Saturday, November 08, 2014

Crushed by the Cards

In my preview I wrote that we were playing with house money. It doesn't feel that way when we lose. We are not good enough to have an off night and still win. We also have no hope of winning if Murphy doesn't play well...and he didn't. There is a lot to digest. I will have my thoughts and grades up late Sunday.


Thomas said...

The atrocious kicking game had a huge impact on the game. If we make our extra points it's 31-21 and we kick a 20 yd FG on 4th down with 6 or 7 minutes left to make it 31-24. Anything that happened after Murphy's 4th down INT is irrelevant. It cost us a chance to still be in the game.

eagleboston said...

Not to mention the blocked punt before the half, Thomas.

I've been going to Alumni for 1 game each year for well over a decade. I've seen a few losses, but none this bad. The program still has a long way to go and we may be two years away from competing for a division. Losing 4 games at home is hard to fathom. I guess the good news is we have won all of our road games and our next one is on the road.

Thomas said...

Yeah, I don't know why I failed to mention that. The whole clock management at the end of the first half was Spaz-esque. I like the idea of being the aggressor but there was no need for Murphy to be dropping back to pass from our own 30 with 1 timeout and 45 seconds with a kicker who can't make an extra point.

CT said...

Ryan Day was pretty bad. The Oline could get no push through the middle and he insisted on trying to attack just that area. Over and over and...

The crowd was pretty sparse, too. Guess I should expect that by now.

Not enough talent in the secondary.

Murphy. Ah well. You get what you pay for.

Daz had no reason to go for two with three mins left in the 3rd qtr. Kick the PAT and make it 24-20. Then you aren't forced to go for it on 4th down trailing 31-19. Kick the short FG and get the possession back. Dumb dumb dumb.

Thought this Oline would be better. Ryan Day? No expectations. Gotta recruit.

Joe Gravellese said...

that was ugly. Lack of talent in the secondary was glaring. I think this D scheme can be successful with better talent in the secondary. As is, it only works when you get pressure on the QB... and it didn't today, at all. And then our most important offensive player goes out and has probably his worst game (admittedly not aided by meh O-line play).

And so there you go. There was lots of other stuff that aggravated me about this one but when you boil it down those were the two main factors.

I had no problem w BC going for 2 and I think at this point they should go for two every time unless maybe they're down by 1 and they just scored to potentially tie a game. The extra point situation is inexcusible 10 games into a season.

Eagleboston --- if this is the worst loss you've witnessed then you really lucked out during the Spaz years with what games you went to...because there were some doozies. At least we had the illusion of being in this one for awhile today.

Long way to go and a lot of room to improve. But if Murphy has a good game on the ground at FSU anything is possible

BCDoubleEagle said...

Beat Syracuse (3-7) and win a bowl game to take some momentum into the offseason, that's all I care about now.

Eagle 1 said...

After we beat USC, I remember one of the guys who runs BC Interruption declaring that our running game was so good, we wouldn't need a passing game. Sure.

mod34b said...

Eagle1 - the BCI guys know more about hockey than football.

but, as planned, BC was in a position to win at the start of the 4Q. Based on FSU and other games, we expected L'ville line to tire by then. But it was the opposite -- it was our guys who lost their edge.

As for the defense, same old bad pass coverage schemes. I may be mistaken, but i don't recall Keyes ever blitzing with success?

Tough game to watch, but we will see these guys every year.... i wish we still had Maryland in the division instead of Louisville.... FSU, Clemson, Louisville -- will be tough sledding

Play calling was not inspired....but play execution was worse.... no pass protection, Murphy not able to deal with pressure....

JBQ said...

Whack! Shellac! Matt Millen solved the PAT problem. With e kickers, there has to be a common denominator. That is the holder Murphy. He doesn't rotate the laces. The kicker kicks the laces and off to the side it goes. Millen also said that Parker should have been played head up with a lot of hand checking until they threw a flag and then do it again. He was running free like a deer in Yellowstone. How about that call on the L QB who threw the ball at the pylon. Instead of an illegal forward pass, Millen believed that it should have been a fumble and then a touchback for hitting the pylon. Murphy had a "bad day and black rock". The defense continues to play well. Wade looked like a "deer in the headlights". It's now Jameis with or without his "code of conduct" hearing.

eagle1331 said...

Ever loss - and even a lot of the wins - it is the same story:

1) We completely lack depth and the boys are done halfway through the 3rd. Either we don't have the players, or we're not rotating them enough, and it is coming back to kill us the last 30 or so minutes of playing time.

2) Time and Time again, the coaches have said "we had a great gameplan and just couldn't execute," or some variation of that. Yes, the execution is a problem, but so is only having 1 gameplan and not adapting when it doesn't work. It is clear we don't have the passing dimension to a level we can rely on it late in games, so why keep putting us in a position to do so? That is squarely on the coaches, not the players executing (or failing to). Conversely, when we come out with only 1 game plan, and it is the same 1 dimensional one (with a few wrinkles) week in and week out, it makes it incredibly easy for the other teams to scheme for us.

