07-18-2017, 04:48 PM
I am somewhat optimistic that we can be better than 8-4, but with a wider standard deviation than most years.
1) The DL will be fine against everybody that doesn't just try to pound the ball. We may have to do a bit of ILB blitzing to get pressure, but that is OK. What would not be OK is if UW, Utah, and possibly SDSU just run right at us with success. If SDSU does, USC will try, and things could get ugly fast. IOW, we could get beat by teams that play Stanford Football. That is the "worst case" scenario. If the DL can basically just keep the linebackers clean, we should be able to survive this. I think the coaches are fully aware of the risk here and are game-planning how to handle it, but at the end of the day, we can't get pushed off the LOS all the time and survive against a power attack. Our "back 8" will do a great job. We just need to avoid getting run over by the power game.
2) The OL is really the key. If we can run reliably, even problems on the DL will be less important because we can shorten the game. I also think having a healthy OL may make more difference than we expect. In theory, we had the athletes last year. It just didn't happen, possibly because of injuries moving people around and delaying the synergy needed. If the OL is of 2015 proportions, look out, because with a healthy fullback and a wider array of very skilled backs we could be offensively better than 2015. Not as dynamic, not as exciting, but just better. This is IMHO the "best case" scenario. The spring game I think showed that we have a chance to wear people out with fresh good backs, any one of which can kill you, but only if the OL can run block reliably. Pass blocking is also a lot easier if the other team is forced to defend the run on every down.
3) The QB situation is an unknown ATM. Until Chryst is back, he isn't. However, the QB isn't going to be our primary weapon. He does need to be able to execute the offense, which does mean throw to the "right" receiver with basic accuracy. AÂ "game manager" will be OK. Yes, it would be great to get more, and we very well may, but right now, I think a realistic hope is "adequate". If we get "good", 10-2, 11-1 is a real possibility! I would really prefer to beat Washington 13-9 rather than 45-42, because 45-42 isn't our sweet spot, but I will gladly take either!
1) The DL will be fine against everybody that doesn't just try to pound the ball. We may have to do a bit of ILB blitzing to get pressure, but that is OK. What would not be OK is if UW, Utah, and possibly SDSU just run right at us with success. If SDSU does, USC will try, and things could get ugly fast. IOW, we could get beat by teams that play Stanford Football. That is the "worst case" scenario. If the DL can basically just keep the linebackers clean, we should be able to survive this. I think the coaches are fully aware of the risk here and are game-planning how to handle it, but at the end of the day, we can't get pushed off the LOS all the time and survive against a power attack. Our "back 8" will do a great job. We just need to avoid getting run over by the power game.
2) The OL is really the key. If we can run reliably, even problems on the DL will be less important because we can shorten the game. I also think having a healthy OL may make more difference than we expect. In theory, we had the athletes last year. It just didn't happen, possibly because of injuries moving people around and delaying the synergy needed. If the OL is of 2015 proportions, look out, because with a healthy fullback and a wider array of very skilled backs we could be offensively better than 2015. Not as dynamic, not as exciting, but just better. This is IMHO the "best case" scenario. The spring game I think showed that we have a chance to wear people out with fresh good backs, any one of which can kill you, but only if the OL can run block reliably. Pass blocking is also a lot easier if the other team is forced to defend the run on every down.
3) The QB situation is an unknown ATM. Until Chryst is back, he isn't. However, the QB isn't going to be our primary weapon. He does need to be able to execute the offense, which does mean throw to the "right" receiver with basic accuracy. AÂ "game manager" will be OK. Yes, it would be great to get more, and we very well may, but right now, I think a realistic hope is "adequate". If we get "good", 10-2, 11-1 is a real possibility! I would really prefer to beat Washington 13-9 rather than 45-42, because 45-42 isn't our sweet spot, but I will gladly take either!