may say that but the second half of that game said something completely different. I told them they were lucky we waited as long to make our QB switch as we did. had it happened i the second quarter, the score would have been extremely different. Holman was shredding their secondary.

I laugh at how smug they are that they won by 2 points with those crazy stats. We had what less than 50yds of offense in the entire first half. Basically we beat them in half a game, they had to kick that winning FG to take it all. Had GOL not decided to go for it, the game would have been ours.

I think we would have won by a TD if Holman had started. With him in, the run game would have opened up better because PSU would not have been able to load the box every play. But the real reason it still would have been close was our less than stellar safety play. Common guys, you are better than falling for every other pump fake. Overall, the lost sucked but best to solve the QB situation early, and our D line looked better IMO than last year. Tyson Summers did well as the new DC and our play book will open up with Holman. With some tweaks, I really like our chances against Mizzou.

(08-30-2014 03:23 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  I know hindsight is 20/20 but I want to pose a question and see what you all think....

Does UCF win this one if they started Holman?


Also...UCF had virtually no running game in this one. What are your thoughts on your backs, oline etc?



And...GREAT game. You guys have nothing to hang your head about. It was a gutsy performance and you gotta be proud of how you took the late in the game and build from there.

1. Who really knows, If he came out to start would he have played the
same?? As a change up he was great. Lets see what happens in 2
weeks.

2. #1 Rb was out of game with turf toe, and O line is rebuild in progress.
getting game 1 under their belts with an extra week to practice should
help there.

(08-30-2014 03:23 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  I know hindsight is 20/20 but I want to pose a question and see what you all think....

Does UCF win this one if they started Holman?


Also...UCF had virtually no running game in this one. What are your thoughts on your backs, oline etc?



And...GREAT game. You guys have nothing to hang your head about. It was a gutsy performance and you gotta be proud of how you took the late in the game and build from there.

They lost because they didn't take the points with a field goal after getting stuffed at the goal line at the beginning of the game. Told my kid they would loose by one. Gambled to early when they didn't have. That's my story and I'm sticking to it. Tough lose though.

(08-30-2014 03:27 PM)Knightsweat Wrote:  

(08-30-2014 03:23 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  I know hindsight is 20/20 but I want to pose a question and see what you all think....

Does UCF win this one if they started Holman?


Also...UCF had virtually no running game in this one. What are your thoughts on your backs, oline etc?



And...GREAT game. You guys have nothing to hang your head about. It was a gutsy performance and you gotta be proud of how you took the late in the game and build from there.

I think we win if Holman starts. Our RBs seem like Stanback is for real, then everyone else is average. OL will be better when they have a couple of games together. Talent is there, chemistry is still being created. I think the real positive to take away is that we found our replacement for Bortles. DiNovo isn't done, but at least he's had real game experience to work from, for improving. But for now, Holman is the guy, imo.

Holman's performance makes you wonder what was going during practice b/c it's a night a day difference between him and weak armed, tentative DINovo. GOL has never really handled the QB position really well other than Bortles.....so who knows.

However, IMO this could work out long term for UCF b/c it gave Holman the opportunity to come in with relatively no pressure and take over the offense and enjoy some success. Sometimes not having the pressure of being a starter can be a blessing in disguise.

Btw, part of the reason Lou Holtz's son didn't recruit DINovo was b/c he can't play another position and was eerily similar to former Bulls QB Matt Floyd. Great kid with a high football IQ and solid practice player but not a high level game day FBS QB. IMO he is done b/c Holman will take over and the young kids behind him will squeeze him out. He either transfers or is content to be on scholarship, which when you consider the $120,000 plus I am going to spend for my daughter's college education over the next couple years is nothing to sneezed at.

(08-31-2014 10:18 AM)CyberBull Wrote:  

(08-30-2014 03:27 PM)Knightsweat Wrote:  

(08-30-2014 03:23 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  I know hindsight is 20/20 but I want to pose a question and see what you all think....

Does UCF win this one if they started Holman?


Also...UCF had virtually no running game in this one. What are your thoughts on your backs, oline etc?



And...GREAT game. You guys have nothing to hang your head about. It was a gutsy performance and you gotta be proud of how you took the late in the game and build from there.

