Illinois State Game - Page 2

UDDoug · #**101** 09-03-2012, 11:29 AM

They played poorly because it was a physical mismatch. Bigger, stronger, faster opponents do that to you. The offense went East West because the ISU DLine dominated up front and so did their OLine. The UD offense may struggle this year but you sure can't tell that from this game.

All games like this prove is the PFL doesn't deserve an auto bid to the playoff. At least in terms of being a realistic contender. The PFL has no more chance in the FCS than a 16 seed in the basketball tourney. What the PFL deserves is a separate playoff classification.
Posted via Mobile Device

San Diego Flyer · #**102** 09-03-2012, 11:41 AM

I agree this ISU game didn't reveal much about our upcoming season. But I do think there will be years where the top Pioneer team with the autobid will pull off the upset. Our really good UD teams, and the best Harbaugh teams at USD, could do it IMO. My concern is that we are entering a spell of football mediocrity. While the ISU loss meant nothing, the Duquesne game will be very telling. We need to --as a minimum--play well and be in the game to the end to give us the indication this season will go as we want it to.

MichiganFlyer60 · #**103** 09-03-2012, 11:54 AM

ISU was bigger and probably faster head to head. I dont think we could have won in hindsight. and yet it did seem like we played offensively on a small field. we need to be able to stretch the field.
What was most concerning to me was when we did have a chance to make a throw a catch or a tackle we often didnt execute.

I'm sure the staff will make adjustments and be ready for Saturday

Flyer Gramps · #**104** 09-03-2012, 12:04 PM

I think DF & I both believe that our offense played too much like last year regardless of the opponent size. We don't criticize the loss to a better team, just the hammering.

Remember the "too" passes last year; too long, too short, too left/right. They were present in Normal & visible on the webcast. We can score & win games w/o a Hoyng/Tino level QB but perhaps just not rings. It was reported that we were in the red zone TWICE! Certainly Bardo should have had at least two more completions with support. We've been too used to receivers like Watkins, Valentino, Collins, Millio, Jonard, Ruhe, Champa, etc. We have some good ones now but somebody has to "step up". Remember when Tino & Watkins missed some passes; hard to remember because it was so seldom.

Remember too there was JJ all over the place disrupting things & Devon blasting off into the backfield (it was reported that we had no sacks & ISU had 3). Remember all the clutch plays by Ries, or the Vossler boys; need a clutch guy this year somewhere on the "D" too. ISU scored all six times they were in the red zone according to stats sheets. JJ & Devon together in their final two seasons accounted for a total of 39 sacks & 389 tackles. Need some defenders to "step up" too!

If play don't improve in Pittsburgh (irregardless of losing or winning the game) others should be tried, even "four freshman" if their good enough to travel.

UD62 · #**105** 09-03-2012, 01:26 PM

Drawing conclusions from a game such as this is a guess at best. Having coached for 25 years I found that when you are completely dominated everything you try to do is usually a failure. We may or may to be a good team this year, and I share some of the concerns that have been expressed. My observation over the last few years is that we are not what we once were, but a good recruiting class or two can change all that. were it not for converting Tino to QB his junior year we would have been in much worse shape. Some, or most of the PFL has recruited as well or better than we have in the last 4-5 years. The thoughts expressed about possibly playing true freshmen, while good for the future, does not bode well for this year. No knock on our guys. ISU game showed a "no quit" attitude and that is invaluable.

DetroitFlyer · #**106** 09-03-2012, 02:35 PM

Yeah, so now we have a new excuse for losing.... Gee, they were bigger, faster, stronger.... It is an insult to every player if you think they cannot hang with any FCS team. I you do not make plays you lose. Does not matter if it is ISU, USD or Duquesne.

UDDoug · #**107** 09-03-2012, 03:50 PM

Facts are facts DF. If your expectation is for nonscholarship UD to be able to hang with ANY FCS program offering 63 scholarships you are just not realistic. It's like saying any FBS team should be able to hang with Alabama. They can't.
Posted via Mobile Device

UD62 · #**108** 09-03-2012, 03:53 PM

Originally Posted by DetroitFlyer

Yeah, so now we have a new excuse for losing.... Gee, they were bigger, faster, stronger.... It is an insult to every player if you think they cannot hang with any FCS team. I you do not make plays you lose. Does not matter if it is ISU, USD or Duquesne.

