Depth is going to be the issue

signalmtnjacket

signalmtnjacket

Varsity Lurker
Joined
Aug 22, 2003
Messages
438
...as we get into conference games.

I think that is really what got us against ND.

You have got to be proud of the pure guts and heart of this years team. ND would pound and we pounded right back. The awesome punt coverage on the last punt brought tears to my eyes.

But, as the game wore on both lines faded. The D line wasn't getting nearly the pressure, interior push and sharp outside containment. I thought Guyton really slowed down as the game went on. Was he hurt?

The offensive line has some fantastic moments in the second half but there were some breakdowns that hurt them. I have to say though that I was very impressed with the line, especially the starting TE (Matthews?). I wasn't expecting his run blocking.

It is odd that the position we have the most depth, RB, only had 17 touches. That has got to change. I would be happy to see the first 17 plays against Stanford be runs.
 
signalmtnjacket said:
It is odd that the position we have the most depth, RB, only had 17 touches. /quote]

Exactly, there is no reason for this. We are a ball control, run first team. We throw more than any run first team in the country. Choice was getting like 5 yards a pop in the 1st half, but we went away from him for some very odd reason.

Our team is built, and very well I might add, to run the ball alot, control the clock, come after you hard on defense and get the offense back on the field. For some strange reason though, we simply refuse to run the football and do what works for us when we get to crunch time.

If you look at every L the last 4 years, Ball threw the ball a good number of times then he handed off, even in his very first start, on the road as a true frosh!!! Looking at the box scores from every game Ball has played, I've only found one game (against UConn 2004) where we threw more than we ran and won. I think I'm the only person that notices this.

I just don't understand why we don't do something we're very good at on offense.
Click to expand...
 
Guyton WAS a non-factor.He really was the weak link out there at times.Too weak to get push too slow to cover.Maybe exp will get him into better position.Also #90 was a non-factor.hmmm,the new guys have to learn.
 
odw said:
Looking at the box scores from every game Ball has played, I've only found one game (against UConn 2004) where we threw more than we ran and won. I think I'm the only person that notices this.
Click to expand...

Wow... I'm going to take your word for it and not look into it myself, but thats just crazy.

It does seem like we fall into a "pass, pass, draw, punt" or "pass, pass, screen/toss, punt" very often whenever we have just a bit of a lead and never really change that up if the games get closer. Choice/Grant are very good backs and I would like to see them get more touches, and with our talented TEs I would be very pleased to see Cox get a few touches, less than 5 but greater than 0, to keep the D just a little more honest.
 
It does seem like we fall into a "pass, pass, draw, punt" or "pass, pass, screen/toss, punt"
Click to expand...

It's pretty easy to fall into that when you can't gain yards on the ground on first down.
 
Just how long will it take to get some depth? Seems like I've heard that for 4 and starting a 5th year now. Seems to me there have been ample classes to get some depth. If my memory has not failed me this is CCG 6th class so when the depth?
 
beej67 said:
It's pretty easy to fall into that when you can't gain yards on the ground on first down.
Click to expand...

it appears that way, but when I go back and look at the play by play objectively, without all the emotion, it shows otherwise.

Against Nd, Choice was getting about 5 yards a carry in the 1st half. He got about 3 yards a carry on the first drive of the 2nd half, not bad. Then one carry for the rest of the game. We shut him down and never gave him a chance to get going in the 2nd half. Ball got the rest of our carries. I don't blame R. Ball this time. He did his job. I blame the play calling by Nix and/or Chan.
 
Guyton over ran the play deep in ND's territory when Walker ran for the big gainer. Scott had contain and Guyton ran right on to him allowing the Walker cut back and big gain. I have to agree that he didn't have a particularly stellar game and yet the team as a whole did well, so who really knows.

And for our friend Old Foggy, our ranks are thin because of probation and prior to that Flunkgate. I know it is hard to remember but go back and look at other programs like Miami and see what probation does to their depth and win/loss record.
 
oldfoggy said:
Just how long will it take to get some depth? Seems like I've heard that for 4 and starting a 5th year now. Seems to me there have been ample classes to get some depth. If my memory has not failed me this is CCG 6th class so when the depth?
Click to expand...

I think the next two games is where we start to get it OF. Plus, we have got to start rotating more on both sides of the ball.

Our football teams are reminding me of our basketball teams of the early 90's where only the starters see any action. That works fine against Duke but it is hard to beat ND that way.
 
Exactly. You can't have depth if you won't use it. I haven't tried to figure out playing time from Saturday, but you have to rotate your 2s in as much as you can early to keep the 1s ready for the stretch. We keep talking about the depth we have but then we're seemingly afraid to use them. Hopefully the next two weeks we play lots of people and give them time to get used to the speed of the game. We will need them over the course of the season.
 
oldfoggy said:
Just how long will it take to get some depth? Seems like I've heard that for 4 and starting a 5th year now. Seems to me there have been ample classes to get some depth. If my memory has not failed me this is CCG 6th class so when the depth?
Click to expand...

