I didn't think it was possible after the game against Notre Dame, but a big difference in this game was coaching. MSU looked well-coached, prepared, and creative for Notre Dame, but in this game it looks like the Wisconsin coaches came in better prepared. Paul Chryst was apparently calling the plays and he was simply excellent. Granted, their QB also showed some incredible accuracy. He was putting throws on the money. MSU was just not creative like they were against ND. On defense, Wisconsin was complex and aggressive. MSU was too soft.
Of course, the job of the MSU coaches was made much more difficult by the struggles of O'Connor. He was just too late and inaccurate on many throws. He does not look beyond the first read. And he doesn't have the arm strength and accuracy for the long passes. On the second interception he should have been able to spot a wide open Corely for a touchdown. That play in particular made me really question O'Connor's ability to lead this team to much success. I think the coaches will need to think hard about replacing him. He's a good kid, and it's always painful to see good kids struggle, but I just don't think he has what it takes to beat good defenses.
If O'Connor is the best QB on the team, then the coaches may have to let him loose. I think his struggles are partially connected to his excessive caution. He doesn't want to make mistakes, but that's causing him to throw late and lock onto receivers. So the coaches may need to let him become a gunslinger and they'll just have to live with the interceptions.
They also need to let the backup QBs play. This game was over by the fourth quarter, and the coaches should have immediately let Terry or Lewerke play. I don't know why O'Connor was still in there with less than 5 minutes to go. I do think that MSU has hurt the development of their younger QBs by not giving them more snaps in real games. I thought the coaches learned that lesson with Maxwell, but I guess they're getting another chance to learn that lesson again this year, and likely next year.
O'Connor was also not helped by the fact that the O-line also looked like a shell of itself in the ND game. Hopefully, Wisconsin didn't just show the world how to beat this O-line. Hopefully the performance against ND was not a fluke.
There is still time to turn things around, but MSU may need to do what Wisconsin just did: replace a senior QB with a redshirt freshmen QB.
Saturday, September 24, 2016
Saturday, September 17, 2016
Thoughts on Notre Dame Game
OK, so apart from the coaches taking the foot of the gas too early, again, I thought this was a program win. I really expected MSU to struggle in this one, because MSU usually struggles against Notre Dame's elite talent (especially on the D line) and because Brian Kelly seems to pull out all the clever stops against MSU. But MSU showed some new things this year that are really encouraging.
First, the coaches showed that they were mostly prepared for this game. They had a great offensive and defensive plan for three quarters of the game. I was impressed with the creativity and relative soundness of the play calling most of the game. I am always so impressed by their ability to succeed by sticking to MSU's identity of "pound, green, pound!"
Second, the O line finally matched up well against Notre Dame's elite front 7. Actually, you could say that the MSU O line looked dominant. That really is something new to me. I have never seen MSU's O line bully Notre Dame's front seven. But that what happened much of this game. Kind of like when MSU bullied OSU in the trenches last year. I said before that this O line could end up being better than last year's O line, and that would make it the best O line in the Dantonio era.
Third, the D line is definitely not as good as last year's, but at least it showed me this game that it can be pretty good. McDowell and Cooper are stars, and the other guys showed some improvement. They played pretty well against Notre Dame's very good O line. That's encouraging. Hopefully they'll continue to improve to the point where they're better than last year's D line. With McDowell and Cooper leading this group, I think that's still possible.
Fourth, Gerald Holmes is a very good running back. He may not be as physically gifted as the other backs, but he shows more awareness and toughness. And he actually showed better speed than I expected and he always shows good lateral quickness.
Fifth, I thought the wide receivers would be a liability this year, but this group could turn out to be the best in the B1G this year. Corely, Shelton, and Madaris are good. Real good. Shelton is clearly the answer to MSU's problems running outside the tackles. He is fast and tough. I think the coaches should let him run the ball a few times a game from the running back position. Particularly the runs to the outside.
