WSU Vs. SDSU: Aztecs Throttle Cougars In 2nd Half To Win 42-24
by Jeff Nusser on Sep 17, 2011 7:53 PM PDT
in 2011 WSU Football News
Email
PrintWSU headed to San Diego looking to validate a hot start in which the Cougars blasted a couple of overmatched teams. Instead, they came back with a 42-24 loss to the Aztecs that resembled far too many games from last season.
The Cougars led 24-14 with just a few minutes gone in the third quarter after Marshall Lobbestael connected with Marquess Wilson on a 78-yard screen pass that was 5 percent throw, 95 percent run. WSU appeared to have SDSU stopped on the next series, with momentum squarely in hand, but a questionable roughing the punter call -- one of many questionable calls today -- extended the drive.
SDSU would finish the drive with a touchdown, and what looked like an opportunity for the Cougars to take control of the game slipped away. Little did we know WSU wouldn't score another point and SDSU would roll all the way to the finish line.
There are a lot of people hung up on that roughing penalty, pointing to it as the turning point in the game. It certainly was the point at which everything sort of seemed to go south. But WSU was dominated in every meaningful metric in the second half, and if you take that long touchdown out of the equation, it looks even worse.
It's just too much to say that one call with 25 minutes to go in the game was the difference in an 18-point game. There will be plenty of time to dissect just what went wrong, but off the top of my head, poor tackling, inability to get off the field on third down and Tyree Toomer playing the worst game of his (or maybe anyone else's) career all rank higher on the list of places to put the blame.
You can probably add Lobbestael to that list, too, despite his 368 yards passing and three TDs. He was directly responsible for four turnovers, and when you take out the two completions for 158 yards to Wilson, you're left with a subpar 18-of-40 for 210 yards. If you were among those wondering if Jeff Tuel would be given the job upon his clean bill of health, hopefully you have now put that silly question to rest. Beyond Lobbestael's turnovers, he made a number of poor throws, showing a distinct lack of arm strength. Funny how that makes a difference when the windows are a lot smaller.
Still, keep your heads up. If you believed this team was much improved before this game, I don't think there's any reason to believe otherwise. You'll hear me say it a lot, but improvement is never linear in sports. Seasons are filled with fits and starts, and you hope that the steps forward are bigger than the steps back. Many of you will remember how I basically quit football after the Arizona State loss last year ... one week before the Oregon State win.
And if you're feeling like a jilted lover at this point, may I submit to you that it might have more to do with your inflated expectations than the team itself?
There were problems today. But the vast majority of them appear correctable to me. More than anything, this struck me as a case of a veteran team remaining cool under pressure and a young team wilting under it. To that end, I'd argue that the most concerning thing was a team that looked like it didn't fight back hard enough when things started to spiral out of control.
Perhaps they'd started to believe their own myth a little bit. And perhaps this loss will provide just the motivational tool Paul Wulff needs for the next two weeks as the Cougars prepare for a Colorado team that is no better than San Diego State.
I know it's disappointing, but keep perspective. Of course we all were hoping this was the beginning of some kind of miracle run, but those just don't happen in college football -- not to teams that were as bad as WSU was as recently as last year. This team will continue to grow. Things are still moving in the right direction, and there's a chance the next two teams are not as good as SDSU -- I don't think it's a stretch to say that their offenses definitely aren't.
Remember the last two weeks, and remember the first half of this game. That's more indicative of where this team is headed.
156 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
It was nice to be in a competitive game. We haven't had consistency in that department in a long time.
So it was nice to still be rooting mid-way through the 4th quarter. I am still excited about this team.
SDSU total yards 499, WSU 429
We were not off that much in total yardage. We blame the defense but they only gave up 70 more yards. WSU 4 Turnovers, SDSU 2 Turnovers. There were a lot of things that hurt us in this game.
-4 TOs
-O Sacks by our defense
-Our Defense on TEs
-QB arm strength
-61 rushing yards (2.3 ypc) The sacks didn’t help this stat.
-7 penalties for 70 yards
-Time of Possession Control (WSU 24:17, SDSU 35:43) Our defense got tired.
-Special Teams play (penalties, SDSU average field position start, our returns…Barton only had one good return)
-10 out of 15 of SDSU’s drives started on the 30 yard line or better. 11 of 15 WSU drives started on the inside of the 30 yard line.
-I think Dockery would help on punts and kick offs.
-I also think Hillman just started to wear us down. The dude had 32 carries. Fox has him with 179 yards and ESPN had him with 191. He had 5.8 ypc which was inflated by that last run. (before the long run it was 4.1) I wish we had a tough back like that.
"Left hand, right hand, it doesn’t matter. I’m amphibious." – Charles Shackleford
Re: The defense getting tired.
They could have spent less time on the field if they played better.
CougCenter In Reid We Trust, Twitter!
by Craig Powers on Sep 17, 2011 8:23 PM PDT up reply actions
They also weren't very good in the first quarter.
CougCenter In Reid We Trust, Twitter!
by Craig Powers on Sep 17, 2011 8:24 PM PDT up reply actions
Ya, they needed to get the other team's offense off the field.
0 sacks didn’t help anything. SDSU was 10-18 on 3rd downs. I felt like I could have been SDSU’s QB with that much time.
