ADVERTISEMENT

Elon Game Thread

Why aren't we going for it on 4th and 3 at the Elon redzone? What does 3 points do to us when we are down 14 (still down two scores with field goal), Elon is scoring at will, and our offense is playing well. Trau misses and Elon is once again running at will.

I have liked Trau but he has become a liability. Anything beyond 33 yards (NFL extra point) is very questionable. Now we don't even try if it's longer than 40, and that's pathetic. There are high school kickers all over the place that can make them longer than 40 yards. And I don't even want to talk about kickoffs, I've beaten that horse for years.

I will give Breckenridge a pass for now because he's a freshman. Statistically he had a good game, with the benefit of some fortuitous rolls. But he's averaging 34 yards a punt (mediocre high school distance).

Now, cue the responses that will say:

1. Can't get good kickers at the FCS level
2. Should never "waste" scholarships on kickers and punters
 
  • Like
Reactions: spideralum08
Now, cue the responses that will say:

1. Can't get good kickers at the FCS level
2. Should never "waste" scholarships on kickers and punters

In my mind, you have sort of won this argument.

Regarding the punting, we were netting 30 yards a punt prior to today. Our opponents were netting 37 yards a punt. Assuming, 4 or 5 punts a game by each team, we are just spotting our opponents 3 or 4 first downs a game before the game even starts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpiderRick
I find it funny how a few weeks ago the former players were saying that this team has talent and the coaches are no good and a majority of this board told them they were wrong and we had no talent and would need years to catch up to the top their teams. Now everybody wants to agree with them? Maybe they do have insider information
 
I find it funny how a few weeks ago the former players were saying that this team has talent and the coaches are no good and a majority of this board told them they were wrong and we had no talent and would need years to catch up to the top their teams. Now everybody wants to agree with them? Maybe they do have insider information
I find it interesting that none of the insiders liked the great message in the "From a Former Player" thread.
 
Choppin, to play devils advocate, I think they were probably silent because that “former player” played in a different era. Things are much different now, not only at Richmond, but across the entire landscape of college football.
 
That was a message from someone who clearly has no idea what is going on with this team. Kind of sick of you trying to play Mr. Holier-than-thou all of the time. Maybe back when you played losing was acceptable.


We're all Spiders, disagree if you desire but show respect. Or at least stop the name calling, or similar.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RollDers
We're all Spiders, disagree if you desire but show respect. Or at least stop the name calling, or similar.
You are absolutely right. Name calling has no place on a forum like this. How about this instead — “Your virtue signalling at times makes me wonder if Huesman was the best man at your wedding.”
 
It does seem Huesman continues to mention missed assignments...we're 8 games into the season should that be at a minimal by now, or are we constantly changing and the players can't keep up?
 
This defense is completely different than our prior philosophy. It is an assignment based agrressive style that is much different from the style many complained about that was more zone oriented and was designed to not give up big plays. Coaches are using two different schemes at this point with either 3 LBs or an extra DB depending on down and distance. We have to either improve the techniques of our current players or get in kids with the ability to cover man to man out on islands and come up and make tackles. Our interior line is playing well but our next two levels have to fill gaps, tackle and cover receivers one on one much better. One blown assignment results in a big play.
 
I can't speak to the technical aspects pointed out by the detractors since I have not been to any practices, but I think that we need to give Huesman more time to show whether he can take us to where we want to be. Perhaps another two years.
It takes time for a coach to settle in and change systems. This is just Huesman's second year. Most experts think it takes three or four years to establish respectability in a program.
 
It does seem Huesman continues to mention missed assignments...we're 8 games into the season should that be at a minimal by now, or are we constantly changing and the players can't keep up?
With this coaching staff, I am not sure our kids are getting the assignments in the first place.

By the way, does Trau ever practice??
 
Huesman's record at Chatty which was in poor, poor shape before his hire:

2009 6-5
2010 6-5
2011 5-6
2012 6-5
2013 8-4
2014 10-4 (Quarter Finals)
2015 9-4 (Second Round)
2016 9-4 (Second Round)

I am impatient by nature (very), but it appears his approach takes a while to implement or at least that's what I am clinging to at this point. (Remember Beamer in the early years at Tech.)

No way we should have been a 6-5 team last year or a 3-5 team this year with the talent we have. The on going costly missed assignments on both O and D trouble me deeply, BUT let's give the guy some more time. If he can't vie for CAA Championships once he has his recruits in place for four years, then the decision should be easy. As of now, although deeply disappointed, I remain on the Russ bus.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT