Sunday morning thoughts - Sacramento State

Sunday morning thoughts - Sacramento State - 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: Sunday morning thoughts - Sacramento State (/thread-24427.html)

Sunday morning thoughts - Sacramento State - msqueri - 09-17-2023

1. It's impossible not to view a loss to an FCS team as a low point. This shouldn't happen to Power Five teams. We now join Northwestern, Kansas, Washington State, Iowa State (four times this century and six overall!), Virginia, Oregon State, Colorado, Duke, Minnesota, and Rutgers as the only Power Five schools to have multiple losses to FCS schools this century. That's a bad list to be on. On the other hand, there was a real we are who we thought we were vibe to last night that makes it less painful. This isn't like 2005 to UC Davis when it was a massive shock and ultimately kept us from breaking a multi-year bowl-less streak. This is a close loss to a team computers thought would be a tossup and will ultimately deprive us of a winnable game in a year that will end up with one, two, or three wins. It does not register very high either on the surprise meter or the stakes meter. That we can lose to an FCS team without it being shocking or too damaging is yet another sign of how low we've fallen. It's so low that I'm starting to have more doubts Taylor is capable of digging out of it, but we can't give up yet. Our theory of the case was always that we hired a culture builder who could engineer a steady (and quite possibly slow) rebuild and we just saw the culture he developed the last four years out-play the one he inherited. It doesn't fundamentally change the diagnosis of our challenge or the hope for what Taylor can bring. It was another miserable night of football, though, and it's an open question how many years of those will be too much for the program to recover.

2. There were a lot of plays that could have gone differently and swung the outcome - the two interceptions, Wright's knee being called down on the pick six and that play not being challenged (or if it was officially reviewed being an awfully quick review), the broken play game winner from Bennett to Fulcher, the bogus roughing the passer penalty on Bernadel - but to be honest Sacramento State persevered through just as many plays one could say that about. Fundamentally this felt like evenly matched teams where the difference was sacks. Six to zero in that category is hard to overcome. In particular, Jett Stanley was the difference and he ate our interior line alive (by the way, recall that the day we hired Taylor I highlighted Stanley as the only Sacramento State player I viewed as an attractive and realistic transfer target for us....oh well). The story of this game was our inability to prevent negative plays in pass protection or to generate negative plays for the Hornets via our pass rush. This is super depressing to me. Strength up front should always be the differentiator between FBS and FCS and there was no reason heading in to think Sacramento State was particularly strong in the trenches. PFF has us #131 (of 133) in pass blocking and #93 in pass rush (such a bitter disappointment given the hype for the OLBs and the April scheme). It's hard to see how we give ourselves much of a shot at all against Pac-12 teams with that being the case.

3. There was more to like on offense than on defense in this one. Sac State had played two FCS bottom feeders (winless Nicholls State and winless Texas A&M-Commerce) and ended up getting more yards per play against us than they came in averaging or than Taylor's Sacramento State teams ever averaged in a season. What.The.Hell. The Bobby April defense is a gigantic disappointment so far. PFF has the offense #99 and defense #120. On offense we are #77 in yards per play and #97 in scoring offense and on defense we're #126 in yards per play allowed and #123 in scoring defense. I would not be surprised if advanced metrics like FEI and SP+ start to reflect this as well. The defense is an abject disaster so far. Last night the defense forced one punt. The pass defense did worse than #215 Texas A&M-Commerce. The run defense gave up almost a yard more per carry than #183 Nicholls State. Kaiden Bennett is an elite FCS player but we shouldn't be making him look like Caleb Williams. The defense has a lot of explaining to do.