I think we win if Holman starts. Our RBs seem like Stanback is for real, then everyone else is average. OL will be better when they have a couple of games together. Talent is there, chemistry is still being created. I think the real positive to take away is that we found our replacement for Bortles. DiNovo isn't done, but at least he's had real game experience to work from, for improving. But for now, Holman is the guy, imo.

Holman's performance makes you wonder what was going during practice b/c it's a night a day difference between him and weak armed, tentative DINovo. GOL has never really handled the QB position really well other than Bortles.....so who knows.

However, IMO this could work out long term for UCF b/c it gave Holman the opportunity to come in with relatively no pressure and take over the offense and enjoy some success. Sometimes not having the pressure of being a starter can be a blessing in disguise.

Btw, part of the reason Lou Holtz's son didn't recruit DINovo was b/c he can't play another position and was eerily similar to former Bulls QB Matt Floyd. Great kid with a high football IQ and solid practice player but not a high level game day FBS QB. IMO he is done b/c Holman will take over and the young kids behind him will squeeze him out. He either transfers or is content to be on scholarship, which when you consider the $120,000 plus I am going to spend for my daughter's college education over the next couple years is nothing to sneezed at.

I thought USF was recruiting DiNovo heavily?

(08-31-2014 10:29 AM)Kruciff Wrote:  

(08-31-2014 10:18 AM)CyberBull Wrote:  

(08-30-2014 03:27 PM)Knightsweat Wrote:  

(08-30-2014 03:23 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  I know hindsight is 20/20 but I want to pose a question and see what you all think....

Does UCF win this one if they started Holman?


Also...UCF had virtually no running game in this one. What are your thoughts on your backs, oline etc?



And...GREAT game. You guys have nothing to hang your head about. It was a gutsy performance and you gotta be proud of how you took the late in the game and build from there.

I think we win if Holman starts. Our RBs seem like Stanback is for real, then everyone else is average. OL will be better when they have a couple of games together. Talent is there, chemistry is still being created. I think the real positive to take away is that we found our replacement for Bortles. DiNovo isn't done, but at least he's had real game experience to work from, for improving. But for now, Holman is the guy, imo.

Holman's performance makes you wonder what was going during practice b/c it's a night a day difference between him and weak armed, tentative DINovo. GOL has never really handled the QB position really well other than Bortles.....so who knows.

However, IMO this could work out long term for UCF b/c it gave Holman the opportunity to come in with relatively no pressure and take over the offense and enjoy some success. Sometimes not having the pressure of being a starter can be a blessing in disguise.

Btw, part of the reason Lou Holtz's son didn't recruit DINovo was b/c he can't play another position and was eerily similar to former Bulls QB Matt Floyd. Great kid with a high football IQ and solid practice player but not a high level game day FBS QB. IMO he is done b/c Holman will take over and the young kids behind him will squeeze him out. He either transfers or is content to be on scholarship, which when you consider the $120,000 plus I am going to spend for my daughter's college education over the next couple years is nothing to sneezed at.

I thought USF was recruiting DiNovo heavily?

No and that was the problem with Lou Holtz's son. He and his QB coach didn't like DiNovo's game and had other QBs rated higher. however they slowed play him after repeated promises that if he came to Spring and early summer on campus camps at USF he would get an offer. That never happened....for a variety of reasons....but changed when UCF jumped on him after the IMG 7-7 tourney championship. Holtz in an effort to save face and stomp on the momentum UCF was building in the Bay Area offered an hour after UCF. This didn't sit well with the DiNovos...... especially his father who was reported already pissed about the non offer during a recent USF team camp and left campus visibly fuming. When UCF gave him an offer they simply felt more wanted so they said thanks but no thanks and started Lou Holtz's son free fall.

BTW, recall that USF was still heavily invested the 4-star Asantii Woulard sweepstakes so they didn't want to offer DiNovo and have him accept on the spot and potentially scare Woulard away. Either way he made a mess of the situation and why Bay Area coaches love how Taggart recruits. He is honest with intentions which is all you can really ask for as a high school coach and player.

