The CardBoard
My thoughts on the SJSU game - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: My thoughts on the SJSU game (/thread-1905.html)


My thoughts on the SJSU game - Mick - 09-04-2011

I’m no coach, but I’ve been attending games since 1969, so here’s my rundown:

The Good• Run defense was surprisingly good.  I was really impressed, had big rush all day.
• Tackling was generally very strong, very few missed tackles. 
• Routes looked very crisp and generally confounded SJSU DBs
• Forced many turnovers
• First safety in three years
• Two punts downed inside 20, one on the 2
• Excellent special teams
• No turnovers
• I thought the coaching was good, leaving very vanilla offenses and defenses, so they were unscoutable.
• Kept starters in until end of 3rd quarter
• Backups looked good.
• Skov, the DBs and DL looked good.  How much of that was a poor SJSU, I don’t know.
• This is odd, but our DBs looked only 1/2 step slower, not 1-2 steps slower than the other team like usual.  I thought they matched up skill positions very, very well.
• Luck looked very, good, very crisp.  Numbers should have been better than they were.
• 57-3 with 10 minutes left says it all

The Bad  • Run blocking was borderline awful.  3.5 yards per carry against the Spartans?  That’s really, really terrible.  There was no push, and I saw their second string OLs get beaten badly off the line (Kevin Danser, in particular, looked awful.  He has had some dehydration problems, but he looked really bad).
• Just one missed tackle, our SCB and SS collided on tackling Jabari Carr (formerly out of Oak Grove) who went for 65 yards.  Without that pass, SJSU’s QB averages 4.8 yards per pass.
• Very poor running on our part, looked like poor decisions and being slow to hit the line. 
• Our TE barely tried to catch what would have been a very easy TD pass.  Reached out with 1 hand, decided not to dive.  Ugh.
• Stanford looked unenthusiastic, like they weren’t up for it.
• SJSU’s pass offense was pretty good.  Their QB left a WIDE open SJSU receiver who was all alone for what would have been a 75 yard TD pass.  Thankfully, their QB did poorly.
• Badspot in our pass offense was Griff Whalen, who had mediocre routes and poor hands.

The Ugly  Reserved for San Jose State’s head coach, McIntyre, who threw tantrums during the first half, then roasted his team after the game in the papers, even though San Jose State was clearly outmatched.

Given the upsets around the country, this could have gone much worse, but overall, it was pretty darned good.

Tight ends - Redrum - 09-04-2011

1.  Who was the TE who gave up on the catchable ball?

2.  How many balls were thrown Toilolo's way?

3.  The radio team-- Husak and Fleming-- made the point a more than once or twice  that the TE's were not making their blocks on the edges and that was why the running game was struggling.

4.  Non-TE related comments by Husak-Fleming:  Wilkerson looked nothing like the Wilkerson of last year.  Was hesitant to commit and hit the hole.  Might be that he was so used to the holes our previous OL created and wasn't seeing the same this time around.  Or maybe the plays just got blown up and it had nothing to do with Wilkerson.  But, tha's what they said.

Re: Tight ends - CowboyIndian - 09-04-2011

(09-04-2011, 04:28 PM)Redrum link Wrote:  Wilkerson looked nothing like the Wilkerson of last year. 

I sort of think he did. So far, to me, he hasn't really looked like the guy with the press clippings and TV announcers hype. 

Re: Tight ends - pefloresjr - 09-04-2011

(09-04-2011, 04:28 PM)Redrum link Wrote:1.  Who was the TE who gave up on the catchable ball?
Pretty sure it was Fleener.  I think he thought he could get it and stay on his feet to gain more yards.  He ended up not making the catch at all.  Hopefully he learned that the key is to make the catch.  Yards after the catch aren't as important when you are already 20 yards downfield. 

2.  How many balls were thrown Toilolo's way?
I think the only ball was a jump ball throw to the corner of the endzone.  Toilolo wasn't able to make the catch, but this was really his first game so I don't think there are any big conclusions to make.