4. The offense wasn't good enough either but it was a lot better than the defense. Sacramento State has a vaunted FCS defense (more so than the offense this year in all likelihood) and we ended up getting 5.9 yards per play, over a yard per play better than they've allowed on average against their lowly first two opponents. It was the best our offense has done yet this season on a yards per play basis and Sac State has a better defense than Hawaii (and is probably closer to USC's defensive quality than many realize). There were things to build off on offense as well as a lot of meat left on the bone. In the run game, our 4.3 yards per carry (even accounting for all the sacks) was the most Sac State has given up, but edging out Texas A&M-Commerce is not cause for celebration and it's the lowest yards per carry we've seen. It's nice that we've been able to run a bit in each game but it's sobering to realize we haven't faced a good major college football run defense yet (USC is #94 in yards per carry allowed). In the pass game, we did well by the standards of the lowly passing games the Hornets have played and had by far our most explosive game yet this season. On the year we have five 30+ yard passing plays and three came last night against a Sac State coverage that has a defining strength this season and last. Encouraging to see some chunk plays that aren't just relying on Yurosek to bail us out. However, silver linings can't overshadow the dark clouds of the two horrible, game-costing interceptions, nor the inefficacy when not connecting on chunk plays.

RE: Sunday morning thoughts - Sacramento State - msqueri - 09-17-2023

5. Along with that inefficacy continues the QB controversy. I fully supported pulling Daniels for Lamson as I think Daniels has consistently looked bad (and especially not comfortable and not good at processing) in his limited action the last two weeks, and the red zone interception was inexcusable. [By the way, we gave Shaw a lot of grief for the predictability of red zone playcalling but to a significant degree it worked, at least a lot better than Shawfense did on the rest of the field. In the years Pritchard had the coordinator title, we were #59, #119, #6, #25, and #35 in red zone touchdown conversion percentage. So far this year we are #116. Something to keep an eye on.] Daniels is not playing well and seeing how Lamson would do against a non-USC opponent made sense to me. Unfortunately, Lamson did terribly too. In Total QBR Lamson was #122 of 124 QBs this week. He was a negative in every single component of Total QBR other than running. Putting this into historical perspective, Lamson's 6.2 Total QBR slots in as the third worst ever recorded by a Stanford QB, a bit better than 2019 Jack West vs. UCLA and 2018 KJ Costello vs. Pitt and a bit worse than 2017 Keller Chryst vs. San Diego State, 2008 Tavita Pritchard vs. TCU, and 2006 TC Ostrander vs. Arizona. Like Daniels, Lamson had a horrible interception. I hope the picks can be teachable moments for both. For Daniels, it looked like we were on our way to a comfortable victory and that mistake turned the tide....hopefully an object lesson that you can't let up on concentration and decision-making even when up multiple scores. For Lamson, hopefully he learns that you can't let desperation to get out of a bad play make the play worse, or let yourself lose composure (recall it happened immediately after he air mailed Farrell on what should have been a touchdown or at least big gain). I will be very interested in Borghi's analysis of QB play. I am inclined to think sacks are a QB stat and Lamson taking five sacks is a black mark, but it was also evident the OL struggled mightily in the second half. I wonder if astute analysis can pick up on something worth saving or further exploring in these guys. The QB play through three weeks has been poor enough (among 133 qualifying QBs nationally, Daniels is #90 on the season in Total QBR and Lamson is dead last #133) that I actually want to see Patu. We need to see what Patu looks like against live bullets. If none of these guys turns a corner in the next 4-5 weeks, what we may be on track for is a Jackson try out later in the year after the true freshman gets more settled.

6. The point Taylor made post-game in the brief availability he deigned to allow in his bizarre, press-avoidant post-game was that it's not all on the QBs. Absolutely. As I noted above, pass protection has been among the worst in the nation. It seemed like this affected the game plan with TEs being kept in to block more often. The PFF snap counts don't necessarily support this (supposedly Yurosek was out in a pattern 28 times) but it seemed like the TEs were geared toward protection rather than receiving. Beyond personnel packages, the line was brutal in pass blocking. PFF thought all were abysmal at that exact for McLaughlin, once again our best OL for the third straight week. [If you had told me going into the year neither Rogers nor Leyrer would have a game in the first three weeks grading out above 70 or even leading our OL in grading I'd be very disappointed....I am very disappointed.] I am hoping that Leyrer playing LT after a career at RT explains his struggles and that he gets better (or that Anderson pushes, but there doesn't seem to be any evidence Anderson is pushing). I was surprised not to see Uke get action inside given the struggles there. The positive personnel observations came at RB and WR. Smith and Filkins can do damage when they're given space. On the year Filkins is 11th among Pac-12 RBs in yards from scrimmage and Smith is 14th, which strike me as solid showings for how much they have to split touches.

