Sunday, November 09, 2014

Second viewing thoughts and grade report: Louisville

If we still had a shot at the division title, every BC fan would be agonizing over this loss. As poorly as BC played, it was still winnable. Louisville did not play all that well either. That doubles the frustration. I am not going to say the sky is falling though. This was more a case of all our issues coming together at once.

Offense: C-

This was Murphy's worst game as an Eagle and it wasn't just the INTs. His decisions on the options weren't great either. There were some huge holes open if he had kept the ball early. The passes and some of the decisions were obviously really rough. His few runs were decent. We just needed more of them. Wade saw a full drive. The game was over so we cannot read too much into it, but the passes were decent.

Hilliman didn't look hurt and showed nice burst, but didn't have explosive plays. Willis and Outlow didn't get enough touches to break a big play or be big factors. Wofford had a huge day. He had big catches plus did a good job blocking.

The WRs and Tight Ends were decent. Alston made some big plays. Darmstatter made a huge play. Bordner blocked well. There weren't a whole series of terrible drops. Crimmins made some nice plays.

During the game it felt like the OLine was terrible. They actually looked somewhat better watching it back. Betancourt had the best game of the group. Gallik was okay, but didn't get enough push. Kramer got called for a critical hold and in general was pushed around. Vardaro was not great. Silberman struggled too and continues to have problems with speedy guys.

The offense had some nice new wrinkles -- like the passes to Wofford and Darmstatter. We also saw an effort to get Alston involved. And there was some aggressive pass plays. However, we didn't do enough of what works best. I pointed out Murphy's issues, but sometimes it is simple and falls on the OC to make him do certain things like keeping the ball on the zone read or using more power runs. Louisville is a good defense and Murphy struggled, but overall this was not a good day for Day. We needed more quick scores and didn't get it. We also could have used some long extended drives at points and also failed.

Defense: C-

They didn't bring enough pressure but the DLine was BC's best unit again. Wujciak did a good job of moving the line and getting some penetration. Landry looked better. Mihalik made some plays. Moore lost contain a few times. Adebayo was fine. Kavalec wasn't as disruptive as he has been in other games. Gutapfel was okay.

Daniels made some plays, but had coverage issues like many of the others. Keyes was just okay and didn't make enough plays. Duggan played a little and looked slowed. Strizak was okay, but missed some tackles and got called for pass interference. Milano looked okay while getting more snaps. Strachan also made the most of his extra time (but did miss a tackle).

Simmons got picked on by Parker and the announcers, but I actually don't think he was terrible. I would have preferred to see Asprilla cover Parker a bit more, but Simmons just got beat by a really good playmaker. Asprilla had the best game of the DBs. Brown was active tackling but his coverage wasn't always tight. Moore was okay. Sylvia was fine, but we already knew about his coverage issues.

When online folks start pointing fingers at the coordinators, I tend to be a Don Brown critic and a Ryan Day apologist. This was not a good game for the Defense, but for the first time in a while, I don't think it was a scheme/play calling failure by Brown. I think this was a game where they targeted our weaknesses. Our back seven are not great in coverage and it showed. Guys were running free or often beating our guys in one-on-one matchups. Brown mixed things up a bit but zone or man really didn't matter. If Pitt was due to sloppy tackling and Colorado State was due to not mixing things up on passing downs. This was just getting beat.

Special Teams: F

It sounds like a knee-jerk reaction or me just being an angry blogger/fan, but there is a solution to the kicking problem. We've seen it this bad before. If you have someone that cannot make an extra point then you find someone on the team or on the campus who can. These are some of the 85 best athletes at the school. Many of whom did multiple things in high school. Someone on that roster can make an extra point 9 out of 10 times. Find him. 

The blocked punt killed all of the remaining BC momentum before the half. It was terrible blocking and even the design looked off (with only two back there). 

The only special teams highlight was Willis' returns. But those were a by product of Louisville scoring over and over again.

Overall: C-

Sh*t happens. I like to think that when it comes to BC sports, I have a pretty good feel of when a game gets sideways on us or when things are really falling apart. The only thing that worried me after this was Louisville's last score on Bonnafon's run. That was the first time where I really felt an Addazio team stopped fighting. The game was pretty much over already, but that still stuck with me. I am probably reading too much into it, but we'll see.

The Special Teams issues were already noted, but the whole useless possession at the end of the half was a killer. Being aggressive is the right thing to do. Get one more score. And BC moved the ball a bit but wasted time and plays with penalties. That left them in a no man's land of leaving Louisville time. Addazio only helped by calling a timeout. And then there was the block. It was not a text book two-minute drive.

Aside from the mistakes and the issues late, the whole team seemed off from the start. It wasn't a good night for anyone. I am glad we have an extra week to prepare for FSU. Everybody needs it.  


AlbanyEagle said...

I don't like to pick on individual players, but Simmons really did look pretty terrible. He was abused all night by Parker. Yes, he was overmatched talent-wise, but even if he made some kind of contact coming off the line it might have disrupted his rhythm a little.

Erik said...

I didn't watch it back on DVR, but the O Line sure looked like a D- or F from my seats.

Big Jack Krack said...

Agree. There were several times at least when the center went looking for someone to block, either left or right, leaving a gaping hole for the un-blocked defense to crush the ball carrier or pressure the QB.

It was very puzzling to me. Even though the play might call for the line to move in certain ways, instead of double teaming someone, you should block the guy right in front of you.

If the scheme isn't working, change it up for crying out loud.

NEDofSavinHill said...

