VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, [7], 8, 9, 10 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 09/ 6/15 12:02:44am Sun
Author: Gate Raider
Subject: Navy game comments

On 'gate's for drive with the ball on the 1 and playing pretty well Hunt decides to kick a field goal. Thought that was dumb. In his comments after the game he says they needed to get a TD there. What? You decided to go for the FG Dan.
Thought it was poor sportsmanship for Navy to go for a field goal when they were up 35 points with 46 seconds left in the game.
If Bridgeforth is gone for the season and Morgan is injured the defensive backfield could be in trouble.
Hardegree had a very good game, congrats to him.
Wilkens looks much better this year - lost some weight and is faster.
Why didn't Holland get the ball more often? He is the fastest RB on the team and had the best yards per carry last season. He should see more action.
Hope Colgate can have a more effective passing game next week.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[> Re: Navy game comments -- 'gate80, 09/ 6/15 8:03:37am Sun

I expected a decisive loss, but this was a very disappointing showing, the most one sided first half against us I've seen since Rutgers in 1993, or maybe even back to Syracuse in 1987. Hell the 3 Navy games in the 90s were more competitive in the first half. We had good first half showings in openers the last 2 years against I-A teams, and I thought the effect of 3 years of schollies would be even more apparent. I think the loss was worse than the stats (and maybe even the score) indicated.

I was surprised how much our lines got pushed around. Melville was off target in the first half (though much better in the second when the game was out of reach). Wilkins was impressive with some nice runs. Quazza's TD was very nice, as he kept the defender away with his body until the ball arrived.

I agree with GR that it seemed silly not to go for it on 4th and a half yard from inside the Navy 2. It seemed like Hunt went for it in similar situations last year. (Not that it would have made a difference.) I had no problem with a long field goal attempt late in the game - Navy could have scored a TD if they wanted to; they gave their kicker some practice. I didn't understand however the multiple timeouts Navy called late in the game.

I ran into some Colgate insiders at an Annapolis sports bar the night before the game. They said recent recruits were the best Colgate has had in many years. Also that the kids really like and respect Hunt. Tellingly they were not optimistic about the Navy outcome, either because of the strength of Navy's team or because of something going on with ours, they didn't elaborate. They also said the kids loved playing games like this no matter what the outcome, which should be enough for the naysayers who want us to stick with the Monmouths.


[ Edit | View ]

[> Re: Navy game comments -- get em gate, 09/ 6/15 10:26:39am Sun

>On 'gate's for drive with the ball on the 1 and
>playing pretty well Hunt decides to kick a field goal.
> Thought that was dumb. In his comments after the
>game he says they needed to get a TD there. What? You
>decided to go for the FG Dan.
>Thought it was poor sportsmanship for Navy to go for a
>field goal when they were up 35 points with 46 seconds
>left in the game.
>If Bridgeforth is gone for the season and Morgan is
>injured the defensive backfield could be in trouble.
>Hardegree had a very good game, congrats to him.
>Wilkens looks much better this year - lost some weight
>and is faster.
>Why didn't Holland get the ball more often? He is the
>fastest RB on the team and had the best yards per
>carry last season. He should see more action.
>Hope Colgate can have a more effective passing game
>next week.

Colgate was not ready. The O line was not ready. Are they really that physically weaker than the Navy defenders? It wasn't that the team lost, it is that they looked helpless and floundering on national tv. Team has a lot of potential they didn't bring to the game.


[ Edit | View ]

[> Re: Navy game comments -- gate, 09/ 6/15 11:27:50am Sun

We beat Buffalo in '03 (albeit not the most competitive FBS team)...Fordham has had success - twice - vs the FBS. It is a bittersweet problem to have playing the elite. Still remember App State beating Michigan at home, correct? Games like that make folklore.