"Left hand, right hand, it doesn’t matter. I’m amphibious." – Charles Shackleford
Travis Long does not impress me with his pass rush.
"Left hand, right hand, it doesn’t matter. I’m amphibious." – Charles Shackleford
He's an average to above average player. He has looked a lot better with bad players around him.
"If you want your dreams to come true, don't sleep in."
It's not all the defense not playing well
Three TD Drives took a grand total of 4:32 off the clock. While that is great because it shows we have big play ability and can strike quick, it does put the D under a little pressure.
I am not excusing our defensive performance, they needed to do much better on 3rd down throughout the game. Especially 3rd and long. But I do take away from this, and hope the coaches take away, that we need to adjust our defensive philosophy. Wilson is a serious TD threat from all over the field, the D needs to be built to recover and get back on the field quickly both if we fail to move the ball or if we cover 80 yards for a TD in 9 seconds (that was awesome).
What would you suggest the defense do different, philosophically?
by Jeff Nusser on Sep 17, 2011 9:11 PM PDT up reply actions 3 recs
There were 0 sacks.
I would like that to change.
The blitzes were pretty basic
Maybe overload one side of the line one time. Maybe send a saftey or corner. In the end it wouldn’t have amounted to much. Would have been the same philosophy, just different looks.
by newportcoug on Sep 17, 2011 11:27 PM PDT up reply actions
Agreed. Nothing wrong with defensive philosophy today.
We tried blitzing early and our secondary got burned, we tried dropping into coverage and we couldn’t get pressure on Lindley so our secondary got burned (or Hillman ran wild). With our defensive personnel there wasn’t much we could do. Our defense was over-matched from a talent standpoint, that was the issue, not coaching (in my opinion).
Streamin' and Threadin' and Shellin
Who does the talent gap issue fall on?
I miss *REAL* Four Loko
by B-Lot tailgater on Sep 17, 2011 10:45 PM PDT up reply actions
Holy crap.
Are we really back to this again?
by Jeff Nusser on Sep 17, 2011 10:57 PM PDT up reply actions
Yes
When a MWC team slaps your around in YEAR 4, you get to criticize the talent gap, no matter how much you want to say its not a problem.
I miss *REAL* Four Loko
by B-Lot tailgater on Sep 17, 2011 10:58 PM PDT up reply actions
Just seems like an old crutch to me.
I didn’t see a huge talent gap.
by Jeff Nusser on Sep 17, 2011 11:00 PM PDT up reply actions
Then what would you attribute it to?
SDSU dominated the LOS on both sides today.
Its either a coaching issue or a talent issue….
I miss *REAL* Four Loko
by B-Lot tailgater on Sep 17, 2011 11:01 PM PDT up reply actions
I disagree they dominated both sides.
The defensive line was not good. But the offensive line was good enough.
by Jeff Nusser on Sep 17, 2011 11:02 PM PDT up reply actions
Huge? Probably not, "over-matched" was some hyperbole on my part.
But what was it? I honestly don’t know what we could have done differently from a scheme standpoint, it seemed like we tried to mix it up quite a bit (hopefully Brian can clear this up later this week with a phenomenal breakdown). We gave up 500 yards, 42 points and 11 3rd down conversions, something went wrong somewhere.
Streamin' and Threadin' and Shellin
it's talent and coaching
We are still playing the same lousy defense we have for years now. No pressure on the QB, Linebackers out of position, cornerbacks playing way off the receiver, just giving away first down after first down, shoddy tackling. I wish some of our players (like AHE) would just stop talking and start playing.
—I think the deficiencies on both lines are the result of Wulff and Co. basically ignoring the crucial need for quaility linemen, and trying to fill in at the last minute with JC guys. Football is still a game of line play. I grant you that the penalty on a punt was a key play. No game would be complete without somebody making a bonehead play and running into the kicker. The refs will call it EVERY time. Even so, one play shouldn’t determine the game. With a second-string QB, the defense has to step up, We should have been able to defend a 24-14 lead even if we didn’t score again. Wulff is responsible for recruiting. I still see a huge talent gap on defense. I don’t think it’s a matter of scheme so much as a lack of talent. Talent always tells on defense, more so than offense, I think.
"basically ignoring the crucial need for quaility linemen"
Yes, I’m sure that’s what they did. Just figured they didn’t need anyone.
Your random ranting just get so old.
by Jeff Nusser on Sep 18, 2011 10:25 AM PDT up reply actions 5 recs
But isn't he entitled as part of this community?
I feel like Charlie Brown trying to kick the football. Ugh
I really don't think that
the “oh well, we tried” approach is appropriate either.
I miss *REAL* Four Loko
by B-Lot tailgater on Sep 18, 2011 2:53 PM PDT up reply actions
I think I have the sight just for you.
www.blogspot.com
you can create your own blog and rant ALL you want.
Attractive, Intelligent, Smart A**
by Neil Vincent Roberts on Sep 20, 2011 9:49 AM PDT up reply actions
I think the philosophy was fine
They just need more depth (and talent) on the line. I’m pretty sure Pole was out, Rankin got hurt (I don’t know if he came back into the game, he may have) and everyone else ran out of gas and heart at the end.
Pole had a tackle
So he had to have played. I just never saw him.
For starters
I wouldn’t go for the punt block up 10 on the road in the 2nd half. Yes technically it was special teams but it was a defensive minded call that cost us big time.
