FB: Empire 8

[theoriginalupstate]

Eh, the ranking doesn't mean much right now.  They're playing great right now and that's all that matters!

I hope they come out with a good game plan to get pressure on UC's QB who was sacked 4 times last week and didn't look as comfortable in the pocket as he did the first couple of games.

I think SJF puts up points regardless, Utica doesn't have the guys on defense to shut down the SJF Offense.  It will be up to the SJF defense to hold the UC offense in check.

Early prediction is SJF-41, Utica 24

That sounds like a stout prediction.

yes, yes it is...

Fisher is on a mission this year, they're just too big, too strong and too experienced this year for Utica to take them down...

Utica will give them a game for a half or so and Borum and Bailey will take over in the 2nd half...

Utica is very, very close to catching up to them though.  As soon as they get a defense and a consistently strong running game they're going to be a force...

[bomber3]

Upstate --

That is an intended rush.  Rushing statistics, in most peoples' minds, refers to when a running back or quarterback gets a hand off.  The sacks and snaps over a punter's head is not a true intended rush and therefore skews the actual rushing data.  They shouldn't count those plays toward the rushing yard total and should be classified in an "other" category or something of the like.  It just doesn't make sense.

[AUKaz00]

Upstate --

That is an intended rush.  Rushing statistics, in most peoples' minds, refers to when a running back or quarterback gets a hand off.  The sacks and snaps over a punter's head is not a true intended rush and therefore skews the actual rushing data.  They shouldn't count those plays toward the rushing yard total and should be classified in an "other" category or something of the like.  It just doesn't make sense.

Perhaps a #@!!% category?

[theoriginalupstate]

Upstate --

That is an intended rush.  Rushing statistics, in most peoples' minds, refers to when a running back or quarterback gets a hand off.  The sacks and snaps over a punter's head is not a true intended rush and therefore skews the actual rushing data.  They shouldn't count those plays toward the rushing yard total and should be classified in an "other" category or something of the like.  It just doesn't make sense.

Perhaps a #@!!% category?

Yeah there are not F-Uped Play categories...

If you lost yardage, you lost yardage...

[Bombers798891]

Pat -

The question on the football homepage regarding Ithaca's rushing game is misleading.  Those numbers take into account a snap over the punter's head and QB sacks, which accounted for -62 yards rushing.  In my opinion those yards shouldn't count so the real number is 48 yards rushing.  It is misleading!

How about this...IC's rushing game was simply atrocious regardless if it was -12 or +48. Believe dlip he understands your frustration with a lack of running game being a Union fan whose team couldn't move the ball on the ground at all at Butterfield in week #2 but in his mind this is a tad bit of a nit pick.  IC deserves negative attention regarding their lack of a ground game because it is their main weakness. If the Bombers could move the ball on the ground they would most likely be a top #5 east region team easily. Who knows they still may end up being one but until they progress in their ground game dlip thinks it is somewhat unlikely.

I am the first to admit that Ithaca's run game has not been a force over the past two years.  But if it is that bad why can't teams focus more on their passing game and stop them?

I disagree. Teams are figuring them out. Zappia started 10-for-10 on Saturday and then went 10-for-23 from then on. Yes, he was without two of his best receivers, but if you think Fisher's not going to have a defensive scheme in place, you're kidding yourself. They've shut down better IC offenses than this one. And their in-game adjustments run circles around the Bombers'--just take a look at the 2nd-half point totals.

I don't think there's "progress" to make in the ground game. Is their offensive line going to get bigger and more skilled over the week? Is Ruggerio going to go back to his pre-injury self? The Bombers' top three running backs have 97 carries and 320 yards. We're not talking about a small sample size here.

What's astounding to me is the complete and utter drop-off of the running game in two years (RB's only):

2008: 388 carries, 2096 yards. 5.4 YPC, 30 TD's
2009: 289 carries, 1099 yards, 3.8 YPC, 8 TD's
2010: 300 carries, 842 yards, 2.8 YPC, 13 TD's (projected)

That's just absurd. But it's also not the kind of thing you can really fix in-season. It's not like 2004 when the Bombers just needed Donovan to get caught up with the rest of the team. This is the kind of issue that takes time to fix.

Maybe IC can just go pass-happy and hope their defense/special teams bails them out and they go 8-2. But to what end? To get the #8 seed and get obliterated at Del Valley or Mount Union? A team this flawed can't make a deep run.

