- This topic has 16 replies, 15 voices, and was last updated 9 years ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Strangely, I don’t think it felt to be as good of a win is maybe it might have been; particularly when you consider that We should not be picky coming
[See the full post at: Highlights: NC State 35 Wake Forest 17]There aren’t any pictures in the standings, and we won a game we all thought we had a very good chance to lose.
The road only gets tougher from here, so hopefully the team can learn some lessons in victory and apply them the rest of the way.
All of the Pack’s scores make for great highlights, and that is precisely the problem.
We had zero scoring drives down the field. In fact, looking at the stats, all of our scores were from the other side of the 50.
That ain’t going to cut it going forward.
Please with all due respect, the only team that stopped us for three straight quarters was our team wearing red up in the booth. Absolutely no reason that I can imagine we go away from our running game when we tally 157 yards on the ground in the first quarter. What is more important, winning a game easily or ensuring our offensive production is balanced on the stat sheet?
It’s extremely hard to sustain or even start drives when we begin slinging the ball on first down when we don’t have the athletes to execute that style. Run the mo-fo ball
I have a slightly different take on our scores being big plays rather than sustained drives. Since CTC left, it seems we seldom have had big plays anymore, and I thought this made us a dangerous and unpredictable team. In the past few years, it seems to me we never scored except on long drives, which meant that there were few long runbacks, interceptions or special teams big plays.
I see big plays as emerging talent on this team. Lord knows we need more talent than we’ve shown in the past few seasons. We sure as heck won’t be competitive next Saturday if we depend on long, sustained drives, although I’ll admit that the longer we keep the ball out of Clemson’s hands, the better off we are.
But really, the best and probably only chance we have of winning the Halloween game will be punt returns, kickoff returns, interceptions and turnovers.
Big plays, and scoring with them, was a specific and highlighted part of the game plan against Wake’s D.
the only team that stopped us for three straight quarters was our team wearing red up in the booth.
Disagree. No one is going to agree 100% with every play call, but as I wrote in the game thread, plays were there to be made all day. It was lack of execution.
Like it or not, the offense needs a passing game to be effective. We are not good enough to win by simply lining up and saying “he we come”.
Balance is needed, if not in production or attempt, then in threat. Look no further than the VT game to see what happens when the passing game is not respected.
“Absolutely no reason that I can imagine we go away from our running game when we tally 157 yards on the ground in the first quarter.”
Why would you want to reveal you lack of football imagination by making such a statement? There are few if any teams on the remainder of our schedule that we can overpower at the LOS. If we are to win we must have an efficient short and intermediate passing game.
What better time to work on this than leading by 4 TDs? There is nothing, zero, nada, zilch to be gained by running up the score against Wake except to placate a few a few short-sighted fans.
Always room to improve, but this was a win against a team we should beat. We have that at W-S monkey off our back. We should be loose against CU and see what happens. Lots of football remains.
Good googity moogity.. A W in W-S. The 1st in 15 years. Wow. A lot’s changed since then: Philip Rivers was QB, Chuck-the-chest was coach, John McEnroe was in the semi-finals of Wimbledon, losing to eventual champ Andre Agassi (sorry-a vivid memory for me), George W. was in his 1st full year as President – of course, 2001 will forever be remembered for another event that will live in infamy…
I have a lot less hair now than when I was in the stands then, & a lot more gray in my beard.. If it takes ‘nother 15 years I may be in the ground.
Next! Bring on Clem’s son. UGH
If we have any aspirations of winning against Clemson, we will have to play 4 quarters of football, and JB will have to do a better job of distributing the ball, especially over the middle, which has been pretty much non existent all season. JB pre determines his pass plays, and rarely if ever checks down for other options. Do that and we lose for sure Saturday. I honestly think we can win for some reason, but we have to use our entire arsenal of weapons, which surely doesn’t include the FG kicker.
Like I said to a coworker, I wondered if we could move the ball in the air if they couldn’t run it. I mean short passes. A ball control offense through the air. That’s not possible with this offense. The Spread doesn’t translate to the west coast offense if the first one is bogged down.
Everyone worries about the long ball and lengthening the field. F’uck that. Move the chains. Eat the clock. Hard to do with this offense.
tfoose I completely agree with you, where we differ is I just want us to do what works best for us 85% of the time. Until a few receivers prove themselves and until Jacoby shows he can be a consistent passer I’d just like us to utilize the real threats we have. First four games of the season we prioritized the running game, L’Ville comes calling, we prioritize throwing the ball and just like Caitlyn, thought of ourselves as something we’re not. I love the big play long ball, I love Nyheim involved in the passing game, I just want to be stopped on the ground before we reinvent ourselves.
@pacofmac
You nailed it. Run the football. I have been scratching my head about this for 3 straight games. We should start out with a running play on 75% of our touches. 1 of 4 to try to keep the other team of balance.Didn’t see this one in real time. I watched the first half on video last night and went to sleep. I could see that neither team was going to do much more. I’m probably more positive about this than most because I didn’t watch the second half.
Thoughts:
– Nice to see us jump out with the foot on the gas. Not nice to see us let up.
– We were more vertical/north/south in the first quarter than we were the entire game against VT or UoL. If we can get things going north/south (even in the running game), it will open up things east/west.
– Loved the movement into the counter play on the 4th and 1 TD run. That took guts to execute after the pre-motion penalty attempt didn’t work.
– It’s a win at Wake. We’ve not done that since PR was here. We’ve gone in there too many times without taking them seriously, played down to their level and lost. It was nice to see us come out strong and bury them.
– There seemed to be a big talent gap between these two teams. Wake looked smaller and slower at every positional match up.
– It was obvious that Wake couldn’t move the ball on the defense. Yeah, we gave up the one long play (which is a trend because it happens every game), but for the most part our front 6 completely handled them.
– I was fine with all the passing once the lead was safe. We’re not going to be able to just run it over teams. If you want to see exhibit A of why that doesn’t work, check out GT this year. Yeah, they had a fluke play and beat FSU, but their lack of any ability to throw the ball makes them incredibly one dimensional and fairly easy to stop. VT and Louisville just stacked the ball against us and dared us to throw (which we couldn’t). If we’re going to beat anyone with a pulse the rest of the year, we’re going to have to find a passing game beyond 7 yards.I’ll leave the thread with a final thought. If we’re unhappy and complaining after that win, what must WF fans be thinking now? Grobe’s teams were never that anemic, particularly not at home against NC State. We’re worried about our hire, but if I were WF, I’d be shopping hard for a new OC and recruiting coordinator.
For those calling for more running – I somewhat agree. However, when shad went out we lost our bruiser – and we really don’t have another bruiser in the line-up with exception of Samuel… And if you take him out all of a sudden you’ve removed from his current position that he’s so effective at.
I did see evidence that the staff wants to use him in this role – but again – at this point it’s kind of a zero sum game. I was hoping Frazier could step into this role but apparently he’s not there yet.
As it is – when we lost Shad – we essentially made the defense’s job much easier – and against solid D’s – well we suck. I don’t think our passing game can be counted on to win us more than 3 conference games. And I don’t necessarily place that limitation on Brisset.
Clemson could get ugly. Our d gives up too many big plays and Clemson makes plenty. They also have a fast qb which is something else that has burned us in the past.
Finally, I will say this going into this game. The difference between Clemson’s offense and our last 2 opponents is every bit as big as the talent gap between our first 4 opponents and Louisville.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