I miss *REAL* Four Loko
by B-Lot tailgater on Sep 17, 2011 10:46 PM PDT up reply actions
Hindsight????????????????
Is that a joke???
Hindsight nothing, that is football 101
I miss *REAL* Four Loko
by B-Lot tailgater on Sep 17, 2011 10:58 PM PDT up reply actions
If he blocks it, it's the greatest call ever.
Right? It’s a great call because it’s aggressive and stepping on their throat and all that mumbo jumbo.
by Jeff Nusser on Sep 17, 2011 11:03 PM PDT up reply actions
Nice straw man
You have a young team on the road with a 10 point lead. There is no good reason to go for that when you are about to get the ball back with somewhat favorable field position.
I miss *REAL* Four Loko
by B-Lot tailgater on Sep 17, 2011 11:04 PM PDT up reply actions
If ONE GUY doesn't do something dumb
And dive directly at the kicker, we’re not even having this conversation. He doesn’t even have to block, he just doesn’t have to be an idiot.
by Jeff Nusser on Sep 17, 2011 11:08 PM PDT up reply actions
Again
the coaches take the conservative approach and we are not having this conversation.
The play call was a mistake.
I miss *REAL* Four Loko
by B-Lot tailgater on Sep 17, 2011 11:10 PM PDT up reply actions
Disagree.
Which is where this is going to have to end, I’m afraid, since there’s nothing more to be gained by bickering.
by Jeff Nusser on Sep 17, 2011 11:11 PM PDT up reply actions
I am going to jump in here and join.
If we went for the block and got it, I still would have questioned it, but of course I would be happy we got it. It was like Sean Peyton’s call in the Super Bowl. An offside kick to open the second half? Stupid if it doesn’t work, but wow it was exciting that it worked…but still stupid.
"Left hand, right hand, it doesn’t matter. I’m amphibious." – Charles Shackleford
I thought we had more to gain
all day by dropping back into punt coverage. It seemed to me that on every punt there were too many black jerseys getting past the blockers on the punts. That said, I don’t think it made all the difference in the world.
I feel like Charlie Brown trying to kick the football. Ugh
WSU is not at a level
where they can go for the jugular like a big time program. If it doesn’t work big time programs usually bounce back…well we didn’t.
"Left hand, right hand, it doesn’t matter. I’m amphibious." – Charles Shackleford
But isn't that part of the growing process?
Personally, I liked the call. Flawed execution, but that could happen on any play.
by Jeff Nusser on Sep 17, 2011 11:09 PM PDT up reply actions
Enough with the growing process
This is not OJT.
I miss *REAL* Four Loko
by B-Lot tailgater on Sep 17, 2011 11:10 PM PDT up reply actions
Now we
supposedly have the the talent I was hoping the growing process was happening during spring practice and redshirt years.
"Left hand, right hand, it doesn’t matter. I’m amphibious." – Charles Shackleford
The announcers said all day
that Paul Wulff says he has the talent he wants and needs.
I feel like Charlie Brown trying to kick the football. Ugh
Sure.
But they’re still young. It’s still only game three. As much as fans don’t want it to be, they’re still in the middle of the rebuild process. Ignore it if you want, but it doesn’t make it any less real.
by Jeff Nusser on Sep 17, 2011 11:21 PM PDT up reply actions
Wulff himself said
we have the talent to compete for a conference title
I miss *REAL* Four Loko
by B-Lot tailgater on Sep 17, 2011 11:22 PM PDT up reply actions
I would like for you to produce this quote.
by Jeff Nusser on Sep 17, 2011 11:23 PM PDT up reply actions
It was at Pac 12 media day
“We’re going to go compete for a championship,” he said at Pac-12 media day. “We’ve got enough experience. We want to win our division title.”
I miss *REAL* Four Loko
by B-Lot tailgater on Sep 17, 2011 11:26 PM PDT up reply actions
link fail
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/huskies/2015736810_pacnotes27.html
I miss *REAL* Four Loko
by B-Lot tailgater on Sep 17, 2011 11:27 PM PDT up reply actions
I don't see any reference to talent!
Only experience! Just kidding. I was out of the country when media day happened so I’ve never seen this. I would have called BS on it immediately. As I wrote in the newsletter, this team still has a lot of ground to make up, and it’s not going to all be done in one year.
by Jeff Nusser on Sep 17, 2011 11:29 PM PDT up reply actions
To be honest
I was floored when I read he said that.
I miss *REAL* Four Loko
by B-Lot tailgater on Sep 17, 2011 11:30 PM PDT up reply actions
I guess what I may be looking for
is for our coaches to do their best to make the right calls for the situation. Yes, we all agree the block the punt call was risky, and a great risk and reward if it happens. But with a young team don’t put your young players in a place to make crucial mistakes. Now if we are making the right calls and making mistakes I can live with that.
I guess if I had a rookie pitcher in the 9th inning and the game is tied and the bases are loaded and it is a full count, I want him to throw the fast ball and let us get beat. I don’t want to get cute and try and throw a curve ball on the outside corner and then it bounces out of the strike zone and we lose. Make that hitter foul off the pitches, make him beat you with your best pitch.
