Monkeypox

...and the same basic results. turnovers from the offense and big plays given up by the defense.

In yardage, maybe. But we have one of the worst rushing offenses, one of the worst scoring offenses, and one of the worst passing efficiency ratings in the country.

Except that this isn't year one for a certain QB, I agree. As I stated in the other thread, I don't think you can make the QB change at this point while the team is still in the conference race. Again, I don't like it, but I don't think it would really serve the team at this time. However, Meager threw 3 costly picks in the game vs. FAU, and, uhm, don't look now, but our passing efficiency is bottom of the barrell. So I guess you could say our offensive scheme isn't working and Todge needs to start playing some Dickeyball after 4 games.

How many 1st downs did we get vs. Arkansas? How many in the first half at all? The players, these veteran defensive players, as pointed out, weren't ever very good. The scheme may not be the problem when there are other issues. Also, and I know this is hard to understand, but we're only FOUR games into the season, so it's just plain ridiculous to call this the worst defense we've had. And while DD ball was the epitome of 3 and out, we haven't fared that well with the passing game and it takes MUCH LESS TIME off the clock each 3 and out. In Arkansas and Oklahoma, we barely got any 1st downs the 1st half at all. These defensive veterans aren't good. You don't miss tackles and assignments and make boneheaded plays and give up a number of big plays only because of a scheme. They have a great deal of responsibility in the matter. Have you considered the option that they just aren't learning the new scheme very well? Have you considered that if we had more consistent success on the offensive end, like, say, we DIDN'T throw picks late in the game when we're up vs. a conference opponent, that things might look different? Maybe if our DB doesn't go for a big play when there's no help and lets a WR get behind him for a huge TD pass, we have a chance still? Oh, that's right, it was the SCHEME'S fault he didn't keep position. Also, it's been FOUR GAMES. Repeat after me - FOUR GAMES. Look at things after the year is up and THEN make assessmentsm, and, you know what? I'll tell you it's been ONE season. I KNOW what it was like in the Kassell years, but then again, back then, we had Kassell, and right now there's not a member on this D that could hold his jock. I don't like our scheme, but giving up 60 and 80 points isn't just a scheme issue.

Where'd you get your 2007 numbers? I've got 534 for SMU and 322 for SMU, averaging out to: 428 ypg and 34 ppg But the point remains that our defenses have never been that good. Being experienced isn't the same as being good. AND, as you pointed out, the season isn't over yet, so you're comparing 2 non-body bag games to an entire season, where we ranked, without our toughest opponents, in the 60s and 70s on defense. Since BK's junior year, we haven't had a good defense, and back then it was easier on them because we ran the ball all the time. No doubt the defense has been atrocious. But I think conditioning, talent, and brains have all played as big a part in its failures as the scheme has.

Well, because realistically, with a high-powered passing offense, more pressure is placed on a defense. If you have a quick-strike offense, you give the opponents more opportunities to score, and you tire their defense out less. A power-running offense will help tire out the defenses, but also lessens the time and opportunity for your own offense to score. And that will show up on the statistics. And those REALLY GOOD defenses (is being ranked in the 70s really good?) WERE helped out by a running scheme. And again, based on what you're saying, we've BEEN a failure on defense for years, which is part of what makes it hard for me to understand why it's suddenly all Mendoza's fault after 4 games, 2 of which were body bag games. I don't LIKE what I've seen of Mendoza's scheme from what I've seen, but I don't feel I can accurately judge its performance at this point and time. I don't LIKE the fact that we have a near complete lack of experience on the defensive side of the ball, but I'll at least give some of the guys some collegiate coaching time before I start ranting and raving, especially since we haven't had a really good defense around here anyway, and were routinely blown out by Texas and Arkansas before. Do I LIKE it? Hell no. Did I really expect new coaches to come in and immediately turn us from a doormat into a good college football team? Hell. No.

Well, I think it's early to judge a scheme after 4 games, especially given the body bag games. To me, there's not much difference in someone scoring 50 and someone scoring 70 as you have no shot either way, but it'll skew the scoring pretty badly (especially, again, after only 4 games). Then, you've got to account for the TOP when the opposing defense is given short yardage by blocked punts or score on a quick strike because a DB makes a boneheaded play in single coverage late in the game. And then you have to account for the change in offensive playstyle NOT tiring out the opposing defense as much, particularly when it's not clicking and takes us forever just to get a 1st down. Personally, despite these returning starters, this defense has never really been great (other than one year in which NONE of these guys were around), so it's hard for me to accept that the scheme is really the problem at this point and time. I know some like to look at last year only, but one year can be anomylous, and expecting linear progression, particularly given coaching and scheme changes, seems ill-advised. In 2005, for example, our defense was sufficiently terrible: 31.5 PPG, 436.6 YPG. Personally, to get an accurate representation at this time, I think you'd have to throw out, every year, our body bag games. Now, I wouldn't throw out games where we simply get blown out by people against whom we SHOULD compete. Keep your Tulsas, Louisiana Techs, etc. in there, but your Oklahomas, UTs, Arkansas - take out those games defensively and then see where we stand and you might get a better idea how our defense is doing. There are plenty of problems with our coaching and adjustments. But players need to step up as well, and blindly accepting their ability because the team defense performed decent one year while throwing the coaching staff under the bus after 4 games might seem like fun, but it just doesn't make much sense to me.

and you were doing so well. i see a solid deep ball from DM and i'll probably crap my pants.

