|
Post by crusader1970 on Oct 8, 2016 15:21:42 GMT -5
My guess is that today's defeat sealed Gilmore's fate.
It's the same story over and over. We get an early lead, look good and imaginative on offense.....and then the other team makes defensive adjustments. Then the offense gets conservative, bogs down, and as a result the defense is on the field for extended periods of time and wears down.
Bottom line? We lose another close one.
We as fans and the players deserve new leadership.
I used to really enjoy watching HC football but I really don't anymore. It's just so frustrating to watch the same pattern repeat itself week after week. If we don't beat GT in DC, it is very possible that we are looking at a 2-9 season.
Nate Pine? Are you listening?
|
|
|
Post by jflare on Oct 8, 2016 15:29:55 GMT -5
Another one point loss..... How many is that now in the last 5 years ? Way too many for it to just be a case of bad luck.
|
|
|
Post by KY Crusader 75 on Oct 8, 2016 18:28:46 GMT -5
Another one point loss..... How many is that now in the last 5 years ? Way too many for it to just be a case of bad luck. Here is our record starting in 2011 season and including today's heartbreaker 10 or more Points= 13 wins - 15 losses 9= 0-0 8= 3-1 7= 2-6 6= 0-2 5= 1-1 4= 0-2 3= 3-5 2= 0-1 1= 1-6 Thus in games decided by a field goal or less we are 4-12 In games decided by a TD or less we are 7-23 I didn't treat over time games differently, i.e. an overtime game where you lose by 6 points should be regarded as a 1 point game since it was tied in regulation--or maybe just track OT games as "0"
|
|
|
Post by joe on Oct 8, 2016 18:30:45 GMT -5
Ageee. I said at some point in the first half that Bucknell would adjust to our flashy plays and that if we adjusted back we could win easily. We either did not adjust or we adjusted incorrectly. The Xs and Os did not work. Bucknell is not good. We're not on track to be able to play FBS teams in the near future.
|
|
|
Post by jflare on Oct 8, 2016 18:43:42 GMT -5
Bucknell is not good but they are better than us
|
|
|
Post by joe on Oct 8, 2016 18:44:43 GMT -5
Bucknell is not good but they are better than us It would seem so. Can't disagree.
|
|
|
Post by sader1970 on Oct 8, 2016 18:48:37 GMT -5
Perhaps a person to ask why our second half and, more specifically 4th quarter fades is this person: www.goholycross.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=33100&ATCLID=210237967In fairness, football is truly a team sport and while posters often point to defensive failures, today was a perfect example where the defense should sue the offense for non-support. The small bright spot today was special teams. Our punter was superb often pinning the Bison inside their 10 yard line. On kick-offs and punt returns Jake was outstanding and a couple of times almost made it to the house. We basically won the first 3 quarters of this game but the offense did nothing in the 4th quarter and second half of the third. The TOP was basically a 2 to 1 proportion in Bucknell's favor in the second half. Just too, too many 3 and outs by our offense. Not going to win many games that way.
|
|
|
Post by sarasota on Oct 8, 2016 18:57:14 GMT -5
In the presser CTG said it was the plan to replace Wade after a couple of series and also to put him back in later in the game. BULL!!
|
|
|
Post by jflare on Oct 8, 2016 19:26:20 GMT -5
Coach looked pretty shaken up in the presser. Hope he can turn things around but it does not look real promising......
|
|
|
Post by hc87 on Oct 8, 2016 19:32:48 GMT -5
Coach looked pretty shaken up in the presser. Hope he can turn things around but it does not look real promising...... Not to be heartless, but the guy has been the head coach for 13 years at Holy Cross....longah than anyone not named HoF'er Dr Eddie Anderson...it is what is, he hasn't won consistently, the program is in a rut, people aren't going to the games....sorry, but what is the argument for keeping Gilmore other than "he's a nice guy?"
|
|
|
Post by bison137 on Oct 8, 2016 20:00:02 GMT -5
. We basically won the first 3 quarters of this game but the offense did nothing in the 4th quarter and second half of the third. The TOP was basically a 2 to 1 proportion in Bucknell's favor in the second half. Just too, too many 3 and outs by our offense. Not going to win many games that way. I think your thesis is correct, but actually the offense did nothing for the majority of the second quarter and virtually all of the second half, not just for part of it. HC had no first downs in the 3rd quarter. For 32 minutes - from the 8:30 mark of the second quarter until the 6:30 of the fourth quarter - they made only one first down (late in the second quarter). And from the 8:30 mark of the second quarter until the end of the game, HC gained 95 yards vs 399 yards. As you say, it makes it tough on the defense.