Overall, the results of this game strongly suggest MSU is a contender for the B1G title and perhaps for a playoff spot. The "back to back" theme is in play.
First, the coaches showed that they were mostly prepared for this game. They had a great offensive and defensive plan for three quarters of the game. I was impressed with the creativity and relative soundness of the play calling most of the game. I am always so impressed by their ability to succeed by sticking to MSU's identity of "pound, green, pound!"
Second, the O line finally matched up well against Notre Dame's elite front 7. Actually, you could say that the MSU O line looked dominant. That really is something new to me. I have never seen MSU's O line bully Notre Dame's front seven. But that what happened much of this game. Kind of like when MSU bullied OSU in the trenches last year. I said before that this O line could end up being better than last year's O line, and that would make it the best O line in the Dantonio era.
Third, the D line is definitely not as good as last year's, but at least it showed me this game that it can be pretty good. McDowell and Cooper are stars, and the other guys showed some improvement. They played pretty well against Notre Dame's very good O line. That's encouraging. Hopefully they'll continue to improve to the point where they're better than last year's D line. With McDowell and Cooper leading this group, I think that's still possible.
Fourth, Gerald Holmes is a very good running back. He may not be as physically gifted as the other backs, but he shows more awareness and toughness. And he actually showed better speed than I expected and he always shows good lateral quickness.
Fifth, I thought the wide receivers would be a liability this year, but this group could turn out to be the best in the B1G this year. Corely, Shelton, and Madaris are good. Real good. Shelton is clearly the answer to MSU's problems running outside the tackles. He is fast and tough. I think the coaches should let him run the ball a few times a game from the running back position. Particularly the runs to the outside.
Overall, the results of this game strongly suggest MSU is a contender for the B1G title and perhaps for a playoff spot. The "back to back" theme is in play.
Friday, September 2, 2016
Thoughts on Furman Game: Optimism Down a Notch
Well, the game started out as I hoped. On the first offensive and defensive drives MSU looked set to do whatever it wanted on both sides of the ball. But then mediocrity set in.
Observations
The coaches need to take some blame. The defense looked sloppy. The players seemed confused too often, as if play calls were coming in late or as if they had no clue what they were supposed to do. The defense also lined up poorly on several plays, including the touchdown they gave up. On offense they ran the ball too much. Furman is the kind of team against which they should be practicing a balanced attack. This is the kind game in which you let your quarterback find his legs. If they can't establish a balanced attack against Furman, they won't do so against Notre Dame. And if they don't have a balanced attack, they won't win any of the big games this season.
The receivers looked good. Madaris and Davis looked like they should have good years. Shelton looked good too, the few times he touched the ball. Hope there are no injuries (let's pray Shelton and Davis are not out long) because the freshmen looked like freshmen. Stewart and Corley look super talented, but they are a year away from being stars.
The running backs looked pretty good, but not outstanding (compared to Bell and Langford). They look to run to the outside too often and they just don't have the speed to do that consistently. That approach will fail against more athletic defenses like Notre Dame's (and like Alabama's last year). I think the coaches think the running backs are dominant, because they used them too often. They're good, but they're not Bell or Langford, yet.
The linebackers were not as dominant as I was expecting. Chris Frey is the best linebacker out there. He's everywhere and should be considered a starter, not an OR player. He's a star. Riley Bullough went the wrong way a few times and didn't show the consistent aggression I was hoping to see.
O'Connor had a decent game. He made some great throws and some decent runs. But he definitely struggles when when plays go off script. And he has to stop staring receivers down. Furman took advantage of that, and more athletic secondaries will take even greater advantage of that. This is one skill that Connor Cook seemed to have been taught well, by his quarterback guru. Either future MSU quarterbacks need to go to that same guru or the MSU quarterbacks coaches needs to focus on that skill more intensively.
The O-line has a ways to go. They didn't look terrible, but this was Furman. I was hoping to see them dominate. They had trouble opening holes, but they did protect O'Connor pretty well. Notre Dame will be the true test of where this line stands.
