Listening to the game

MSUcantouchus · Post by **MSUcantouchus** » Sun Sep 12, 2004 9:59 am

The thing I would like to point out is that Kramer has mostly run the ball at the beginning of the seasons and that has translated into slow starts and losses. Only when we had to start throwing the ball late in those games did we look better. Last year I remember Kramer saying he made mistakes in the gameplans for these opening games. I took this to mean (and believe he ment this too) that he should have developed the passing game earlier. That is what I think he is doing. He is trying to get the passing game on track right away. As we all saw alot of the time we passed on the majority of the play yesterday. Like everyone else I hated what I saw yesterday but I saw improvement as things went along, and I hope the passing game improves over the week.

Milton looked better than dominick I thought. Faster and quicker cuts.

catatac · Post by **catatac** » Sun Sep 12, 2004 11:19 am

peedintunnel wrote:The thing I would like to point out is that Kramer has mostly run the ball at the beginning of the seasons and that has translated into slow starts and losses. Only when we had to start throwing the ball late in those games did we look better. Last year I remember Kramer saying he made mistakes in the gameplans for these opening games. I took this to mean (and believe he ment this too) that he should have developed the passing game earlier. That is what I think he is doing. He is trying to get the passing game on track right away. As we all saw alot of the time we passed on the majority of the play yesterday. Like everyone else I hated what I saw yesterday but I saw improvement as things went along, and I hope the passing game improves over the week.

Milton looked better than dominick I thought. Faster and quicker cuts.

That's true, and I am confident that the talent is there, but I ws hoping for a faster start unlike we've had the past two years. The frustrating thing is that the O looked a lot better during the Spring in G.F. IMO. On a positive note, they say the most improvement comes between games 1 and 2. Also, yo're right om the improvememt, they did MUCH better during the 2nd half.

raincat · Post by **raincat** » Sun Sep 12, 2004 1:47 pm

It sounded like 19-0 was as good as it could have gotten yesterday. What's disturbing is considering if the defense hadn't ruturned an iterception for a score, blocked two field goals and stopped them at the 2, 0-2 Division II ADAMS STATE could have taken us into overtime @ 13-13 on our own field, in our home opener!

iaafan · Post by **iaafan** » Sun Sep 12, 2004 5:48 pm

I wouldn't put too much weight on this game. Not yet at least. A lot of things happened and were happening that caused MSU's offense look poor. You only have four players back. Of the seven new starters none saw the field for more than a few plays and three are transfers. The bobbled snap - the second since fall practice, the inability to get on the field due the INT for TD, the hole after stopping ASC on the goal line.

I wouldn't have put too much weight on the game if MSU had come out and drove for four TDs in the first either. That would've just given the offense a false feeling of being better than they are, setting up a big fall vs. Cal Poly.

Still, Domineck, Morris, Gathing, ran well when they got settled. Guinn, Gatewood and Roosevelt seem to have more ability than Turnquist, Smith and Sullivan. This offense will never be confused with the St. Louis Rams of a few years ago, but if it can generate 325 yards a game MSU will be in business.

If Dorowski and Lulay continue to kick/punt well, the defense will be better than a year ago simply because of the field position.

Helcat72 · Post by **Helcat72** » Sun Sep 12, 2004 8:08 pm

Travis also has to pay attention to his mechanics...set his feet before he throws. ON roll outs he seems to make the ball fade and spin sideways. He had receivers breaking into the clear toward the middle of the field if the ball hadn't fades out of bounds. If he would have thrown directly over the top he might have had some good receptions.

Having someone in his face may be one reason some of his throws were off. He admitted that he got hit a couple of times and that he lost his cool a little. The O-line has to instill some confidence in him so he doesn't start peeking at the rush. Likewise the receivers need some confidence catching the ball too. I'm not sure how they get it...but it better come quick!

Is it the offense, or the ability of the receivers that won't allow them to get wide open? I keep seeing teams that naturally work their receivers into the open at least once in a while. Saturday I don't think they were ever more than a yard or two from the D backs. Was Adam's St that good? Did we not run routes that would show too much to Cal PolY? Or was it the fault of our offensive scheme? I'm afraid to find out! I suppose we'll find out in the next few weeks.

CARDIAC_CATS · Post by **CARDIAC_CATS** » Sun Sep 12, 2004 8:43 pm

Helcat72 wrote:Travis also has to pay attention to his mechanics...set his feet before he throws. ON roll outs he seems to make the ball fade and spin sideways. He had receivers breaking into the clear toward the middle of the field if the ball hadn't fades out of bounds. If he would have thrown directly over the top he might have had some good receptions.

Having someone in his face may be one reason some of his throws were off. He admitted that he got hit a couple of times and that he lost his cool a little. The O-line has to instill some confidence in him so he doesn't start peeking at the rush. Likewise the receivers need some confidence catching the ball too. I'm not sure how they get it...but it better come quick!

Is it the offense, or the ability of the receivers that won't allow them to get wide open? I keep seeing teams that naturally work their receivers into the open at least once in a while. Saturday I don't think they were ever more than a yard or two from the D backs. Was Adam's St that good? Did we not run routes that would show too much to Cal PolY? Or was it the fault of our offensive scheme? I'm afraid to find out! I suppose we'll find out in the next few weeks.

We will know this week! Can't judge the offense on the first game. Offense usually lacks behind the defenses early on and we have some youngsters in there.

This is a huge game this weekend. We need to be 2-0 going down into CSU and then playing the next week at ISU. This game is in OUR house and nobody comes into our house and gets a win (especially with our DEFENSE).

Lets fill the stands this weekend again! AWESOME ATMOSPHERE LAST WEEK FOR THE OPENER. Bring your lawyers/your mother in laws/your Griz friends/your kids. Lets pack it and BE LOUD AGAIN!

GO CATS!

Bleedinbluengold · Post by **Bleedinbluengold** » Sun Sep 12, 2004 8:48 pm

Good point about the crown at the stadium. It could most definitely affect the throws - especially if they haven't practiced on the field much this fall.

Good thoughts on remembering what Krames said last year about the game plans, throwing, running, etc. However, my stupid opinion is that with a young O Line and rookie RBs, run blocking and running are much easier than pass blocking and picking up blitzes. Just a thought. I still say that running plays will be easier to execute at this point - but then again, I don't have the benefit of film, so perhaps it was all just bad.

You know what - if those receivers decide to catch those balls that hit their hands, the offense will roll. You just can't get into any rythm if you can't catch.

I have confidence that Bailey's offense and his play calling would roll up 500 yards and 40 points a game if the players executed. I'm wondering, though, if he's trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. That's not a slam on our guys. All I'm saying is maybe that part of being a good to great coach is understanding what your guys are capable of at any point during their career. Kind of like a-crawling-before-walkin- before-running-kinda-thing.

Poly's gonna be tough - real tough.

wbtfg · Post by **wbtfg** » Mon Sep 13, 2004 4:17 pm

Anyone know why Clive Lowe didn't play last week? He looked like a monster in the final scrimmage this year. I'd love to see him in there chasing some people down.

Post by **SonomaCat** » Mon Sep 13, 2004 4:22 pm

Wisdom teeth pulled, major swelling, not feeling good. I think I read that he should be back this week.