Not completely out of the question for this to actually occur. But I still say suck it Forde.
Not completely out of the question for this to actually occur. But I still say suck it Forde.
Hoke's comments indicate to me that he's somewhat concerned about the game, and SDSU will almost certainly be able to move the ball on the ground. I think we may need another day on the right side of the turnover margin stat if we are going to pull this out. I think we do and win a close one, but I'm very nervous about this game.
Hillman racked up yards against Cal Poly Army and Washington St.
Armys front 4 averages 230 lbs.
Washington St averages about 265
and Cal Poly. averages about 260 as well
not to take anything away from Hillman, you should consider that anyone wiht 4.5 speed should be able to rack up yards if your front 5 outweights the opposition by a good 40 lbs (they average about 300)
I will like to see the offensive line from SDSU going against guys who raent 230. Namely Will Campbell, MM, RVB, Roh and Black.
Not to mention, those guys arent 300lbs of fat.
This is a good point, and one I didn't consider. We're just much bigger than anything they've seen yet. A front four of RVB-MM-BWC-Roh averages about 295. Not only that, I bet they haven't faced guys with the athleticism that MM, Roh and Black have either.
I would be surprised if Q Washington gets more PT this week. Reports on him are that he's almost as big as BWC, not as athletic but is near impossible to move. He's perfect for a team that likes to run a lot.
the biggest Black Knight on the Dline is 270lbs, the Cougs have Sampson at 303 the rest well below 300lbs, Cal Poly has a 270lb'er. UM has three 300lb'ers. Defensively the Aztecs' heaviest dlineman is Long at 285lbs. Suddenly I'm not as worried about the Aztecs.
I hope our DB's/DL can keep Lindley from firing lasers beams in the secondary. I know their 3-3-5 is going to provide holes for our backfield to run through just like they did for Army. Also, when they weren't throwing picks, the Cougs peppered the SDSU secondary pretty well.
Is he saying Gibbons is going to miss an extra point?
or we make two field goals.
But who are we kidding -- he's saying Gibbons misses an extra point.
but Gibbons NEVER misses extra points!
I think hes saying Gibbons is going to make 9 FGs. Gibbons goes 9/10 on the day and we lose 27-28. That last FG cost us.
On the flip side SDSU's 14 safeties were all vital in their win.
So we have at least 24 offensive possessions? Awesome!
We'll have 34 offensive possessions. Glorious! With that many, it's gonna be hard to keep Denard under 50 runs.
14 safeties + 10 field goals = 24 offensive possessions
variant day of field position to get into position for 10 field goal attempts, but to also have the ball 14 other times backed up by the goal line.
Forde pulls a Dantonio...
You squeeze the Dantonio-bag gently, allowing the fluids to gently clean the cavity, thereby Dantonio-ing.
Balanced offense with a talented RB. I'm hoping Borges has a good plan to attack Long's defense - and I think he will - but I think the game will be too close for comfort.
Why do we care? Has he demonstrated, even once, a knowledge of anything other than girls on TV he would like to have sex with?
Or Doug Flutie's daughter? yeah. he's kind of a pathetic dude.
that's awesome. i'm really worried about this game, think that it will be close. but pat forde is always wrong, so that helps.
Both he and Coward...errr Cohwerd pick ND also and we all know how that went.
Yeah we pulled a rainbow out of our ass
As in, no, not a rainbow out of our ass, but a golden victory from Hoke's arse.
Yeah, well, you know that's just like, your opinion, man.
I think this game is going to be considered an uncomfortable win but I think, especially for this season, a win is a win no matter how the team played on the field.
Denard against a 3-3-5? I like our chances.
Wouldnt a 3-3-5 be the best defense to stop Denard?
Except he practiced against it his first two years.
That depends on what your definition of the word it is.
Possibly, but most people around here think 3-3-5 = only what we saw last year, so they think it's a useless D. A well played 3-3-5 should be an interesting test for Denard, but I'm not sure if it's the best to handle Denard. SDSU runs an aggresive version and blitzes a lot, which should leave Denard some easier quick throws and running lanes to take off. The best way to handle him is probably to only rush 4, keep contain, and force him to beat you from the pocket throwing the ball.
I would love to see them lnie up in the 3-3-5.
That means we have Lewan vs a DE and Huyge as well..
That leaves Donkameh, Molk and and Barnum vs. a DT and 2 LBS. with the potential to be able to seal off the backside backer, allowing it to be 2 S's vs Denard, a RB and a FB.
Dont forget that the 3-3-5 will allow us to direct a FB against a S.
To be fair, wasn't the 3-3-5 sort of design to stop the spread?
Pat Forde? Never heard of him.
SDSU is a team that gets respect now, so that's a good thing for us. That way, losing to them won't be crushing like losing to many mid-majors would be, and beating them will actually get us some credit.
That said, I still think we win. We won't kill them, but in the second half their undersized DL will be too worn out to take our pounding. The pounding might not work well in the beginning, but it will as the game goes on. With the occasional Denard scamper, of course.
is that the media will pretend that all the SDSU respect wasn't given and they'll be reclassified as a cupcake Orwell-style.
Their 3-3-5 is not set up well to stop the run. Their DL and LBs are small, and they have very little DL depth. That's not set up well to stop the run. Against Army, they gave up 5 yards per carry - on 77 carries. I know Army is a good rushing team, but SDSU knew they'd run the ball, they only completed 2 passes all game. If Army can get 5.2 ypc against them, we should be able to do the same if we mix it up a little more than they did.