"Left hand, right hand, it doesn’t matter. I’m amphibious." – Charles Shackleford
And then when he crushes the fastball?
You’re cool with it?
by Jeff Nusser on Sep 17, 2011 11:30 PM PDT up reply actions
As long as it was a good pitch.
Yes. Sometimes you get beat. I would be more pissed if it was a hanging curve or thrown out of the strike zone. I rather lose with our best stuff, then try to get fancy and risk losing the game. (this is all hypothetically, so if the curve is his best pitch, then throw that one, but for most it is their fastball because it is consistent) I think I need to stop the hypothetical talk.
"Left hand, right hand, it doesn’t matter. I’m amphibious." – Charles Shackleford
And I guess the main difference is
That I don’t see rushing a punter on 4th down with a 10-point lead as even remotely analogous to the scenario you described. That’s more like having a runner on 1st with a four-run lead and hanging a curve that gets crushed for a 2-run homer that cuts the lead in half. There was still a lot of bad pitching that had to come after that to lose …
by Jeff Nusser on Sep 17, 2011 11:42 PM PDT up reply actions
I guess I can agree with you
on that one.
If this is a rookie pitcher you could be messing with his psyche, but now we are back into this “momentum” area and area we can’t gauge with stats. At least in baseball we could bring the talented veteran guy out of the pen, but in this game we couldn’t (that being Jeff Tuel). The hits just kept coming after that.
"Left hand, right hand, it doesn’t matter. I’m amphibious." – Charles Shackleford
But there usually is a strategy to follow.
Up by 10, about to get the ball in good field position, why take that risk? Wasn’t #19 Jordan Simone who hit the kicker. The ref said the wrong number. A walk-on freshman? When you go for the block you are taught to roll away from the punter so you don’t run into him, thus causing a penalty.
"Left hand, right hand, it doesn’t matter. I’m amphibious." – Charles Shackleford
Why take the risk?
Perhaps they saw something in SDSU’s punt protection they were sure they could exploit. But even if it was simply taking a chance on being aggressive, I’m ok with it.
And, again, I don’t understand the fascination with this play. SO MANY OTHER PROBLEMS OUT THERE TODAY. How about breaking down one of those?
by Jeff Nusser on Sep 17, 2011 11:14 PM PDT up reply actions
Maybe because we played
like crap after this play. We will never know if this play has any correlation, but as Mark said in another post, the graphs spiked after this play and we sucked from here on. It may or may not have been this play, but this just happens to be one of the plays that we are talking about. Some calls are more of a gamble than others, that is why this play is being talked about more than others.
"Left hand, right hand, it doesn’t matter. I’m amphibious." – Charles Shackleford
I would argue we were more or less not playing all that well before this play.
by Jeff Nusser on Sep 17, 2011 11:22 PM PDT up reply actions
We did much better against
the run in the first half then the second. In the first we couldn’t cover the TEs, in the second we did okay, but not great. In the first half at least we answered. We fumbled, then we intercepted it back. You will probably say we answered back because Lindley threw a bad ball. Yes he did but at least we capitalized on it. Second half we were not opportunistic. We didn’t answer back.
"Left hand, right hand, it doesn’t matter. I’m amphibious." – Charles Shackleford
Lindley was missing guys who were open.
All of a sudden, he wasn’t. Take away a huge run by Hillman, and he didn’t do anything all that different in the 2nd half than he did in the first.
by Jeff Nusser on Sep 17, 2011 11:37 PM PDT up reply actions
He wasn't missing his TEs.
"Left hand, right hand, it doesn’t matter. I’m amphibious." – Charles Shackleford
He was for a while.
Not coincidentally, the part where they weren’t scoring points for about a 15-minute span.
by Jeff Nusser on Sep 17, 2011 11:43 PM PDT up reply actions
As I said in the second
we didn’t answer back. The 2 TOs in the 2nd half didn’t help. There was so many things, but it hard for me to put my finger on what the one thing was that just killed us. I “feel” like it was the D-Line and our inconsistent offense.
"Left hand, right hand, it doesn’t matter. I’m amphibious." – Charles Shackleford
One of those two things is correctable.
And should help tremendously as we move forward.
by Jeff Nusser on Sep 17, 2011 11:45 PM PDT up reply actions
It scares me how
we have almost no pass rush whatsoever. What is going to happen in Pac12 play? I know we got ran over a bit, but this is the first time I didn’t feel like the RB was going to go to the house every time he touched the ball. He felt contained, but the yards just racked up. I felt like our LB play was good, our DBs got hurt by our D-Line play.
"Left hand, right hand, it doesn’t matter. I’m amphibious." – Charles Shackleford
I did below
You chose to respond to this part and the debate began
I miss *REAL* Four Loko
by B-Lot tailgater on Sep 17, 2011 11:20 PM PDT up reply actions
Not a post intended for bickering
Just saying in case you did not see it
I miss *REAL* Four Loko
by B-Lot tailgater on Sep 17, 2011 11:21 PM PDT up reply actions
Wow, this sparked a lot of discussion while I was away
But to answer your question Nuss, here are my thoughts. Granted, I was at a bar and can’t be sure I didn’t miss some things.
I feel like we didn’t give the 3-3-5 look on third and medium to third and long. I say that knowing that it might be the viewing across the bar that made it hard to see numbers, so we might have gone with it and I didn’t catch it. Our front 4 is far from great on D and I’d like to see a really varied look when we get to 3rd down.
