waking up 2-0

[roanoke]

Midway through last night's game things were not looking particularly encouraging. I thought back to all those years when the SEC made us open with a league opponent. Dreams died early in many of those seasons. I am glad we got to open with four out of conference games this year. While we have set two of them back to back on the road (two thousand miles apart) we did get to play the first two at home and a 2-0 start is just what the doctor ordered. Football is very much about confidence. Being 2-0 without playing great does build confidence.

Last night's game also revealed how thin our margin of error is. In the first half, at home, we were held to 135 total yards of offense. Our qb was below 50%, looked confused and unconfident. Our refusal to recognize or check down out of a run up the middle into a run blitz had gotten our starting rb injured and our offense looked a shambles. This was almost all poor play calling.

It is incredible how much better an offense can look when the OC calls plays it can execute versus plays he wants to execute. In the first half we showed we had learned little from the Hawaii experience and we were bound and determined to run straight up the middle and execute slow-developing downfield throws from the pocket. This was varied with RPO's where our qb did not run, which amounted to more runs up the middle and pocket passes downfield. It was not just stubborn and uncreative - it was allowing a weaker opponent to load the box and stop everything up the middle - which was essentially everything.

I would like to have heard whatever happened at halftime. Did Lynch figure it out on his own? Did Coach Lea lower the boom? In the second half, we ran wide, we threw quick slants and screens that got the ball directly into our playmakers hands. We ran jet sweeps. And then, with the whole field in play, the middle opened up. Football is complicated, but it is not rocket science. Do what you can do. We are pretty good at quick release routes and running wide. We are not good at smashmouth/pro style and it is inadvisable for us to try to outmuscle SEC opponents anyway. If the Mason years taught us nothing else, it should be this. I hope we do not squander all the talent on the offensive side of the ball trying to power the middle and throw long downfield next week. We will not be able to give away a half and recover against any future opponents. That is what we got away with last night.

And that is not a slight to A&M. Honestly, they played hard and admirably. And they exposed some problems. I might add that their #60 was a heck of a player - not a real big nose tackle, but our success in running came only after he got banged up. He was very solid.

Injuries hurt us too. De'Rickey Wright got hurt early - it looked like maybe an ankle got rolled? He did not return. Patrick Smith did return from getting his shoulder hammered. He played well - the play where he got hurt should never have happened... we should have checked into a screen or quick throw, not run into the teeth of a run blitz. Sedrick Alexander looked very, very good. And he benefitted most from our decision to run wide. He got his first two TDs. Let's hope there will be a bunch more. I wish we would throw to our backs more - but maybe we are hiding that for a big reveal next week?

Alexander was not the only young blood that showcased last night. Kamrean Johnson caught a TD. Martel Hight had a return that was head-turning. Langston Patterson had a lot of tackles. A frosh special teamer, Longwell, blocked a punt that arguably turned the game. Trudell Berry looked good out on the field. So did Bryce Cowan.

The level of competition will go up from here - but special teams have been a bright spot. We had one blocked punt last night and possibly a second tipped one? Two weeks in a row special teams have really made the game-turning play. We have a stable of return guys. There is much to feel good about. Consistently deep kickoffs would be nice.

I return to the offense here - because Swann looked great when asked to execute the plays that are available. Low hanging fruit. The quick stuff, the open throws, the tempo. He looks less impreswsive on the long downfield plays - and he locks in too early and does not see the field. Last night again, we went deep on a key play and misfired when an eight yard curl was uncovered. It is clear he is being coached to go deep - but we need to see the field and take the uncovered receivers. In Swann's favor, under siege, he did have one great play where he avoided a blitz, had nothing deep and found the open man under duress. Throwing into the deep, we had one red zone INT and a couple of dropped INTs that won't be dropped by SEC defenses. Locking in is a bad habit.

I can be a broken record - but our braintrust needs to lose the idea that there is something unmanly about outthinking the opponent and using speed or tricks and misdirection. Smashmouth just isn't what we do best. If we do what we do best, we are a much improved team.

