The Hangover
Well, it could've been worse. We could have lost that game.
The question for me is whether I would be this bothered by the game had we not had the experience of last year. If LSU was coming off a 10-2 campaign, getting an ugly win against a Pac-10 team in a game that ended well past midnight wouldn't bother me in the least. But our antennae are up for any sign of disaster.
I'm not checking the boxscore yet, as I like to have a full "Behind the Numbers" post during the week. So this is all off observation and gut. It's a good starting point before we actually look at the numbers in a cold, clinical manner. This was definitely a win that felt like a loss.
In that vein, let's just talk about all of the bad stuff right now and we'll take you back to the shire over the course of the week. Because, all in all, I'm not too unhappy with a sloppy win. Sloppy wins in week one don't bother me as a rule, especially wins that were never seriously in doubt. Let's not lose sight of the fact UW only touched the ball once in the second half with a chance to tie the game, and that was their first possession of the third quarter.
OK, that was a long lead up to the griping, so it comes after the break.
The pass rush was terrible. Absolutely worthless. Richard made apologies for it in his initial thoughts, but I completely and whole heartedly disagree. The pass rush was almost completely non-existent. Locker had all day to pass and even worse, when his protection broke down after what seemed like ten seconds in the pocket, he consistently was able to scramble for five to ten yards. To review, no pass rush AND no containment. It was the worst of both worlds.
The offensive line must be pretty happy with how terrible the defensive line played because it took some of the focus off of their performance. I'm going to let the fact Ciron Black apparently is on a different snap count as everyone else slide as first game jitters, but the line was unable to get any sort of push for the running game after the first drive. Jefferson didn't have a whole lot of time in the pocket.
Admittedly, the play calling was beyond vanilla. It was so white bread, Wonder Bread considered suing Crowton for copyright infringement. The playbook seemed to only have four plays: run middle, option, draw, and out route. That could certainly contribute to the offensive line looking poor, but they completely failed to fire off the ball. That's not play calling, that's effort.
The tackling, of course, was the worst thing about the game. For a defense that spent most of the offseason being horribly maligned for last season's effort, you'd think they would come out extra motivated to show last season was, well, last season. Instead, it was the same lethargic effort we got most of last season. Was the late start on the west coast a factor? Maybe. But it was a pretty disturbing sign. LSU had every reason to be motivated and come out to make a statement, yet they failed to do so, particularly on defense.
Charles Scott getting blown backwards on the goalline was one of those "oh, crap" moments that I'd rather not get into. That is the sort of thing that isn't supposed to happen. I want to blame the line, but Scott also had no forward momentum. He doesn't look like the same power back from early last year. That needs to be fixed immediately.
Hell, even the punting sucked. It was that sort of game. But even with all of the poor tackling, poor line play, and unimaginative play calling, LSU won this game with relative ease. There was never a moment that Washington really had a chance to win. They hung around all game, they just couldn't make the game interesting. The truly myopic fans will claim LSU would have lost if not for turnovers. Maybe that's true, but Scott lost a fumble deep in UW territory and the UW fumble eventually lead to the field position giving the Huskies a field goal anyway. And it's not like LSU was some passive observer, especially the INT. Jacob Cutrera made that play happen. Considering LSU lost so many games last season due to their own self-inflicted wounds, it was nice to see it turned around. The points don't count any less if the defense scores them. If you believe LSU was lucky to win because of a pick six, then you must think the team should have be 10-3 last year.
It's just one game. And it was still a win. But it doesn't really feel like it. I'm going to cure this hangover by drinking some more bourbon and not thinking about it anymore.
0 recs |
13 comments
|
Comments
I was going to write another big write-up, but I'll save it..
I think our defensive line played better than you give credit for, and that’s fine. It’s something that can be watched in the coming weeks. I saw us getting into the backfield quite a bit, and while we didn’t often get to Locker, we frequently made him hurry a throw or get out of the pocket. The problems came when he completed the hurried throws or got positive yards when flushed out of the pocket. They also ran a lot of counters and misdirection to take advantage of our aggressive line play. And btw, I like our line playing more aggressively.
I think we lacked a certain amount of intensity from many of the players. Nevis was good. Peterson was great. I saw Alexander get into some plays. Cutrera made a huge play and lots of other nice-sized plays. Kelvin Sheppard played well (and surprisingly often). We still have to figure out what’s going on at cornerback opposite Peterson, because they completed a lot of passes to the Hawkins/Eugene side of the field. Also, Chad Jones did very little, and the strong safety spot is still a work in progress.
Next week will tell us a lot more about this team.
Father. Husband. Lawyer. Nerd.
by Richard Pittman on Sep 6, 2009 11:48 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
The Intensity
Was the most disappointing thing. Everybody treated this like a scrimmage, from the coaches on down. And it was clear from snap one that this was Washington’s Super Bowl.
If that part doesn’t improve next week, this season will get worse.
by Billy Gomila on Sep 6, 2009 1:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
So there were a lot of negatives that I can put a positive spin on, and some obvious positives.
I disagree that our pass rush was horrible. I think our pass rush was inconsistent. Maybe this was us respecting Locker’s scrambling ability? Maybe the problem wasn’t Earl Lane last year?
The D really missed some tackles. But when we hit, boy did we hit. I haven’t seen us deliver hits like those on opposing offenses in a while. It was nice.
