|
Post by ncaam on Feb 3, 2017 15:45:10 GMT -5
Running out clock and scoring on goal line requires strong OL and big RB
|
|
|
Post by sader1970 on Feb 3, 2017 15:51:57 GMT -5
I would be fine dropping to 6 RBs if 2 of them were built with the size (5'11', 223 lbs.), speed and power of underutilized Eddie Houghton. But, then again, I have posted these thoughts perhaps a dozen times in the past.
|
|
|
Post by richh on Feb 3, 2017 15:54:26 GMT -5
HC's isdue over the last 5 yrs has been the lack of overall team speed partucularly on D. TG has brought in more speed ovrr the last 2 classes.. D has always been well cosched. Usually in proprr posotion just too slow. Underclass athletes should help there. On O some very good skills players with a mediocte to avrrage OL. Downside no go to RB. Guild closest you've had but he is not built for the pounding.
|
|
|
Post by beerseach on Feb 3, 2017 16:00:31 GMT -5
Our red zone efficiency has improved greatly under Coach Rock. The fact is there aren't too many 5-10 to 6-0 go to RBs at the FCS level. Most of those guys if good enough go to FBS schools. Not enough of those guys to spread around at the FCS level. I'm still of the mind set that HC hasn't developed their talent very well. Maybe the new RB coach will do a better job...
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Feb 3, 2017 16:08:02 GMT -5
not looking for one in every class, just one in 4 classes you do not make those explanations(excuses ?) for CBC's recruits does not some of our competition recruit power backs ? (A) Recruiting to HC Football is more difficult than recruiting to HC Basketball. (B) TG has still recruited players who can be productive, get on the field, stay in school, etc. A) please explain b) Have a high % of football freshmen and sophs been productive and gotten on the field in the last 11 years ? Re "stay in school"-- Has no football player ever left the school in 11 years ? c) competition question not answered
|
|
|
Post by sader1970 on Feb 3, 2017 16:09:22 GMT -5
Without doing the research, my eyeball impression is the Colgate, especially, has had no problem recruiting strong RBs and, to a lesser extent Fordham.
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Feb 3, 2017 16:11:16 GMT -5
Our red zone efficiency has improved greatly under Coach Rock. The fact is there aren't too many 5-10 to 6-0 go to RBs at the FCS level. Most of those guys if good enough go to FBS schools. Have not some Pl schools recruited some of these players ?
|
|
|
Post by bringbackcaro on Feb 3, 2017 16:48:40 GMT -5
(A) Recruiting to HC Football is more difficult than recruiting to HC Basketball. (B) TG has still recruited players who can be productive, get on the field, stay in school, etc. A) please explain b) Have a high % of football freshmen and sophs been productive and gotten on the field in the last 11 years ? Re "stay in school"-- Has no football player ever left the school in 11 years ? c) competition question not answered A) There is a bigger talent pool that we can go after in basketball, and we typically only need to fill around 3 spots. There are also many more opportunities to watch high school players in person in basketball, with time to watch some guys play high school games, and then they are also playing for most of the spring and summer prior to their senior seasons. On the other hand, football has no meaningful tournaments to watch in the offseason, and it can be very difficult to try and recruit a football player based on film from their Junior year when they're ~16 years old. It can be very different to try and translate how a football player that young will look when they are 20 years old and a Junior in college. B) Comparing frosh & sophs in College Football to frosh & sophs in College Basketball is like comparing apples to tractor trailer trucks. (The part about never having had someone kicked out of school before was a joke) C) Yes, some of our competition recruits "power backs." They also have a different style than us and run the ball a lot more. The ancient idea that you need to have a 50/50 run/pass balance to be successful in football has been thrown out the window. We can be successful without a power running back, but we just need to do a better job of recruiting and developing quarterbacks. In my opinion, it is a lot easier to stockpile talent at the wide receiver and QB positions at our level than it is to find a "power back" that you can rely on to carry the offense.
|
|
|
Post by Sons of Vaval on Feb 3, 2017 17:17:23 GMT -5
Impressive making it through a post without any words in all caps, bolding words, or italics.
By the way, I agree with much of what you write, particularly point C.
|
|
|
Post by sader1970 on Feb 3, 2017 17:17:34 GMT -5
I respectfully disagree.
