(08-31-2014 01:40 PM)MJG Wrote:  Idaho went to the Swamp and refused to lose.

(08-31-2014 01:38 PM)panama Wrote:  Offense
Quarterback:(B+) Nick was asked in the presser last Monday what he brings to the position. Basically said he isn't the tallest, fastest or have the strongest arm but brings the other 90% of the on the field part you need to play the position. We saw that on display Wed.

Offensive Line: (B) Would be an A except for Garrett Gorringe's THREE false starts. Run and pass blocking was otherwise outstanding.

Running Backs: (C+) Freshman Krysten Hammon was a revelation. But he isn't an every down back at 180 lbs. Serious question marks with the others.

Wide Receivers and Tight Ends: (A-) WR Robert Davis and TE Joel Ruiz are next level players. WR Avery Sweeting has finally matured and is faster than a speeding bullet. Lynquez Blair isn't Albert but he will more than do.


Defense

Defensive Line:(A-) They finally played like a stout run stopping line and plugged holes and freed up the LBs.

Linebackers:(B+) Outstanding game overall especially by MLBs.

Defensive Backs: (D) Oi! What a mess. TURN AROUND! Allowing 400 yards passing to ACU doesn't bode well for the pass happy SBC.

Great minds think alike. He only difference is I get the secondary an F. They were beyond awful. And did I mention we found a QB. Ronnie did alright at something's but if he was QBing I have no doubt we would have lost. (The two runs by Arbuckle is what you do to keep the chains moving, not take a sack and not throwing an ill timed INT.)
Also hopefully Evans comes back in a couple weeks.

(08-31-2014 12:34 PM)InjunJohn Wrote:  For ULM, I would give the offense a C+. Started pretty bad but played better as game went on. Timing between QB and receivers was off. Hopefully will see an improvement next week. We should have a very good running game throughout the year with Donaldson and Cain providing a different look (power vs speed and agility). Our biggest drawback is our OC who loves to go to the outside, which opposing defenses have been sitting on for the last year and seems to forget that there is a whole section of the field between the hash marks. When we attack there, good things happen. He also remembered that we have TEs on the team and finally used one of them in the last drive to success. Thomas looked to be more relaxed in the second half and looked pretty good when the moved him out of the pocket.

Defense was an A+. Gave up less than 100 yards of total offense. Five sacks and first pick 6 of the college football year. DC was not as conservative as last year and brought pressure. I especially liked that our DBs were more aggressive and even when there were passes completed for some yardage, the DBs were right there and quite a few of those were just because of great throws and catches. If what I saw was the standard for the year, this could be one of the best defenses in conference. Now how much of that game was due to the youth and poor play of Wake Forest is yet to be seen. Always the case after one game....are you that good or was the competition that bad....not sure if Idaho will tell us any more as I didn't get to see them play due to the weather.

ULM had seven sacks. We had 16 all of last year.

(08-31-2014 02:54 PM)SOT1977 Wrote:  

(08-31-2014 12:34 PM)InjunJohn Wrote:  For ULM, I would give the offense a C+. Started pretty bad but played better as game went on. Timing between QB and receivers was off. Hopefully will see an improvement next week. We should have a very good running game throughout the year with Donaldson and Cain providing a different look (power vs speed and agility). Our biggest drawback is our OC who loves to go to the outside, which opposing defenses have been sitting on for the last year and seems to forget that there is a whole section of the field between the hash marks. When we attack there, good things happen. He also remembered that we have TEs on the team and finally used one of them in the last drive to success. Thomas looked to be more relaxed in the second half and looked pretty good when the moved him out of the pocket.

Defense was an A+. Gave up less than 100 yards of total offense. Five sacks and first pick 6 of the college football year. DC was not as conservative as last year and brought pressure. I especially liked that our DBs were more aggressive and even when there were passes completed for some yardage, the DBs were right there and quite a few of those were just because of great throws and catches. If what I saw was the standard for the year, this could be one of the best defenses in conference. Now how much of that game was due to the youth and poor play of Wake Forest is yet to be seen. Always the case after one game....are you that good or was the competition that bad....not sure if Idaho will tell us any more as I didn't get to see them play due to the weather.

ULM had seven sacks. We had 16 all of last year.

