73 Passing Attempts? Really?

[apbengalsfan]

Looking the stats..one would wonder if the coaching staff even looks at it. I feel that the offense needs to go with a more balanced attack..even if you like passing...and "Coach" seems to love it...I would like to see at least one game where the ratio is 50/50..60/40..or even 70/30. Looking at the stats..I don't know if passing is this teams recipe for success. The rushing game needs to be looked at you have X. Finney a really solid back who's not afraid to stick his helmet in someones chest. A.Prier a speedy back that I'm totally confused at why he's not getting more touches...he has excellent speed and a pretty good yard per carry average. The games I've seen him play he breaks a long one eventually. I'm also wondering what happened to McSurdy...with all that being said. if you pass 97 times a game(exaggerated stat) and don't win something needs to change. A proud bengals fan.

 

[votb]

From Sunday's Idaho State Journal, quoting Coach Kramer in his post-game interview:

“I’m disappointed in our running game,” Kramer said. “Our running game’s got to actually be a part even though I give a lot of public service to how we don’t really run the ball. We want to run the football, we want to do all things well. When we hand the ball off, we want to gain yards. We’re not trying to lose yards running the football.”

Game Rushing Totals:

Yost -- 6 carries, -16 yards (sacked three times for -16 yards)

Prier -- 3 carries, 15 yards net (longest = 12 yards)

Finney -- 4 carries, -1 yard net (longest = 2 yards)

http://www.isubengals.com/boxscore.aspx?id=2972

 

[letsgobengals]

So is this quote supporting WHY there are 73 passing attempts or supporting the fact that there are not enough running attempts, or are you saying that THIS is the reason there aren't more running attempts?? Not sure if 7 attempts in 4 quarters for 2 guys is enough to get going. I just know Sac State's D realized we weren't running and blitz the #($&*@)#( out of us!

From Sunday's Idaho State Journal, quoting Coach Kramer in his post-game interview:

“I’m disappointed in our running game,” Kramer said. “Our running game’s got to actually be a part even though I give a lot of public service to how we don’t really run the ball. We want to run the football, we want to do all things well. When we hand the ball off, we want to gain yards. We’re not trying to lose yards running the football.”

Game Rushing Totals:

Yost -- 6 carries, -16 yards (sacked three times for -16 yards)

Prier -- 3 carries, 15 yards net (longest = 12 yards)

Finney -- 4 carries, -1 yard net (longest = 2 yards)

http://www.isubengals.com/boxscore.aspx?id=2972

 

[apbengalsfan]

Exactly what I mean...how are you(coach) disappointed in a run game that doesn't exist? The stats say it all, and what I'm saying is you cant be mad at the run game when your not calling run plays...how bout this 43 passing attempts and 30 rushing attemps....whats your thoughts Votb?

 

[4ISUfans]

I believe Coach would like to establish a run game when we're able to and the game situation dictates it.. As was mentioned in the Sac thread this was a tale of 2 halves. Going into 3rd Qtr down 27-24 is a very winnable game and could lend itself to some running assuming you can get 3-4 yards a pop.

However when your defense gives up big plays and arm tackles you quickly get behind and running the ball when your behind 2-3 TD's late in the game is guaranteed LOSS.

Finney and Prier and very capable backs and given a seam can push the ball down field. Prier has already shown that if he gets to second level he can do some good things with the ball. I would add that their pass blocking needs some improvement.. A handful of times I saw some chip blocking on the blitz and that won't cut it. Gotta put the whole body in there. Both are young and will only get better! Look for good things from these 2.

The issue right now is the Defense. If we can't stop anyone and have to win shoot outs then Running the ball is out the window.. First things first! Lets get the defense fixed, and hopefully soon.

Go Bengals!

 

[up for the challenge]

Positives

In the Sacramento State game Yost threw for 534 yards, 4 touchdowns, 2 interceptions, and had many passes dropped by the receivers. The offensive line did a good job as they only allowed 3 sacks. The offense never had good field position so most of the touchdowns came from good drives down the field. I predicted that the Bengals would have to average 35 plus points per game this season to win games but obviously that number was not even close in this game.

Good Attendance at Holt Arena. Good fan support...

Negatives

Our defense continues to struggle as they allowed 54 points at Holt Arena during homecoming weekend. We have had 3 games and one bye week to prepare our defense for the BSC. I do not think we can win games this year unless our defense starts to play with aggression and starts wrapping up and making tackles. Allowing long runs is a break down in team defense and coaching. I look for Coach Kramer to start replacing current starters that are not playing up to his expectations.