Dom Randolph was one of the best, if not the best ever, in the PL. Peter Pujals prior to his injury was/is an excellent QB at our level. Geoff Wade is also very good and we have not really had a problem with QBs and WRs have been a strength in the Gilmore years. We don't rebuild at QB and WR spots, we re-load.
I can tell you from painful experience that the lack of a power running back has caused us to lose two PL championships to Colgate because we needed to run the ball up the gut and control the clock. We didn't, the Raiders did.
A wide open offense looks great, especially on a wide open field. When you get down inside the 10 yard line the opposing defense has a lot less area to guard against for a pass and we have struggled.
How many times have we started a possession with a run up the middle for less than 2 yards and now we are 2nd and 7 or 8, or worse? How many times have we been 3rd and 2 and not been able to pick up a first down because we throw a short pass that goes incomplete or caught and the receiver just doesn't pick up the first down. Drive killers.
Alright, I will get off the soap box but this has been driving me crazy for 10 years or more.
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Feb 3, 2017 17:22:43 GMT -5
Dom Randolph was one of the best, if not the best ever, in the PL. Peter Pujals prior to his injury was/is an excellent QB at our level. Geoff Wade is also very good and we have not really had a problem with QBs and WRs have been a strength in the Gilmore years. We don't rebuild at QB and WR spots, we re-load. I can tell you from painful experience that the lack of a power running back has caused us to lose two PL championships to Colgate because we needed to run the ball up the gut and control the clock. We didn't, the Raiders did. A wide open offense looks great, especially on a wide open field. When you get down inside the 10 yard line the opposing defense has a lot less area to guard against for a pass and we have struggled. How many times have we started a possession with a run up the middle for less than 2 yards and now we are 2nd and 7 or 8, or worse? How many times have we been 3rd and 2 and not been able to pick up a first down because we throw a short pass that goes incomplete or caught and the receiver just doesn't pick up the first down. Drive killers. Alright, I will get off the soap box but this has been driving me crazy for 10 years or more. I admire the passion in your answer. I wish we had at least one big power back for red zone caries - inside the 5 yard line. However, if we keep building our offensive line, there can be holes for any size running back...I hope.
|
|
|
Post by sader1970 on Feb 3, 2017 18:16:28 GMT -5
The issue that I see is that we have had multiple occasions when our o-line and the opposing d-line basically have a standoff and our backs, none of them, can push the line forward for yardage as other teams have had. No one can move the pack. Our o-line very rarely is able to make holes that speedy backs can get through. I hate to see 170-180 pound backs running up the middle. No mas!
|
|
|
Post by bringbackcaro on Feb 3, 2017 18:27:31 GMT -5
I respectfully disagree. Dom Randolph was one of the best, if not the best ever, in the PL. Peter Pujals prior to his injury was/is an excellent QB at our level. Geoff Wade is also very good and we have not really had a problem with QBs and WRs have been a strength in the Gilmore years. We don't rebuild at QB and WR spots, we re-load. I can tell you from painful experience that the lack of a power running back has caused us to lose two PL championships to Colgate because we needed to run the ball up the gut and control the clock. We didn't, the Raiders did. A wide open offense looks great, especially on a wide open field. When you get down inside the 10 yard line the opposing defense has a lot less area to guard against for a pass and we have struggled. How many times have we started a possession with a run up the middle for less than 2 yards and now we are 2nd and 7 or 8, or worse? How many times have we been 3rd and 2 and not been able to pick up a first down because we throw a short pass that goes incomplete or caught and the receiver just doesn't pick up the first down. Drive killers. Alright, I will get off the soap box but this has been driving me crazy for 10 years or more. Pujals has been good, not great, and Wade has way too limited of a sample size to make a judgement. While Pujals is capable of making big plays, his accuracy throwing into tight spots on 3rd down and in big spots has been very inconsistent. RE: Colgate, they had one of the best (if not the best) RB's in the country. Guys like that don't grow on trees, and are extremely difficult to stop. RE: Red zone and short yardage, I agree that we must improve. However, there are creative ways to do it. We have accumulated a ton of size and skill at the Tight End position. We need to get a lot better at using those guys as weapons, especially in short yardage situations.