Finally, the score here was interesting. With three minutes left and the score 47-10, I understood A&M kicking the field goal. It stopped the bleeding after we had scored 28 straight - they were not going to win and wanted something to show for that last drive. The fact that the line was -35 did make it an interesting call. Just sayin'.

After two night games, we basically have a morning game next week. It is a very big game. I hope we can deliver our A-game. Hope is still alive. And that matters.

[cc11316]

Spot-on summary. I did find it bizarre with the field goal at the end that gook it from a 37 point lead to a 34 point lead, especially when I understood the unofficial line was around 36. Even the announcer on ESPN+ made a comment to the effect of that field goal may matter to some as I took it to mean gamblers rather than the A&M team, fans or staff.

[roanoke]

I caught that reference too. I laughed out loud when the announcer said it! It was definitely a reference to gamblers.

[shelbz75]

One thing that bothered us was all the pre snap shifting A&M was doing, I will be honest that is tough to execute and difficult to execute against especially on the OL where much communication is involved. I thought offensively in the first half we went "freeze" cadence too much where we would clap and then check over to get the play, A&M timed up their shifts off of that. We started having success when we went tempo and began running more of our wide zone scheme on the OL. The tempo nullified any pre snap movement with the front and we caught them a few times lined up out of position due to tempo. I am not one to shout and fuss at the games because I coach as well and I am not in the meetings, I liked the freeze cadence at first but I sat there the whole first half wondering why we didn't go more tempo. We will have to be better vs Wake but credit to Alabama A&M for bringing a tough game plan to deal with, we will see some of that again later on down the line I imagine. I also imagine we haven't totally tipped our hand on what all we can do offensively either.

[coachinwaiting]

It's great to be 2-0. The alternatives of either 1-1 or 0-2 against the competition so far would be quite disheartening. But, at the same time, AAMU is a much better opponent from the FCS than some of the FBS programs that could have easily been on the schedule instead. Over the last few seasons, they've competed admirably in their conference and that's the best way IMO to judge their commitment to the sport. They have recruited to compete where they must, and I thought they offered challenges to VU in the first half that were beneficial to the Commodores development.

The first 6 quarters of this season weren't exactly stellar for Vandy, but the second half of Saturday's game appeared to be a lot closer to what Coach Lea probably has in mind moving forward. Wake is going to be a measuring stick for the team and for the season to this point, but I'm optimistic. It has been awhile since Vanderbilt has been able to sport a 3-0 or 4-0 record to begin the football season, but this year at least offers that possibility.

[roanoke]

One thing that bothered us was all the pre snap shifting A&M was doing, I will be honest that is tough to execute and difficult to execute against especially on the OL where much communication is involved. I thought offensively in the first half we went "freeze" cadence too much where we would clap and then check over to get the play, A&M timed up their shifts off of that. We started having success when we went tempo and began running more of our wide zone scheme on the OL. The tempo nullified any pre snap movement with the front and we caught them a few times lined up out of position due to tempo. I am not one to shout and fuss at the games because I coach as well and I am not in the meetings, I liked the freeze cadence at first but I sat there the whole first half wondering why we didn't go more tempo. We will have to be better vs Wake but credit to Alabama A&M for bringing a tough game plan to deal with, we will see some of that again later on down the line I imagine. I also imagine we haven't totally tipped our hand on what all we can do offensively either.

This is a really good point. A&M did do a very good job of shifting pre-snap and it was effective.

This also sort of falls into the category of “telegraphing” - or, more to the point, not telegraphing. And A&M’s tactics certainly illustrated that surprise adjustments can cross up even an experienced, bigger opponent.

I felt like against Hawaii our defense telegraphed a lot - and Hawaii read the handwriting and took advantage. This was less of a problem against A&M. Just the same, maybe the success A&M had adjusting and crossing us up will be a good reminder that we can do it too.

We have not, to date, done a lot of showing blitz and dropping out, etc. As you note, maybe we are saving stuff for tougher games - our d certainly was much in control after the first drive… except for that one bomb.

Still, I would like to see us cross up opposing offenses more - and show them what is coming less. I am a big fan of the element of surprise - trying to “out execute” is fine, but the private school in the SEC needs to out-smart its opponents too.