Someone posted here and elsewhere that this is what the players want. A good point was made that we could play Navy on national tv or be like Lafayette and lose a terrible game to W&M at home. That impressed me and made some sense. But there are over 30,000 Colgate alumni who also support (I assume) the program and should potentially have a say. The annual drubbings get tiresome and the wait for that elusive victory is long. Colgate women's soccer just lost a very respectable 2-0 to #16 South Carolina...but had zero shots on goal. As an alum or fan, it is disheartening to say the least.

Hunt's pregame interview was extremely positive and I was giddy with anticipation; his postgame comments were nothing short of depressing and put us back at square one, or actually behind square one with injuries. This game may not have been the best measure of success; we have had turnaround seasons before once league play begins.

Other than Fordham, the rest of the PL is off to an auspicious start. Lehigh squeaked by CCSU, Lafayette's loss, HC finally getting in the W column but not by much over blah Monmouth, G'town getting trounced by St. Francis(?!)...and Bucknell's shutout, though impressive, was against a MAAC team who they are now 11-0 all-time against. Not sure there's need to panic just yet but like hockey 2 years ago...injuries are the unknown factor to any sport in any season.

Navy announcers did comment on just our recent addition of scholarships and still not having a full roster of them. In time, one would think we could make a better game of things. The PL will be a whole new season with a different sense of urgency.

In the past, having 2-3 games under our belt should be an advantage but has not always been the case when playing Yale/Ivies. Hope that's not the true this year. Would also love to see...at least for one quarter...a new freshman QB come in, make some plays and show us his stuff!

FWIW, I would rather not play Syracuse, but it must be great for the recruiting process. I'm selfish to admit that I want to keep our winning record over this old archrival, but Colgate would never let such a thing stand in its way of competition. Onward and upward.


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> Re: Navy game comments -- bison137, 09/ 6/15 1:03:39pm Sun


>
>Other than Fordham, the rest of the PL is off to an
>auspicious start. Lehigh squeaked by CCSU,
>Lafayette's loss, HC finally getting in the W column
>but not by much over blah Monmouth, G'town getting
>trounced by St. Francis(?!)...and Bucknell's shutout,
>though impressive, was against a MAAC team who they
>are now 11-0 all-time against.


I know Bucknell isn't 11-0 all-time vs Marist, since I was in attendance in 2010 when Bucknell lost. The MAAC, btw, hasn't existed for almost a decade for football. Marist is in the Pioneer Football League with a collection of teams from across the country (Jacksonville, San Diego, Drake, Dayton, etc.)

Agree that the BU 17-0 win wasn't impressive however. Having two of its top players suspended for violation of team rules didn't help.


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> Re: Navy game comments -- Maven, 09/ 6/15 1:36:13pm Sun

>
>>
>>Other than Fordham, the rest of the PL is off to an
>>auspicious start. Lehigh squeaked by CCSU,
>>Lafayette's loss, HC finally getting in the W column
>>but not by much over blah Monmouth, G'town getting
>>trounced by St. Francis(?!)...and Bucknell's shutout,
>>though impressive, was against a MAAC team who they
>>are now 11-0 all-time against.
>
>
>I know Bucknell isn't 11-0 all-time vs Marist, since I
>was in attendance in 2010 when Bucknell lost. The
>MAAC, btw, hasn't existed for almost a decade for
>football. Marist is in the Pioneer Football League
>with a collection of teams from across the country
>(Jacksonville, San Diego, Drake, Dayton, etc.)
>
>Agree that the BU 17-0 win wasn't impressive however.
>Having two of its top players suspended for violation
>of team rules didn't help.


Who were suspended?