One dimensional teams don't win championships. It is plain and simple. Until Day installs the 2nd dimension, or we get an OC who can (like Logan was), we will not win the ACC Championship. Balance is needed. Day doesn't believe in that, and Daz could say as much as he wants that "we're working on the passing game," but until he proves it, he is all talk and Vines, not substance.

JDK said...

The end of the first half and beginning of the second half were just crushing. We moved the ball well, but Day stuck with the run in goal-line situations only to leave us with an obvious pass on 4th an goal. D just couldn't get off the field enough.

Tough loss but it's important for the Eagles to shake it off and be loose going into Tallahassee and pull off an upset!

Hoib said...


I don't think it was dumb to go for 2. You're assuming a made kick in your argument, w/ this group that's quite a reach.

Eagle 1331

We only have 71 scholarship players, out of a possible 85. I think that's the reason for the running out of gas. Daz has said on several occasions that he doesn't expect to compete for the division till year 5. This thing is a work in progress.

blist said...

Spaz left the cupboard bare, to use GDF's favorite expression for defending that guy. We've followed every loss with two straight wins this year -- let's keep it up!

mod34b said...

Hoib. Where are u getting the 71/85 stat ?

Gotta link?

eagle1331 said...

There is no way we are only playing with 71 scholarship players. That is the same as a whole class of scholarships short. The same if not worse than the NCAA punishment for PSU. I don't know your source for that but if it is true, which I can't possibly see it being, we have a whole other set of issues.

Hoib said...


Daz said it in his pressed after Tech game. ATL had a link to it in a post a few back. That's also where he talked about the 5 yr plan. He also said that in the BC mag interview before the season. Hope this helps.

CT said...

Find it hard to believe we have 71. What are we? USC?

Come on.

You never go for two in the third qtr.

And yes, a FG from 20 yds would have kept momentum and the defense engaged. Made it a one possession game, even after the UL TD. Dumb. Never go for two in the 3rd. It's bad math. It's coaches out-thinking themselves. If that's possible. So many stupid people. Keep it simple.

Anyway. The bigger problem is this Oline. Murphy has covered up a lot of their deficiencies.

Why expect a passing game? Did you last year? When we were running into a 9 man box on nearly every play? This is no different, except our best athlete plays QB not RB. Couldn't throw then, can't throw now. Just a different scheme.

This team will be good when they recruit a defense. Defenses travel.

This conference is pretty bad. It's too bad we're average, too.

mod34b said...

Hoib -

I checked the stats. I compared the current roster to those who were listed as recruits on Rivals for a particular year. I assume all of the grad students are scholarship players, and in all the remaining classes only those originally recruited and listed on Rivals are true scholarship players (i know Dazz ‘gives’ extra schollies away to hard working walk-ons. I did not count those as true scholarship players)

Total school players: 73!

gs 13
Sr 9
Jr 13
So 11
Fr 27

total 73

I think my quick “back of the matchbook” analysis works…but maybe i am overlooking something to get this approximation.

mod34b said...


total of 73 scholarship players

thanks Spaz!


Hoib said...

Daz, said 71, I think he would know. Are u accounting for players dismissed? Anyway u cut it, I think it explains some of the 2nd half struggles.


Does your math assume making the PAT and the 20 yard field goal are made? If so, as a former president was known to say, that's flawed math. We have a high school kicking game in my book. Allot of high schools just go for 2. Wish it weren't so but that's how I see it. I think fixing the kicking game is priority #1 for next year.

mod34b said...

Hoib. I am agreeing with you! Duh

73 is just as low as 71. Very surprising.

mod34b said...

Yes I account (and do not count) dismissed players.

My analysis is of the current BC roster and I count 73 players who were listed on rivals as recruited.

eagle1331 said...

"listed on rivals as recruited"

So your total of 73 likely leaves out:
- Transfers (Murphy et al)
- walk-ons that have been rewarded (Steve Aponovicious types)
- preferred walk-ons ("recruits" that don't get a scholarship right away)
- players who were recruited and had career ending injuries that are not on the active roster

mod34b said...

i included all Grad students which i think inlcudes all transfers on the roster - Transfers (Murphy et al)

not included - walk-ons that have been rewarded (Steve Aponovicious types)

not included - preferred walk-ons ("recruits" that don't get a scholarship right away)

not on roster and not included - players who were recruited and had career ending injuries that are not on the active roster

Hoib said...

It's kind of ironic, due to Spazes ineptitude we're kind of on probation w/o ever having done anything wrong! Good news in all this is that it allows for Daz to go out and get more of his kind of guys.