Forde Picks SDSU 28-27
Link:
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/6994911/coaching-conference-chaos-college-football
Not completely out of the question for this to actually occur. But I still say suck it Forde.
#suckitforde
September 20th, 2011 at 5:45 PM ^
Not a chance. Michigan in the Big House with SDSU's former coach exploiting their weaknesses with superior players and Denard? No.
September 20th, 2011 at 7:22 PM ^
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.
September 20th, 2011 at 7:34 PM ^
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.
September 20th, 2011 at 7:42 PM ^
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.
September 20th, 2011 at 10:44 PM ^
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.
September 20th, 2011 at 5:45 PM ^
Is he saying Gibbons is going to miss an extra point?
September 20th, 2011 at 5:47 PM ^
or we make two field goals.
But who are we kidding -- he's saying Gibbons misses an extra point.
September 20th, 2011 at 5:52 PM ^
but Gibbons NEVER misses extra points!
September 20th, 2011 at 6:46 PM ^
He did against ND....
Oh, I see what you did there.
September 20th, 2011 at 6:59 PM ^
Someone blew an " R " horn... That's why he missed..
September 20th, 2011 at 5:48 PM ^
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.
September 20th, 2011 at 5:50 PM ^
So we have at least 24 offensive possessions? Awesome!
September 20th, 2011 at 6:02 PM ^
We'll have 34 offensive possessions. Glorious! With that many, it's gonna be hard to keep Denard under 50 runs.
September 20th, 2011 at 6:07 PM ^
14 safeties + 10 field goals = 24 offensive possessions
September 20th, 2011 at 6:13 PM ^
What about the 4 INTs and the 6 3-and-out punts?
September 20th, 2011 at 8:36 PM ^
I was assuming this...but I'm just bad at math.
September 20th, 2011 at 5:50 PM ^
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.
September 20th, 2011 at 6:36 PM ^
You are not considering that they will get stuffed on 4th and goal 14 times.
September 20th, 2011 at 5:46 PM ^
Forde pulls a Dantonio...
September 20th, 2011 at 5:48 PM ^
You squeeze the Dantonio-bag gently, allowing the fluids to gently clean the cavity, thereby Dantonio-ing.
September 20th, 2011 at 5:47 PM ^
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.
September 20th, 2011 at 5:47 PM ^
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?
September 20th, 2011 at 5:48 PM ^
Or Doug Flutie's daughter? yeah. he's kind of a pathetic dude.
September 20th, 2011 at 5:49 PM ^
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.
September 20th, 2011 at 5:56 PM ^
Both he and Coward...errr Cohwerd pick ND also and we all know how that went.
September 20th, 2011 at 5:57 PM ^
Yeah we pulled a rainbow out of our ass
September 21st, 2011 at 3:08 AM ^
As in, no, not a rainbow out of our ass, but a golden victory from Hoke's arse.
September 20th, 2011 at 5:57 PM ^
Yeah, well, you know that's just like, your opinion, man.
September 20th, 2011 at 5:59 PM ^
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.
September 20th, 2011 at 6:08 PM ^
Denard against a 3-3-5? I like our chances.
September 20th, 2011 at 6:25 PM ^
Wouldnt a 3-3-5 be the best defense to stop Denard?
September 20th, 2011 at 6:38 PM ^
We're going Wisconsin on their ass, manball ftw!
September 20th, 2011 at 6:39 PM ^
Except he practiced against it his first two years.
September 20th, 2011 at 6:50 PM ^
That depends on what your definition of the word it is.
September 20th, 2011 at 6:45 PM ^
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.
September 20th, 2011 at 7:39 PM ^
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.
September 20th, 2011 at 6:59 PM ^
To be fair, wasn't the 3-3-5 sort of design to stop the spread?
September 20th, 2011 at 6:09 PM ^
Pat Forde? Never heard of him.
September 20th, 2011 at 6:10 PM ^
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.
September 20th, 2011 at 6:25 PM ^
is that the media will pretend that all the SDSU respect wasn't given and they'll be reclassified as a cupcake Orwell-style.
September 20th, 2011 at 6:31 PM ^
I don't think beating SDSU will carry much weight unless they have some meaningful wins against other teams. Beatting Army and Wazzu doesn't mean much and SDSU is still viewed as marginal team. Their identity is still "Isn't that where Marshall Faulk went? Are they in the WAC or the MWC?"
I think your assertion that we can pound the ball against SDSU is nuts. We weren't able to do that to EMU or WMU, why would SDSU be any different? They have a good run defense (remember the 3-3-5 is designed to stop the run) for an MWC team.
On a seperate note...If you HAD to pick a game to lose this season, there's less on the line against SDSU than any other game. It's not a team where you're embarrased to lose and (since it's a non-conference game) there aren't many ramifications either way.
September 20th, 2011 at 7:14 PM ^
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.
September 20th, 2011 at 8:07 PM ^
You need size to stop a power run attack like Wisconsin. You don't need size to stop Michigan's run game. You need smarts and know-how.
The best D in the country by FEI last year was WVU's 3-3-5. SDSU's was 46th. These are small but very effective defenses.
Look at WVU's front now: it's 230-260-265 according to rivals. Jordan Kovacs weighs 195 lbs and he's the best tackler on our defense.
Army is an unorthadox running team that runs on most teams, reading a lot into that is foolhardy. SDSU shut down the other two teams they faced.
I'm not an expert, but the argument of "well, we're bigger" just doesn't hold much traction. Especially for a team that a)hasn't been effective at power running and b) has 300+ lb DTs who can't make the 2-deep ahead of much lighter walk-ons.
September 20th, 2011 at 8:40 PM ^
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.
September 20th, 2011 at 8:59 PM ^
I wanted to agree with you. But watching the OL struggle to execute basic I-form running plays against ND and EMU changed my mind. The OL is good at what it's been taught to do for the last 3 years, but powering through people isn't that.
I brought up WVU just to point out that a small defense can be really good. FEI accounts for opponent difficulty.
Agree that SDSU isn't a powerhouse and that they've proven very little. I'm just having a hard time swallowing the logic that "we're bigger, so we'll kill them". The flaw with that logic is all around you. My b point was in regards to Campbell (who weights 330 but has been pushed around easily in the past) and Ash/Washington who are huge dudes but have been beat out by smaller guys like Brink and Heininger. These are guys who theoretically should be able to bully smaller opponents, but they don't.
Kovacs would be our best LB if he was used at that position.
You're overrating size which is weird, since M's OL isn't even particularly large. SDSU has faced, and defeated, bigger OLs than what we have.
The reason I'm concerned with SDSU is their balance. I think we have the raw talent and coaching, plus vastly improved tackling this year - enough to keep a run game in check when we know it's coming (watch out OSU!). Where I think we'll struggle is with balanced teams that can do both (like ND). I think SDSU has 2 real weapons in their QB and RB and they'll put up around 25+ points. As for our offense, I think we'll put up more, but I think we'll do it like we usually do - with Denard making magic.
September 20th, 2011 at 6:34 PM ^
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.
September 20th, 2011 at 6:58 PM ^
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.
September 20th, 2011 at 6:16 PM ^
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.
September 20th, 2011 at 6:21 PM ^
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.