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> Re: Navy game comments -- bison137, 09/ 6/15 2:10:59pm Sun

>>
>>>
>>>Other than Fordham, the rest of the PL is off to an
>>>auspicious start. Lehigh squeaked by CCSU,
>>>Lafayette's loss, HC finally getting in the W column
>>>but not by much over blah Monmouth, G'town getting
>>>trounced by St. Francis(?!)...and Bucknell's shutout,
>>>though impressive, was against a MAAC team who they
>>>are now 11-0 all-time against.
>>
>>
>>I know Bucknell isn't 11-0 all-time vs Marist, since I
>>was in attendance in 2010 when Bucknell lost. The
>>MAAC, btw, hasn't existed for almost a decade for
>>football. Marist is in the Pioneer Football League
>>with a collection of teams from across the country
>>(Jacksonville, San Diego, Drake, Dayton, etc.)
>>
>>Agree that the BU 17-0 win wasn't impressive however.
>>Having two of its top players suspended for violation
>>of team rules didn't help.
>
>
>Who were suspended?


Will Carter, who is the league's most dangerous deep threat. Was 1st team All-PL as a soph - led the league in yards per catch, total yards, and receiving TD's. Also Nick O'Brien, who is their best CB by a wide margin and also their best KR. Violation of team rules. Susan is tough about that.


[ Edit | View ]

[> Re: Navy game comments -- frank zappa, 09/ 6/15 12:45:04pm Sun

>On 'gate's for drive with the ball on the 1 and
>playing pretty well Hunt decides to kick a field goal.
> Thought that was dumb. In his comments after the
>game he says they needed to get a TD there. What? You
>decided to go for the FG Dan.
>Thought it was poor sportsmanship for Navy to go for a
>field goal when they were up 35 points with 46 seconds
>left in the game.
>If Bridgeforth is gone for the season and Morgan is
>injured the defensive backfield could be in trouble.
>Hardegree had a very good game, congrats to him.
>Wilkens looks much better this year - lost some weight
>and is faster.
>Why didn't Holland get the ball more often? He is the
>fastest RB on the team and had the best yards per
>carry last season. He should see more action.
>Hope Colgate can have a more effective passing game
>next week.


You mean they'd never give up the money.


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> Re: Navy game comments -- The Future, 09/ 6/15 4:15:15pm Sun

The upside '80, is that you have forgotten about how bad the Fordham game was from two years ago!

This game finished worse than it started. It was 10-3 18 minutes into the game. And with 8 minutes left in the second, Colgate was down 17-3 when they didn't convert on 4th and 1 at the 50. I was certainly still doing the, "We score here and get the ball back to start the second" math at that point. The rest of the second was rough. Colgate came out for the third with a renewed effort--which was great to see. Just didn't execute and Navy is better--which is a tough combo.

Colgate held the Navy QB to 21 yards on 11 carries and a TD. He will probably go down as the most prolific scorer in college football history and was being pumped as a Heisman candidate before the game. Not sure if Colgate worried about him too much or if he just made all of the right reads. Missed tackles on the FB seemed to hurt the most--but those guys were beasts.

Colgate's D line seemed to do best when slanting. Had a lot of tackles for loses but Navy's O line fires off the ball so fast--seems like when the D line would change up the angle it would throw that off a bit. They seemed to run away from Steffen (though I could certainly be wrong). Navy just blocks so well. Once the receivers got their hands on a corner, it was hard for the corners to break free.

Navy has 182 players on their roster--all of them are scholarship players. You're going to be able to find 30 good ones if you are able to bring in that many kids. Colgate gets 15 scholarships a year. Navy gets 45-and you are basically competing for the same kids academically. Navy should be better and Colgate should be playing teams like Navy every year. The only way you're going to get a big win is to actually schedule those games and bring in the kids who want to play in them.

Go 'gate!

Beat UNH!!!


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> Re: Navy game comments -- 'gate80, 09/ 7/15 7:11:02am Mon

You are preaching to the choir, Future. We absolutely should be playing games against teams like Navy. There is nothing wrong or unusual about this - there were 8 games on national TV last weekend where the Sagarin spread was greater than that for Colgate-Navy (29 points). There are good losses in games like this, even good decisive losses (I thought Air Force and Ball State were good examples of this). Plus you are right that the first quarter was competitive.

I think I have very realistic expectations about stretch games, yet I couldn't help having the overall sense that this game was a step backwards, despite what stats may show. Maybe all the "3rd year of scholarships" talk inflated my expectations more than they should have. Maybe Navy will win 10 games this year (I hope they do).