BC is one win and two losses in night games. Mayors Warren and Walsh should restrict BC to one night contest a year. Public safety and neighborhood relations are compromised. New England weather in November can be tough. The electric bill is substantial and their carbon footprint increases. Remember when Al Gore was born there were 130,000 glaciers on the planet. That number has fallen to 130,000 today. 2. You can't win many games with five turnovers. The complexion of that contest changed with the Cards TD just before half. Much like the Pitt game. BC is not a come from behind offense. Eight wins is still doable(SYR and the bowl). Coughlan averaged 6 wins in the first two years of his rebuilding program. TOB didn't produce a winning team until year three. Daz is above 50% in his first two years.

BCFBfan said...

Simmons didn't have a great game. But, he is still one of our most valuable players on defense (being able to play corner and safety). He has really stepped up since B. Jones and J. Johnson have been lost. He won us the Wake game with his last minute pick. And I think he will rebound against FSU.

In terms of Parker, I really think this is a case where a great player, had a great game. His night wasn't a Simmons thing or a scheme thing or a BC thing. Parker has been doing this to everyone since he returned. He's a stud. I found this write-up below on ESPN and thought it was interesting.

From ESPN:
"Louisville wide receiver DeVante Parker. It's easy to wonder where this Cardinals team would be had Parker not gotten hurt during camp. The senior turned in another brilliant performance on Saturday, notching eight catches for 144 yards to go along with his first touchdown of the season. All Parker has done in his three games back is tally 25 catches for 490 yards, topping 130 yards in each of his three contests."

eagle1331 said...

I would love to hear a more in depth analysis on the kicking game and Murphy holding. Millen seemed to note (and other friends seemed to confirm) that Murphy doesn't put any effort in to turning the ball for the kicker. Now "Laces out, Dan" won't completely make or break an extra point, but it definitely has an affect on it, and if it is a common denominator, why not mix it up? Our starting QB shouldn't be out there on extra points anyway. It isn't like we've tried to fake one. That should be Wade's gig since he doesn't have a red shirt left to burn.

BCFBfan said...

In my experience, "Laces Out" might negatively influence the flight of the ball on a long field goal attempt. The ball travels such a long distance and this could cause the ball to hook or get pushed, etc.

But, not on an extra point. It shouldn't matter where the laces are you should be able to bang that puppy home. It is such a short kick. Is everyone telling me that all H.S. holders get the laces spun correctly, etc.?

It just seems like guys are pressing and now it's mental. But, we need this issue corrected because it is such a buzz kill. And it's really impacted us negatively. During the Clemson game (after the Rouse drop we should have kicked a game tying field goal) and the Louisville game it completely changed our strategy. It also could have costed us the Wake Forest game. We have too many positives going for us this year to have this keep rearing it's ugly head. Hopefully, someone steps up and gets this thing corrected.

eagleboston said...

MVP award for this week goes to ATL for having the stamina to watch that game a second time!

Most of the Alumni crowd didn't even bother to watch it all the first time.

AlbanyEagle said...

The crowd was atrocious. Down by 12, not even halfway through the 4th quarter, and people were running for the exits like rats off a sinking ship. It was cold, but not THAT cold. I didn't necessarily expect we'd come bak to win it, but it was still a real possibility at that point.

Like ATL, I subjected myself to a second viewing. The practically deserted stadium was an embarrassment.

Big Jack Krack said...

I agree 100%, Albany. We are pitiful, and a laughingstock when it comes to attendance. We are not much different than Wake Forest in that regard.

Our players and coaches deserve so much better.

I also agree to limit our night games, and make sure none of them take place in November.

But no matter whether it's nice in September or cold in November - we have a huge gorilla in the room. Poor fan support heading towards Templesque levels - at least that's how it seems.

Let's go, BC - let's go, Brad. Figure this out; straighten this out.

mod34b said...

Factoid 1: BC carries 5 kickers on the roster, and none can consistently make a PAT.

this is mind blowing to me that we cannot rely on getting a PAT.

Factoid 2: BC has 15 walk-ons, 15 graduate players and 11 (non walk on) seniors ...41 players that can be expended for 2015, but we only appear to have 23 commits so far for next year

Factoid 3: BC has something like 75 recruited scholarship players. NCAA allows 85. F'ing Spaz in addition to his overall suckitude, effectively put us, as Hoib noted, on probation by having an under talented under-recruited roster... no wonder our starters are tired

Hoib said...


Any way to figure out how many of those kickers have scholarships?

Tim said...

Re: attendance

This program has not been ranked in the top 25 in six years. We have been irrelevant for several years now.

We had no attendance problems in 2007, when we won 11 games and were ranked all year.

Put a quality product on the field and more fans will show up.

mod34b said...

Hoib --

Of the 5 kickers, 3 are walk-ons (Wilhelm, Mahar and Launceford), and 2 were recrutied (Howell and Knoll)

We also have two long snappers (Fisher and Skubal), and both are walk-ons

Our holder is Murphy.

my guess is the the Mega-Star of BC is not spending enough time with the low rent guys. Maybe just not enough time in the day to spend of PAT holding

By the way, BC is #128/#128 in NCAA FBS in PAT - missing 7, inlcuding 1 in each of last 5 games.

We are last in ACC by a huge margin. 2nd to last, Miami, missed 3.. we miss more that double

Bravesbill said...

Why hasn't Howell returned to kicking PATs? He's shown he can hit a long-ish FG (once in a blue moon) so he should be kicking the PATs as well. He's only missed 1 or 2 which is less than the other goons.

Hoib said...


Very interesting thanks. I think this scholarship issue is bigger than most people realize. Besides UMASS and Maine we have only out scored our opponent in the 4th quarter twice this year and even then by small margins. As Daz has said from the beginning we have serious depth issues.