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Feb 3, 2017 18:31:59 GMT -5
A) please explain b) Have a high % of football freshmen and sophs been productive and gotten on the field in the last 11 years ? Re "stay in school"-- Has no football player ever left the school in 11 years ? c) competition question not answered A) There is a bigger talent pool that we can go after in basketball, and we typically only need to fill around 3 spots. There are also many more opportunities to watch high school players in person in basketball, with time to watch some guys play high school games, and then they are also playing for most of the spring and summer prior to their senior seasons. On the other hand, football has no meaningful tournaments to watch in the offseason, and it can be very difficult to try and recruit a football player based on film from their Junior year when they're ~16 years old. It can be very different to try and translate how a football player that young will look when they are 20 years old and a Junior in college. B) Comparing frosh & sophs in College Football to frosh & sophs in College Basketball is like comparing apples to tractor trailer trucks. (The part about never having had someone kicked out of school before was a joke) C) Yes, some of our competition recruits "power backs." They also have a different style than us and run the ball a lot more. The ancient idea that you need to have a 50/50 run/pass balance to be successful in football has been thrown out the window. We can be successful without a power running back, but we just need to do a better job of recruiting and developing quarterbacks. In my opinion, it is a lot easier to stockpile talent at the wide receiver and QB positions at our level than it is to find a "power back" that you can rely on to carry the offense. A) does not our competition have the same challenges ? b) you have praised Gilmore for getting his approximately 200 recruits on the field and performing(but not winning), but readily criticize CBC's 5 recruits in 1 + seasons, while winning a PLC, but losing 20 games, with significant contributions from one of those recruits. who else laughed at your "joke " ?
|
|
|
Post by bringbackcaro on Feb 3, 2017 18:40:32 GMT -5
A) There is a bigger talent pool that we can go after in basketball, and we typically only need to fill around 3 spots. There are also many more opportunities to watch high school players in person in basketball, with time to watch some guys play high school games, and then they are also playing for most of the spring and summer prior to their senior seasons. On the other hand, football has no meaningful tournaments to watch in the offseason, and it can be very difficult to try and recruit a football player based on film from their Junior year when they're ~16 years old. It can be very different to try and translate how a football player that young will look when they are 20 years old and a Junior in college. B) Comparing frosh & sophs in College Football to frosh & sophs in College Basketball is like comparing apples to tractor trailer trucks. (The part about never having had someone kicked out of school before was a joke) C) Yes, some of our competition recruits "power backs." They also have a different style than us and run the ball a lot more. The ancient idea that you need to have a 50/50 run/pass balance to be successful in football has been thrown out the window. We can be successful without a power running back, but we just need to do a better job of recruiting and developing quarterbacks. In my opinion, it is a lot easier to stockpile talent at the wide receiver and QB positions at our level than it is to find a "power back" that you can rely on to carry the offense. A) does not our competition have the same challenges ? b) you have praised Gilmore for getting his approximately 200 recruits on the field and performing(but not winning), but readily criticize CBC's 5 recruits in 1 + seasons. who else laughed at your "joke " ? A) Yes, our "competition" (as in the PL) face the same challenges but I don't think we have really been out-recruited since we started giving schollies. Prior to scholarships, we had some pretty sizable disadvantages compared to the other schools in the league with regard to resources invested into football programs. For how poor the basketball team is playing, frosh and sophs have a huge opportunity to get playing time. The fact that 3 of the 4 (4 of 5 if you include the guy now at a Community College in Kansas) guys Carmody recruited don't see meaningful minutes is alarming. But that is a totally different discussion than trying to recruit "power running backs" to HC football.