The program needs a down year, IMO. Just a little kick in the butt, let's revitalize the program kind of thing. Wake up the coaching staff and administration a little. The program's become a little stagnant and the seasons all blend into an 8-2/7-3 mush. Sometimes, I wonder if, long-term going 5-5 would help them more than 7-3.

[Bombers798891]

Upstate --

That is an intended rush.  Rushing statistics, in most peoples' minds, refers to when a running back or quarterback gets a hand off.  The sacks and snaps over a punter's head is not a true intended rush and therefore skews the actual rushing data.  They shouldn't count those plays toward the rushing yard total and should be classified in an "other" category or something of the like.  It just doesn't make sense.

Perhaps a #@!!% category?

Yeah there are not F-Uped Play categories...

If you lost yardage, you lost yardage...

I quote Sports Night.

"There's a difference between divorced and separated. One is divorced and the other is separated. That's why they have those names."

If a rush for negative yards and a sack were the same thing, we wouldn't call them by different names. That's why "pass protection" is considered blocking before the QB throws the ball.

Seriously, where's the common sense? When a QB takes the snap, we say "He drops back to pass," not "He takes the hand-off, runs backwards six yards and looks for his receiver." When a QB gets sacked on four straight plays like they did at Iowa, we don't say "Man, the Hawkeyes can't run block at all!"

Isn't a punt a special teams play? Why is it considered a "rush"? A ball snapped over a punters head which he falls on is not a running play. There may not be a category for it, but that doesn't mean there shouldn't be. Why not just make a "Special Teams Yardage" category? When the Bombers blew that punt snap, was your first thought, "Man what a terrible running play?"

[theoriginalupstate]

Well someone at Ithaca better petition the NCAA to make a new statistical category, this is a travesty of epic proportions...

[Bombers798891]

Well someone at Ithaca better petition the NCAA to make a new statistical category, this is a travesty of epic proportions...

Hey, anything that accentuates the ineptitude of the 2010 Bomber running game, I'd usually be on board with. But I favor logic, and it's just not really logical to consider a blown punt snap to be the same thing as a hand-off to a running back.

[AUKaz00]

Well someone at Ithaca better petition the NCAA to make a new statistical category, this is a travesty of epic proportions...

Hey, anything that accentuates the ineptitude of the 2010 Bomber running game, I'd usually be on board with. But I favor logic, and it's just not really logical to consider a blown punt snap to be the same thing as a hand-off to a running back.

If the punter picked up the botched snap, then ran around and lost more yardage, how should it be handled?

[SJFF82]

Eh, the ranking doesn't mean much right now.  They're playing great right now and that's all that matters!

I hope they come out with a good game plan to get pressure on UC's QB who was sacked 4 times last week and didn't look as comfortable in the pocket as he did the first couple of games.

I think SJF puts up points regardless, Utica doesn't have the guys on defense to shut down the SJF Offense.  It will be up to the SJF defense to hold the UC offense in check.

Early prediction is SJF-41, Utica 24

That sounds like a stout prediction.

yes, yes it is...

Fisher is on a mission this year, they're just too big, too strong and too experienced this year for Utica to take them down...

Utica will give them a game for a half or so and Borum and Bailey will take over in the 2nd half...

Utica is very, very close to catching up to them though.  As soon as they get a defense and a consistently strong running game they're going to be a force...

I dont think 17 points is such a stout prediction...

On the other hand, it feels very odd to be sensing some sort of trash talking situation with Utica....man, who woulda thought that Utica would replace Ithaca as our E8 rival on post-patterns...

[theoriginalupstate]

I dont think 17 points is such a stout prediction...

On the other hand, it feels very odd to be sensing some sort of trash talking situation with Utica....man, who woulda thought that Utica would replace Ithaca as our E8 rival on post-patterns...

With Blaise running the show there it was just a matter of time...

The man is an awesome recruiter and a pretty dang good defensive coordinator in his own right. He's also got a bright, young offensive coordinator in Fitzpatrick (who still owns the SJF record for passing TDs in a season)...

It will be interesting to see what Fitzpatrick and Fox pull out for their respective teams in terms of a game plan...

[SJFF82]

I dont think 17 points is such a stout prediction...

On the other hand, it feels very odd to be sensing some sort of trash talking situation with Utica....man, who woulda thought that Utica would replace Ithaca as our E8 rival on post-patterns...

With Blaise running the show there it was just a matter of time...

The man is an awesome recruiter and a pretty dang good defensive coordinator in his own right. He's also got a bright, young offensive coordinator in Fitzpatrick (who still owns the SJF record for passing TDs in a season)...

