FB: Old Dominion Athletic Conference

[Ron Boerger]

Heck, some of you guys who just came back should come over to the SCAC board.  We can talk about the good ol' days when Trinity and Bridgewater ruled the South.   

[Matt Barnhart (kid)]

I will say that I like what I've seen on defense.  We've improved on that side of the ball...

	2005	2006
Opp. PPG	27.3	16.4
Opp. YPG	391.3	296.2
Opp. Pass%	54.8	45.2

Obviously I'm worried about our offense, but I certainly wouldn't say it's because of Colbert leaving (who I have a lot of respect for, don't get me wrong) or any particular person or position.  It's simply a lack of focus.  We have the same mix of pass and run that we did last season (around 60-40 run to pass), we take care of the ball as much as we did last season and we have as much potential talent-wise as we did last season.

I think it has to do with what's going on upstairs (in their heads).  They came into a winning situation in 2003, 2004 or 2005 - not knowing what it was like to lose back in 1999 and prior.  We have just as much talent as we did in year's past, but instead of going into every game feeling like we had to prove something (like we did in year's past), we are letting our opponents do that and beat us in the process.

The feeling around campus is a cold one (not just because it's 40 degrees here, brr!).  We realize we've underachieved.  Unfortunately, the rest of this season and for the coming years, we're going to have to chase someone else instead of them chasing us.  Maybe that will work to our advantage?

[Snakehandler]

But we haven't played anybody that's any good.

[Snakehandler]

Not to get off topic but, anybody know whats the deal with all of the W&L guys wearing green wrist/bicep bands? Kinda clashes with the royal blue and white. I'm thinking its probably something gay.

[xbcdad]

Saturday was my first opportunity to see the the 06 Eagles.

First off let me congratulate E&H... as "kid " says "they won it!" No amount of previous wins and tradition made a difference to the the out come. They won it on the field. They were the better team on that day and that won't change until we get a chance to prove differently.

When it comes to analysis I think I find myself somewhere between snakehandler and kid. I didn't sense much urgency on the part of the players, offense in particular. Just sorta walking around like "that's right ...we bad" no running on or off the field back to the huddle, no body on the sideline firing up the troops.

I think it has to do with what's going on upstairs (in their heads).  They came into a winning situation in 2003, 2004 or 2005 - not knowing what it was like to lose back in 1999 and prior.  We have just as much talent as we did in year's past, but instead of going into every game feeling like we had to prove something (like we did in year's past), we are letting our opponents do that and beat us in the process.

Matt's comment pretty much summarized what I was observing and the rationale for it. If lack of effort is "gift wrapping" that's in the eye of the beholder. Credit to E&H for doing what they needed to do to win. I guess we'll get to find out on Saturday whether the rest of the league has become that much better, whether BC is not as good, or whether the Eagles are very talented but have been under performing.

[Matt Barnhart (kid)]

But we haven't played anybody that's any good.

True, but did we last year during the regular season?  I think it's a fair comparison.

[Jacketlawyer]

As much as I hate to say it, I don't think R-M is going to be beating Bridgewater this year. . . .

The Eagles have an excellent (EXCELLENT) chance to win out.

[casper]

But we haven't played anybody that's any good.

Then that's a sad testimonial.  I guess you got it right the first time....your team sucks and they just layed down and gave it to Emory.

Sorry for the confusion.

[religion_major]

But we haven't played anybody that's any good.

Let me add my take on Snake's statement.  Since 2000, Bridgewater fans have come to see Bridgewater College as a national powerhouse.  By national standard we haven't played anybody good, but that just shows that this year's BC team was not as good as the previous years.  But I regress, a little humility never hurt anybody in the long run...

[abnrgr]

All you Eagles
God you guys sound like the Denver Bronco's fans out here in CO. They want to kill off Plummer and they are 5-1.

It's not over (cannot believe I am saying this) until NOV. Win out. This conference is not used to somebody else winning so they just might not pull it off. Matt has shown you the numbers. Somebody will gag on the big one before its over.

What's next bridge jumping?

Anyway go Quakers

[Llamaguy]

Good one ABNRGR!

In a nutshell here is my take on BC's season:

We started the season with a new offensive coordinator and a proven QB without a seasoned back-up. We had studs at all the other skilled positions and a competent offensive line. We knew we couldn't take a chance at getting our QB hurt so the play calling has been close to the vest. Yes we have backs who can run and an o-line that can block, but not and I qoute Winston Young, "when they have 9 men in the box and the safeties are 6 yrds off the line of scrimmage." We went to a basic gameplan to protect Highfill from injury and try to use the run game to our advantage. We have not run the option much at all, again trying to protect the QB, and have not passed much on firstdown. We became too predictable and needed to execute in order to succeed in this senario. Is anyone at fault? I say not totally! If we run the same offense as the 2005 playoffs, Highfill gets hurt in game 1 or 2 where are we now? I will admit that the execution of a few open passes during the season would have helped but everyone is human. You could probably pick 5 plays every game that made a difference so no one play cost BC in thier losses. The fact is Emory & Henry showed last week that BC can no longer line up and run over the ODAC with a basic game plan of run as the first, second, and third option.
Personally I think Coach Soltis opens up the playbook this week and we see and unbridled BC offense that throws caution to the wind and goes for a much needed "W". Will they be successful? I don't have the answer yet, but I can't wait until Saturday to see the battle!

Go Eagles!

[BCeagle79]

Is Highfill prone to injury? When I've seen him play all out he looks good. I didn't think the 2nd team QB is all that bad. If I recall Highfill didn't get much playing time last year until Lewis got hurt and he did a good job.

I am very hopeful that the playbook is opened up this weekend. After W&L we have two games on the road. Is it possible that for the first time this century we could finish 5-5?

Come on EAGLES, we your fans believe in you. You've got to find it within you to believe!

GO EAGLES!!!

[Matt Barnhart (kid)]

Llama,

I took a look at the first game of the year (McDaniel) and most recent game (Emory & Henry) when it came to first downs.

In our 29 first down attempts against the Green Terror, we threw 11 times and ran for the other 18.  In the 11 passes, four were incomplete (leaving 2nd-and-10s) with the seven completions averaging 12.3 yards.  With the 18 rushes, 14 went for 3-plus yards while all 18 averaged a gain of 7.6 yards.

In our 21 first down attempts against the Wasps, we threw 6 times and ran for the other 15.  In the 6 pass attempts, two were incomplete while the other four averaged 23.8 yards a completion.  The 15 run plays only gained 2.8 yards a carry, while nine went for 3-plus yards.

Clearly a big change in what we gained on the ground from the first game to the last one ... but we still run nearly 70% of the time and pass the other 30% on first downs.  We do spread the ball around, though, with five different rushers and five different receivers being used during the McDaniel and Emory & Henry games.

[Eh-You]

Obviously I'm worried about our offense, but I certainly wouldn't say it's because of Colbert leaving (who I have a lot of respect for, don't get me wrong) or any particular person or position.  It's simply a lack of focus. 

I know my friends from the South Region Poll may be surprised that I can go back this far in ODAC history but wasn't Bridgewater pretty unfocused under M Clark before Coach Colbert? I'm not saying that Colbert leaving kills their offense b/c he's not calling plays anymore, I think it hurts much deeper than that. Pre - Colbert Bridgewater football wasn't exactly a thing of beauty (under Clark) and time will tell whether Mike Clark reverts back to Colbertless Mike Clark. And I'm not piling on - I said this when Colbert got there (ask a late 90's BC player whether their success was b/c of Colbert or not) and I said this as soon as he left - but nobody would listen until the last two weeks.

[Snakehandler]

Ouch!