• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!

Balanced Attack. Good Defense. 42 points!

ronbo

Well-known member
Rushing 186 yards, would have been 237 but Ochs and JH were minus 51 yards.

Passing 15-22, 159 yards, 2 TD's, 0 interceptions.

0 turnovers for Griz, 4 turnovers for the Viks all forced by great hits and the defensive line hurrying the QB, and great efforts by the DB's.

Time of possession Griz 35:43, Portland 24:17

1st downs Griz 24, Portland 13.

Portland passing 11-27, 183 yards, 2 picks. And they had a 45 yarder that was totally a luck play. The Defensive Backs did real good.

Portland rushing 105 yards. We shut down another tough runner. Fuqua 19 attempts, 77 yards.

Penalties Griz just 4 for only 30 yards!

We dominated this game. Now let's keep improving next week and take a win home from Flagstaff.
 
i take all the credit for the win, what with my highly supportive posting, and not pressuring the coaching staff to pass all the time this week.

it was a great win. i'm still a little afraid of nau, though, 'cuz despite what rainbow said, the griz didn't 'dominate' the game. they dominated the 4th quarter, due to wearing down the vik defense, and a mix of great play by the griz dbacks combined with some serious shooting of one's own foot by the vickies.

i know i'll get accused of sour coating, etc, by pointing out that it was still a nailbiter very late in the 3rd quarter, with the griz "o" stifled and the vickies with the ball and moving it and only trailing by six, but hey. the three running backs all had stellar games, and the dbacks seemed to really step up, even more so when v. smith had left the game. that's sweet, let's see it continue!
 
I agree it was a nice win, still lots of areas to improve upon, but we continue to play a little better every week. If I had a real complaint it would be about all the lame fans sitting around me this year. Also, it would have been good to let Harman throw the ball a couple times when he came in at the end.
 
I agree with letting Hartman throw a few but that probably would have looked really classless after we were crushing them. Like we were running up the score.

I think the running game is excellent. I know everybody whines about too much running and how boring it is, but I don't care as long as we win. I do think we run too much to start games though. I know, run to set up the pass, but you can also pass to set up the run. I think we should do that. Come out firing, get the lead and then run it into the ground. The Hilliard, Green, and Waller combo is an excellent variety of backs that can really mix it up.

I'm also really impressed with Walden. He is playing really well this year. It's nice to see Ochs spreading the ball around.
 
argh! said:
it was a great win. i'm still a little afraid of nau, though, 'cuz despite what rainbow said, the griz didn't 'dominate' the game. they dominated the 4th quarter, due to wearing down the vik defense, and a mix of great play by the griz dbacks combined with some serious shooting of one's own foot by the vickies.
I agree.............I thought I started to see some of the PSU defensive line with their hands on their knees sucking air late in the 2nd quarter. I'm not sure PSU had the debth to rotate their players like we did and this may have been part of their undoing as well.
 
We will not score 42 or even 24 if we run the ball 50 times next week. Ofcourse...I don't think we will be in a postion to run the ball that much...cuz NAU is going to score. They are comin off a tough and unexpected loss.....now they will play desperate...they will play their best game of the year next week......so bring it on. It is the game of the year next week.
 
It would be nice to see MORE of Waldon. Waller finally came to play. I still wish we would throw more...I guess we would/might have had our O-line been giving better protection. Some miss comunication? or did they just get beat a few times. More play action, naked boots and roll outs. All and all we did fine. PSU gave up after Edwards got his pick. NAU will be out for blood next week we better bring the A+ game to that one. Yea no turn overs today...oh what a difference when you win that battle. I didn't like the decision to use Samson at QB...but who am I. I was also kind of dissapointed that we couldn't find the enzone in the 1st quarter. We dominated the 1st and the 4th. should have been 50-14. Good job though. Go GRIZ
 
Let us not forget this was a very good team we played today. What, because we beat them 42-14 they are not any good?

Portland State was a 4-3 team coming in.

They just beat Sac. State 20-7.

