forums

Week 1 overreactions vs. valid concerns

C

canefan88xbl

Redshirt Freshman
Joined
Oct 12, 2013
Messages
146
Via ESPN:

"This was one of the teams I was most curious to see in Week 1. There was some reason to be excited about the Hurricanes, but we hadn’t seen enough to fully believe in progress in Coral Gables.

Takeaway after the opener: woof.

I thought QB would be the biggest position of concern, but both lines were woeful. The defense couldn’t get pressure on Louisville, and the offense couldn’t open holes for elite RB Duke Johnson.

I mentioned coach Al Golden in the preseason as a possible hot-seat candidate, and what you saw Monday suggested I understated the road to his dismissal."

FSU, Bama, Georgia, South Carolina among others that were overreactions to their week one performance.

http://insider.espn.go.com/blog/travis-haney/post?id=3410
 
Advertisement
crossover22[]_[];1967251 said:
Actually out d line played good. But we only send 3 so pressure is almost impossible.
Click to expand...

While it wasn't Jerome Brown and Danny Stubbs, that is the best our DL has looked in years.
 
we got 4 sacks, 2 sack fumbles, mutiple TFL, gave up under 5 yards per carry even while being gassed. They didn't get enough pressure, but certainly enough to win. The last few years the DL has been bad, but Monday night they were not the problem. They played good enough to win
 
Dline did look the best it has in years, especially considering it is not allowed to tackle behind the line of scrimmage without written permission. Then again, the bar is not very high.
 
Imagine how good the DL would look if they actually lined up in a 4-3 with proper pass rushers...
 
My biggest concern wasn't the O-line, but the play calling. Had we actually taken and hit some shots down the field, that D would've backed up, and the O-line could've done some work. Duke could've done his thing. This entire game was all about the anemic plan on O. What makes me so mad about it is Golden had said he HOPED they would stack the box. Well, why the heck would you hope that if you don't plan on throwing over it? To prove how stupidly stubborn you are by running and throwing right into it? Seriously? It's like a matador hoping the bull runs right at him, only to not move.
 
I agree, and it seems like James Coley is so one dimensional, he is either unwilling or unable to make logical/obvious adjustments to take advantage of what the defense is showing. That is what is scary, and it was highlighted in the last two games.
ThomasM said:
My biggest concern wasn't the O-line, but the play calling. Had we actually taken and hit some shots down the field, that D would've backed up, and the O-line could've done some work. Duke could've done his thing. This entire game was all about the anemic plan on O. What makes me so mad about it is Golden had said he HOPED they would stack the box. Well, why the heck would you hope that if you don't plan on throwing over it? To prove how stupidly stubborn you are by running and throwing right into it? Seriously? It's like a matador hoping the bull runs right at him, only to not move.
Click to expand...
 
Advertisement
He's not one dimensional, he's ZERO dimensional. As in he has zero clue what he's doing.
Canesfreak said:
I agree, and it seems like James Coley is so one dimensional, he is either unwilling or unable to make logical/obvious adjustments to take advantage of what the defense is showing. That is what is scary, and it was highlighted in the last two games.
ThomasM said:
My biggest concern wasn't the O-line, but the play calling. Had we actually taken and hit some shots down the field, that D would've backed up, and the O-line could've done some work. Duke could've done his thing. This entire game was all about the anemic plan on O. What makes me so mad about it is Golden had said he HOPED they would stack the box. Well, why the heck would you hope that if you don't plan on throwing over it? To prove how stupidly stubborn you are by running and throwing right into it? Seriously? It's like a matador hoping the bull runs right at him, only to not move.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
ThomasM said:
He's not one dimensional, he's ZERO dimensional. As in he has zero clue what he's doing.
Canesfreak said:
I agree, and it seems like James Coley is so one dimensional, he is either unwilling or unable to make logical/obvious adjustments to take advantage of what the defense is showing. That is what is scary, and it was highlighted in the last two games.
ThomasM said:
My biggest concern wasn't the O-line, but the play calling. Had we actually taken and hit some shots down the field, that D would've backed up, and the O-line could've done some work. Duke could've done his thing. This entire game was all about the anemic plan on O. What makes me so mad about it is Golden had said he HOPED they would stack the box. Well, why the heck would you hope that if you don't plan on throwing over it? To prove how stupidly stubborn you are by running and throwing right into it? Seriously? It's like a matador hoping the bull runs right at him, only to not move.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

I noticed he wasn't on the field on Monday, which was a change from last season. My question is, why when the QBs are on the sideline, they aren't getting coached up? Morris used to go sit like a jackass on an equipment trunk with his baseball hat on. I'm pretty sure you would never see that at an NFL game. They are looking over slides of the defensive coverage and talking about adjustments. I know colleges don't do the slides, but you can talk over adjustments.

I knew I didn't like Coley during Savannah St. Yes, it was Savannah St and they couldn't beat most Miami high school teams, but we shouldn't change our approach. Coley was running go routes with Allen Hurns, because he could win. Hurns ain't beating a good CB on a go route, so why allow him to do it against weak opponents. You don't coach or play down to your competition, that is how you develop bad habits.
 
Hard to get pressure when you have 3 DL's against 5 OL's and 1 of those DL's drops back into coverage.
 
Popa's Shoes said:
we got 4 sacks, 2 sack fumbles, mutiple TFL, gave up under 5 yards per carry even while being gassed. They didn't get enough pressure, but certainly enough to win. The last few years the DL has been bad, but Monday night they were not the problem. They played good enough to win
Click to expand...

This. Idiots totally destroyed their credibility in their analysis by saying that. DL actually played QUITE well. Best DL play we have had here yet under Golden. 4 Sacks in 1 game, 2 TOs caused by pressure. There as absolutely NO comparison between the DL and the **** show the OL looked like.
 
"Woeful" DL? Someone must have been ball watching. DL was fine, I was pleasantly surprised. Considering a true freshman Played the second most snaps at NT, D had 4 sacks, 6 TFLs, and gave up 3 yards a rush while their counterparts on offense converted 1 third down the entire game, that is pretty good.
 
DL played well against the run and would've been better in pass rush if dorito rushed tyriq mccord more instead of having him cover the slot receiver. O line play and play calling was just awful as we all know.
 
People in the national media are jumping off the Golden ship in a hurry. People are really starting to take notice of how much of a Corch he really is.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top