Not excuses, reasons. I believe you have an overinflated opinion of the level of play in the PFL. On occasion a top flight team in the PFL may beat a fairly high caliber FCS team but as a rule games like Saturday are usually the result. I believe the insult is thinking they did not play well in the face of what appeared to be overwhelming odds. I believe your basic premiss of us being able to hang with any FCS team is just plain wrong. As it appears neither of us will be changing our minds any time soon, let's just agree to disagree and let the subject drop.

DetroitFlyer · #**109** 09-03-2012, 07:37 PM

Wow, do you guys even follow FCS football? Have you even been to a game? I suppose the next thing you are going to tell me is that Michigan was manhandled by Alabama because they were bigger, faster and stronger. Oh wait, YSU manhandled Pitt because they were bigger, faster and stronger .... We lost because just like Pitt and Michigan we played poorly. It happens. No excuses, put the pads back on, practice hard this week, and play better at Duquesne.

UD62 · #**110** 09-03-2012, 08:31 PM

Originally Posted by DetroitFlyer

Wow, do you guys even follow FCS football? Have you even been to a game? I suppose the next thing you are going to tell me is that Michigan was manhandled by Alabama because they were bigger, faster and stronger. Oh wait, YSU manhandled Pitt because they were bigger, faster and stronger .... We lost because just like Pitt and Michigan we played poorly. It happens. No excuses, put the pads back on, practice hard this week, and play better at Duquesne.

So much for letting it drop

UDDoug · #**111** 09-03-2012, 09:24 PM

UD could play well against a top 10 FCS team and the FCS team play average. Top 10 team wins by 20 or so. If you think UD can compete game in and game out with upper tiers of FCS your red and blue glasses are blinding you.

Not every game is size, speed and strength. This one was. Totally outclassed in talent. Which is what should happen nonscholarship bs top 10 fully funded FCS.
Posted via Mobile Device

PIONEER 8 · #**112** 09-04-2012, 12:12 PM

I decided to let this sit over the weekend to in order to allow a little perspective to sink in before jumping in on the discussion. Here are my thoughts and opinions (that is all they are and I claim no particular expertise):

-Cleary ISU was the better team. Bigger, stronger, faster and playing at home. With that said, if we want to be big boys in the FCS then we cannot let that be an excuse. The players and coaches can't take the attitude that they are a scholarship program and we are not and therefore we cannot compete. The facts are the facts and we need to find a way to step up and compete and we did not give it our best effort on Saturday.

-The defense was not as bad as the score would indicate. I know that sounds strange when we gave up 56 points but you have to remember that 7 came on a blocked punt and 7 came on an 80 yard run late in the 4th when we were completely worn down. Up to that point there were no big plays against us. They dinked and dunked us on passes and ground it out in the running game but our defense made them work for what we got. I do think that our defense would have done much better if the coaches would have let the kids get up on their receivers and not let them complete an 8 yard out whenever we wanted. I am sure it was respect for their speed but when we did get up tight and they tried to go over the top they were largely unsuccessful (aside from a bad pass interference call down near the goal line).

-Our offense was worse than the score would indicate. We could not run the ball and we could not pass. From a running standpoint we were getting beat at the line and the backs had no place to go. I know that they were bigger and stronger so either we need to get bigger and stronger or we need to develop schemes that give us angles that help to create better lanes. I am also not sure if #5 is completely healthy. He just has not shown the burst that I have seen from him in the past.

-Our passing game was poor. The line actually did a decent job of pass blocking but there were many poorly thrown balls and at least two drops that should have been catches. If we don't get better throwing the ball fast it is going to be a disappointing season because teams are just going to stack the box against the run and dare us throw it over the top. If we cannot threaten them with the pass it is going to shut down our run game and we will not do well.

-I have yet to see any really true difference makers on either offense of defense. Last year we could count on #5 on offense and #11 on defense to really cause some disruption to the other teams. I have not seen that happen this year in any of the scrimages or in the game on Saturday. We need to find a playmaker on defense as well as on offense (as I said above, I really question if #5 is fully recovered from his off season surgery).

I know our kids have heart and will give it their best but we have a long way to go to be anything more than a run of the mill team in the Pioneer League. I am not saying it is time to panic (in fact it is never time to panic) but we need to step it up and make some changes pretty quickly or this season is going to get away from us.

San Diego Flyer · #**113** 09-04-2012, 02:13 PM

Duquesne. After the DU game, please post a follow up critique. The coaches have a lot of film to watch and time to correct things. We now get to measure ourselves against a team of our same cloth. If your critique is the same, we are in big trouble.