NAU only scored 23 points on them.

By the way how does everyone feel about Weber State now? Some of you were saying we only scored 12 points on such an AWFUL team like Weber.

They anailated Idaho State.

Food for thought. I think NAU better be VERY NERVOUS about us. We are starting to peak.

We are 4 points from being undefeated folks. 4 POINTS!!!!!
 
ronbo said:
Let us not forget this was a very good team we played today. What, because we beat them 42-14 they are not any good?

Portland State was a 4-3 team coming in.

They just beat Sac. State 20-7.

NAU only scored 23 points on them.

By the way how does everyone feel about Weber State now? Some of you were saying we only scored 12 points on such an AWFUL team like Weber.

They anailated Idaho State.

Food for thought. I think NAU better be VERY NERVOUS about us. We are starting to peak.

We are 4 points from being undefeated folks. 4 POINTS!!!!!


Yes 4 points....and to think we gave the ball away so much in those games that we lost by only 4 points......but it is now time to look to next week! Game of the year....again. :lol:
 
argh! said:
i take all the credit for the win, what with my highly supportive posting, and not pressuring the coaching staff to pass all the time this week.

You most certainly deserve the credit, argh! You are a man of true vision, and insight...for that, I'm thankful.
 
I noticed today the Portland State defense was playing pass. I think that's why we didn't really go deep very often. We would have been playing into their strength. They were rushing four and dropping seven with some blitzing by the backers here and there.

Ochs game last week had em' worried.

So the coaches played to their weakness, the run. And we walked all over them with it. We truly should have scored our 49th points there at the end, we drove 50 yards to the 1 yard line with the run. Then a penalty pushed us back and the coaches just ran out the clock at that point.

Now if they had stacked the line, then I'll bet we would have passed for 300+ yards again. But today we took what they gave us, the short passing game and the rush.

What's NAU going to do? They going to play us to run? They going to play us to pass? It'll be fun.
 
ronbo said:
So the coaches played to their weakness, the run. And we walked all over them with it.

Now if they had stacked the line, then I'll bet we would have passed for 300+ yards again. But today we took what they gave us, the short passing game and the rush.


I hear where you are coming from.......but I come from the school of thought that a team should always play to it's stregths and not to the other teams weaknesses.


Our stregth is mixing in more pass. Not to pass every down, but to pass as many times as we run. When we only pass 20 times a game, our O is way less than good. But when we throw the ball.....not only do we get crowd pleasing exciting pass plays, but it opens the run. With more pass mixed in it makes our whole O more efficient, and a lot more dangerous.


Look, Ochs again was passing at a 70% completion rate....had no INTs, and two TDs. His QB rating had to be out of this world in this game. So if PSU was "playing" our pass, why were we so effective throwing the ball? And what would have happened if we threw it 10-15 more times?


And it is not a balanced O to run twice as many times as we throw......Ochs has proven he can get it done....so let him is my thought.


I do think it is rather odd that we play super conservative and run the ball 50 times a game at home.....but then on the road open it up and go for 500+ yards! Is Bobby giving the big FU to the home fans???? I sure hope not......for his sake. :wink:
 
Keep in mind the score after the end of 3 quarters was Griz 20 - PSU 14. The difference in the game was Griz wearing them out in 4th Qtr and PSU turnovers. PSU had 4 turnovers, Griz had none. This could have been a nailbiter at the end without the turnovers.

A 42-14 win seems big, and it is a good victory, but may not be as dominating as it sounds, just as a 1 point loss on a missed field goal or a 3 point loss in double OT is not reason to fire the coach. Griz would have beaten ISU last week without the Griz turnovers. The Griz are not that far from being 8-0 --or that far from being 4-4. The difference between victory and defeat is sometimes pretty narrow, and we need to recognize this and keep things in perspective.

AND GRIZ need to stop turnovers and force the other team to turn the ball over. In tight games that is the key.
 