The D-line was disappointing. McDowell looked great and he looks like he's committed to having a big year, but the rest of the line didn't seem to do much. Furman ran the ball way too well. If they don't improve a lot in the next 2 weeks, they could get dominated by Notre Dame's O-line. Maybe they'll have to let Lyle's have a few snaps on the D-line.
The secondary held it's own. Hicks was the most tested defensive back and he played pretty well. Needs to learn to look back for the ball, but otherwise, he can keep up with speedy receivers and sticks to them pretty well.
The game was sloppy. There is a lot to clean up. The penalties and turnovers have to be addressed. The kickers need to be better than they were last year. Guess we'll see how much progress they can make in 2 weeks.
I still have high hopes for this team, but the scales have fallen from my eyes on a couple of things. I am particularly more disappointed in the D-line and the linebackers than I had hoped to be after the first game. On the other hand, I am actually more hopeful about the receivers (if the injuries are not serious). Lots can change over the course of a season, so let's see what unfolds.
Observations
The coaches need to take some blame. The defense looked sloppy. The players seemed confused too often, as if play calls were coming in late or as if they had no clue what they were supposed to do. The defense also lined up poorly on several plays, including the touchdown they gave up. On offense they ran the ball too much. Furman is the kind of team against which they should be practicing a balanced attack. This is the kind game in which you let your quarterback find his legs. If they can't establish a balanced attack against Furman, they won't do so against Notre Dame. And if they don't have a balanced attack, they won't win any of the big games this season.
The receivers looked good. Madaris and Davis looked like they should have good years. Shelton looked good too, the few times he touched the ball. Hope there are no injuries (let's pray Shelton and Davis are not out long) because the freshmen looked like freshmen. Stewart and Corley look super talented, but they are a year away from being stars.
The running backs looked pretty good, but not outstanding (compared to Bell and Langford). They look to run to the outside too often and they just don't have the speed to do that consistently. That approach will fail against more athletic defenses like Notre Dame's (and like Alabama's last year). I think the coaches think the running backs are dominant, because they used them too often. They're good, but they're not Bell or Langford, yet.
The linebackers were not as dominant as I was expecting. Chris Frey is the best linebacker out there. He's everywhere and should be considered a starter, not an OR player. He's a star. Riley Bullough went the wrong way a few times and didn't show the consistent aggression I was hoping to see.
O'Connor had a decent game. He made some great throws and some decent runs. But he definitely struggles when when plays go off script. And he has to stop staring receivers down. Furman took advantage of that, and more athletic secondaries will take even greater advantage of that. This is one skill that Connor Cook seemed to have been taught well, by his quarterback guru. Either future MSU quarterbacks need to go to that same guru or the MSU quarterbacks coaches needs to focus on that skill more intensively.
The O-line has a ways to go. They didn't look terrible, but this was Furman. I was hoping to see them dominate. They had trouble opening holes, but they did protect O'Connor pretty well. Notre Dame will be the true test of where this line stands.
The D-line was disappointing. McDowell looked great and he looks like he's committed to having a big year, but the rest of the line didn't seem to do much. Furman ran the ball way too well. If they don't improve a lot in the next 2 weeks, they could get dominated by Notre Dame's O-line. Maybe they'll have to let Lyle's have a few snaps on the D-line.
The secondary held it's own. Hicks was the most tested defensive back and he played pretty well. Needs to learn to look back for the ball, but otherwise, he can keep up with speedy receivers and sticks to them pretty well.
The game was sloppy. There is a lot to clean up. The penalties and turnovers have to be addressed. The kickers need to be better than they were last year. Guess we'll see how much progress they can make in 2 weeks.
I still have high hopes for this team, but the scales have fallen from my eyes on a couple of things. I am particularly more disappointed in the D-line and the linebackers than I had hoped to be after the first game. On the other hand, I am actually more hopeful about the receivers (if the injuries are not serious). Lots can change over the course of a season, so let's see what unfolds.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)