True.  Should've rolled the pocket out.  No particular adjustments to counter the push from kents' d-line.  No jet sweeps--not many fakes of them.  We didn't seem to throw the ball downfield much, didn't make kents cover that in attempt to stop them from stacking 8 in the box.  Not too many runs toward the outside.

Yes, kents' d-line dominated.  But we looked like we had nothing at all to try to counter that.

Sorry.  I forgot.  Whatever the coaches do is correct and it is impermissible to question their strategy.

Answer me this, Wanny:  Another poster stated that kents averaged (before us, I presume) giving up 2.8 yards per carry against the run.  We saw from last year, I believe, that they are tough up the middle.  So what plan was their to counter a likely inability on our part to run the ball.

And guess what?  The wind is the same whether one drops back or rolls the pocket out.  So what does wind have to do with anything?  Perhaps wind affects throwing long.  Well, kents succeeded at least once with that.

Could you just make this easier for both of us.  Number your three standard responses 1, 2, and 3.  That way you can spend less time posting.  You could just go, for instance, "2" and we'll all know what you mean.

Forget the 2+ yards Kent was allowing and just look at what they had been doing lately:
ARMY-KENT
 NET YARDS RUSHING.............            233              185

  Rushing Attempts............       62       30
  Average Per Rush............      3.8      6.2
  Rushing Touchdowns..........        6        2
  Yards Gained Rushing........      246      195
  Yards Lost Rushing..........       13       10
NET YARDS PASSING.............      149      225
  Completions-Attempts-Int....   9-10-0  13-25-3

KENT-Western Michigan
NET YARDS RUSHING.............      182      259
  Rushing Attempts............       42       32
  Average Per Rush............      4.3      8.1
  Rushing Touchdowns..........        0        4
  Yards Gained Rushing........      198      280
  Yards Lost Rushing..........       16       21
NET YARDS PASSING.............      249      167
  Completions-Attempts-Int....  26-40-2  22-33-1

Imposters-Kent
NET YARDS RUSHING.............       50      140
  Rushing Attempts............       37       36
  Average Per Rush............      1.4      3.9
  Rushing Touchdowns..........        0        3
  Yards Gained Rushing........      101      156
  Yards Lost Rushing..........       51       16
NET YARDS PASSING.............      133      100
  Completions-Attempts-Int....  14-27-2  11-19-0

Rushing              No Gain Loss  Net TD Lg  Avg -------------------------------------------------
BATES, Phil           6   31    0   31  0 15  5.2
DAVIDSON, Vince       7   19    0   19  0  6  2.7
HERSHEY, Paul         1    7    0    7  0  7  7.0
THOMPSON, J.          1    1    0    1  0  1  1.0
HARDEN, Donte         2    0    2   -2  0  0 -1.0
JACKSON, Boo         20   43   49   -6  0 12 -0.3

So why did Kent give up all these rushing yards in the immediate two games to these
other teams when Ohio had a superior rush advantage to Western Michigan for the year?  
Either Kent made adjustments to their run defense on very short notice or Ohio didn't 
watch Army and Western game films and try to exploit which was clearly two beatdowns on 
the Kent vaunted defensive line?

Wanny, I'd really like to acknowledge the good sense of your take.

Really, I want to.  But I can't

Abandon the passing game totally--good strategy.  All in all, we didn't adjust, didn't try something to counter what kents was doing.  If we had and it didn't work, then no griping.  But we didn't.

I was at the game, the wind was nasty.  I'm assuming the wind played a role as there were open people down field, but we rarely attempted to throw to them.  Choosing instead to throw into coverage on shorter throws (when we had time).

Yes way!  That place is a wind tunnel.  Passing long was going to be a problem.  They played a great defense with the weather.  Not a good day for us, our offense went very vanilla and the weather played a role. Not the total reason, but a part of it.

The problem with the play calling in the Kent game was that we kept going to the same plays even though they clearly weren't working.  Yes the wind undoubtedly factored into the play calling, but after 3 1/2 quarters of running the ball up the middle, would it have really hurt that much to at least try a couple down field passes?  Even if they weren't completed, you might at least move the safeties back a few steps.

I don't doubt that there was some logic to the game plan, but our staff seems unable or unwilling at times to shake things up when the original plan isn't working.

Field position also factors in here, and we rarely had good field position.  Our average starting field position was the -27yardline and in the first half we started 4 drives at our 20 or less.  While Kent's average position was the -45 yard line.  This started primarily due to the blocked FG, which turned the Field Position battle against us for the remainder of the half.

We called 34 pass plays, were sacked 7 times, we completed 14 of the 27 for 13 ypc.....13ypc is a very good number, the 50% comp is the poor number as well as the 2/16 on 3rd down.

Flomo slams it on the head.

Great first post, sholtis.  You are true; nobody could possibly have a right thought unless they are a coach with many years of experience.  In fact, no one should be allowed to become a coach unless they have many years of experience as a coach.