Reno newspaper's take on Nevada/ND
Kind of interesting take on the game. They put it on poor play and mistakes, not superawesomeNDISBACK. No sour grapes by any means from Nevada, but they definitely didn't feel blown away by Jimmy. Also, if Michigan can average over 5 YPC against ND like Nevada did then I think we should get the win for sure.
http://www.rgj.com/article/20090905/SPORTS0604/90905021
September 6th, 2009 at 5:23 PM ^
No disrespect to Notre Dame and a good win, but they were playing the WORST pass defense in the nation from a year ago. Teams don't go from worse to first in those statistical categories in one year, so you have to imagine that the pass defense may be improved a bit, but it is still terrible. I would've expect for Jimmay to put up big stats against a terrible pass defense. With any college game, a few plays can change the entire momentum of a game (i.e. Mich vs. Wisc last year), so I think there is some truth to the Nevada coaches statements.
This week Jimmay has to throw against a much better secondary. Boobie and Warren are no doubt leaps and bounds better than anything Jimmay threw against Nevada. Jimmay will not throw for 4 TD's, and Jimmay will not throw for anywhere close to 300 yards.
September 7th, 2009 at 12:31 AM ^
I wouldn't put a lot of stock in that WORST thing... last year, Nevada's pass efficiency D was 85th in the country (they played Texas Tech and Mizzou) and we were 79th. So not all that much of a difference.
Both teams had a lot of turnover. I think Warren looks like a new player, and move Stevie out of the secondary... that could be the biggest difference this year.
September 7th, 2009 at 3:35 AM ^
I DVR'd the game and watched it last night when I got home from the Michigan game. ND actually looked much more polished on offense than I expected, but they were up against one of the worst pass defenses in the country. ND's defense looked slow to me. Kyle Rudolph is a major threat and must be contained at all costs.
September 6th, 2009 at 5:34 PM ^
especially if it depends on our ground attack... of all the aspects of yesterday's game which was a bit underwhelming to me it was that. If you subtract Denard's 43-yd broken-play run, our YPC was just a hair over 4. There were few big holes opened by the OLs for the RBs, and this was against a defensive line that was inexperienced and supposedly not very good. Unless ND's defense is weaker than WMU's, getting that YPC up to over 5 is going to require a better effort than yesterday's. That can certainly happen, but there are no guarantees.
September 6th, 2009 at 5:55 PM ^
Remember, our top RB and returning starter didn't play at all.
September 6th, 2009 at 6:10 PM ^
My point was, IF (not when) we can manage 5 YPC next week then it will mean an excellent game on the part of our O-line and the fact that ND is probably having to keep guys out of the box to account for our passing game.
September 6th, 2009 at 6:40 PM ^
So it is many times normal to take out long runs to see how the run offense "really" did, but that does not always give a more accurate picture.
For example, Rodriguez offenses in the past have been known for breaking many big plays. So taking out long runs doesn't necessarily give a better picture of a run offense if some offenses have long plays more consistently.
September 6th, 2009 at 8:03 PM ^
"If you subtract Denard's 43-yd broken-play run, our YPC was just a hair over 4. "
And why, exactly, would you take it out? It happened, did it not? If Denard were to do the exact same thing against ND, would it not count?
Not that it's necessarily a great predictor, but football is a high-variance game, and weird shit happens. We would have beaten Illinois last year, if not for all the big plays. Does that mean we deserved to beat them? No.
September 7th, 2009 at 2:25 AM ^
Yes, Denard's TD inflated our average, but our average was also dragged down by a bunch of runs in obvious running situations in the second half.
Also, it's worth noting that not only did our #1 tailback not play, but also that our #2 back (Brown) only had 10 carries. Even so, our tailbacks combined for 111 yards on 23 carries, just a shade under five a pop.
September 6th, 2009 at 5:47 PM ^
after one game, the coaching staff now has a baseline with which to work. I would imagine we'll see some improvement next week from the O-line as well as the QB play. The entire team is still pretty young and certainly still learning the system. If Tate's running 60% of the offense, things should be pretty interesting by season's end.
You're right, next week isn't a certain win, but I'm more optimistic now.
September 6th, 2009 at 5:55 PM ^
Didn't we own ND's d-line last year with our run blocking? If McGuff put a hurtin on them, then ND don't want it with Minor...
September 6th, 2009 at 6:22 PM ^
than last year. The fact that the game is at home doesn't hurt, either. It's going to be an excellent test for Gerg's D. I love the fact that Roh has already forced his way into the lineup. One of the side benefits of that is that it shows potential Dline recruits that if they have talent, they can get significant playing time as freshmen.
September 6th, 2009 at 7:48 PM ^
Last line - on the money.
If I were a prospect watching that game to see how Michigan was doing, that would be something I would immediately see.
Many other things I would notice as well.
For example, if I were a tight end looking for an exciting offense that would appreciate my talent, I would take notice of that game.
That is all.
September 6th, 2009 at 8:05 PM ^
It looked like his Wr's made some amazing plays, didn't drop a ball. It's not liekly to happen twice in a row.
September 7th, 2009 at 3:41 AM ^
Having watched Notre Dame here and there, I think that's a fair assessment. Nevada was largely able to run the ball at will, but shot themselves in the foot when they got within legitimate scoring range. The defense was clearly over matched, more so than Western's was against us.
Bear in mind that Nevada's pistol offense is not radically different than what we run. We should do well against Notre Dame's defense, though we won't shred them by any means. I'm not sure how good our defense actually is, but I don't expect them to contain Jimmah any better than their D will contain our running game. Ultimately, it'll be a shootout, ime.
September 7th, 2009 at 8:34 AM ^
ND had a pretty interesting defense to their pistol option. They essentially brought an additional linebacker from the outside on every play to force the read to the RB between the tackles. They basically conceded a 4 yard run up the middle on every play to keep Kaepernik from running outside the DEs. I think they did a decent job stopping an offense that returned three 1,000 yard rushers from last year. When they didn't run they had someone in Kaepernick's face almost immediately because of bringing the LB.