In which case, we've had a great defense what... ONE YEAR in the last bit of forever? Personally, I'd see #31 as being pretty great, ESPECIALLY given a heavy passing offense.

I agree. While I personally feel Meager simply doesn't have the ability to get it done, Dodge probably feels he hasn't seen enough of the guy to be sure. To be honest, NONE of us really know what we saw in Meager before, because of the coaching situation. Right now, we're not out of the conference race by any means, and Dodge isn't going to declare it a lost season and start the true freshman at this point, NOR is he going to declare Meager a lost cause until he sees all he can. I don't LIKE the decision, but I understand and respect it. I believe Vizza would probably give us as much of a chance to win as Meager does, but I can understand a hesitancy to go jerking QBs around when you're not officially out of it. Now, I really have a problem with people who try to compare the 2 QBs too much at this point based on this current season. Meager enters the game at 0-0. Vizza enters the game with us down by a jillion points. Of course he's trying to make things happen. AND he's a freshman, not RS-junior.

Exactly. And I think a point to be made is that our coaches, being fresh out of high school, have a certain learning curve. Many of us are willing to let that learning curve take its course before declaring the success or failure of the coaching, because we believe that the long-term outlook is better with Dodge at the helm than it has been in a long time. I have no problem being wrong on that, but it WILL take time. Naming other college coaches who've taken on similar situations still doesn't compare. We've taken a great risk in our regime change, and THAT'S why some of us aren't gonna flip out when we lose a few games right now. ESPECIALLY given that this last game hinged on two very bad plays made by veteran players who should know better.

Yeah, I didn't think they'd have a shot against Woodson and Kentucky. Kentucky is a serious team this year. I think next week against USF could be interesting. USF has gotten up to play some of the big boys, and they're kind of a darling team this year. However, when you combine: 1) In-state rivalry 2) USF coming off a big win vs. WVU 3) FAU coming off a big loss vs. Kentucky ... it could get pretty interesting.

As much as I might like to see the guy, I'm not sure you want to throw him to the wolves against Arkansas, as down as they may be right now. There will probably be a good time, like the start of the 2nd half when we're getting blown out, but I wouldn't do it until then. After that, we'll be 0-4 and I see no reason to not have him starting the rest, regardless. You can't turn the ball over like we've been doing and win ball games, and Meager doesn't have the excuse of injury or inexperience anymore.

if anyone expected anything other than a long season this year, i would really like to know why. last year we were terrible. we have an entirely new regime. we still have mostly the same players. the rest of the conference isn't as terrible as they used to be. it will get worse before it gets better.

picked off... FAU wins.

11 penalties. 4 turnovers. have to fix that. and the defensive struggles will be a consistent problem if the offense can't get better in the run game. you have to be able to pound an opponent late when you're up. if your offense can't do anything but pass the ball, look for every game to be a shootout.

the value in special teams will put Johnny in.

I don't recall that. In fact, I'm prett sure they kept a 3-4 for most of the season. Kassell was just behind Vilma and Barton at ILB. In the article I posted before, Kassell talked about how he had to adjust to the 3-4 in New York and how it better fits his playstyle, so he's excited to be in New York where they run that D. Another article. http://www.newyorkjets.com/news/articles/s...-a-special-side “Brad has been a great addition to the team. He has all the qualities that we look for,” said Mangini. “In researching him, there were several coaches who said he was their favorite player because of the way that he worked at practice, the way that he worked in the meeting rooms. He has a good presence about him. He's got that toughness, that country toughness.” Kassell, a North Texas product, is also a heady ballplayer. He played with a passion welcomed by the coach.

I believe Brad and Cody are both with the New York Jets. The Jets drafted ILB Harris in the 2nd round this weekend, so they've got their work cut out for them. EDIT: good article on Brad's switch to New York and the 3-4 http://www.newyorkjets.com/news/articles/s...to-pick-up-pace

I think this is a ridiculous question at this point. If you believe you've actually seen anything, good or bad, out of the guys we had last year, then NONE of them should be starters, and we'd go with the new people. However, I'm of the opinion that our offensive scheme has been so poor that it didn't matter who we had at QB. With a new coach and system and not a single spring practice, it's way too early to be deciding a frontrunner. Everyone on our roster has an equal chance to surprise.

People are making too big a deal about his (unconfirmed) size as a graduating senior when he's still growing, and while mentioning the more obvious NFL names of smaller players, there's a lot more that make an impact in Div. 1-A football.

It's not a party without Monkeypox.

from what i've seen, you've never held DD to any standard, and certainly had no problems with him only winning 2 or 3 games. so i consider this BS. it would also be illogical to expect a new coach to come in and fix a terrible team in less than a year. quite frankly, you're holding him to a higher standard in 1 year than you did DD after 9 years. i certainly wouldn't expect a winning record. i will, however, expect our team to look like it's headed in the right direction.

lots and lots of angry snapping.

Roy and Keith are getting torched.