Our running game is non-existent which means we are not running the ball very much during the game. How can we keep defenses honest and take time off the clock if we never run the ball. Teams have to establish the running game so the offensive linemen and running backs can gain confidence during games. If we are not going to run the ball, maybe, put Finney or Prier on defense as both have played defense in high school. They are good athletes with speed and could make a difference on defense.

Punt return special teams. We are not getting downfield to make tackles thus allowing the punt returners to gain good yardage. The opposing offense comes onto the field in good field position which gives them scoring opportunities either by touchdowns or field goals. Sacramento State kicked 4 field goals against us on Saturday. It is best probably to kick the ball near the sidelines in hope that it goes out of bounce.

 

[4ISUfans]

"Our running game is non-existent which means we are not running the ball very much during the game. How can we keep defenses honest and take time off the clock if we never run the ball."

uftc, this is my point.. You can't establish a run game or even consider clock management when your constantly down by 3,4, possessions. I was terribly disappointed in the way we let the Sac game get away from us. 27-24 was VERY WINNABLE game!

Your right about Special teams :-( figured I'd leave that alone for now given the state of the D.

 

[up for the challenge]

4IISUfans - I do understand that you have to pass the ball when you are down by 2 or 3 touchdowns especially the way our defense is playing. With that said, we should establish a running game early into the game to give our offensive line, running backs, and coaches confidence that we can move the ball on the ground. If we are not going to establish a running game put Prier or Finney on defense as we need more speed on the defensive side. I'm tired watching opposing team running backs run for 80 yards for touchdowns untouched. I would even consider putting some of our 2nd string big offensive linemen on the defensive line to start clocking up the middle. Our defensive coaches cannot allow 50 point games in the BSC and expect to win games which means something has to change (i.e., player replacement, different defensive schemes) otherwise we may not win a game this season.

 

[Bengal]

If we had an effective running game it would take pressure off the line because when they line up for a pass blitz we respond by running it up the gut. Rip off a couple of ten yard gains and the pass blitz will disappear -- then you go right back to the pass. I always have thought that an element of an effective offense is to be unpredictable keep the defense on its toes. We seem to be uber- predictable short pass underneath or bubble screen that is pretty much it. I saw only one or two plays that were new the entire game.

With no running game to keep the defense honest they are able to focus on stopping the short pass. We are not BYU and this is not 1984. Defenses have evolved they can stop the pass play -- lets be clear they do not have to prevent you from moving the ball they have to keep you from scoring. That is exactly what SAC state did in the second half.

I really hope we make some adjustments before Portland. Go Bengals.

 

[up for the challenge]

Bengal - that is great analysis about our offense. I am looking forward to watching the Portland State game.

 

[Skippy]

Now that I'm no longer broadcasting football, I am just like the rest of the fan base -- uninformed, but full of opinions. Having said that, here are my thoughts on the Sac State game:

1. First, some context. Mike Kramer and his staff inherited an absolute mess -- APR restrictions that cut the number of scholarships, reduced practice time, made ISU ineligible for the post-season and left the program "branded" as not only a bad football team, but also a bad classroom performer. Try to recruit to all that. And yet, early indications are Mike and his staff have done an admirable job of recruiting. And, he has successfully lifted the program's academic performance to the point where the NCAA has lifted most of the sanctions -- in just over a year's time. That is truly amazing.

2. One of the prices he had to pay to accomplish that is giving up essentially a fulltime coaching position (which turned out to be the D coordinator), and paying for a fulltime academic advisor. I agree with those who question whether Mike is "oversubscribed" as both head man and D coordinator (and, last year, he was also running the special teams), but that is the price Mike had to pay in order to get the APR situation cleaned up.

3. As to the offensive philosophy, you can call me a dinosaur if you'd like, but I believe you have to at least make an honest effort to run the football in order to be successful -- even in these "video game" days of 70-63 games. (Somewhere Woody Hayes and Bo Schembechler are rolling over in their respective graves -- Babe Caccia, too.) Here's something to think about from the Sac State game: ISU's four first-half scoring drives took a cumulative 4 minutes and 37 seconds off the clock. The longest "drive" was 2:04, the shortest: 8 seconds. We scored, great! But our defense had to drag its butt back on the field just a few plays later.

4. And when the defense went out on the field, we lined up in our 3-4 with a defensive front that averages 250 pounds and four linebackers who average 223 pounds against a Sac State offensive line that averages 300 pounds. (And that doesn't include several lanky TEs). I understand that offensive lines ALWAYS outweigh defensive fronts, but if you're going to play a 3-4, you better have some large bodies upfront taking up two blockers apiece and keeping them off those 220-pound linebackers. The Bengals do not, and they will continue to struggle until their defensive recruiting catches up with what they've done with the offensive line.

