menu
Logo
99+
Bobcat Attack Menu
Logo
99+
Ohio Football Topic
Topic: Official Game 4 Thread: UMass
Page: 3 of 5
mail
person
L.C.
9/27/2018 8:54 PM
Steve1981 wrote:expand_more
Wow, who the heck poisoned your kool-aid?

The koolaid is gone, and will stay gone, until the defense improves.
mail
person
Doc Bobcat
9/28/2018 6:27 AM
Steve1981 wrote:expand_more
[QUOTE=L.C.] Ohio has scored more than a few TDs on trap blocks over the years. I have pointed them out in the highlights at least a few times. I think, though, that most of them have been from the 5-8 yard line, not the 1.
Yessir. You are 100% correct ... trap block plays have been successful over the years. But as you stated, not from the 1-inch line.

That's where my problem lies. How, considering the circumstances, can you make that play call .... especially after you ran the EXACT same play the play before. That's super troubling for a coaching staff that has the experience they do ... and the fact they've been together for 14 years with Ohio. It's almost like Keystone Cops sometimes over there. I'd expect that sort of mishap from a young coaching staff that doesn't have a lot of experience ...

If they had ran a traditional smashmouth, downhill blocking running play or a QB sneak (which is the obvious play ... Solich afterwards admitted so) and they got stuffed ... that's one thing. I can (somewhat) live with that. Would be disappointing the didn't stuff it in ....

But to run a play that leaves you open for the type of result they got is just baffling. And this comes as the cherry on top of a performance where you put up 21 points in the first quarter and a half .... and then scuffled to just 6 points the rest of the way.

It's worth pointing out that Red Zone Offense has been one of the few bright spots for Ohio. That is the only trip this year where Ohio didn't score. Meanwhile problem areas for the offense have been first downs, and 3rd down conversions, and pass efficiency has not been great as a team, despite some great numbers by Maxwell.

By contrast, it's hard to find any bright spots for the defense. In MAC stats, they are last in total defense, pass defense, opponent 3rd down converstion percentage, and pass efficiency defense. They are 2d to last in in scoring defense, and sacks. I guess the bright spot is that they are 5th in rushing defense because, after all, why bother rushing? They are deceptively 5th in total first downs given up, and first in time of possession, because, when you give up so many 1-play drives for TD, there aren't a lot of first downs, nor time of possession.'

With UMass being an efficient passing team, this weekend promises to be, um, well, interesting? Last year Ohio managed to win 58-50. This year the offense is still not as good as last year, and the defense is much worse. I'm going to project a UMass win by the score of 73-

Wow, who the heck poisoned your kool-aid?
Remote view channeling by Monroe.
Last Edited: 9/28/2018 6:29:13 AM by Doc Bobcat
mail
bshot44
9/28/2018 10:11 AM
L.C. wrote:expand_more
Wow, who the heck poisoned your kool-aid?

The koolaid is gone, and will stay gone, until the defense improves.
Sad but true. The defense is anemic. And will be a cancer to this team all season if they don't get better.

UMass will be a good measuring stick to what we can expect going forward.

Kent, Akron, BG, Miami and UB are all vastly improved offensive teams. Not to mention WMU, NIU and Ball are no slouches either.

Going from MAC penthouse to MAC outhouse is NOT out of the question if this defense continues to get torched
mail
person
Rufusbobcat94
9/28/2018 10:53 AM
L.C. wrote:expand_more
[QUOTE=Rufusbobcat94]... It is no mystery that the defensive numbers looked better vs Cincy as the offense was significantly better in possessing the ball and converting 3rd downs. Much easier to be the 2017 Ohio defense when your offense is averaging 250 yards rushing a game....

The only problem with the theory that they have dramatically improved is that the last 40 minutes of football the defense has played is some of the worst of the year. During those 40 minutes they gave up about 450 yards of offense, and failed to get a stop on five tries at 3rd and 7+ yards. During those 40 minutes, Ohio lost 34-9.

The theory makes sense because the offense's success vs cincy was predominantly in the first half as was the defense's success. As you claim, the worst defensive stats of the cincy game were in the last 40 minutes. 30 minutes of that 40 were in the second half. In the second half before that game-ending drive by the Ohio offense, Ohio's offense gained a total of 126 yards on 10+ minutes of time of possession. In the first half, the Ohio offense possessed the ball almost 23 minutes and had over 200 yards offense. Cincinnati scored 7 points in the first half and 27 in the second half.
mail
bshot44
9/28/2018 12:48 PM
Rufusbobcat94 wrote:expand_more
[QUOTE=Rufusbobcat94]... It is no mystery that the defensive numbers looked better vs Cincy as the offense was significantly better in possessing the ball and converting 3rd downs. Much easier to be the 2017 Ohio defense when your offense is averaging 250 yards rushing a game....

The only problem with the theory that they have dramatically improved is that the last 40 minutes of football the defense has played is some of the worst of the year. During those 40 minutes they gave up about 450 yards of offense, and failed to get a stop on five tries at 3rd and 7+ yards. During those 40 minutes, Ohio lost 34-9.