We might have to really gamble. Clearly our secondary can’t cover guys indefinately, so if we can force a 3rd and 7+ it might be a good idea to bring 5 or 6, even 7 guys and try and force a quick pass that might be off target. Or ideally actually get home for the sack.
And I would say that it would help if our offense had sustained some long scoring drives. It would help the flow of the game to let the defense talk, rest, and have confidence that good things are happening with the offense. Getting Tuel back will hopefully help this.
This was pretty much a repeat of last year's UCLA game.
Big plays from Wilson and eventually just wearing up front. Our defensive line is still pretty terrible. Outside of Pole, there isn’t a single above average Pac-12 player up front. We played alright for a half but the offense didn’t do much in the second half to stay on the field. Today we saw the difference between Tuel and Lobbestael.
"If you want your dreams to come true, don't sleep in."
Agreed, outside of Pole I can't remember another DL member making a play.
Our LBs had to be every where.
"Left hand, right hand, it doesn’t matter. I’m amphibious." – Charles Shackleford
I am watching the Stanford game
and I just saw Andrew Luck slide and it made me mad at Jeff Tuel. I still love you Tuel, but I hope while you are hurt you are watching film on how to slide. I don’t care if you are tough or not (I already know you are tough), but you are too important to this team.
"Left hand, right hand, it doesn’t matter. I’m amphibious." – Charles Shackleford
Nope...I thought his knee was down.
I just don’t want Tuel to take anymore shots. I think we are 3-0 if Tuel plays this game.
"Left hand, right hand, it doesn’t matter. I’m amphibious." – Charles Shackleford
So did I, but you can't leave it up to the refs to always make the right call (don't we all know that)
like Jeff said, not smart to leave the ball out there like that.
That was bad Marshall at his worst
You know how how there was all that talk about him trying to do too much and that getting him in trouble? Yup, that was yesterday. Even the fumble where SDSU jumped the screen, he probably should have just tucked it and gone down instead of continuing to backpedal and try to find someone else. If the screen’s not there, there ISN’T anything else.
I wasn't able to see the second half, so there isn't really much I can comment on there.
I guess where I think our main problems lie (and Jeff touched on it in the post) is our inability to capitalize on momentum. Two long TD passes (OK so one long pass and one long pass-run). That’s two very deflating plays for the opposing team, and yet they couldn’t ride that momentum.
I gotta say, losing feels a lot better when you totally expect to (as we have the last few years). Losing when you think you could win sucks.
or suffer the consequences
Something I forgot.
Hurry back Jeff. This game is exhibit A of how important he is to this team.
or suffer the consequences
"Losing when you think you could win sucks."
Progress…right?
CougCenter In Reid We Trust, Twitter!
by Craig Powers on Sep 17, 2011 9:14 PM PDT up reply actions
Yeah.
CougCenter In Reid We Trust, Twitter!
by Craig Powers on Sep 17, 2011 9:17 PM PDT up reply actions
Yeah, that was a tough one
The worst part for me is the final score does not show how close the game was. That sucks.
Momentum only matters as much as your opponent lets it.
SDSU is a veteran team. They didn’t ever panic.
by Jeff Nusser on Sep 17, 2011 10:58 PM PDT up reply actions
And WSU is not a veteran team
Momentum is huge for WSU this year.
I miss *REAL* Four Loko
by B-Lot tailgater on Sep 17, 2011 11:00 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
SDSU might not have been worried
but they also knew how to take advantage of the momentum swing and step on our necks with it.
I miss *REAL* Four Loko
by B-Lot tailgater on Sep 17, 2011 11:06 PM PDT up reply actions
I reread your post and it did not say what I thought it said
I miss *REAL* Four Loko
by B-Lot tailgater on Sep 17, 2011 11:06 PM PDT up reply actions
I love Rock Lobster
But to me, if Tuel plays this game, we win. When clutch time hit, Rock Lobster went to Lobster Tail. He still is doing a hell of a job for a backup.
Note: Marquess Wilson is amazing….wow!
I was thinking the same thing.
It’s tough to say “If Player A was playing, we would win”, but I can think of two distinct, potential big plays in the first half that Marshall missed on. There was a jump ball to Karstetter, and a deep ball to Marquess. Those were both in the first half. If Jeff was playing, he would hit those passes as he has every other time and we are looking at a very different ballgame.
or suffer the consequences
Jeff also would not have just coughed up the ball on a pump fake
It sucks, but that made me laugh…poor guy, he is playin with everything he has. He also locked on to Wilson at the end of the game, and it cost him two picks.
I actually have some major issues with some of the calls, and non-calls in this game. I think the guy covering Wilson commited interference about 8 times more than it was called, but that is another topic…
I wonder how fast Wilson is off the edge?
I think he would get one sack in a game.
"Left hand, right hand, it doesn’t matter. I’m amphibious." – Charles Shackleford
Ugh Robo doesn't play defense
I miss *REAL* Four Loko
by B-Lot tailgater on Sep 17, 2011 10:57 PM PDT up reply actions
So we can forget about my stupid idea
of Gameday coming to Pullman.
Go Cougs!