UDDoug · #**114** 09-04-2012, 06:07 PM

Originally Posted by PIONEER 8

-Cleary ISU was the better team. Bigger, stronger, faster and playing at home. With that said, if we want to be big boys in the FCS then we cannot let that be an excuse.

I don't believe Dayton has any aspiration of being the big boy in FCS. If they did, they'd fund the program and provide the 63 scholarships they are permitted. That's not going to happen.

Dayton is not in FCS because they want to be in it, or they have any desire or expectation to win or compete for an FCS national championship. They are in FCS because the NCAA says they have to be in it. If the NCAA suddenly allowed UD to drop back down to Division III as they were in the 80s and early 90s they would jump at the chance. It's that simple.

PIONEER 8 · #**115** 09-04-2012, 06:17 PM

Originally Posted by UDDoug

I don't believe Dayton has any aspiration of being the big boy in FCS. If they did, they'd fund the program and provide the 63 scholarships they are permitted. That's not going to happen.

Dayton is not in FCS because they want to be in it, or they have any desire or expectation to win or compete for an FCS national championship. They are in FCS because the NCAA says they have to be in it. If the NCAA suddenly allowed UD to drop back down to Division III as they were in the 80s and early 90s they would jump at the chance. It's that simple.

I don't disagree with anything that you said but let me correct something in my statement. I intended to say "play with the big boys."

That is, if we want to be in the playoffs (which I think the coaches and team do) then we better have it in our mindset that we need to expect to be competiive at that level. We should not go into these games expecting not to be able to compete and feel sorry for ourselves. We need to have the attitude that we are going to go toe to toe with them and see where we stand. If we lose we lose but go in ready to compete. As I have said before, the Patriot League champion has won its first round playoff game each of the last two years on the road and those teams were non-scholarship. In fact, now that they have gone to scholarships for next year there may be a few midwest kids that we will have a shot at that went the Patriot League route in the past (especially he better academic schools in the Pioneer League like UD). I know that our coaches have grumbled in the past that they lose a lot of suburban kids to the Patriot League so maybe they can turn that around.

UD62 · #**116** 09-04-2012, 08:08 PM

Originally Posted by PIONEER 8

I don't disagree with anything that you said but let me correct something in my statement. I intended to say "play with the big boys." That is, if we want to be in the playoffs (which I think the coaches and team do) then we better have it in our mindset that we need to expect to be competiive at that level. We should not go into these games expecting not to be able to compete and feel sorry for ourselves. We need to have the attitude that we are going to go toe to toe with them and see where we stand. If we lose we lose but go in ready to compete. As I have said before, the Patriot League champion has won its first round playoff game each of the last two years on the road and those teams were non-scholarship. In fact, now that they have gone to scholarships for next year there may be a few midwest kids that we will have a shot at that went the Patriot League route in the past (especially he better academic schools in the Pioneer League like UD). I know that our coaches have grumbled in the past that they lose a lot of suburban kids to the Patriot League so maybe they can turn that around.

I don't believe there is anything wrong with the team attitude or the desire to play well. I also believe that the players felt that this was an opportunity to 'play up' and welcomed the challenge. Sadly we found out where we stand. No shame in that. But to say, as some do, that we can compete on the ISU level while remaining a non-scholarship program is in my view in error. Future games may well, and I believe probably will, show that we are about at the same level as last year. QB and secondary play are a ?, last year play at those positions cost us dearly. ISU game really didn't answer the questions , as we were outmatched all day. Dukes and RM will provide a more realistic view of were we are.

UDDoug · #**117** 09-04-2012, 11:00 PM

I agree they want to be in the playoffs. But that is because of the auto bid. Without it, the playoffs weren't really a goal. And so I don't think they intend to compete at that level. They want to play uo, get a taste and prepare to compete at a PFL level. There is no real amition to play at an ISU level.
Posted via Mobile Device

UDBrian · #**118** 09-05-2012, 05:37 PM

I have thought about Detroit Flyer's comments. It is always possible to outscheme and beat a superior team. I think that if you plan on playing an athletically superior team toe to toe it simply becomes an athletic contest which you will use. The QB at this time is not capable of executing a game plan which could help beat a superior team. Whether that would be enough to win the game, who knows, but it would have been much closer.

I don't think that it is a good goal to qualify for the playoffs and get your head beaten in during your last game. Hopefully the team will improve enough to compete when that happens.