7. But far and away the best thing about this game was the breakouts for Ayomanor and Reuben. They both more than tripled (Reuben nearly quadrupled) the output of their previous career bests. We know this is a rebuilding year (or potentially rebuilding numerous years) and one of the worst things about the first two games is how they little we saw in terms of talent with multiple years left in the program, especially at WR. It's hard too see Taylor's reign working out without reliable production from the skill positions, so if Yurosek, Smith, Filkins, and Humphreys (all potentially playing their last year) is all we have that's super bleak for the future. Ayomanor and Reuben breaking out with some production is a big relief and hopefully something they can build on. [This week's moving the chains (first downs) leaderboard: Filkins (4), Smith (4), Reuben (3), Ayomanor (3), Lamson (2), Butler, Daniels, Farrell]

8. It's harder to find nice things to say about individuals on the defense. It's a killer when your star player is a zero, as Bailey has been for two weeks. I have to believe his skipping much of the early action was a disciplinary response to his self-evidently loafing performance against USC. I support that but then am a bit disturbed to see Bailey not come out with his hair on fire when he did get a chance (and arguably not even be replacement level). The ILBs were a glaring weakness, which is super disappointing given off-season hype, D'Onofrio track record, and the scheme. I do at least like that Sinclair has a knack for ok plays (e.g, tackles after five yard gains on 2nd and 10) and that Edwards is so game (multiple run stops and an interception a lot to get from somebody with his athletic limitations). The one and only player we can consistently count on to make plays is Wright, and he does it both in coverage and in tackling. He's not perfect (and a penalty bailed him out on giving up a chunk play, giving up too many of those and more Kyu Blu Kelly-esque than a true lockdown guy so far), but he's the best we've got and I think is having a nice start to his redshirt freshman year. The group that really mystifies me is DL. This is an example of my eyes disagreeing with PFF. I was very frustrated by our lack of push given that it was against an FCS opponent not known for its OL and then when I checked the box score to see if I had missed something I had not, I was right that our DL didn't show up in the box score in making significant positive plays. Yet PFF loved the performance of Phillips, Franklin, and Moi (Franklin even grading at an elite level). I'm wondering what others saw there.

RE: Sunday morning thoughts - Sacramento State - msqueri - 09-17-2023

9. Karty is automatic but we knew that. His Groza campaign is the main thing I'm rooting for this year. He's now third in the nation in made field goals with seven and both guys with eight have missed (one of them missing four times). Karty and Farrell teaming up for the onside kick was a neat moment. It's a bit depressing to think we were pulling out all the stops against Sacramento State and still lost (if what we saw last night is the full measure of innovation and creativity.....), but it's where we are right now. Weselman had a 46 yard net punt for a fair catch (will take that every time) and choked in crunch time with a 34 yard net punt when he had 81 yards to work with to try to flip the field and protect a tie with time dwindling. I still have no confidence we're going to break something in the return game and am almost disappointed when we don't just fair catch it, though I guess with our offensive troubles we shouldn't be giving up the possibility of a big return play.