I wish I could forget the Fordham loss 2 years ago! I was referring to games I had attended. Yes that was rock bottom, the worst first half in Colgate history, at home against a team we had lost to only 4 times in 25 years. What a way for Biddle to go out!


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> Re: Navy game comments -- 'gate73, 09/ 7/15 9:27:34am Mon

>You are preaching to the choir, Future. We absolutely
>should be playing games against teams like Navy. There
>is nothing wrong or unusual about this - there were 8
>games on national TV last weekend where the Sagarin
>spread was greater than that for Colgate-Navy (29
>points). There are good losses in games like this,
>even good decisive losses (I thought Air Force and
>Ball State
>
>I think I have very realistic expectations about
>stretch games, yet I couldn't help having the overall
>sense that this game was a step backwards, despite
>what stats may show. Maybe all the "3rd year of
>scholarships" talk inflated my expectations more than
>they should have. Maybe Navy will win 10 games this
>year (I hope they do).
>
>I wish I could forget the Fordham loss 2 years ago! I
>was referring to games I had attended. Yes that was
>rock bottom, the worst first half in Colgate history,
>at home against a team we had lost to only 4 times in
>25 years. What a way for Biddle to go out!

I watched the entire game and was disappointed and a bit down, but I appreciate The Future's information and analysis. I did not realize that Navy has 182 players. That makes a big difference. It's great for the kids to play these games, no doubt. I hope we show well in the next few games.


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> Re: Navy game comments -- bs, 09/ 7/15 11:41:15am Mon

since the taxpayers foot all of Navy's bills, why do they charge admission to their games?


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Navy game comments -- Philip, 09/ 7/15 12:12:18pm Mon

>since the taxpayers foot all of Navy's bills, why do
>they charge admission to their games?

Taxpayers most certainly do NOT pay all of Navy's bills...

http://www.navysports.com/ot/what-is-naaa.html


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> O-line -- The Future, 09/ 7/15 12:25:37pm Mon

So much is asked of Colgate's O-line in this offensive philosophy. There is very small percentage of the field that you are asking the defense to defend. Against teams of equal or lesser talent, Colgate's offense typically prevails. It controls the clock and rarely makes mistakes. The #1 precursor to victory is turnover margin. Colgate wears other teams down by saying, "This is what we are going to do and you can't stop us." and has an offense that doesn't turn the ball over. That will win you a lot of games. Against teams with better talent, Colgate offense sacrifices the #2 precursor to victory (plays over 20 yards) by consistently running the read option. Colgate doesn't dominate the line of scrimmage the way it does agains lesser programs and doesn't run plays designed to go over 20 yards. I think, in many ways, this explains Colgate's consistent winning over the past 20 years and lack of big wins (and often getting blown out) against schools with better programs over the past 12. Colgate beats teams it should and doesn't beat teams it shouldn't. Teams of equal talent like Holy Cross make enough mistakes (like not running the ball in the 4th quarter with a lead) for Colgate to win the majority of these contests.

Colgate threw the ball more than 20 yards once against Navy (the TD to Quazza). RBs averaged over 4 yards a carry and the line didn't give up any sacks--which is pretty impressive against a team of that quality--but it also only scored one touchdown. The (only?) way for Colgate to win a game like that is to have more plays of 20 plus yards--even just the threat of Colgate running these plays would probably help.

It's impossible to see what receivers are doing down the field watching a game on TV but it seems like Colgate almost never runs play action with receivers running go routes to open up the middle of the field for everybody else--especially on traditional running downs like second and short. It seems like the threat of Colgate going for a big play and working receivers on different levels and occasionally going for the big play would really help Colgate's entire O--particularly against good teams. Even running a series where the offense goes into hurry up for five plays would put the D on its heels, confuse them, and not let them catch their breath.