San Diego Flyer · #**119** 09-05-2012, 06:52 PM

I think the team that wins the Pioneer League will have a decent chance for an upset the first game, depending on the seeding. We just have a long way to go to prove that team is us. We can start proving it with Duquesne.

jmitch · #**120** 09-05-2012, 07:28 PM

Originally Posted by San Diego Flyer

I think the team that wins the Pioneer League will have a decent chance for an upset the first game, depending on the seeding. We just have a long way to go to prove that team is us. We can start proving it with Duquesne.

Only the top 8 teams will be seeded in the 2013 FCS playoffs and those teams will receive first round byes. The first round games will match up teams by geography. So if Dayton wins the PFL next year and Duquesne wins the NEC, there is a decent chance that those teams will be matched up against each other in the first round. In this case, Dayton over any NEC team would not be considered an upset in my mind.

UACFlyer · #**121** 09-05-2012, 07:39 PM

It was only a few years ago when the Flyers were expected to win every game, win the PFL championship, etc. And that expectation was almost always fulfilled.

No longer.

Something has changed. Is it as simple as the fact that Mike Kelly retired? I don't know enough about Flyer football to make an intelligent guess. Am I on the right track...or am I missing something entirely?

Chris R · #**122** 09-05-2012, 08:52 PM

Football, unlike some other more flukey sports like baseball or soccer, is a game where the best team almost always wins. At the end of the day you can dissect it down to the cob, but it ultimately comes down to the Jimmys and the Joes. 63 schollies bring in much better players. You are worth what someone is willing to pay for your services.

jmitch · #**123** 09-05-2012, 09:53 PM

Originally Posted by UACFlyer

It was only a few years ago when the Flyers were expected to win every game, win the PFL championship, etc. And that expectation was almost always fulfilled.

No longer.

Something has changed. Is it as simple as the fact that Mike Kelly retired? I don't know enough about Flyer football to make an intelligent guess. Am I on the right track...or am I missing something entirely?

Whose expectation has changed? The Flyers have won 2 of the last 3 PFL championships under RC. This Flyer team fully expects to win the PFL this year. They had a down year last year, just like they did in 2006. In 2007, they won the PFL. I think folks are putting too much stock in a single loss to ISU. This team will be fine.

UACFlyer · #**124** 09-05-2012, 11:03 PM

Originally Posted by jmitch

Whose expectation has changed? The Flyers have won 2 of the last 3 PFL championships under RC. This Flyer team fully expects to win the PFL this year. They had a down year last year, just like they did in 2006. In 2007, they won the PFL. I think folks are putting too much stock in a single loss to ISU. This team will be fine.

I did not have the ISU game in mind at all. I was referring to the remarks of several on the previous posts in which Priders seem to be saying that we're going to have a tough time in the PFL this year, a mid-pack team, etc.

I don't know....that's why I was asking. Surely, I hope that the team will be fine...better than fine.

UDDoug · #**125** 09-06-2012, 07:45 AM

I have no idea how UD will fare in the PFL, but the midpack comments are mostly coming from the ISU beat down. Almost like if you can't hang with ISU then you can't win the PFL. Nothing could be further from the truth.

The gap from unfunded FCS to top 20 fully funded FCS is pretty wide. Wider than top 10 FCS to mid pack FBS.

Also agree if the PFL were matched with the NEC it would not be much of an upset for the PFL to advance. Just nit sure it plays out like that. Matching the PFL to MVC or a Colonial is just as regional and avoids any noise about matching up two weaker auto bids.
Posted via Mobile Device

UD62 · #**126** 09-06-2012, 08:48 AM

My view that the Flyers may be a mid-pack team is not based on the ISU game at all. We were outgunned everywhere in that game and had very few opportunities to do anything. The secondary and QB are my major concerns, and we lost a few good ones to graduation. the Dukes and RM will go a long way in determining what we will be this year. Improvement in the areas mentioned and we could contend, lack of improvement could make a winning season a struggle. The days of UD dominating the league are probably coming to an end, not because we are weaker necessarily but because the league has stronger teams.

rollo · #**127** 09-06-2012, 09:20 AM

One of my students is a starting offensive lineman...we discussed the game yesterday and he said they were the biggest mother-f'ers he's ever seen. Most of their defensive line were D1 transfers from Oklahoma, WVa, etc... I looked up the ISU roster and he was right.