Actually we are both wrong....according to the NCAA. We had 6 sacks....so split it down the middle!!

(08-31-2014 10:53 AM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  

(08-31-2014 09:47 AM)statefanatic Wrote:  stAte has to work on run blocking. The Oline is full of young guys and they need to grow up quick. We are playing alot of true freshmen this year. These guys will need to step up in a big way to give us depth. I'm worried ASU will have some growing pains this year.

They averaged 6.1 yards per rushing attempt, using mostly backups.

You just manhandled a team that you weret 8 points favorite's over and who are better than most SBC teams. Most on the national scene expected this game to be a dogfight to the end.

Really don't think your have a clue what you are talking about.

When an FCS team stuffs you 4&1 on the opponents 1 YARD LINE...that's a problem.

The OLine started blocking better as the game went on but they still gotta play better to give the offense a chance to get clicking.

(08-31-2014 03:39 PM)InjunJohn Wrote:  

(08-31-2014 02:54 PM)SOT1977 Wrote:  

(08-31-2014 12:34 PM)InjunJohn Wrote:  For ULM, I would give the offense a C+. Started pretty bad but played better as game went on. Timing between QB and receivers was off. Hopefully will see an improvement next week. We should have a very good running game throughout the year with Donaldson and Cain providing a different look (power vs speed and agility). Our biggest drawback is our OC who loves to go to the outside, which opposing defenses have been sitting on for the last year and seems to forget that there is a whole section of the field between the hash marks. When we attack there, good things happen. He also remembered that we have TEs on the team and finally used one of them in the last drive to success. Thomas looked to be more relaxed in the second half and looked pretty good when the moved him out of the pocket.

Defense was an A+. Gave up less than 100 yards of total offense. Five sacks and first pick 6 of the college football year. DC was not as conservative as last year and brought pressure. I especially liked that our DBs were more aggressive and even when there were passes completed for some yardage, the DBs were right there and quite a few of those were just because of great throws and catches. If what I saw was the standard for the year, this could be one of the best defenses in conference. Now how much of that game was due to the youth and poor play of Wake Forest is yet to be seen. Always the case after one game....are you that good or was the competition that bad....not sure if Idaho will tell us any more as I didn't get to see them play due to the weather.

ULM had seven sacks. We had 16 all of last year.

Actually we are both wrong....according to the NCAA. We had 6 sacks....so split it down the middle!!

Sun Belt stats have it at seven sacks. ULM's own stats have it at six. The ESPN announcers said seven. Who knows?

There were also two tackles for a loss so one of those might have been mistaken for a sack.

(08-31-2014 03:46 PM)RamblinRedWolf44 Wrote:  When an FCS team stuffs you 4&1 on the opponents 1 YARD LINE...that's a problem.

...A problem on that one play.

I think you're reading way too much into one play.

We ran for 283 yards, with a 5.8 ypc average.

Only 23 offensive lines in the country blocked for more yards than stAte's offensive line did this week.

(08-31-2014 03:49 PM)SOT1977 Wrote:  

(08-31-2014 03:39 PM)InjunJohn Wrote:  

(08-31-2014 02:54 PM)SOT1977 Wrote:  

(08-31-2014 12:34 PM)InjunJohn Wrote:  For ULM, I would give the offense a C+. Started pretty bad but played better as game went on. Timing between QB and receivers was off. Hopefully will see an improvement next week. We should have a very good running game throughout the year with Donaldson and Cain providing a different look (power vs speed and agility). Our biggest drawback is our OC who loves to go to the outside, which opposing defenses have been sitting on for the last year and seems to forget that there is a whole section of the field between the hash marks. When we attack there, good things happen. He also remembered that we have TEs on the team and finally used one of them in the last drive to success. Thomas looked to be more relaxed in the second half and looked pretty good when the moved him out of the pocket.

Defense was an A+. Gave up less than 100 yards of total offense. Five sacks and first pick 6 of the college football year. DC was not as conservative as last year and brought pressure. I especially liked that our DBs were more aggressive and even when there were passes completed for some yardage, the DBs were right there and quite a few of those were just because of great throws and catches. If what I saw was the standard for the year, this could be one of the best defenses in conference. Now how much of that game was due to the youth and poor play of Wake Forest is yet to be seen. Always the case after one game....are you that good or was the competition that bad....not sure if Idaho will tell us any more as I didn't get to see them play due to the weather.