Our D-line needs to learn how to contain runs. We let them bounce runs to the outside all night and they took it. Florida will score more than 51 on us this year if this is not fixed.
Our LBers looked slim, trim and quicker than last year and played well. I’m starting to wonder if this “hungry team” means litterally “they are on a diet and craving cheeseburgers”
Peterson, stud.
Chad Jones, must have come down with “ghost flu”. Symptoms include dissapearing for 3hr periods of time. I thought he was ready to take his play to a different level? I hope that level isn’t the MLB…
I stand by my thought last night that the players really picked up on the vanilla game plan and responded accordingly. We didn’t look all that focused, we didn’t play with fire or enthusiasm, and never did we seem to be all that worried that we weren’t blowing this team out. The players respond to the coaches, and the coaches didn’t seem to have much fire either.
We dished out a pick six!!! I really want some sideline footage of J. Lee during that play. If I were Lee I would have broken out into a Riverdance. If I was any other member of the team, and saw Lee break out into a Riverdance, I’d have joined him.
Question: Would you rather have beaten UW 31-24 or lost to OK St 24-10? Ok St had a pathetic D last year, and UGA was supposed to have the best Oline in the conference. I’m confident UW will give other teams problems too, and I’m confident UGA and LSU will improve.
Miles said “Russell Shepard would see 8-10 snaps”. Maybe Russell suffered an eye injury and Les litterally meant, he’d only be able to focus long enough to see 8 or 10 plays of the game?
The only huge problem I saw was there were several plays where we had players bickering with each other. Ciron was jawing at JJ after a false start which was possibly a Jefferson screw up with the snap count since half the line jumped. Also it seemed that Keiland jawed with JJ once after a play. The team has seemed to back JJ all off-season so maybe the “jawing” was “constructive” but it didn’t appear that way.
TT, stud.
Lafell, the forgotten man.
Keilland, improved.
Scott, hindered by the blocking.
Jai, always in position to make the play.
Jai, has never made the play.
Having said all that, If I’m Auburn, Alabama, Mississipi State, Ole Miss, and Arkansas, I’m looking at the LSU game and licking my chops.
by LSU Jonno on Sep 6, 2009 11:51 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
One other thought...
Charles Scott getting blown backwards on the goalline was one of those “oh, crap” moments that I’d rather not get into. That is the sort of thing that isn’t supposed to happen. I want to blame the line, but Scott also had no forward momentum. He doesn’t look like the same power back from early last year. That needs to be fixed immediately.
Are you talking about the play where a UW defensive player shot through the line and hit Scott in the backfield, causing Scott to pull off a nice little spin move avoided a negative play and turning it into a positive play because he had no momentum when he was met by a second and third UW defensive player after he completed his spin move? (TAKING A DEEP BREATH) Because I thought “2008 Scott would have taken the loss of yardage instead of spinning for a gain of 1” Not saying your wrong on your opinion, I just saw that play differently.
by LSU Jonno on Sep 6, 2009 12:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think..
He was referring to the one time where CS was wrapped up at the legs and shoulders and the announcer said “I’ve never seen Scott blown backwards.” Which was totally wrong, because 1 Scott wasn’t blown backwards he just simply was halted, and 2 it was by two tacklers, we aren’t talking about a CB who blew Scott up here.
by Mikeno on Sep 6, 2009 12:06 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, that's the play I'm talking about, the openning drive I think.
by LSU Jonno on Sep 6, 2009 12:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
They were two different plays I think..
I remember the spin move you are mentioning and a whole separate play where Scott was halted by TWO defenders where after the announcer said "I’ve never seen Scott blown backwards."
Whoops, lol.
by Mikeno on Sep 6, 2009 12:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
"Licking my chops"
Which may work in our favor.
by Mikeno on Sep 6, 2009 12:03 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
They were two different plays I think..
I remember the spin move you are mentioning and a whole separate play where Scott was halted by TWO defenders where after the announcer said “I’ve never seen Scott blown backwards.”
by Mikeno on Sep 6, 2009 12:13 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
There was the two defender play.. and a third waiting to assist on the goalline
But I was actually concerned about some of his second quarter runs that were just the ordinary run-of-the-mill runs. He got no space and was just getting trucked. He stopped falling forward, probably from getting hit over and over at the line of scrimmage.
Fake Pundit. Real Fan.
http://www.andthevalleyshook.com
by Poseur on Sep 6, 2009 12:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I blame..
most of that on interior line play. It was obvious that UW was committed almost solely to the run when Scott was in, they also had a fairly big front 7, I also feel we didn’t do ourselves any favors by not using the option more or not utilizing any stretch runs.
by Mikeno on Sep 6, 2009 12:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Come to think of it..
There was the one time we ran a toss or was it a lead off of the tackle (can’t quite remember) where Scott was the feature back and it went for 8-10 yard run (I think) as well as a first. we should have stretched the UW defense out more with the run.
by Mikeno on Sep 6, 2009 12:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Where was the Intensity?
I’m not complaining about a win, but no one can say this game made us feel good.
Just winning (unlike GA) is not enough; I can handle a loss when there’s some intensity. But just showing up like that? UW dominated every part of that game!
We had ONE good offensive series, the last TD.
I’m trying to be positive here, but…
Looking forward to seeing week 2. Always some improvement there…isn’t there?
by TigerTex on Sep 6, 2009 6:13 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

by 

