It was a mismatch from the opening snap...and is not an indication of the Flyer talent.

We'll see.

DetroitFlyer · #**128** 09-06-2012, 03:38 PM

Originally Posted by rollo

One of my students is a starting offensive lineman...we discussed the game yesterday and he said they were the biggest mother-f'ers he's ever seen. Most of their defensive line were D1 transfers from Oklahoma, WVa, etc... I looked up the ISU roster and he was right.

It was a mismatch from the opening snap...and is not an indication of the Flyer talent.

We'll see.

When you are manhandled, the other team is almost always the biggest you have ever seen. Go back and look at the game notes I posted for ISU. The height and weight of the players were all listed. I recall maybe one defensive lineman that was over 300 lbs. I think most of the rest were well within the range of many we will face this season. As for transfers, they are normally FCS players that ended up at FBS schools for a number of reasons. Most transfers, unless there is a disipline issue, are transferring because they were riding the pine at their FBS school.

DetroitFlyer · #**129** 09-06-2012, 03:45 PM

DEFENSE
POS NO NAME HT WT CL SGP CGP HOMETOWN
DE 4 Nate Palmer* 6-3 240 Sr. 0 11 Chicago, Ill.
31 Will Davis 6-2 210 RFr. 0 0 Wheaton, Ill.
DT 92 Albert Sparks** 6-3 320 Jr. 0 19 Irving, Texas
91 Tim Dawson* 6-2 280 Sr. 0 4 Crawfordville, Fla.
DT 93 Shelby Harris** 6-2 260 Jr. 0 20 Milwaukee, Wis.
99 Bradon Prate* 6-4 270 So. 0 8 Wauconda, Ill.
DE 35 Colton Underwood** 6-4 255 Jr. 0 21 Washington, Ill.
53 Rickey Simpson** 6-2 245 Jr. 0 7 Naperville, Ill.
SLB 3 Evan Frierson* 6-2 240 Sr. 0 11 Washington, D.C.
29 Brandon Westphal** 6-1 230 Jr. 0 22 Bolingbrook, Ill.
MLB 9 Mike Zimmer*** 6-3 235 Sr. 0 31 Wheeling, Ill.
33 Pat Meehan 6-1 220 RFr. 0 0 Frankfort, Ill.
WLB 23 Austin Davis*** 6-1 220 Sr. 0 32 Normal, Ill.
40 Alex Donnelly 6-0 225 RFr. 0 0 Kirkland, Wash.
CB 24 Mike Banks* 5-7 180 So. 0 11 University Park, Ill.
20 Dominic Clarke 5-10 195 Jr. 0 0 Frederick, Md.
SS 22 Ezra Thompson 6-2 215 Jr. 0 0 Tinley Park, Ill.
42 Soniel Estime 6-0 190 Fr. 0 0 Boynton Beach, Fla.
FS 7 Ben Ericksen*** 6-1 200 Sr. 0 25 Greendale, Wis.
30 Dontae McCoy 6-0 205 So. 0 11 Palos Heights, Ill.
CB 5 Tevin Allen* 5-9 170 So. 0 10 Ft. Lauderdale, Fla.
14 Matt Goldsmith** 6-1 200 Jr. 0 18 Clinton, Md.
SPECIALISTS
POS NO NAME HT WT CL SGP CGP HOMETOWN

Size was not the issue....

UD62 · #**130** 09-06-2012, 04:25 PM

I wonder if the Buckeyes have an opening in two years. If size strength and speed don't mean anything, we have a shot, and should we lose it will be because we didn't play well.

proudpapa · #**131** 09-06-2012, 05:20 PM

I don't know what the program said but I know what my eyeballs said and what everyone around me was saying. They said that they were much larger than we were. There "O" line was huge. On par with most FBS schools. I hope that we can all agree that the game was lop-sided. In the first half we had 25 or 40 yards of offense and 1 first down. If you don't think there was a disparity in talent then I may point out something from their page.

http://www.goredbirds.com/trads/ilsu-trads-inthepros-m-footbl.htm[/URL]l

I know that some of these kids are now where they need to be or should have been in the first place. The point is that they were given a shot at FBS football to start with. That means that someone thought they were worthy, talented and athletic enough at one point. Who knows why they are no longer there. You would have to have your head in the sand to not observe that the gap between top tier FCS and the FBS is closing and closing very fast. Five years ago it was unheard of for a FCS school to beat the lowliest of FBS schools. Now we don't even bat an eye when one wins. Look at your NFL rosters, they are full of FCS players. You need to be a realist and see that they are not full of PFL players. There is a difference, embrace it and realize that this is where our sights need to be set. Our guys are very smart, talented and play with a lot of heart. They will have to become bigger, stronger, faster and coached up to play with the better FCS teams.