|
|
|
Post by A Clock Tower Purple on Feb 3, 2017 18:49:14 GMT -5
A) There is a bigger talent pool that we can go after in basketball, and we typically only need to fill around 3 spots. There are also many more opportunities to watch high school players in person in basketball, with time to watch some guys play high school games, and then they are also playing for most of the spring and summer prior to their senior seasons. On the other hand, football has no meaningful tournaments to watch in the offseason, and it can be very difficult to try and recruit a football player based on film from their Junior year when they're ~16 years old. It can be very different to try and translate how a football player that young will look when they are 20 years old and a Junior in college. B) Comparing frosh & sophs in College Football to frosh & sophs in College Basketball is like comparing apples to tractor trailer trucks. (The part about never having had someone kicked out of school before was a joke) C) Yes, some of our competition recruits "power backs." They also have a different style than us and run the ball a lot more. The ancient idea that you need to have a 50/50 run/pass balance to be successful in football has been thrown out the window. We can be successful without a power running back, but we just need to do a better job of recruiting and developing quarterbacks. In my opinion, it is a lot easier to stockpile talent at the wide receiver and QB positions at our level than it is to find a "power back" that you can rely on to carry the offense. A) does not our competition have the same challenges ? b) you have praised Gilmore for getting his approximately 200 recruits on the field and performing(but not winning), but readily criticize CBC's 5 recruits in 1 + seasons, while winning a PLC, but losing 20 games, with significant contributions from one of those recruits. who else laughed at your "joke " ? Hoops - DR hired TG. That makes anything to do with football A-OK. If NP had made the hire, it would be vilified in the same manner his other hires have. Watch what happens if TG gets launched.
|
|
|
Post by bringbackcaro on Feb 3, 2017 18:59:51 GMT -5
A) does not our competition have the same challenges ? b) you have praised Gilmore for getting his approximately 200 recruits on the field and performing(but not winning), but readily criticize CBC's 5 recruits in 1 + seasons, while winning a PLC, but losing 20 games, with significant contributions from one of those recruits. who else laughed at your "joke " ? Hoops - DR hired TG. That makes anything to do with football A-OK. If NP had made the hire, it would be vilified in the same manner his other hires have. Watch what happens if TG gets launched. YEAH! WATCH WHAT HAPPENS!!! AGENDA!!! What the hell's your point? DR was a lousy AD, and made a lot of really lousy hires, particularly the two disastrous basketball hires. The athletic department was stuck in the mud under him. He should not be the benchmark for Pine, if all of the Puppets want to claim that we have miraculously transformed the athletic department. I applauded Pine for not recklessly pulling the trigger on Gilmore. I have been critical of Pine for mishandling the basketball coaching search. Fair and balanced.
|
|
|
Post by beerseach on Feb 3, 2017 19:16:02 GMT -5
Our red zone efficiency has improved greatly under Coach Rock. The fact is there aren't too many 5-10 to 6-0 go to RBs at the FCS level. Most of those guys if good enough go to FBS schools. Have not some Pl schools recruited some of these players ? Yes, there are some out there but not one for every school. Being a school that has thrown the ball more than 55% of the time over the last two years is not attractive to a good, big back. Those dudes want the rock. And in my opinion, a big back like that wouldn't have been real successful in the current offensive scheme Holy Cross uses. A big back who runs a 4.4 will be but not a 4.5 guy. Cozier was so successful because our offense requires a quick cutting type guy not a straight forward bruiser. Our OL doesn't get off the ball...
|
|
|
Post by breezy on Feb 3, 2017 20:17:00 GMT -5
Our OL doesn't get off the ball... *** That was / is my biggest disappointment of the 2016 season. With 5 experienced seniors starting on the OL, I expected we should have been able to have some success running the ball. It just did not happen.
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Feb 3, 2017 20:24:10 GMT -5
A) does not our competition have the same challenges ? b) you have praised Gilmore for getting his approximately 200 recruits on the field and performing(but not winning), but readily criticize CBC's 5 recruits in 1 + seasons. who else laughed at your "joke " ? A) Yes, our "competition" (as in the PL) face the same challenges but I don't think we have really been out-recruited since we started giving schollies. Thus, if Gilmore has not been outrecruited, why have we not won more games ?
|
|
|
Post by KY Crusader 75 on Feb 3, 2017 20:31:03 GMT -5
I respectfully disagree. Dom Randolph was one of the best, if not the best ever, in the PL. Peter Pujals prior to his injury was/is an excellent QB at our level. Geoff Wade is also very good and we have not really had a problem with QBs and WRs have been a strength in the Gilmore years. We don't rebuild at QB and WR spots, we re-load. I can tell you from painful experience that the lack of a power running back has caused us to lose two PL championships to Colgate because we needed to run the ball up the gut and control the clock. We didn't, the Raiders did. A wide open offense looks great, especially on a wide open field. When you get down inside the 10 yard line the opposing defense has a lot less area to guard against for a pass and we have struggled.