I don't blame USF for also offering DiNovo. You gotta remember that DiNovo holds the passing record for Pinellas County that used to be held by Tampa Bay Bucs QB Shaun King. He was the MVP of the coveted IMG 7-on-7 Team Tampa and led them to a 7-on-7 national championship.

Team Tampa, as you may recall, had in itself a ton of prized recruits so it would have been a huge mistake not to send an offer his way. UCF got the Griffin twins out of it as well. According to Pete's dad, FSU offered that December, long after he already had the UCF and USF offers. At that point he was already a UCF Knight and began recruiting Team Tampa players to UCF with him.

(08-31-2014 11:07 AM)St. H. Gink Wrote:  I don't blame USF for also offering DiNovo. You gotta remember that DiNovo holds the passing record for Pinellas County that used to be held by Tampa Bay Bucs QB Shaun King. He was the MVP of the coveted IMG 7-on-7 Team Tampa and led them to a 7-on-7 national championship.

Team Tampa, as you may recall, had in itself a ton of prized recruits so it would have been a huge mistake not to send an offer his way. UCF got the Griffin twins out of it as well. According to Pete's dad, FSU offered that December, long after he already had the UCF and USF offers. At that point he was already a UCF Knight and began recruiting Team Tampa players to UCF with him.

Well....the irony of the situation was that Holtz got I "right" in not heavily recruiting DiNivo as he didn't really garner more than a couple FBS offers despite all his success...but you nailed from a recruiting perspective. Holtz should have been all over that team but he only alienated kids for one reason or another. For example, the Griffin twins wanted to play close to home, but Holtz only wanted one of them and pissed off their parents as well on how things were handled.

Too many bad stories regarding Holtz's....and company on the local recruiting trail.

If you watched LSU play Wisconsin last night, you saw an almost identical game to UCF/Penn St.

In both cases, Wisconsin and Penn St were facing inexperienced quarterbacks, and both accurately predicted that the passing game would not be featured early on. They stacked the lines, and neither LSU or UCF could get the run game going. Eventually, the passing games opened up and LSU/UCF started moving the ball with ease. The difference is that LSU's defense held on for the win.

Who knows if Holman starting the whole game would have worked. One thing is clear, his arm is much stronger than Dinovo's, and he wasn't afraid to take a shot down the field.

Of course UCF wins if Holman starts. UCF probably wins by 2 TDs.

Our defense only really made 2 mistakes, although big ones, and it had alot to do with the fact that they were on the field nearly the entire 1st half. If Holman starts we add at least 14-17 points in the 1st half and win going away.

UCF had the better athletes on the field.

Which is why it's frustrating. Time to beat Missouri.

I don't know if UCF wins with Holman starting but I do know that I will feel much better at getting to 9-10 wins this season post Bortles if Holman is our starting QB and Stanback is healthy as our starting RB all season

(08-31-2014 01:22 PM)knightastic Wrote:  I don't know if UCF wins with Holman starting but I do know that I will feel much better at getting to 9-10 wins this season post Bortles if Holman is our starting QB and Stanback is healthy as our starting RB all season

This is a good point. I'm far more concerned with our RB depth than QB, after seeing Holman's performance.

(08-31-2014 01:02 PM)The Knight Time Wrote:  Of course UCF wins if Holman starts. UCF probably wins by 2 TDs.

Our defense only really made 2 mistakes, although big ones, and it had alot to do with the fact that they were on the field nearly the entire 1st half. If Holman starts we add at least 14-17 points in the 1st half and win going away.

UCF had the better athletes on the field.

Which is why it's frustrating. Time to beat Missouri.

While UCF's Offense put UCF's D in bad position for much of the game...UCF's D was pretty bad on 1st down...which put PSU in easy 2nd/3rd and short, which kept most of their drives alive.

Here's what UCF's D gave up on first downs in just the first half:

1st down plays by PSU in the First Half:
8 yd pass (1st and 15)
9 yd pass
44 yd pass
9 yd pass
9 yd pass
4 yd pass

2nd Q:
Incomplete pass
9 yd pass
5 yd rush
16 yd pass
8 yd pass
13 yd pass
6 yd pass
Incomplete pass

You can't give up that much yardage on 1st down and expect to get your D off the field.