5. Speaking of the offensive line: for much of the game on Saturday, ISU had freshmen at center, left guard and left tackle. If you're going to throw the ball 73 times a game with three freshmen starting on the o line, there are going to be issues. In the second half of the Sac State game, the Hornets just started throwing the kitchen sink at us, sending 7-8 guys on every down, and we paid the price in hurried throws and picks. In my view, that's another reason to at least try to develop something of a running game -- to keep the defense off the field, yes, and to reduce the number of exposures for your young linemen and the QB. And at least Mike is honest when he says he gives "lip service" to running the ball -- that's about ALL the Bengals do. In order to run the football, you have to be committed and the Bengals are not.

6. Finally, let me say I've watched a lot of Big Sky football over the years, and it's been a relatively wide-open league with some great passing attacks. BUT, to be successful -- the teams that win championships -- you have to play defense. And most of them (not all, e.g. Montana in the mid-1990s) have had a decent running game to take some of the pressure off their defenses and keep them off the field for a period of time.

In summary: The program is improving, there is good, young talent in the pipeline, and the shackles of APR restrictions have been removed. BUT recruiting must improve on the defensive side of the football, and I believe the offensive approach needs to change -- not dramatically, but there has to be SOME effort made to establish a running game.

 

[letuknow]

SKIPPY great post! You are sorely missed on the radio(no offense to the new guy)We simply do NOT have the players YET. We are in a rebuilding process and the IMPROVEMENT is showing. KEEP THE FAITH BENGAL FANS!

 

[up for the challenge]

Skippy - I agree with everything you are saying but I do not see Coach Kramer making changes.

Running Game - I do not think Coach Kramer will ever establish a "running game" this season as Coach Kramer and Coach Bailey are committed to throwing the ball 70 times a game. To have a running game the offensive linemen and the running backs will need to show the coaches that they are capable of picking up positive yardage and scoring touchdowns while running the ball. Right now, Coach Kramer is not happy with the running backs performance when they do run the ball. Coach Kramer and Coach Bailey are happy with the passing attack so I do not see us establishing a running game this season.

Defense - I do not see Coach Kramer switching to a 3-4 to a 4-3. We are currently in last place on defense in the BSC. In the Sacramento State game we gave up 54 points, 349 yards in rushing and 202 yards in passing. Coach Kramer indicated that he did not like the defensive performance during the game. My question is "What is he going to do different against Portland State so we do not have a repeat of the Sacramento State game"?

Rebuilding Year - I do not like hearing from Coach Kramer or anyone else that this season is the foundation year and we are in the process of rebuilding. Coaches recruit players to replace players and coaches recruit players to win games. Coach Kramer elected to recruit high schools seniors this past season rather than go after JC players or step down players. Sacramento State had two step down players starting on their defense, one from Nebraska and the other one from USC. These players were highly recruited during their senior year of high school. With that said, do you think a true freshmen at ISU is better than a step down player from Nebraska and USC? There are plenty of good students and good players from JC's and D-1A programs that would have loved coming to ISU but Coach Kramer does not like the idea of recruiting these type of players for whatever reasons he may have.

At the end of day it is all about the wins and losses and coaches at a D-1 level are expected to win 50% of their games. Right now, Coach Kramer is way below the 50% mark at ISU. Coach Kramer inherited many problems last season so I do not think we can say he should have won more games. This season is different as Coach Kramer now has two recruiting classes in place on the team. Coach Kramer and his coaches are expected to perform better than last season and they are expected to win more games in the BSC. I do think that he has changed the program around by making sure his players are doing well in the classroom, obtaining good APR ratings, more scholarships, more practice time, performing community service, etc.

 

[letuknow]

Hate to break it to you up, but it is a rebuilding year. Look around at any REBUILDING program and it takes time. It is about setting a foundation for the future. They can't run the ball because your brother, boyfriend, cousin or whatever the relation of your significant other on the O LINE is not providing any holes to run. Things are better and will continue to get better. Keep the FAITH BENGAL fans.

 

[up for the challenge]

letuknow - you must be in the construction business as there is no such thing as "rebuilding years" in D-1 college football. The term "rebuilding years" is a coaching term used by coaches when they take over a program but it does not mean a team will win games 2 or 3 years down the road. Our players have been coached by Coach Kramer and his assistant coaches for a very long time so it is time for the players to step up and perform well in game situations. I believe Coach Kramer indicated that he expects to win games this year with this team as they have now coached 15 games.. As far as the offensive line, they have shown to be the most improved group on the Bengal football team thus far since last season other than Kevin Yost passing the ball. The offensive line only allowed 3 sacks during the Sacramento State game after 70 plus passing attempts. We have great receivers that are making plays and touchdowns but we did have some trouble catching the ball at the Sacramento State game as 8 passes were dropped. Like most fans, I would like to see the Bengals establish a running game but Coach Kramer and Coach Bailey are committed to the passing attack which is fine as they know best. I do not think it has anything to do with the offensive line or running backs as we only ran the ball 7 times with our running backs and that sir is not enough running attempts to establish a running game during a game. Maybe, we will see more running plays against Portland State but again that is up to Coach Kramer and Coach Bailey. Like most Bengal fans that are posting, I am more concerned about our defense stopping the big run plays and big passing plays for touchdowns. I look forward to seeing our defense play much better against the Vikings. Defenses win championships, no doubt about it.