If there's one positive I can take from this game,
it’s that these Arizona guys are making me feel pretty good about Furney.
or suffer the consequences
So many issues exposed today
1) Special teams: Our kick coverage was awful. Our kicker cannot kick it deep consistantly. Punter was shanking kicks like it was going out of style. We surrendered a lot of field position on kicks alone.
2) Defense: Our d line is slow and over matched. I don’t think we so much as breathed on the SDSU QB. What is going to happen in conference play? Secondary looked confused a lot as well.
3) Offense: O Line play has improved but has a ways to go. Robo depended too heavily on the deep ball to Wilson on the left side (maybe that is on Sturdy) and it bit us in the 4th when it got picked. Our runs seemed very predictable.
I miss *REAL* Four Loko
by B-Lot tailgater on Sep 17, 2011 10:49 PM PDT reply actions
It is hard for the secondary to look good when the D-Line is getting
dominated like you said.
"Left hand, right hand, it doesn’t matter. I’m amphibious." – Charles Shackleford
Its also hard
for the d-line to do anything when they’re on the field as much as they were/ the quick scores were great, but our defense isnt read to recover from a long defensive series, quick score, another long defensive series.
The defense had 19 chances to get itself off the field
And 11 times, they couldn’t. Is it really feasible to blame that on “scoring too quickly”?
The special teams in general are very concerning.
Ignoring the play that shall not be named, I’m not sure I understand how our coverages suddenly got so much worse.
by Jeff Nusser on Sep 17, 2011 11:24 PM PDT up reply actions
Me either
The only thing I can think of is we are missing Forrest in a bad way. Our punts are low and fast this year, as opposed to high and slow with Reid kicking.
I miss *REAL* Four Loko
by B-Lot tailgater on Sep 17, 2011 11:28 PM PDT up reply actions
Kickoffs are short, too.
But man, so many times they’re just out of position.
by Jeff Nusser on Sep 17, 2011 11:30 PM PDT up reply actions
Have we had a touchback yet this year?
I think there might have been one against ISU, but I am not positive.
I miss *REAL* Four Loko
by B-Lot tailgater on Sep 17, 2011 11:31 PM PDT up reply actions
Not that I've seen
And I’m sure we won’t see one, either.
by Jeff Nusser on Sep 17, 2011 11:35 PM PDT up reply actions
Kickoff stats
WSU yd/ret allowed 2010 17.0 (lead the nation)
WSU yd/ret allowed 2011 22.7
WSU touchback% 2010 22.9%
WSU touchback% 2011 03.8%
WSU Kickoff dist 2010 60.6 yd
WSU Kickoff dist 2011 60.6 yd
I swear Wagner can produce a high booming punt.
I’ve watching him drill punts in practice. In the games … welp.
by Brian Floyd on Sep 17, 2011 11:52 PM PDT up reply actions
By the way
I’m not as concerned by the defensive line. Not because they were any good, but because this is what I more or less expected this year. They’re just not very good, especially at any kind of pass rush.
by Jeff Nusser on Sep 17, 2011 11:40 PM PDT up reply actions
I don't think the DTs are that bad and we have some Redshirts (Davis, Cooper, etc.)
coming in next year and hopefully Bennett out of Mississippi. It is our DEs that scare me. We don’t have any pass rush, we don’t have any DE recruits coming in next year that can make a splash. The JC DE guys won’t get it done. Rankin as a DE was a leader in sacks at the JC level and he can’t do that at the D1 Level. This position worries me.
"Left hand, right hand, it doesn’t matter. I’m amphibious." – Charles Shackleford
I watch a lot of college football.
And I do mean a lot. Just from my own experience and eyes, there are very few kickers that can consistently produce touchbacks. And thus, Vince’s story. Put it between the numbers and sideline, otherwise there will be trouble.
Or do like they did last year and kick it at the fat guy.
by Brian Floyd on Sep 17, 2011 11:51 PM PDT up reply actions
I was at the game
SDSU’s O Line was really good. All this ‘what will we do in conference’ talk is predicated on the idea that everyone’s line will be that good. I disagree, I think this will be one of the better O-lines acros the front as we see this season. Those vets picked up nearly every LB blitz and didn’t fall for the faux gap rushes by the LB’s any time that I noticed. Their LT just defeated Long head up all day. CJ bit on the OL motion ALOT on the runs, and got caught by the back cut (not precisely a counter gap call- but Hillman’s instincts are uncanny at the line) and got beat in the middle. Their TE’s came open frequently and frankly Lindley missed a good many open throws to them. The ’backers were baffled by the 3 TE sets. At the end our defensive front 7 just looked tired and beat down by so much field time.
I was surprised we hung in as long as we did… I think it matters that this Coug team was able to hang in w/ a #2 QB running the show. It warrants consideration- he is the #2 and still managed to keep us in a game against a probable bowl team on the road. Lobes forced some stuff today and it was costly. He just tried to do too much. Made some bad decisions and turned it over too many times because of them. The middle was a bit porous, maybe meighen missed some reads. Lessons will be learned-
The WSU secondary didn’t look good. It had less to do with a lack of a rush than just having real poor footwork and getting turned around on many downs. In 3rd and mid yardage, the corners ‘gave’ the slant and denied the sideline by their set ups… sure seemed like it should have been the other way around. Lindley recognized and took what he saw. Lots of finger pointing and palms up “WTF” directed at each other after plays.
