Game 1: Boston F'in College

78 · Post by 78 » Wed Sep 03, 2014 12:40 pm

InnervisionsUMASS wrote:Other than the loss sucking, I was pleased with the defense. The offense needs some work but I suspect it is more of them just needing to come together, specifically the QB and his receivers.

It will come together. Whipple is walking into a much better situation than Molnar did, that's for sure. Things are looking up.

Yikes. We allowed 511 total yards. Hard to be pleased with that kind of defense -- at least for me.

Roadtrip · Post by **Roadtrip** » Wed Sep 03, 2014 1:18 pm

^ I believe that when you also look at Time of Possession, you see that the defense was just way overworked. Lack of offense tends to skew things.

UMass87 · Post by **UMass87** » Wed Sep 03, 2014 1:51 pm

Time of Possession is also influenced by giving up lots and lots of first downs and 5+ yard runs. The defense was doing that long before they had any excuse to be tired. Sure, the offense was bad and too many long pass attempts were made but that is absolutely not why the defense kept giving up first downs and long runs. In fact, there was only a single possession in the first half where BC didn't have their way with the UMass defense. If they were tired it was because they played badly on defense.

78 · Post by 78 » Wed Sep 03, 2014 2:16 pm

Don't have the stats in front of me, but I believe BC punted once the entire game and no times in the first half.

UMass2FBS · Post by **UMass2FBS** » Wed Sep 03, 2014 2:26 pm

78 wrote:Don't have the stats in front of me, but I believe BC punted once the entire game and no times in the first half.

You are 100% correct. They only punted once and it was on their last possession of the day. The punt occurred with 1:21 left in the game.

Here is the BC drive chart: Turnover on Downs, FG, FG, INT, Missed FG, TD, TD, TD, FG, Punt.

I would list the UMass drive chart but I don't want all of you slitting your wrists.

Sharksrule04 · Post by **Sharksrule04** » Wed Sep 03, 2014 2:33 pm

78 wrote:
InnervisionsUMASS wrote:Other than the loss sucking, I was pleased with the defense. The offense needs some work but I suspect it is more of them just needing to come together, specifically the QB and his receivers.

It will come together. Whipple is walking into a much better situation than Molnar did, that's for sure. Things are looking up.
Yikes. We allowed 511 total yards. Hard to be pleased with that kind of defense -- at least for me.

The defense kept BC to almost 0 pts in the first half. That sounds good to me. The offense couldn't stay on the field forcing the D to repeatedly come out. That wears you down. I knew BC would run away with in the 2nd half because the defense was beat already.

UMass87 · Post by **UMass87** » Wed Sep 03, 2014 2:49 pm

Sharksrule04 wrote:...

The defense kept BC to almost 0 pts in the first half. That sounds good to me. The offense couldn't stay on the field forcing the D to repeatedly come out. That wears you down. I knew BC would run away with in the 2nd half because the defense was beat already.

A strong argument could be made that the officials or BC held BC to six points in the first half. On BC's first possession, not including the crucial holding penalty, they had a grand total of two plays that went for less than five yards - a one yard pass and an incomplete pass. ON BC's second possession, agains not including the crucial holding penalty, they had three plays that netted less than five yards - o run for a loss of one, a four yard run and a one yard run. In those first two possession, BC had seven runs of ten yards or more. Maybe UMass was just tired out before they got to the game? Certainly time of possession wasn't already a problem, right?

The fact is that your memory of the game is probably as bad as mine. Looking at the play by play here: http://www.umassathletics.com/sports/m- ... l#GAME.PLY really makes it very clear that UMass lost the game in the first half when they let BC run all over them.

Dickie Dunn · Post by **Dickie Dunn** » Wed Sep 03, 2014 3:05 pm

I left the stadium Saturday satisfied with the defensive effort and thinking the offense didn't do much to help them out ... much as was the case the last two seasons.

But upon re-watching the first half last night, I've kind of done a 180. The offense was better than I thought -- ran the ball OK and, other than blowing the wide-open checkdown to Blyden on a third-and-short, Froh just missed in a couple of key spots (I would have preferred a different play call right after the Jette INT).

Like many, I would have liked to see some sustained drives to help keep the D off the field. But the D didn't do much to help its cause either. Being outmanned in the trenches was a given, but Andre and Messiah constantly getting beaten on the edge really hurt.

InnervisionsUMASS · Post by **InnervisionsUMASS** » Wed Sep 03, 2014 5:30 pm

Correct, the D was great in the first half considering how much they were on the field. Most of the D lapses in the 2nd half seemed to be due to the fatigue issue.

Jack · Post by **Jack** » Wed Sep 03, 2014 5:57 pm

The D wasn't "great" in the first half. "Great" would imply that the UMass D was able to consistently stop BC and get the ball back for the offense. Instead BC had sustained drives and maintained possession but was too incompetent to get in the end zone. The UMass D played hard and gave a great effort but it was not "great".

Agree that the D got worn down in the 2d half. That was pretty obvious. They will need to stop the Buffs on Saturday or we can expect a similar result.

DrG · Post by **DrG** » Wed Sep 03, 2014 5:59 pm

I don't have the 1st half stats but it seemed they pushed us around pretty good in the first half as well. We just made some timely stops to keep the score down. Yes, their O-line wore us down in the 2nd half, but the fact remains we couldn't stop them on the edge for the entire game. Need to get much better in that respect and I'm sure the defensive staff is working on it.

78 · Post by 78 » Wed Sep 03, 2014 6:18 pm

InnervisionsUMASS wrote:Correct, the D was great in the first half considering how much they were on the field. Most of the D lapses in the 2nd half seemed to be due to the fatigue issue.

The D was great in the first half? Bwahahahahahahahahahaha....

SJGMoney · Post by **SJGMoney** » Thu Sep 04, 2014 1:24 pm

BC didn't punt in the first half, but we did stop them on downs, virtually the same thing. Against a physical opponent where we were overmatched the defense did what it could in the first half, as it bent but did not break. BC moved the ball into the red zone where we held very tough. Would we have all been happier with stopping them cold more often, yes. Would we have been much happier if our OLBs did a better job of contain, yes. Would the defense have held up longer and continued to prevent TDs if our offense had sustained some drives, probably yes. It was not a good matchup for our young, and un-deep defense and as the game played out it got worse.

Matt Chatham's "disgust" was evident, but that's what I would expect from a guy that played LB watching OLBs fail to do their job. I wouldn't say condescending, I'd say it was more disappointed. Let's just say that if he was an Akron announcer there would have been some very heavy sighs every time Seals and Messiah failed to keep contain.

The defense did not play great, but they kept us in the game for a long time and did their job for a long time. Last I looked they keep score with points, not yardage or TOP.

UMass87 · Post by **UMass87** » Thu Sep 04, 2014 2:16 pm

SJGMoney - I felt that way when I was watching the game - that the defense didn't give up many points so they did ok. On further reflection I've done a 180. While the defense did hold them on downs it happened all three times because of penalties on BC (holding on the first two and a false start on the third). The inability to hold the edge allowed BC to run at will. It's really hard for me to see how the UMass performance against the run was anything other than atrocious in the first half.

InnervisionsUMASS · Post by **InnervisionsUMASS** » Thu Sep 04, 2014 7:39 pm

78 wrote: The D was great in the first half? Bwahahahahahahahahahaha....

Sure, feel free to take out the rest of my post in your response. You saw what you saw, I saw what I saw... get over it. Do you want to start the Fire Whipple thread already??

If the offense stays on the field a bit longer in the first half, we're in much better shape. It's not hard to figure out.