The theory makes sense because the offense's success vs cincy was predominantly in the first half as was the defense's success. As you claim, the worst defensive stats of the cincy game were in the last 40 minutes. 30 minutes of that 40 were in the second half. In the second half before that game-ending drive by the Ohio offense, Ohio's offense gained a total of 126 yards on 10+ minutes of time of possession. In the first half, the Ohio offense possessed the ball almost 23 minutes and had over 200 yards offense. Cincinnati scored 7 points in the first half and 27 in the second half.

Translation... Ohio played "good" defense for three series to start the game forcing punts while UC got their footing. I guess that's an improvement over giving up 35 points on the first 25 plays vs UVa?
mail
person
Bcat2
9/28/2018 9:05 PM
So page 3, thread about UMASS. Hey, how about they are 0-3 on the road. Their loss at GS had GS with 59 rushing attempts @ 5.7 per rush for 344, w 2 tds. GS only needed 9 passing attempts which resulted in 17 per attempt, w 2 tds. Anyone else have anything about tomorrow's opponent?
mail
person
Pataskala
9/28/2018 10:54 PM
Bcat2 wrote:expand_more
So page 3, thread about UMASS. Hey, how about they are 0-3 on the road. Their loss at GS had GS with 59 rushing attempts @ 5.7 per rush for 344, w 2 tds. GS only needed 9 passing attempts which resulted in 17 per attempt, w 2 tds. Anyone else have anything about tomorrow's opponent?
They've used three QBs this year and may have settled for now on Michael Curtis, a junior. He's hitting 62% of his passes for 10 yds an attempt and a QBR of 162. Last week vs Charlotte he was 12/19 for 182 yds, 2 TDs and no INTs. He usually doesn't run much but last week had 9 carries for 35 yds and 2 TDs. So he accounted for 28 of their 49 pts. He played the whole game. Their star QB, Andrew Ford (115 QBR), sat out last week after a tough outing vs FIU. Last year against us Ford was 32/54 for 390 yds, 5TDs and an INT. Curtis didn't play.

Edit: Apparently both Ford and their other QB (Ross Comis) were injured last week.
Last Edited: 9/28/2018 11:05:23 PM by Pataskala
mail
bshot44
9/29/2018 7:49 AM
Bcat2 wrote:expand_more
So page 3, thread about UMASS. Hey, how about they are 0-3 on the road. Their loss at GS had GS with 59 rushing attempts @ 5.7 per rush for 344, w 2 tds. GS only needed 9 passing attempts which resulted in 17 per attempt, w 2 tds. Anyone else have anything about tomorrow's opponent?
Their offense is geared to throw. It should be even more skewed in that direction knowing how anemic our pass defense is. They have to make up for their porous defense, so I'm guessing they'll try to make this a shootout like last year. Be a good test if our secondary & pass rush have improved at all
mail
person
L.C.
9/29/2018 9:37 AM
bshot44 wrote:expand_more
So page 3, thread about UMASS. Hey, how about they are 0-3 on the road. Their loss at GS had GS with 59 rushing attempts @ 5.7 per rush for 344, w 2 tds. GS only needed 9 passing attempts which resulted in 17 per attempt, w 2 tds. Anyone else have anything about tomorrow's opponent?
Their offense is geared to throw. It should be even more skewed in that direction knowing how anemic our pass defense is. They have to make up for their porous defense, so I'm guessing they'll try to make this a shootout like last year. Be a good test if our secondary & pass rush have improved at all

Exactly. The facts are that Ohio has been particularly bad on pass defense this year, and that the best part of U. Mass. is their passing attack. If Ohio is going to compete for the MAC, Ohio will need to have a good pass defense. Today we can see how much they have improved. This is how I see it. If Ohio can hold U.Mass under:
60 pts/650 yards: Slight improvement
45 pts/550 yards: Significant improvement
30 pts/430 yards: Defense is coming to life
20 pts/350 yards: Defense is ready to compete for the MAC
10 pts/280 yards: Ohio is back as a favorite
mail
person
Macaluso
9/29/2018 2:16 PM
Ummm....*speechless*
mail
person
71 BOBCAT
9/29/2018 2:17 PM
Me too



GO BOBCATS
mail
person
Macaluso
9/29/2018 2:31 PM
It was like okay, maybe...wait for it...haha, just kidding.
mail
person
ohio9704
9/29/2018 2:31 PM
DB's getting burned for long TD's, just stunned. Not like we haven't witnessed it all year. I get some of it is on the pass rush, but same thing game after game from DB's.
mail
person
L.C.
9/29/2018 2:44 PM
bshot44 wrote:expand_more
I'm going to project a UMass win by the score of 73-42.
Wow! Can't tell if you're drunk ... just given up on this team ... maybe a hacked account?