I don’t think this game means the Cougs can’t win @ Colorado. SDSU’s offense was poised and solid and Lobes gave them the ball too often.
Sorry for the long post- just drove the fam home from SD and am coffee’d up.
If you can't Go Cougs... don't go.
by hollyweirdcoug on Sep 18, 2011 1:32 AM PDT reply actions 5 recs
By the way
I think it’s obvious at this point that the blitz is pretty much the only way we’re going to generate pressure. From having watched some of the other teams in the conference — notably Colorado and UCLA — I don’t think they’re going to handle it nearly as well as SDSU did. That was a very mature front five and QB we faced yesterday.
Good post.
There are things that you can observe at a game, that you can’t on TV. Like the players looking around at each other with the “WTF” look. The camera doesn’t give you everything. For some reason I always notice pure dominance more at a game but not as much on TV. I remember being at the Rose Bowl against OU and man did we get pushed around.
"Left hand, right hand, it doesn’t matter. I’m amphibious." – Charles Shackleford
The footwork is a very good point
I couldn’t believe how many times they got turned around
I miss *REAL* Four Loko
by B-Lot tailgater on Sep 18, 2011 8:53 AM PDT up reply actions
The LB's in pass coverage
were flummoxed by the use of double and triple tight ends. They flooded those guys behind the line often enough that they froze our blitz packages. Lindley did much of it a the line; relying on the audible once he felt he had the Cougs set in place. One common thing was a TE released to the R and the SS LB hanging with him- then the RG wasting CJ- and a delayed handoff to Hillman into the A gap. Unless the DE had collapsed the hole it was often a solid 7 yard gap. The next time, they faked the run and play action went to the TE. It was clever. They had a very good scheme to take away the speed of our LB’s- that coupled with Long getting owned by their LT and we didn’t get push on many runs, because we bit on the short throw ruse. This was particularly effective when the Cougs went 3-3-5.
One other thing— Toni Pole is going to be a terrific player for the Cougs. He really gets around the field for a big man.
If you can't Go Cougs... don't go.
by hollyweirdcoug on Sep 18, 2011 2:09 PM PDT up reply actions
Pole used to play basketball.
Believe it or not, he’s one of those sneaky athletic guys. Doesn’t look it, but the man has some agility.
This game popped my bubble.
Me and my roommates were watching at home and in the second half we practically called 3/4 of their plays before they ran them. I was disheartened at this loss because I thought our defense had made a huge step forward, but I was really disapointed in what I saw today. This may be the coors talking, but after this game, only see one or two more wins, which seriously dampen my expectations and my hopes i had for this team.
Try Busch, it seems to always help Cougar spirits.
"Left hand, right hand, it doesn’t matter. I’m amphibious." – Charles Shackleford
Honestly
I really don’t understand the negative Wulff talk at all. I know it is frustrating to let a game slip away in the 4th, but to just blame the coach seems a little silly. I think the punt block was a great call. In fact it was a call that had to be made it the Cougs wanted to win that game. I’m sure Wulff new that if the game stayed close until the end, they would lose. The type of O that the Aztecs run, and the size and experience of their O line and the awsome talent of their RB would win out in the end. Something had to change. The Cougs needed some Mo, and they needed to build a big enough lead to force SDSU to change there Offensive philosiphy. If they would have blocked that punt that would have been acomplished. It was a gamble, and it failed. But that happens in football. For the Cougs to hang as long as they did against a ground and pound O with a overmatched D-line and a backup QB??? Pretty noble effort.
by Louhawk on Sep 18, 2011 8:57 AM PDT reply actions 2 recs
Is anyone concerned by the seeming absence of half time adjustments?
I often read, by people on this site, that this is an indication of a well-coached team. For the last few years I have been completely supportive of Wulff. CPW has improved the overall quality of the players in a very dramatic way. The lack of academic issues coupled with the talent upgrades is a marvelous thing.
Now that the coaches have the talent they have been seeking, shouldn’t we be seeing a level of gamesmanship from the coaching staff that has not been possible the last few years? I am concerned that our coaches are playing checkers when they should be playing chess.
I don't think you can draw any definitive conclusions from yesterday
But I think it’s worth keeping an eye on as the season unfolds.
I mentioned this in earlier, or in another post
It seems like the coaches game plan and then stick to the plan. I didn’t see that much changed from the first half to the second and I found that discouraging. As Nuss said, I think it’s worth keeping an eye on this in the next two weeks.
I feel like Charlie Brown trying to kick the football. Ugh
Why would they change their gameplan in the second half?
1) They were winning at halftime
2) Their D did as good if not better than expected containing SDSU running game.
3) The breakdowns on 3rd down were not fixable from a scheme or plan standpoint. Players screwed up, or so it seems to me.
As a general rule,
you always have to be getting better. Even if you are up multiple TD’s at the half. If you are just content to stay the same while the other team makes changes to improve, then you run the risk of falling behind.
or suffer the consequences
Thats not what I meant
I know you have to tweak your gameplan at halftime to keep it current with the gametime enviorment. I was just saying that what they were doing in priciple was working (relativly speaking considering what they had to work with) so you would not expect to see alot of halftime adjustments. Maybe some pep talks with the db’s trying to get them in better position on 3rd down, or mixing the blitzs up a little. I think the defensive game plan was pretty succesful considering the type, size and experience of the offense they were playing. If anything the offense (Lobster actually) making key mistakes and not capitalizing on situations hurt the defence and cost the Cougs the game.