There are 2,500 D1 football scholarships out there each year. Other FCS schools are using them. No knock on UD, I am just stating the facts. That's what we are having to compete against. Usually the top 2,500 players will be at a scholarship school. Let's say UD has 30-40 players that could have been at D1 scholarship schools. Most all of the kids at ISU are on scholarship.

Again not a knock, just a bit of reality in my opinion. There are many FCS scholarship schools that I think UD can not only play with but beat. Just not the top level.

UDDoug · #**132** 09-06-2012, 06:29 PM

Scholarships. We don't need no stinking scholarships. We can win the FCS championship without no stinking scolarships.
Posted via Mobile Device

chriscage · #**133** 09-06-2012, 06:58 PM

Is it not true that 80-90% of UD Footballers qualify for scholarships, grants and aid? If that is the case, it confirms that a very high percentage of all UD students receive aid, because NCAA requires that the team MUST mirror the student body in this regard.

I guess that our guys are just smarter than the typical FCS team!

UDDoug · #**134** 09-06-2012, 07:28 PM

The FBS transfers that end up at FCS schools perhaps are where they should have been. But it is a real stretch to say that UDs nonscholarship FCS players are comparable to those FCS players. That's like saying that basketball players at South North Bejeesus State are the same as Kentucky just because the are in D1.

In hoops terms you have the top tier of FCS equivalent to the top 6 conferences. Then you have othe scholarship players equal to the next tier. For lack of a better term call it mid major. Then you have nonscholarship players equivalent to low major. Not all players get slotted appropriately. But let's say top 10 FCS gets a mix of high FCS and some FBS. UD gets more low and mid major. Good coaching and recruiting the right kids who fit the system can make up some of that. Not all of it.

So if UD has one of their better teams and plays well they lose 45 to 21.
Posted via Mobile Device

DetroitFlyer · #**135** 09-06-2012, 07:49 PM

Yeah... So no one comments on the "size" of the defense.... I stand behind my comments. Size was not a factor on the poor offensive play.

proudpapa · #**136** 09-06-2012, 09:19 PM

Their defense was more athletic on the front seven than we we could handle. Just because their defensive front line wasn't as big as their offensive front line doesn't mean they weren't more athletic. The NY Giants defensive front isn't that big but they are pretty good. As a matter of fact they are about the same as the line up that you posted for ISU. I watched the game just like you did. We all need to realize we have a filter that we see the game with. You have a filter that you compare the qb play with Hoying and Valentino. My filter is just Valentino. To be 100 percent honest I never thought that the offense was that efficient. I saw a great athlete make plays out of alot of broken or broken down plays.

Again, I know I'm beating a dead horse, but everyone else is throwing quick hitches, bubble screens and split screens. They show a very short passing game. We do not run that many quick screens. Our completion percentage would be significantly better if we did. That's not our game plan. Our patterns take longer to develop and sometimes there just isn't enough time. We are comparing our spread offense to other spread offenses and they just are not calling the same games.

HAs any one ever seen an audible by the Flyers in the last three years? ISU audibled several times during that game last week. These are some of the reasons I have been saying we don't set our qb's up for success. I know that noone wants to hear this but Will is a great athlete and believe it or not he is one of the fastest players on the team. I believe he does give us the best chance for success on Saturdays. Voigt and Johnson throw great balls but I don't know if they bring any threat in the running game. I don't know. We will know more after these next two games.
Posted via Mobile Device

Flyer Gramps · #**137** 09-07-2012, 10:10 AM

proudpapa...what you said about Wil is very true. It's what I read in Kentucky & Cincinnati newspapers as I followed his recruiting time. It was very exciting to anticipate his arrival & my posts expressed that.

From many first-hand reports, he is very good at practice & the obvious choice to start. Now he needs to transform from the speed & familiarity of practice to a game setting. He cannot continue to throw into the ground or way high regardless of the pass pattern during a game. This transformation from Tues./Fri. to Saturday seems to be a problem. We're into a second season of waiting for the blossom from all the fertile practices. I'm a patient gardener but the anticipated bloom does face frost soon.I have the CBS webcast contract to watch again tomorrow.