3.  The radio team-- Husak and Fleming-- made the point a more than once or twice  that the TE's were not making their blocks on the edges and that was why the running game was struggling.
I think that is spot on.  At least some of the run struggles seemed to be based on trouble finding the right hole/lane on runs behind the tackles.  The tight ends did not seem to be on the same page as the backs in deciding to seal off the defenders on the inside or push them to the outside.  We did adjust the blocking (I think we did a better job sealing off) and holes started to open up.  I also think the backs started hitting the holes more quickly and the defense wasn't able to get there to fill the hole in time.  Still lots of work to do, but I think the loss of Marecic is a big deal and will take a while to overcome.

4.  Non-TE related comments by Husak-Fleming:  Wilkerson looked nothing like the Wilkerson of last year.  Was hesitant to commit and hit the hole.  Might be that he was so used to the holes our previous OL created and wasn't seeing the same this time around.  Or maybe the plays just got blown up and it had nothing to do with Wilkerson.  But, tha's what they said.
I thought he looked ok.  All the backs were having trouble until the blocking got straightened out. 

Cheers,
Pete F.

Re: My thoughts on the SJSU game - fullmetal - 09-05-2011

I remember one play where Wilkerson looked as if he was heading for a left-side sweep, then had to change his mind and cut back inside of the left tackle (or was it a tight end?) where a hole had manifested itself.  Are the RBs and OL not on the same page?  Not sure.  But there had better be a run game against Arizona.  (Duke: Luck and the threat of a 3 yard/carry rushing offense should win it.)

How would you all grade Ryan Hewitt's performance in the rushing offense?  He had the hands to catch a touchdown pass, at least.

Was Toilolo's opportunity the one that could have been ruled an interception?

Re: Tight ends - Mick - 09-05-2011

(09-04-2011, 11:29 PM)pefloresjr link Wrote:[quote author=Redrum link=topic=4433.msg31338#msg31338 date=1315178914]
1.  Who was the TE who gave up on the catchable ball?
Pretty sure it was Fleener.  I think he thought he could get it and stay on his feet to gain more yards.  He ended up not making the catch at all.  Hopefully he learned that the key is to make the catch.  Yards after the catch aren't as important when you are already 20 yards downfield.  CORRECT, IN REVIEW.  HE GOT ONE HAND ON IT IN FULL STRIDE, NEVER DOVE, NEVER WENT DOWN.

2.  How many balls were thrown Toilolo's way?
I think the only ball was a jump ball throw to the corner of the endzone.  Toilolo wasn't able to make the catch, but this was really his first game so I don't think there are any big conclusions to make.  RIGHT.  NOT THE NEAR INTERCEPTION

3.  The radio team-- Husak and Fleming-- made the point a more than once or twice  that the TE's were not making their blocks on the edges and that was why the running game was struggling.
I think that is spot on.  At least some of the run struggles seemed to be based on trouble finding the right hole/lane on runs behind the tackles.  The tight ends did not seem to be on the same page as the backs in deciding to seal off the defenders on the inside or push them to the outside.  We did adjust the blocking (I think we did a better job sealing off) and holes started to open up.  I also think the backs started hitting the holes more quickly and the defense wasn't able to get there to fill the hole in time.  Still lots of work to do, but I think the loss of Marecic is a big deal and will take a while to overcome.

4.  Non-TE related comments by Husak-Fleming:  Wilkerson looked nothing like the Wilkerson of last year.  Was hesitant to commit and hit the hole.  Might be that he was so used to the holes our previous OL created and wasn't seeing the same this time around.  Or maybe the plays just got blown up and it had nothing to do with Wilkerson.  But, tha's what they said.
I thought he looked ok.  All the backs were having trouble until the blocking got straightened out. 

Cheers,
Pete F.
[/quote]

Re: My thoughts on the SJSU game - Hank 91 - 09-05-2011

(09-05-2011, 01:25 AM)fullmetal link Wrote:Was Toilolo's opportunity the one that could have been ruled an interception?
That was the one, but it was reviewed and I think they got it right. The defender came down with the ball, but his foot was on the chalk as he gained possession.

Re: My thoughts on the SJSU game - fullmetal - 09-05-2011

I didn't think there was enough visual evidence to show that the DB had control of the ball...but whew, glad it was ruled the way it was ruled.  Toilolo was pretty much mugged on that play.

Re: My thoughts on the SJSU game - FarmBoy - 09-06-2011

I guess 6'8" guys don't get the call much when obstructed by 5'10" defenders.