ULM had seven sacks. We had 16 all of last year.

Actually we are both wrong....according to the NCAA. We had 6 sacks....so split it down the middle!!

Sun Belt stats have it at seven sacks. ULM's own stats have it at six. The ESPN announcers said seven. Who knows?

There were also two tackles for a loss so one of those might have been mistaken for a sack.

Bottom line is that we had a dominating defensive performance. I will take 11 more just like it!!

(08-31-2014 10:53 AM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  

(08-31-2014 09:47 AM)statefanatic Wrote:  stAte has to work on run blocking. The Oline is full of young guys and they need to grow up quick. We are playing alot of true freshmen this year. These guys will need to step up in a big way to give us depth. I'm worried ASU will have some growing pains this year.

They averaged 6.1 yards per rushing attempt, using mostly backups.

You just manhandled a team that you weret 8 points favorite's over and who are better than most SBC teams. Most on the national scene expected this game to be a dogfight to the end.

Really don't think your have a clue what you are talking about.

Yet, and had we not had some various issues today that were clearly seen. (Little RB depth behind Gordon, Young receivers dropping TD passes, McKissic taking his stupid pills and trying to catch a punt over the shoulder) we probably win that game by 50 points.

I don't take any stock what national experts think because they know nothing about Arkansas State.

(08-31-2014 03:46 PM)RamblinRedWolf44 Wrote:  

(08-31-2014 10:53 AM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  

(08-31-2014 09:47 AM)statefanatic Wrote:  stAte has to work on run blocking. The Oline is full of young guys and they need to grow up quick. We are playing alot of true freshmen this year. These guys will need to step up in a big way to give us depth. I'm worried ASU will have some growing pains this year.

They averaged 6.1 yards per rushing attempt, using mostly backups.

You just manhandled a team that you weret 8 points favorite's over and who are better than most SBC teams. Most on the national scene expected this game to be a dogfight to the end.

Really don't think your have a clue what you are talking about.

When an FCS team stuffs you 4&1 on the opponents 1 YARD LINE...that's a problem.

The OLine started blocking better as the game went on but they still gotta play better to give the offense a chance to get clicking.

Our issues with QB sneaks have little to do with our OL, and more to do with that we're not built to run a QB sneak. It was the only snap we took under center all game long...anyone with a brain knew a sneak was coming. It was poor play selection by bell. If he runs Knighten outside on a little speed option, he scores.

The App game was pretty much as I expected.

We had a bad 5 minutes at the end of the first half that accounted for 21 of UM's 52 points. I felt like we were really reeling at that moment.

I liked how we payed in the second half with both Kam and Lamb getting TD drives, Kam against the first team defense. We have two good QB's two good RB's and a lot of talent on the front three defensive line. Our OL didn't do too bad either considering.

As another Mountaineer stated, we won't know what we have until Southern Miss. I liked the way the team responded I the second half and I liked how Satterfield coached the team in that half as well.

This one is history and the "exhibition" game is over. Let's settle in over the next two weeks and see what we got.

(08-31-2014 01:40 PM)MJG Wrote:  Idaho went to the Swamp and refused to lose.

That performance was nothing short of electric.

(08-31-2014 06:54 PM)GoAppsGo92 Wrote:  The App game was pretty much as I expected.

We had a bad 5 minutes at the end of the first half that accounted for 21 of UM's 52 points. I felt like we were really reeling at that moment.

I liked how we payed in the second half with both Kam and Lamb getting TD drives, Kam against the first team defense. We have two good QB's two good RB's and a lot of talent on the front three defensive line. Our OL didn't do too bad either considering.

As another Mountaineer stated, we won't know what we have until Southern Miss. I liked the way the team responded I the second half and I liked how Satterfield coached the team in that half as well.

This one is history and the "exhibition" game is over. Let's settle in over the next two weeks and see what we got.

I completely agree, Michigan had this game circled for a while and was not going to let off the gas. App looked better in the second half so I still feel like I did to start the season that you guys will have more wins this year than last.