10. Game balls: Elic Ayomanor, Collin Wright, Joshua Karty, Tyler Osborne

11. Next week is another opportunity to try to put some substance behind all the talk of resilience and culture. The last two weeks have been troubling failures to show we've made any progress from what Taylor inherited. There are some (very) modest signs of individual progress and we can try to build on that. On paper, Arizona is a winnable game but not unless we play better than we have been. However, with last night's loss we've pretty much disspelled any illusions that win/loss record might show progress this year. It seems almost certain this year's team will be awful. As such, those who had maintained hope for momentum or a quick turnaround can now shift their sights on more incremental signs of improvement. If we can stay within a few scores of Arizona and/or shore up key weaknesses in pass protection, QB ball security, pass rush, and pass defense, that might be something to build on. We just need to make sure the rebuild doesn't start to look too Sisyphean lest the first and second year players develop losing mentalities and habits or the incoming recruits defect en masse.

RE: Sunday morning thoughts - Sacramento State - thatboy - 09-17-2023

Thank you. I have nothing of value to add, but always learn a lot from these summaries.

RE: Sunday morning thoughts - Sacramento State - ADPinWDC - 09-17-2023

Excellent rundown, MSQUERI

So, then what prospects for Season Ticket sales from here?
https://gostanford.com/sports/football/schedule/2023
I favor giving away tickets to as many high school players as are willing to drive to the stadium. Fill it up.
We offer the #4 TOUGHEST Schedule in the country, featuring a lot of ranked teams!! Come to our stadium!

ZONA -- they handled UTEP last week; prospects dim to herd the Cats.
#10 OREG -- will come in looking to run up the score aiming to take the Pac-12 crown, hosting USC at Autzen Nov. 11
bye
@ #19 COLO on Friday (ESPN) -- We contribute to the PrimeTime mystique emerging in Boulder, as Buffs pound toward a Bowl Game
#22 UCLA (Reunion HC) -- Frosh 5-star QB Dante Moore and RB Duo of Steele and Hardin slice us up. (Will Bruins lose at UTAH or at WAST?).
#8 WASH -- Penix pokes us to death as Huskies are also in the hunt for NY6 Bowl echelon, or better. They visit Troy after us.
@ #21 WAST -- Going to Pullman in Nov. sucks; often a rain squall or a slick field minimum. Cougs could post 500 yards on us.
@ #14 ORST -- Ditto with Corvallis. Beavers likely use us for a homecoming pasting to qualify for Bowldom.
BigGame -- We host KALSucks for what will be our Circular Rinse Bowl Game 2023. Who knows where Kal sits here.
Possibly they sit on 4 or 5 wins and need our scalp to maybe eek into a bowl. Or a fitting Battle for the Bottom.
#9 NDAM -- By now Our Lady knows where they sit for Bowl invites; there is no 2015 drama to N'UKE them out of Playoffs. They cruise.

How about that ACC Schedule for 2024?

RE: Sunday morning thoughts - Sacramento State - needle - 09-17-2023

Quote: The offense wasn't good enough either but it was a lot better than the defense.

I couldn't disagree more. The offense's production dropped to 3.7 yards per play in the 2nd half compared to 6.6 in the first. No TDs in the second half compared to two in the first.

This season is supposed to be all about showing improvement. Yes, that mostly means from game-to-game, but a big decline within a game--a game that really was there to be had--is very troubling.

Quote: The offense wasn't good enough either but it was a lot better than the defense.

RE: Sunday morning thoughts - Sacramento State - SamuelMcF - 09-17-2023

(09-17-2023, 03:49 PM)needle Wrote:
Quote: The offense wasn't good enough either but it was a lot better than the defense.

I couldn't disagree more. The offense's production dropped to 3.7 yards per play in the 2nd half compared to 6.6 in the first. No TDs in the second half compared to two in the first.

This season is supposed to be all about showing improvement. Yes, that mostly means from game-to-game, but a big decline within a game--a game that really was there to be had--is very troubling.

Once they figured out our WRs couldn't separate and our OL couldn't pass block, they assigned man coverage & LB run support over and over again and dared us to throw. I theorize everyone else will do that this season, leading to a lot of "big declines."