How many times have we started a possession with a run up the middle for less than 2 yards and now we are 2nd and 7 or 8, or worse? How many times have we been 3rd and 2 and not been able to pick up a first down because we throw a short pass that goes incomplete or caught and the receiver just doesn't pick up the first down. Drive killers.
Alright, I will get off the soap box but this has been driving me crazy for 10 years or more. I agree 100%. I was a big Eddie Houghton fan--I think I had "Eddie is very tough to tackle" on auto-type. I always like to look at the stats to see if we can glean any insights from them to confirm or refute our beliefs. "Inside the 10 Yard Line" stats are not readily available, but here's how the Crusaders compare to our opponents on some readily available measures that may address in part this idea of "having a big back or an effective offense that will get us the short but crucial yards when we need them: Composite of past three seasons Scoring in the Red Zone--Okay, this is inside the 20 yard line, not the 10 yard line, but can we punch it in as well as our opponents? HC 127 trips to the Red Zone 77 TDS= 61% 27 FGS= 21% 23 NO SCORE= 18% Opponents 130 trips to the Red Zone 85 TDS= 65% 17 FGS= 13% 28 NO SCORE= 22% Looks like we did about as well as our opponents. If you figure 7 points for TDS and 3 for FG HC got 4.9 points per Red Zone visit OPPONENTS got 5.0 points per Red Zone trip Third Down Conversions---Could be 3rd & 1, 3rd & 4, or even 3rd & 19 HC= 227/525= 43% first downs on third down attempts OPPONENTS= 202/488= 41% first downs on third down attempts Fourth Down Conversions--Okay, these have to be short yardage attempts unless it's a desperation attempt at the end of the game or half HC= 44/79= 56% first downs on fourth down attempts OPPONENTS= 43/73= 59% first downs on fourth down attempts As frustrated as we get with our offense, especially the short running game, we are getting about the same results on these several imperfect stats, but please know : I still want a big bruising back and great linemen to help give us a better running game
|
|
|
Post by breezy on Feb 3, 2017 21:02:48 GMT -5
On the question of whether Gilmore has been "out-recruited" by other PL teams.
1. Although the Patriot League authorized up to 60 scholarships , HC initially did not get authority to offer the full 15 scholarships in at least the first year -- a situation that was resolved only when Nate Pine became AD and got authorization for football to get a full complement of scholarships going forward.
2. In past years there were several instances where other PL teams got recruits that had been offered by HC.
3. This year, however, it was noticeably different. On my list of HC offers (and I acknowledge it is certainly incomplete because there were undoubtedly offers that were not publicized and I was not aware of them), there was only one instance where a recruit was offered by HC and chose another PL team (a CB who committed to Lehigh).
4. On the other hand, there were numerous instances where recruits (at least 5) who committed to HC had offers from other PL teams. (I note that in the thread about recruiting around the PL, there was a list of Fordham committed recruits and one poster thought several of those recruits had been pursued by HC. However, none of the Fordham commits are on my list of HC offers.)
Conclusion -- for the 2017 recruit class, HC (and Gilmore) were clearly not outrecruited by the other PL teams.
|
|
|
Post by sader1970 on Feb 3, 2017 21:12:24 GMT -5
KY, I definitely recall that we were co-leaders of the Eddie Houghton fan club on Crossports.
i also appreciate your recognition that your stats are not perfect so I still stand by my point that we are hurting in short yardage situations without a power back (and I know you are not arguing against me here).
I think that inside the 20 vs. inside the 10 and certainly inside the 5 is quite different. It just isn't worth the effort to look at the different results.
Please, Tom, get a bruiser with that last open slot!
|
|
|
Post by deep Purple on Feb 3, 2017 22:17:33 GMT -5
Get the best player available with the last open slot.
|
|
|
Post by sarasota on Feb 3, 2017 23:04:57 GMT -5
In the past, when it comes to OL recruiting, have we mistakenly overemphasized pounds over quickness and agility?
|
|