I would argue that what they were doing in principle wasn't working
sure, we had the lead, but I felt from SDSU’s second possession that the wheels could fall off at any moment. I felt like they were hanging on, not winning. If you look back through the game thread, there are innumerable comments to the effect that no one was really feeling good about the way the game was going. This suggests to me that we, as fans, identified a need for some sort of change. Lobbestael made a number of his mistakes doing the same things he was successful doing in the first half. Perhaps, SDSU made adjustments that put our QB in a position, repeatedly, where he was more prone to mistakes.
I feel like Charlie Brown trying to kick the football. Ugh
Agreed.
I didn’t get the see the second half, but at no point in the first half did I have a feeling that we were in control, even if we were ahead. There’s a distinction between winning and playing well or controlling the game. You can be ahead in a game, and yet not be in control of the game. We caught some breaks in the first half, and that’s why were ahead. It could just as easily have been us down a TD going into the locker room.
or suffer the consequences
I felt like we outplayed them in the first half.
We contained Hillman and made Lindley and his drop prone receivers try to beat us. We weren’t in control of the game but it was about 50/50 at the half. In the second half we couldn’t take advantage of an opportunity (roughing the kicker) to build a large enough lead to force them to go away from Hillman.They also did an excellent job taking away Lobbestael’s safety net Karstetter. My one criticism of the coaching staff is SDSU wanted to make Lobbestael beat them and we allowed that to happen.
"If you want your dreams to come true, don't sleep in."
I understand what you are saying
But what else could they do? I don’t believe the failures where scheme related, or bad coaching. The SDSU O line is REALLY good both physicaly and experience wise. They have one of the better RB in the nation, and a senior QB who made good use of audibles. Combine that with the fact they were playing a defense geared to play fast more than strong, (Not alot of smash mouth 2 TE football in the Pac) and it could be a bit of a disaster. It seems to me, in that situation, the way you win is by playing a “bend but don’t break” defense, get a few turnovers or whatever, and hope your offense scores points. That is what the Cougs did, however in the 4th the defense ran out of gas, and Lobster choked. Like I said, I am not sure what else they could have done. It does suck though, it was a pretty disapointing game.
It sounds to me like you think SDSU was, and is, a better team
I think that’s fair and if we can all agree that SDSU is a good team, and possibly better than WSU, much of our concern can go out the window. Let’s just hope we are better than Colorado and UCLA.
I feel like Charlie Brown trying to kick the football. Ugh
Here's where I think the biggest loss was yesterday.
Looking at the schedule, if going bowling is still the goal (which for the coaching staff’s sake it has to be), I think they have to take 3 of the next 4 games now. That’s not to say that a bowl couldn’t happen if they didn’t win 3 of 4, but that’s probably the most likely route. Win any three of Colorado, UCLA, Stanford, OSU. And then hope to sneak 1 or 2 in the last 5 (maybe Cal away, Utah or ASU at home, and the Apple Cup is always a possibility). My point is, I think the road just got a lot tougher. It didn’t end by any means, but got tougher.
I said earlier in the week that I thought yesterday was the most important game of Paul Wulff’s WSU career. I think that now becomes this next game. Colorado isn’t that good. Good teams bounce back. Bounce back, and we could be looking pretty good for the rest of the season. Don’t and it could spell doom for the rest of the season and for CPW and everyone else’s jobs.
or suffer the consequences
Going into the season I thought this team would have it's moments
where we would all think, “Wow, this team is special”, see UNLV. And times where we would think what the hell is wrong with these guys? See, yesterday. Moments like this are because this team is still so young. Clearly this is by far the best team we’ve had in the Wulff era and it has the chance to be best we’ve had since ‘03. My hope is the young players like Pole, Williams, Galvin, Fullington and so many others continue to develop during the season and get us to a bowl game. There are going to be growing pains though, and that’s something we all need to keep in the back of our minds each week.
"If you want your dreams to come true, don't sleep in."
by kelly20210 on Sep 18, 2011 3:27 PM PDT reply actions 3 recs
I think there is also coaching growing pains that go along with this group. By the way, good comment.
Coaches have to be constantly figuring out what fits their personnel, because you can’t figure it all out in practice. It takes actually games and game film to asses the best approach with the players you have. I am sure Chip Kelly thought he was going to put some points on LSU and was surprised how much he got dominated at the line of scrimmage and how his offense couldn’t do anything. I am sure he will be making adjustments for when he plays teams of that caliber.
Some players are practice warriors and some players are game warriors and some are both. Coaches also live and learn from games. Smooth seas never made a skillful sailor. This staff hasn’t had the players to put them in a position where if the change a couple things, they actually could win the game. Before it was change 100 things and most of their personnel. I am sure they will be going over how to defend 3 TE sets and play action, what to look for, yada yada. Because other schools will be watching this game tape. I was disappointed after the game, but I think we are in a good place.
"Left hand, right hand, it doesn’t matter. I’m amphibious." – Charles Shackleford
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Community Guidelines
Related FanPosts on CougCenter
Related FanShots on CougCenter
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