|
|
|
Post by joutsHC77 on Oct 9, 2016 7:29:40 GMT -5
Perhaps a person to ask why our second half and, more specifically 4th quarter fades is this person: www.goholycross.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=33100&ATCLID=210237967In fairness, football is truly a team sport and while posters often point to defensive failures, today was a perfect example where the defense should sue the offense for non-support. The small bright spot today was special teams. Our punter was superb often pinning the Bison inside their 10 yard line. On kick-offs and punt returns Jake was outstanding and a couple of times almost made it to the house. We basically won the first 3 quarters of this game but the offense did nothing in the 4th quarter and second half of the third. The TOP was basically a 2 to 1 proportion in Bucknell's favor in the second half. Just too, too many 3 and outs by our offense. Not going to win many games that way. Sader1970: I think this needs to be evaluated also. The strength and conditioning is very important. What does Navy's program do that allows their players to play at high levels?
|
|
|
Post by hc6774 on Oct 9, 2016 8:42:34 GMT -5
Perhaps a person to ask why our second half and, more specifically 4th quarter fades is this person: www.goholycross.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=33100&ATCLID=210237967In fairness, football is truly a team sport and while posters often point to defensive failures, today was a perfect example where the defense should sue the offense for non-support. The small bright spot today was special teams. Our punter was superb often pinning the Bison inside their 10 yard line. On kick-offs and punt returns Jake was outstanding and a couple of times almost made it to the house. We basically won the first 3 quarters of this game but the offense did nothing in the 4th quarter and second half of the third. The TOP was basically a 2 to 1 proportion in Bucknell's favor in the second half. Just too, too many 3 and outs by our offense. Not going to win many games that way. Sader1970: I think this needs to be evaluated also. The strength and conditioning is very important. What does Navy's program do that allows their players to play at high levels? Navy is the PO of college football... its offense possess the ball for long periods and scores on a high % of those possessions; good for any defense. Our kicking game was good we should have played for the field goal in the 2nd half more often or put Wade back in the game. Except for 2 unsportsman like penalties, the D played well enough to win.
|
|
|
Post by timholycross on Oct 9, 2016 9:57:41 GMT -5
For you time-of-possession-means-a-lot advocates, BC had the ball vs Clemson for 38 minutes, Clemson for 22. Final Score 56-10, Clemson. Best case scenario was 49-17, as BC had 3 plays inside the 1 and couldn't score; plus Clemson got a pick 6 at the end of the game.
|
|
|
Post by wayback on Oct 9, 2016 10:00:48 GMT -5
Gilmore is not a good "game day" coach. He may come into a game with a plan but does not have the ability to make adjustments during the game. It would be interesting to see how often we were ahead at the end of the first half in those close games we lost. Half time is when you make adjustments on offense and defense based on what happened during the first half., During the second half you must adjust to the other teams adjustments, we haven't done that. I feel that many of the close games we lost were not that we came back and didn't quite finish the job but rather where we were ahead and it was the other team that scored last to put us away. Good coaches win close games, in game adjustments are key.
Coaches lose their jobs because they are not winning enough games, even if they have a winning record. Our coach has a losing record over 13 years. Football players coming out of high school want to go to schools with winning programs, We aren't going to get the players we want and need until we have a new coach who brings hope and excitement to the program. Coaching is a tough business, you need to produce, Coach Gilmore hasn't, time to move on.
|
|
|
Post by HC92 on Oct 9, 2016 10:22:57 GMT -5
For you time-of-possession-means-a-lot advocates, BC had the ball vs Clemson for 38 minutes, Clemson for 22. Final Score 56-10, Clemson. Best case scenario was 49-17, as BC had 3 plays inside the 1 and couldn't score; plus Clemson got a pick 6 at the end of the game. When one team is infinitely more talented and deep than the other and can score at will, time of possession is not the most important thing in an individual game. When, like us, your defense is generally bad and lacks depth, not putting them on the field any more than necessary is important. Our litany of second half collapses is not a coincidence. We ain't Clemson.
|
|
|
Post by KY Crusader 75 on Oct 9, 2016 10:43:06 GMT -5
For you time-of-possession-means-a-lot advocates, BC had the ball vs Clemson for 38 minutes, Clemson for 22. Final Score 56-10, Clemson. Best case scenario was 49-17, as BC had 3 plays inside the 1 and couldn't score; plus Clemson got a pick 6 at the end of the game. When one team is infinitely more talented and deep than the other and can score at will, time of possession is not the most important thing in an individual game. When, like us, your defense is generally bad and lacks depth, not putting them on the field any more than necessary is important. Our litany of second half collapses is not a coincidence. We ain't Clemson. Yes, Clemson got 11.0 yards per passing attempt (8.0 is good) and 6.5 yards per rushing attempt (4.5 is good) so it didn't take the Tigers very long to score when they got the ball.