RE: Sunday morning thoughts - Sacramento State - Snorlax94 - 09-17-2023

(09-17-2023, 03:59 PM)SamuelMcF Wrote:
(09-17-2023, 03:49 PM)needle Wrote:
Quote: The offense wasn't good enough either but it was a lot better than the defense.

I couldn't disagree more. The offense's production dropped to 3.7 yards per play in the 2nd half compared to 6.6 in the first. No TDs in the second half compared to two in the first.

This season is supposed to be all about showing improvement. Yes, that mostly means from game-to-game, but a big decline within a game--a game that really was there to be had--is very troubling.

Once they figured out our WRs couldn't separate and our OL couldn't pass block, they assigned man coverage & LB run support over and over again and dared us to throw. I theorize everyone else will do that this season, leading to a lot of "big declines."

One of my gripes is that clearly our opponents are making better halftime and in-game adjustments than us. This must be David Shaw’s fault, of course.

I’m not calling for TT’s head, I’m just saying we took a chance on a bunch of people who are coaching Power 5 for the first time, or have been promoted to a new level for the first time, and they need to improve quickly.

RE: Sunday morning thoughts - Sacramento State - cardcrimson - 09-17-2023

(09-17-2023, 04:03 PM)Snorlax94 Wrote: I’m not calling for TT’s head, I’m just saying we took a chance on a bunch of people who are coaching Power 5 for the first time, or have been promoted to a new level for the first time, and they need to improve quickly.

Perhaps not, but seem to be sharpening the guillotine and getting the basket ready.

RE: Sunday morning thoughts - Sacramento State - qwerty49 - 09-17-2023

(09-17-2023, 03:59 PM)SamuelMcF Wrote:
(09-17-2023, 03:49 PM)needle Wrote:
Quote: The offense wasn't good enough either but it was a lot better than the defense.

I couldn't disagree more. The offense's production dropped to 3.7 yards per play in the 2nd half compared to 6.6 in the first. No TDs in the second half compared to two in the first.

This season is supposed to be all about showing improvement. Yes, that mostly means from game-to-game, but a big decline within a game--a game that really was there to be had--is very troubling.

Once they figured out our WRs couldn't separate and our OL couldn't pass block, they assigned man coverage & LB run support over and over again and dared us to throw. I theorize everyone else will do that this season, leading to a lot of "big declines."

Excellent observations, Samuel.

I really wonder why we stopped running. Filkins and EJ were doing pretty well and the quick holes were opening up the middle. Perhaps the change in LB assignments put a stop to that.

Having to keep Yurosek in to help on pass blocking is just a self-inflicted gunshot wound.

RE: Sunday morning thoughts - Sacramento State - doubledub - 09-17-2023

(09-17-2023, 05:16 PM)branner Wrote: I am trying to understand two things:

1. Why aren't they targeting Yurosek? He probably has nearly the same number of catches and carries over the last 2 games.

2. Why isn't EJ playing more? I don't recall seeing much in the last quarter.
Thank you for another terrific game recap, Matt. Of most importance to me, we had far more intensity and hustle this game than we did against USC, which was a pathetic performance (we quit and embarrassed ourselves). Guys did a better job yesterday of flying around. Sac State was, sadly, the better team, especially at QB, running back, and across both lines. On offense, we look slow off the snap. On defense, we get little push and are easily manhandled. We are too small on both lines, and inexperienced. We don't close well on defense. Guys get too many critical yards when they are already surrounded by our defenders.

I remain a believer in what TT and his staff can do. Right now, we just don't have the athletes to compete at a high level. This will be a multi-year rebuild. If Coach Taylor has the right institutional support, I think he can get the job done.

RE: Sunday morning thoughts - Sacramento State - Snorlax94 - 09-18-2023

(09-17-2023, 08:42 PM)qwerty49 Wrote:
(09-17-2023, 03:59 PM)SamuelMcF Wrote:
(09-17-2023, 03:49 PM)needle Wrote:
Quote: The offense wasn't good enough either but it was a lot better than the defense.

