baloo
Baby Bear
Posts: 12 
|
Post by baloo on Oct 18, 2015 17:47:19 GMT -5
Anything jump out at ya from the game??
|
|
|
|
Post by MUfan on Oct 18, 2015 19:56:40 GMT -5
Our tight ends are pretty good.
|
|
|
|
Post by 95sacks on Oct 18, 2015 22:27:00 GMT -5
Not really,were are 3-0 over inferior teams and 0-3 playing quality opponents, 1-8 in the SOCON.
|
|
|
|
Post by BearDownMU on Oct 19, 2015 1:50:40 GMT -5
Thanks for that, Captain Sunshine.
|
|
|
|
Post by bear38 on Oct 19, 2015 9:02:38 GMT -5
So do we have a new kicker or were they just giving the back up an opportunity?
|
|
|
|
Post by chez23 on Oct 19, 2015 10:00:41 GMT -5
Good to see MU take of business as expected.
|
|
|
|
Post by jackal on Oct 19, 2015 11:05:47 GMT -5
So do we have a new kicker or were they just giving the back up an opportunity? My counting may be wrong (Furman degree and all), but it looks like Mercer played over 70 players on Saturday. I imagine that was most, if not all, of the players dressed out and maybe even a few of the cheerleaders. |
|
|
|
Post by BearDownMU on Oct 19, 2015 13:54:15 GMT -5
By my recollection we were subbing liberally at the end of the 2nd quarter and 2nd team or deeper for the majority of the 2nd half.
|
|
|
|
Post by FUBeAR on Oct 19, 2015 15:41:17 GMT -5
By my recollection we were subbing liberally at the end of the 2nd quarter and 2nd team or deeper for the majority of the 2nd half. You are, for the most part, correct BDMU, but there was a little bit of a difference in the substitution pattern from prior games in which Mercer has demolished their opponents, as they did ETSU on Saturday. Despite the outcome of the game being obvious by the 2nd quarter, Mercer stayed with their starters AND their normal rotations (going 3 deep on the DL, instead of 2; however) a bit longer than in prior, similar games. IMHO, this was in no way intended to 'run up the score.' I'm thinking the Coaches wanted to keep the "Top 44 or so" in as close to '4-quarter mode' as possible. As we all, painfully, know, the Bears have lost 3 games late in the 4th quarter this year and as many as 5 last year. This is NOT a conditioning issue, and while it may have been, to some degree, a depth issue last year, not so much in 2015. I think the idea is that these "Top 44 or so" need to be stay ready to MENTALLY play 4 quarters and to WIN the 4th quarter. While the play-calling on both sides of the ball was definitely 'throttled-down' early, there were 1's and 2's in there in the 4th quarter. I think this was the right move coaching-wise, despite the risk of additional injuries (which we KNOW the Bears cannot afford), and I think it was handled rather deftly so as to not 'rub salt in the wound' of the Bucs. |
|
|
|
Post by BearFacts on Oct 19, 2015 16:20:29 GMT -5
So do we have a new kicker or were they just giving the back up an opportunity? Yes give the backup (96) more opportunities. Remainder of the season!!! |
|
|
|
Post by jackal on Oct 19, 2015 16:32:37 GMT -5
By my recollection we were subbing liberally at the end of the 2nd quarter and 2nd team or deeper for the majority of the 2nd half. You are, for the most part, correct BDMU, but there was a little bit of a difference in the substitution pattern from prior games in which Mercer has demolished their opponents, as they did ETSU on Saturday. Despite the outcome of the game being obvious by the 2nd quarter, Mercer stayed with their starters AND their normal rotations (going 3 deep on the DL, instead of 2; however) a bit longer than in prior, similar games. IMHO, this was in no way intended to 'run up the score.' I'm thinking the Coaches wanted to keep the "Top 44 or so" in as close to '4-quarter mode' as possible. As we all, painfully, know, the Bears have lost 3 games late in the 4th quarter this year and as many as 5 last year. This is NOT a conditioning issue, and while it may have been, to some degree, a depth issue last year, not so much in 2015. I think the idea is that these "Top 44 or so" need to be stay ready to MENTALLY play 4 quarters and to WIN the 4th quarter. While the play-calling on both sides of the ball was definitely 'throttled-down' early, there were 1's and 2's in there in the 4th quarter. I think this was the right move coaching-wise, despite the risk of additional injuries (which we KNOW the Bears cannot afford), and I think it was handled rather deftly so as to not 'rub salt in the wound' of the Bucs. I was going to ask whether there was a method to the substitutions. I couldn't help but think that playing these blowout losses probably isn't good for a team and whether any lessons were learned from last season (Warner to Wofford, for example). I do think it is good business to have your guys ready to play 4 quarters. I remember well the 2004 Georgia Southern team that eviscerated everyone they played struggling when Furman finally gave them a four quarter fight. You could tell the Eagle team (who was fantastic) had not played a lot of four quarter football games, and a lot of the "little things" from substitutions, execution, and clock management were just off. |
|
|
|
Post by Hayes on Oct 21, 2015 12:51:53 GMT -5
So do we have a new kicker or were they just giving the back up an opportunity? Per Lamb, the backup was just being given game experience. He said they have had weekly kicking battles in practice, and Jagger Lieb has continually won them. |
|
|
|
Post by BearFacts on Oct 21, 2015 14:29:19 GMT -5
Well some kids are practice players and some are game players as the past reflects. Ask Coach Lamb with a 50% fg performance would he say we have had continued growth at the position this year. I say not.
|
|
|
|
Post by bear38 on Oct 21, 2015 14:51:52 GMT -5
Well some kids are practice players and some are game players as the past reflects. Ask Coach Lamb with a 50% fg performance would he say we have had continued growth at the position this year. I say not. Technically 58.3% but I am sure he would be the first to say it needs to improve. |
|
|
|
Post by clustersports on Oct 21, 2015 15:27:12 GMT -5
Well some kids are practice players and some are game players as the past reflects. Ask Coach Lamb with a 50% fg performance would he say we have had continued growth at the position this year. I say not. Technically 58.3% but I am sure he would be the first to say it needs to improve. I think that's why he is getting the other kids playing time. He said he wants get as many guys playing time as possible so they have game experience. |
|