|
|
|
Post by jflare on Oct 9, 2016 11:09:37 GMT -5
If PP is not coming back this season I find it hard to see another win on the schedule. Someone tell me please that we are not going 2-9 without PP !!
|
|
|
Post by joe on Oct 9, 2016 12:15:24 GMT -5
Half time is when you make adjustments on offense and defense based on what happened during the first half., During the second half you must adjust to the other teams adjustments, we haven't done that. This is exactly what I said during the second quarter. Adjusting to the adjustments. We don't do that. Ever.
|
|
|
Post by purplehaze on Oct 9, 2016 12:35:43 GMT -5
there is no school this week , i suggest the coaches have a mid-season 'camp', and make a statement such as brian kelly did after they lost to duke 'every job is up for grabs on this football team'. doubt 'two a days' are permitted but something close might be necessary as changes have to be made now !
|
|
|
Post by deep Purple on Oct 9, 2016 13:09:21 GMT -5
If PP is not coming back this season I find it hard to see another win on the schedule. Someone tell me please that we are not going 2-9 without PP !! If PP does not come back this season then the only winnable game on the sched is Gtown. If he does come back then it's going to be a long and dreary season next year unless there's another qb on the roster who is better than the two who played yesterday. I'm sorry to be blunt.
|
|
|
Post by sader1970 on Oct 9, 2016 13:22:17 GMT -5
Purple, my best bet is that everyone on this team already knows that 'every job is up for grabs on this football team'. My inside information is that Geoff Wade was considered the 4th string QB, at least going into the season. While it is probably a legitimate question as to why Blaise replaced Geoff and then Geoff came back in, there is little doubt that the move was made because the coaches thought that they wanted the best player in the game. The problem would seem not to be that all positions are open for anyone but the judgment as to who is best.
My classmate's opening post was: "It's the same story over and over. We get an early lead, look good and imaginative on offense.....and then the other team makes defensive adjustments. Then the offense gets conservative, bogs down, and as a result the defense is on the field for extended periods of time and wears down." I have said exactly the same thing during games over many games the last few years. The most immediate offensive coordinator seemed especially unimaginative. Our current one seems very imaginative (loved Flaherty's TD toss that caught the Bison flatfooted) in the first half. We then get a lead, a fairly good-sized lead, and then we seem to go into a "prevent" mode, which we know all that does is "prevent you from winning."
Once we rock a team back on its heals, we never seem to put the pedal to the metal and have a crushing mentality. We give them just enough breathing space to let them back in the game and the next thing we know, we are trying to come from behind.
Perhaps it is my purple blinders but I have said before that I don't see these losses caused by a talent gap (except, yep, I'll repeat, a serious lack in a large, powerful RB that can move a pack when we need 2-3 yards).
I'll put Pujals, Flaherty, Jake with not only anyone in the league but any team we play. McBeath, though undersized and a penchant for sometimes stupid penalties, and Cameron are great on defense.
|
|
|
Post by joe on Oct 9, 2016 13:26:00 GMT -5
If PP is not coming back this season I find it hard to see another win on the schedule. Someone tell me please that we are not going 2-9 without PP !! If PP does not come back this season then the only winnable game on the sched is Gtown. If he does come back then it's going to be a long and dreary season next year unless there's another qb on the roster who is better than the two who played yesterday. I'm sorry to be blunt. Georgetown is not a guaranteed W.
|
|
|
Post by timholycross on Oct 9, 2016 13:40:05 GMT -5
If PP is not coming back this season I find it hard to see another win on the schedule. Someone tell me please that we are not going 2-9 without PP !! If PP does not come back this season then the only winnable game on the sched is Gtown. If he does come back then it's going to be a long and dreary season next year unless there's another qb on the roster who is better than the two who played yesterday. I'm sorry to be blunt. Both young men will play better than they did yesterday just by getting to play. Don't sell them that short. But anyone who expects them to play at Peter's level is delusional.
|
|
|
Post by sarasota on Oct 9, 2016 15:10:26 GMT -5
If PP plays next season it pushes back by one season the QB that will lead us against the big teams that are scheduled. I would devote next season to developing the QB that will lead us to the promised land.
|
|