It will be interesting to see what Fitzpatrick and Fox pull out for their respective teams in terms of a game plan...

ha...what I just said over on the other board....our posts crossed in the mail as they say...

[Bombers798891]

Well someone at Ithaca better petition the NCAA to make a new statistical category, this is a travesty of epic proportions...

Hey, anything that accentuates the ineptitude of the 2010 Bomber running game, I'd usually be on board with. But I favor logic, and it's just not really logical to consider a blown punt snap to be the same thing as a hand-off to a running back.

If the punter picked up the botched snap, then ran around and lost more yardage, how should it be handled?

How do we handle it if a ball is at the 20, a pass is thrown that the WR catches at the 40 and then, in trying to break tackles, runs backwards to the 35 where he's tackled? Do we count that a "20 yard pass" and a "-5 yard run"? No. Near as I can figure, here's what they say:

What kind of play was it? A pass play

How far did the ball move? 15 yards

Hence it's a 15 yard pass. Just like the IC play was a special teams play that resulted in (I think) 40 yards being lost.

[tecmobowler]

In response to Ithaca not using their timeouts, and letting Lycoming run the time out....

Coach Welch was asked about it by the radio guy after the game. He stated that he didn't use any timeouts because they were confident they could block the kick.

?

[Jonny Utah]

Pat -

The question on the football homepage regarding Ithaca's rushing game is misleading.  Those numbers take into account a snap over the punter's head and QB sacks, which accounted for -62 yards rushing.  In my opinion those yards shouldn't count so the real number is 48 yards rushing.  It is misleading!

How about this...IC's rushing game was simply atrocious regardless if it was -12 or +48. Believe dlip he understands your frustration with a lack of running game being a Union fan whose team couldn't move the ball on the ground at all at Butterfield in week #2 but in his mind this is a tad bit of a nit pick.  IC deserves negative attention regarding their lack of a ground game because it is their main weakness. If the Bombers could move the ball on the ground they would most likely be a top #5 east region team easily. Who knows they still may end up being one but until they progress in their ground game dlip thinks it is somewhat unlikely.

I am the first to admit that Ithaca's run game has not been a force over the past two years.  But if it is that bad why can't teams focus more on their passing game and stop them?

I disagree. Teams are figuring them out. Zappia started 10-for-10 on Saturday and then went 10-for-23 from then on. Yes, he was without two of his best receivers, but if you think Fisher's not going to have a defensive scheme in place, you're kidding yourself. They've shut down better IC offenses than this one. And their in-game adjustments run circles around the Bombers'--just take a look at the 2nd-half point totals.

I don't think there's "progress" to make in the ground game. Is their offensive line going to get bigger and more skilled over the week? Is Ruggerio going to go back to his pre-injury self? The Bombers' top three running backs have 97 carries and 320 yards. We're not talking about a small sample size here.

What's astounding to me is the complete and utter drop-off of the running game in two years (RB's only):

2008: 388 carries, 2096 yards. 5.4 YPC, 30 TD's
2009: 289 carries, 1099 yards, 3.8 YPC, 8 TD's
2010: 300 carries, 842 yards, 2.8 YPC, 13 TD's (projected)

That's just absurd. But it's also not the kind of thing you can really fix in-season. It's not like 2004 when the Bombers just needed Donovan to get caught up with the rest of the team. This is the kind of issue that takes time to fix.

Maybe IC can just go pass-happy and hope their defense/special teams bails them out and they go 8-2. But to what end? To get the #8 seed and get obliterated at Del Valley or Mount Union? A team this flawed can't make a deep run.

The program needs a down year, IMO. Just a little kick in the butt, let's revitalize the program kind of thing. Wake up the coaching staff and administration a little. The program's become a little stagnant and the seasons all blend into an 8-2/7-3 mush. Sometimes, I wonder if, long-term going 5-5 would help them more than 7-3.

It shouldn't take you a half of football to figure it out should it?  And SJF figured out Ithaca when they had great running games, so I don't think SJF "figuring" IC out this year is going to be a suprise.

And Ithaca this year has had great second halves against their first three opponents.  Union connected on some amazing pass plays to make that game close,  St. Lawrence crumbled in the 4th, and Wilkes let up 21 points in the third quarter.  And we could very well see a Lycoming team that ends up with one or two losses.

As for a wake up call for the school I can't say I disagree.  Although I've heard the financial aid just isn't there like it was 10 years ago.  Plus they don't recruit New England and any of the prep-private NE schools like they used to.