UDDoug · #**138** 09-07-2012, 10:23 AM

Let's just focus on one aspect of size, strength and speed. Guarantee that an ISU defensive end at 245 is stronger and faster than a 245lb defensive end at Butler. You have to face facts - the talent gap between a fully funded top 20 FCS program and a nonscholarship UD program is vast. No surprise - most kids given the choice will take the scholarship. They go FBS over FCS if they have the choice and they scholarship FCS over nonscholarship FCS if offered. Not everyone but most and absolutely at a level that affects the balance if talent.

With that I am done because if you don't rwcognize that fundamental issue further discussion is futile.
Posted via Mobile Device

comebackkids0708 · #**139** 09-07-2012, 10:54 AM

IMHO Illinois State played the better game, period. The team that plays the better game, wins, usually. Going in to the game I mentioned mistakes had to occur on ISU side and there were a few things that suggested that might hapeen (1st game, cocky team), well you can't win them all and you can't always be right, HaHa. I personally think UD played ok, but they made the mistakes and ISU didn't. Also remember the final 2 scores (like Pioneer pointed out) were after the starters were pulled for UD as well as the last TD before the half for ISU was because of a suspect penalty on our corner to say the least. End of the day we lost. Yes they are bigger, faster, stronger but I'm going to side with DF to an extent, that doesn't always mean a victory. Like he stated, we didn't play our best game and lets be honest, they played a good game. If you ever have the chance watch the game film please do so...they never beat us deep, they tried but never did. Our Dline held their own, considering the size difference, I mean really watch the tape. They weren't getting pancaked or blown off the line. We won't start on the other items (dropped balls, penalties) the typical items you note as mistakes of a team that lost.

With all that being said......WHY ARE WE STILL TALKING ABOUT THE ISU GAME? If our Flyers are as hung up on last weekend as everyone here is, Good luck vs Duquesne. The good thing is, they aren't. They've moved on. I will say this about the game and future games, which some of you have already pointed out; play calling has got to be changed up a little. Now it was the first game for a new OC and a new QB coach, and 1 loss doesn't mean you rebuild the wheel, so I'm not overly concerned with it, there just has to be some mixing of goods.

PS. I haven't had time to read through EVERY single post. So if there are some things I said that are repeats and I didn't acknowledge it, I apologize.

Scout86 · #**140** 09-07-2012, 11:29 AM

When Dayton plays someone like ISU, what amount of money do they get ?

HawkFlyer · #**141** 09-07-2012, 12:07 PM

I enjoy reading all the posts and opinions. But the ISU game is OVER. We lost big for many of the reasons posted above. Let's move on and focus our energies on the next game this week against the Dukes. Go Flyers.
Posted via Mobile Device

UD62 · #**142** 09-07-2012, 01:54 PM

141 post for a football thread, that has to be a record.

San Diego Flyer · #**143** 09-07-2012, 06:09 PM

Originally Posted by San Diego Flyer

What goes around, comes around. FCS member Savannah State lost to
Oklahoma State 84-0. But they were only down 35-0 with 3 quarters to play!

So now this week Savannah State is a 70.5 underdog to #6 FSU. Do you take the points or give the points. This is not a slam dunk either way.

Is FSU's depth as strong as Oklahoma State's depth? They will likely play the last 3 quarters.
Are the coaches at FSU just as mercenary?
Will the FSU alumni who are putting big money on this game be in the coaches ear to cover the spread?

NB: The STU coach says we are going in there to win!!!

http://espn.go.com/college-football/...tate-seminoles

DetroitFlyer · #**144** 09-07-2012, 09:49 PM

Originally Posted by Scout86

When Dayton plays someone like ISU, what amount of money do they get ?

I do not know for certain, but I do not think this was a money game. Probably have to go FBS these days.

DetroitFlyer · #**145** 09-09-2012, 10:59 AM

Gee, interesting how ISU was bigger, stonger and faster than FBS Eastern Michigan yesterday....

UACFlyer · #**146** 09-09-2012, 03:10 PM

Sagarin has ISU ranked #6 among FCS teams and #93 among FBS and FCS combined....meaning that ISU is ranked above about thirty FBS teams.

Too bad UD got a tough draw like ISU in its first "step" up the ladder of FCS football

Interesting stat: ISU had possession of the ball for over 14 minutes in the 4th Q of the EMU game. How do you have possession for 14+ minutes of a quarter? Unusual.