Hell, Cal Poly San Luis Obispo got 3.0 ypc against them and they're a bad FCS team. It doesn't have to be all power I running, but we should run the ball against them a lot.
EDIT: I pulled up their Rivals preseason depth chart. Their front three weighs 280-280-250. Not big for a 3 man front. The three guys behind them weigh 245-280-240. This means that when they rotate at all, our size advantage is massive. At LB, they weigh 235-205-220, with backups weighing 210-220-210. Not bad for the starters, but significantly smaller for backups, and that 205lb MLB is a freshman. None of their starting DBs weight above 195, and only one is above 190.
Agree to disagree. We have a big, good OL that should push their front 7 around.
WVU has better athletes than SDSU, plus they play in the Big East - not exactly great offenses there. Plus, just because WVU's D was good doesn't mean SDSU's is. SDSU also only has 5 returning starters from last year, so they aren't very experienced in addition to being small.
Kovacs only weighs 195 because he's a safety. That's OK because Thomas Gordon, our other starting safety, weighs 208 and can fly.
I wouldn't say SDSU "shut down" the other teams they faced. Cal Poly did respectably against them, despite being an FCS team. Washington St. didn't run the ball much against them because they were able to throw for 360 yards or something like that. Army might be unorthodox, but it's not like they're good, and they almost beat SDSU had they not turned the ball over almost every drive.
We haven't had much luck running a lot of power running yet this year, but we'll keep trying, and SDSU has the best D to do so against. I'm not sure what your "b" point has anything to do with this, just because those particular big DL aren't getting much PT doesn't mean that it isn't what you want out of a DL.
Like the one we gave to Eastern in the first quarter for a total of 32 yards and a 3-0 deficit. Face it, our best chance to win this year is running primarily spread principles and the sooner Borges realize this the better. I'm not saying we can't pound the ball against them we're just a better running team out of shot gun allowing our lineman to get to the second level and destroy LBs.
I think that overall. running more spread than not is our best chance to win. But different teams, and different defenses, require different attacks. What doesn't work against EMU might work well against SDSU. What I'm saying is, I like our match-ups in the trenches this week, SDSU will easily be the smallest front 7 (6?) we see all year. Running the ball, in some fashion, should be our M.O. on Saturday. The longer the drives, the better.
Picked Michigan to lose by one point to a smaller school in the big house. Vegas picks us by 8.5. Well I just dont know who to believe. Guess I'll have to watch the game and find out.
SDSU traveling 3000 miles and has to deal with a 9AM kickoff per PST.
Usually not a good track record of teams adjusting to that very well.
to pick SDSU for double date of wrongness.
A winged helmet prior to the Notre Game Dame. Was he wrong with that one? Or are we talking blind squirrels & acorns?
Actually, Vegas now has Michgain as 10 point favorites--which just means that money has been coming in heavier on UM than SDSU---the betters out there like the Blue in this contest.
Game cancelled. No need to play, Forde has spoken.
I watched the SDSU vs Army game. They were lucky to win! Army shot itself in the foot approximately five times in the game, not the least on the final drive that would have won the game. The parallels to OSU-Toledo were creepy. Army deserved the win. Unless you think Michigan would lose to Army, we should be two score favorites, at least. The QB was able to run all over SDSU. Just think what Denard should do.
Part of being a prognosticator includes the given that you have to make one or two upset picks each week, whether you believe them or not. Unlike Lee, this would be one of the more logical upset picks.
Prior to Brady turning them into a damn fine team, they gave us all we could handle in the Big House when we had them badly outmatched man for man, yet were unable to put them away until the fourth quarter. They are a much better team today, coming in with a four year starter at qb and one of the nation's top RBs. I see SDSU as a very dangerous game, and even though I don't agree with his pick, I can see his reasoning.
CA, much like TX and FL have so damn much talent that much of it gets overlooked. That's why you can take schools like USF and make them legit within a few years. Brady and his staff took full advantage of the talent pool in that area and, obviously, convinced a number of them to go to SDSU. Yes, they lost their primary weapons at wr but they seem to have filled in nicely and the qb is producing basically the same numbers as he did last season.
Until proven otherwise, this year's version of the wolverines will be seen as slow starters. This is the type of team that could take advantage of that, and given their experience at key positions, won't make the mistakes that ND did, the only team we've played so far that actually did have superior talent on both side of the ball.
Thankfully, this year's defense actually consists of players that have at least one year's experience under their belt. This has allowed Mattison to make necessary game time adjustments, but there is always danger in allowing a team that is used to winning to get off to a good start. If they manage this, it won't be anything new to them, and they could prove to be far more difficult to slow down than the directional schools.
Is Forde correct in this pick? I highly doubt it for some of the obvious reasons, most notablfy the 9 am kickoff and one Denard Robinson residing in our backfield. But as pointed out above, sportswriters are obligated to pick a couple of upsets each week. I'd rather see picks like these that hold a degree of merit than those of Corso and Beano who always inspire the question, how the hell did they get those jobs?
if our coaches are any good coaches, they should be able to beat their ike team that they coached the last 2 years, they should know sdsu more than they know their new team. if they don't win this game, than Hoke is not a great coach.