 

[boisebengal]

Usually with most programs it takes about five or six years to rebuild any program, and this is only Kramer's second year here. After the APR mess that Zamberlin left us with plus the lack of talent available, you just can't expect miracles to happen overnight. Even Kramer agreed with me that the more downtrodden a program is, then the longer it's going to take to start turning things around. Remember, it took Bill McCartney at Colorado six years before he was able to start to have winning seasons at CU.

I had a talk with Jeff Tingey last year, and he agreed with me that this year we'd see a little more improvement from last year, and we'd see a little more improvement next season, and so on and so forth. I think that there's a big improvement on the offensive output from last season, mainly because the offensive linemen are much improved and are giving Yost more time to throw the ball. I just think that these linement were recruited for pass blocking, and they're probably not as good blocking for our running backs, because we do have adequate backs on hand. (Whatever happened to Daniel McSurdy?) If we don't have the horses up front to run a 3-4 defense, then perhaps we should switch to a 4-3. Look for Kramer to recruit next season to try to shore up the defensive side of the ball a little bit. I really would like to see Kramer hire a full-time defensive coordinator. But in any event, I think you can expect better things for ISU next year and the year after, and just as long as Kramer is here we'll be in good hands.

 

[blackfootbengal]

Not recruiting JC's was Tingey's idea not Kramer. Zamberlin had a knack for recruiting JC kids who were not good students. Note; not all the JC kids recruited under Zamberlin were bad students, just enough that combined with bad retention of both freshman and JC kids along with poor results in the classroom contributed to the APR issue. The policy since Kramer came in is to recruit high school kids with above average academic's. In the first class we signed five JC kids and one Div. Transfer. All the JC kids still here are on track to graduate, the Div. I kid is working on his Master's. The same higher standards applied to JC kids recruited in the first year as high school kids, thus it looks like all will graduate.

The fastest way to fix an APR issue is to give scholarship money to walk-on's. We have many former walk-on's on the team at this time. While I like giving walk-on's money at a point and time, I don't like being put in a position where to fix something we have given money to some who are not as good as what we could have gotten with a full ride offer. These kids are scattered all over the team at many positions. Some were going to get offers anyway, some may not have ever gotten a ride without the APR issue. This affects our depth, we are just not good at some positions. Along with replacing kids at poorly recruited positions we will have to eventually replace the walk-ons who receive money, all of this will take time.

Additionally, we still have some kids who have never played or will never play again still on roster collecting full ride money. Injuries are a part of the game and you will always have one or two kids who have season ending or career ending injuries. The one's I don't like are the ones who were injured prior to coming to ISU where the coach that recruited the kid ignored the problem, thus we are stuck paying his way for never playing.

 

[up for the challenge]

Coach Kramer, his coaching staff, and the football players did a great job fixing the APR issues last season. The NCAA awarded us with the maximum amount of scholarships, awarded us with the full amount of practice time, and now we are eligible for the playoffs.

To rebuild the ISU football program we will need to have a winning season this year. Recruiting is the key to building a strong program and good players or potential recruits want to hear that ISU has a winning record otherwise they may go to a winning program in the Big Sky. It is why good teams stay good and bad teams stay bad. Coach Kramer knows he needs to have a winning season this year as he will need to sale the potential recruits on ISU.

 

[letuknow]

No such thing as a rebuilding process huh? :rofl: Go ahead and Google "College football rebuilding" You will notice teams like: Ohio St, Penn ST, and even #1 ranked Alabama had a article on Rivals.com about rebuilding. Here is that quote" The Crimson Tide has ranked among the NCAA leaders in most pass defense categories the past four years, although the secondary will have at least a rebuilding job ahead", I admire your ability to look at the glass half full up for the challenge, but this is a REBUILDING process. Blackfoots post was spot on. It will take awhile, but we all have to be patient.

 

[up for the challenge]

letuknow - My definition of a rebuilding program is to have a winning season this year so our coaches can tell a potential recruit that we have a winning program at ISU and that we want you to be part of our program at ISU so we can continue having a winning tradition. What is your definition of a rebuilding program and what do you mean that it takes time or it will take awhile as you have not spelled it out for us?