Good post. Why do we still have depth problems? Can't be because of Gailey's past recruiting. When I questioned recruiting efforts in the past on this very board, I was told that things were fine, that we had great recruiting classes. Can't be due to flunkgate. We've had enough classes to recover from that deficit. So, why the depth problems?
 
ncjacket said:
Exactly. You can't have depth if you won't use it. I haven't tried to figure out playing time from Saturday, but you have to rotate your 2s in as much as you can early to keep the 1s ready for the stretch. We keep talking about the depth we have but then we're seemingly afraid to use them. Hopefully the next two weeks we play lots of people and give them time to get used to the speed of the game. We will need them over the course of the season.
Click to expand...
Good point, NCJacket, these next two games our back ups will get the experience necessary for when we play VPIss, scUM, and UGAy our three toughest games.
 
How many classes does it take to recover from losing 10 guys unexpectedly at one time? We only have 79 'ships to give so our depth will be less than some simply due to that.

I actually think we have more depth than we use and that's my issue. You don't have depth for 1 of 2 reasons. Either you simply don't have numbers, that is other players who are D-1 caliber or guys with experience who you feel comfortable playing. We do seem to have numbers at most spots, but the backups are inexperienced. If that's the case, the only way to get them seasoned is to play them. And it's better to play them when we want to than have an injury and have to throw them in. It's part of the coach's responsibility to work those kids in and get them ready to take on the load. That builds depth and gives the starters a blow.
 
For 5 going on 6 years now I've heard about all the diamonds in the rough, how CG can make a 1 or 2 star player better and into a 3 or 4 star. Now when it's crunch time against good teams, I hear NO DEPTH! When will the excuses stop? If you think he can just look at the QB situation! Flunk gate, how many were starters on the OL, how many were starters any where? I know do you?
 
Last edited:
I don't think it's too uncommon to not play a lot of depth in the first game against a big opponent. Depth will be generated a lot more in the next two games.

But another issue to ponder, the new NCAA rules have taken 20 plays away from the game. That's 10 less plays the defense has to play, so I wouldn't expect depth to be as important as in the past.
 
Most of the Flunkgate people were younger, thus they may have ended up starters. Anthony Hargrove and Tony Hollings were both stars too.
 
Another thing to remember is we are still a very young team. Look at the starters and depth chart:

Senior Starters: D: Anoia, K Hall, Scott
O: Ball, Wrotto, Matthews

Senior Two Deep O: Dunlap, Cooper

ST's Two Deep: Are there any more?

We could return 36 of 44 two deep on D, O and ST next year. That's a lot.

Regarding recruiting, I do believe that we got hurt by recruiting developing OL a few years ago (as opposed to ready to go guys). Most of those guys have not put on the weight and strength. We are light in the pants and it has been showing the last two years.
 
Returning 36/44 on the 2 deep would be great. If you think about it, we really haven't had a team with alot of seniors in a while. I think that is part of the reason for us being so up and down last couple years.

With our coaches refocusing themselves on recruiting now, our depth will improve. It won't happen over night though.
 
We'd be in great shape right now if our OL had developed better, size and strength wise. We are hurting badly for athletes to play on special teams. This was something that we all talked about in pre-season so we shouldn't get all hyped up about it when we don't play great on special teams. We just do not have the quantity of athletes required and it can be directly attributed to the probation. (this issue is going to bite us in the butt in three more years at the OL unfortunately, UNLESS we recruit absolutely ready to go studs in number)

If we can avoid injuries at LB and S this year, then we'll be okay on defense. Pray that we'll be okay.

The area that I think deserves the Wha? guy, is offense. But the first game of the year it's not uncommon to look average on offense. We'll give it some more time but if we aren't moving at will by the UVA game, then we'll be looking at another 7-5 season.

If we can't move straight ahead and plow it ahead on 3rd and 1, or 1st and goal, then we'd better seriously open up the offense and try to score a whole lot more on the long passes.

Sorry for hijacking but it started out as a depth response.
 
Certainly scholarship limits affect depth somehwat. But, I do believe under Coach Gailey we tend to leave first stringers on the field too much and do not play reserves. I know there is a dropoff when you play second string over starters, but depth is something you have to develop.

I thought our best coach at this was Ross. He substituted groups at a time. You could look up and see the second string OL in for a series. You could see the second string LB's in for a series. This is how you discover players and it gives starters a rest and a chance to see the action unfold from the sideline for a series. In the long run it's the right way to go.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top