I couldn't disagree more. The offense's production dropped to 3.7 yards per play in the 2nd half compared to 6.6 in the first. No TDs in the second half compared to two in the first.

This season is supposed to be all about showing improvement. Yes, that mostly means from game-to-game, but a big decline within a game--a game that really was there to be had--is very troubling.

Once they figured out our WRs couldn't separate and our OL couldn't pass block, they assigned man coverage & LB run support over and over again and dared us to throw. I theorize everyone else will do that this season, leading to a lot of "big declines."

Excellent observations, Samuel.

I really wonder why we stopped running. Filkins and EJ were doing pretty well and the quick holes were opening up the middle. Perhaps the change in LB assignments put a stop to that.

Having to keep Yurosek in to help on pass blocking is just a self-inflicted gunshot wound.

Not throwing to Yurosek was so bizarre and inexplicable that it made me wonder if there was some larger explanation. Like, maybe he broke some team rule, like curfew at USC or whatever, and maybe the punishment is to be suspended one game, but instead, they just don’t throw to him for a game. Yurosek seemed surprisingly “Okay” with his role as a blocker. If there was no larger explanation, wouldn’t he be more frustrated?

RE: Sunday morning thoughts - Sacramento State - JohnR34231 - 09-18-2023

(09-18-2023, 03:29 AM)Snorlax94 Wrote:
(09-17-2023, 08:42 PM)qwerty49 Wrote:
(09-17-2023, 03:59 PM)SamuelMcF Wrote:
(09-17-2023, 03:49 PM)needle Wrote:
Quote: The offense wasn't good enough either but it was a lot better than the defense.

I couldn't disagree more. The offense's production dropped to 3.7 yards per play in the 2nd half compared to 6.6 in the first. No TDs in the second half compared to two in the first.

This season is supposed to be all about showing improvement. Yes, that mostly means from game-to-game, but a big decline within a game--a game that really was there to be had--is very troubling.

Once they figured out our WRs couldn't separate and our OL couldn't pass block, they assigned man coverage & LB run support over and over again and dared us to throw. I theorize everyone else will do that this season, leading to a lot of "big declines."

Excellent observations, Samuel.

I really wonder why we stopped running. Filkins and EJ were doing pretty well and the quick holes were opening up the middle. Perhaps the change in LB assignments put a stop to that.

Having to keep Yurosek in to help on pass blocking is just a self-inflicted gunshot wound.
Not throwing to Yurosek was so bizarre and inexplicable that it made me wonder if there was some larger explanation. Like, maybe he broke some team rule, like curfew at USC or whatever, and maybe the punishment is to be suspended one game, but instead, they just don’t throw to him for a game. Yurosek seemed surprisingly “Okay” with his role as a blocker. If there was no larger explanation, wouldn’t he be more frustrated?

Not throwing to Yurosek ia even more bizarre when you realize that our best wide receiver (Humphreys) was not playing.
As far as him not being more upset about it, I would assume he is a team kind of guy. If the coaches tell him he can best help the team by staying in as a blocker he is willing to do it without complaining.
Saw the highlights and at least on one play they said he was targeted (in the waning moments of the game). He was well covered and the pass fell incomplete.

RE: Sunday morning thoughts - Sacramento State - fullmetal - 09-18-2023

I didn't see the game -- were there any designed screens or wheel routes to punish an overeager pass rush? Was Sac State getting pressure with their base defense?

RE: Sunday morning thoughts - Sacramento State - needle - 09-18-2023

(09-18-2023, 08:33 AM)fullmetal Wrote: I didn't see the game -- were there any designed screens or wheel routes to punish an overeager pass rush? Was Sac State getting pressure with their base defense?

Definitely some wheel routes, with a notable strike from Lamson to EJ for about 20 yards in the third quarter. Do not recall a screen attempt.

Yes, Sac State did at times get pressure rushing four.