Either way, this made me chuckle

With 13 minutes gone, the score projects to be UMass 96, Ohio 65. I expect the scoring to slow down, though, and my projection looks to be pretty close.
Last Edited: 9/29/2018 2:48:03 PM by L.C.
mail
person
71 BOBCAT
9/29/2018 2:53 PM
Yes, all tied up.




GO BOBCATS
mail
AlumDadDad
9/29/2018 3:24 PM
Any team that punts on our defense the rest of the year should immediately fire their offensive coordinator.
mail
person
allen
9/29/2018 3:34 PM
AlumDadDad wrote:expand_more
Any team that punts on our defense the rest of the year should immediately fire their offensive coordinator.
Lol, you are hilarious. We are back to handing out gold jackets.
mail
person
allen
9/29/2018 3:38 PM
Second half, we need to continue to be aggressive offensively, no run run pass. We have already made the qb a hall of famer, let’s not do that for anybody else. AJ needs to explode faster on handoffs, the difference between he and irons is that it takes a rod bit longer for him to get going. Rourke is really Houdini in the open field. Our wide receivers need to get more separation in the second half so that we can blow this thing open. Go Cats
mail
person
allen
9/29/2018 4:01 PM
There is that 4.47 speed, way to go AJ
mail
person
BryanHall
9/29/2018 4:08 PM
The defense is terrible. Terrible. We finally get a QB that make big plays and we can't stop anyone.
mail
person
berniebobcat
9/29/2018 4:10 PM
So when might we expect this defense to “mature?”
mail
person
L.C.
9/29/2018 4:36 PM
L.C. wrote:expand_more
I'm going to project a UMass win by the score of 73-42.
Wow! Can't tell if you're drunk ... just given up on this team ... maybe a hacked account?

Either way, this made me chuckle

With 13 minutes gone, the score projects to be UMass 96, Ohio 65. I expect the scoring to slow down, though, and my projection looks to be pretty close.
[/QUOTE][QUOTE=L.C.]...If Ohio can hold U.Mass under:
60 pts/650 yards: Slight improvement
45 pts/550 yards: Significant improvement
30 pts/430 yards: Defense is coming to life
20 pts/350 yards: Defense is ready to compete for the MAC
10 pts/280 yards: Ohio is back as a favorite
Final is 58 to 42, giving up "only" 451 yards. That puts Ohio in the "Significant improvement" range. It's still not close to what is needed for my "ready to compete for the MAC" group, but it's nice to see that the offense is now at mid-season form.

Even better, after the first quarter, the defense gave up only 304 yards, or a 400 yard/game pace. That puts Ohio in my "coming to life" range. I'm much more comfortable with a bad first quarter, then solid the rest of the way than the reverse, which was what we saw at UC.

On the negative side, here are the pass efficiency ratings of opposing QBs:
Howard: Newton 26-52, 439 yards, 3 td, 2 int, efficiency=132.3
UVA: Perkins 25-30, 379 yards, 3 tds, 0 int, efficiency=222.5
UC: Ridder 19-29, 274 yards, 2 tds, 1 int, efficiency=160.7
UMass: Ford 27-38, 355 yards, 4 tds, 1 int, efficiency=179.0
overall:101-157, 1547 yards, 13 tds, 4 int, efficiency=169.3

As a comparison point, the Ohio record for pass efficiency is 148.
Last Edited: 9/29/2018 5:47:46 PM by L.C.
mail
person
Bcat2
9/29/2018 5:29 PM
Remember MACtion? We had those wishing to be a MACtion team. Well, seems MACtion has arrived.
mail
person
Pataskala
9/29/2018 5:57 PM
That's the kind of offensive output Ohio needs to have while the D is getting its sea legs. After the pick six, six straight TD drives (which would make seven straight, if you count the one that went the other way). Nine straight drives with points. Got away from RBUTM on first down and mixed it up a bit more. And the execution was much better than last week. Just the one TO. TOP really helped the D. We were up by 12 minutes over the first three quarters. Kept the D off the field. Still a little too conservative near the goal line late in the game, given that UMass has such a potent offense. Keeping the lead at two scores left the door open for them just a bit.
mail
person
Bcat2
9/29/2018 6:24 PM
Looking at the participation report, not always accurate right after games. But since it all begins up front. OL #s 65, 63, 61, 57, 60 & 70. I expected to have 73 & 76 getting reps, evidently not. DL #s 43, 48, 50, 51, 55, 97, 98, & 99. Expected 88, though Ogun-Semore was listed as # 8A. Receivers. Expected # 8 - Buckner, not listed (injured ?). Hooks listed twice as 5 & 25. 25 should be Gullett. Make of this what you will, if anything.
Last Edited: 9/29/2018 6:28:55 PM by Bcat2
Showing Messages: 51 - 75 of 115
reply
vertical_align_top
vertical_align_center
vertical_align_bottom
add_comment
chevron_backward
chevron_forward
MAC News Links



extra small (< 576px)
small (>= 576px)
medium (>= 768px)
large (>= 992px)
x-large (>= 1200px)
xx-large (>= 1400px)