So much is asked of the O-line given the methodical nature of Colgate's offense. Making the offense a little less predictable (especially against the toughest opponents) would probably help them and the rest of the offense. Or, maybe not. I'm just some dude on the internet who knows less about coaching than just about everybody (other than the guy calling plays at the end of Holy Cross games).


Here is an interesting article about the high school coach who never punts and is also looking to change what his players do when they have the ball in open space. It also where I got the precursor to victory stats:
http://www.courant.com/sports/football/hc-jacobs-column-football-rules-0822-20150821-column.html


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: O-line -- The Lone Haranguer, 09/ 7/15 1:24:44pm Mon

Question: in an early season game against a foe such as Navy, Syracuse, Air Force, etc., how much do we "open our kimono" to our Patriot League opponents?


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: O-line -- pigskin, 09/ 7/15 2:06:31pm Mon

>Question: in an early season game against a foe such
>as Navy, Syracuse, Air Force, etc., how much do we
>"open our kimono" to our Patriot League opponents?

There's plenty of time to switch up our O before league games start, I wouldn't worry about that. Our game plans have changed in the past and I would guess this is all part of the strategy of the long season.

I have to agree with The Future on one thing. Why not use the hurry up offense once in a while to confuse the opponent? It wouldn't hurt to change the pace of things. Also I don't like the long count we were using vs. Navy. Gives them much too much time to settle into their defensive schemes. Would much rather see a quick count - keep the D off balance.


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: O-line -- 'gate73, 09/ 7/15 4:17:18pm Mon

>>Question: in an early season game against a foe such
>>as Navy, Syracuse, Air Force, etc., how much do we
>>"open our kimono" to our Patriot League opponents?
>
>There's plenty of time to switch up our O before
>league games start, I wouldn't worry about that. Our
>game plans have changed in the past and I would guess
>this is all part of the strategy of the long season.
>
>I have to agree with The Future on one thing. Why not
>use the hurry up offense once in a while to confuse
>the opponent? It wouldn't hurt to change the pace of
>things. Also I don't like the long count we were using
>vs. Navy. Gives them much too much time to settle into
>their defensive schemes. Would much rather see a quick
>count - keep the D off balance.

It seemed like we were using long counts before the snap frequently. Was that meant to draw the defense offsides? Didn't seem effective (but the coaches know more than I ever will). Also, where was Afriyie after the first few minutes? Was he hurt? He seems to be quite an athlete.


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> Re: Navy game comments -- Gate Raider, 09/ 7/15 7:32:18pm Mon

The Future is correct. Colgate's game plan and play calling is very predictable and has been for two decades. Go to a game or to the Inn after a game and it is a frequent topic of conversation. Works okay within the PL and not so much outside of it.


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Navy game comments -- The Future, 09/12/15 1:41:44pm Sat

I really like Colgate's offense and in many ways, it's been the offense that has been the foundation for Colgate's best teams over the past 20 years (which means Hunt should get a lot of the credit for Colgate's best moments). There is nothing more demoralizing for a defense to know (basically) what is coming at you and not be able to stop it. My only point is that the offense is hurt by not having the threat of the ball being thrown down the field and that tends to show itself against the better teams. As for tempo, I think just mixing it up would help/keep the defense on its toes. Unless you are running out the clock, there is an energy to a offense getting on a roll--the best recent example of that to me is that end of the first half against Princeton last year (which was also the last jump ball to Quazza in the end zone).

Navy may also be the best team Colgate has played since #3 Syracuse in '87 (I'm sure there is a team in there I'm forgetting). I have no doubt that this team can beat UNH and anybody else they play this year.

Hope they came out of the Navy game game with the energy and cohesiveness they had at camp mixed with a healthy dose of anger.

Also, for those people who don't like Colgate playing up, Jacksonville State (FCS team) is beating Auburn at the half. Auburn was between a 41 and 47 point favorite in this game. Auburn will probably win but the Jax State kids will never forget the day they went into half beating the #6 team in the country.

Beat UNH!


[ Edit | View ]


[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-5
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.