I disagree, Geaux. If I'm a coach, I'd think to myself, "What would be the last thing the coach on the other side would want me to do?" and then I'd do just that. Flashback: Idaho game.
 
All good points by everyone here. I do think we dominated the red zone though. We made at least 3-4 trips there and only came away with about 6 points from those trips. If we had scored 14 instead of 6 on the first two drives the third quarter score would have been much different.

They scored 7 on a 23 yard muffed punt that gave them a very short field. And their other score came also on a fluke 45 yard reception that was a pass that would have been incomplete 9-10 times.

So I think they lucked into their 14 points.

On the passing issue we threw 22 times on paper but Ochs had 8 rushes and I think only one was a planned run.

So we had 29 called pass plays and 7 broke down and were sacks or Ochs was forced to run it.

I believe balance is measured by yards gained not plays called. This is the way I have always heard it while playing and then following the game.
Can someone correct me if I am wrong.

I have always understood that a team that rushes for 175 yards and passes for 175 yards is a balanced attack.
 
ronbo said:
I do think we dominated the red zone though.

So I think they lucked into their 14 points.

On the passing issue we threw 22 times on paper but Ochs had 8 rushes and I think only one was a planned run.

I believe balance is measured by yards gained not plays called. This is the way I have always heard it while playing and then following the game.
Can someone correct me if I am wrong.

I have always understood that a team that rushes for 175 yards and passes for 175 yards is a balanced attack.


I agree, we did MUCH better in the redzone. I think for 2 reasons.
1. better execution. 2. varied play calling...the play action pass rollout to Walden was a great call.

I can agree that they "lucked" into their 14 points, but on the other hand i feel the PSU OC called a bad game. THey should have went to the air a lot more. and maybe thrown to Fuqua out of the backfield. We stiffled their run from the get-go and they didn't adapt to the fact that on 3 and 4 wr sets they had guys getting very open.

In regard to what one considers a "balanced attack" is sort of a general term and basicly, actually comes down to plays called in some ways. like if a team ran 50 times and threw 2 passes i'd say they're a run-oriented team, yet if they ran 50 times for 50 yards and threw 2 times for 100, i'd still say runnig the ball was the team's method of operation.

Personally, i agree with the way EA sports does it in that they have a playbook called "Balanced Run" and one called "balanced Pass" meaning that you do both but might lean a little to running or passing, but both are balanced attacks. In our last 2 games we saw examples of each. vs ISU we had a balanced-pass game, while this game was balanced-run, dictated by what the opposing D's weakness was.

One thing i hold to is that a team does need balance to in playoff and NC's. why? well, by being able to run or pass you can play and win against a variety of defensive schemes.

Right now i like our balance, but i would also point out that we need to develope a short and intermediate passing game more than we've done.
PSU was in 3 deep quite a bit forcing short passes yet many routes were long and right into coverage. short, underneeth passes can work wonders. Just an observation more than a complaint.
 
In regard to what one considers a "balanced attack" is sort of a general term and basicly, actually comes down to plays called in some ways. like if a team ran 50 times and threw 2 passes i'd say they're a run-oriented team, yet if they ran 50 times for 50 yards and threw 2 times for 100, i'd still say runnig the ball was the team's method of operation.

50 runs for 50 yards, 2 passes for 100 yards.

I'd say that's a coach that would truly need to be fired. :oops:

Here is another example of balance. Yards gained per play.

Our running game had 48 carries for 244 yards. This is subtracting the 7 rushes by Ochs that were sacks for 47 lost yards. I am counting the one planned QB draw that was a 9 yard TD.

That's 5.08 Yards per rush play.

Our passing attack was generally the short game because of the Defensive formations Portland gave us.

We were 15-22 for 159 yards.

That is 7.22 yards per pass play.

So we had pretty good balance in that we gained close to the same whether we ran or passed.
 
ronbo said:
In regard to what one considers a "balanced attack" is sort of a general term and basicly, actually comes down to plays called in some ways. like if a team ran 50 times and threw 2 passes i'd say they're a run-oriented team, yet if they ran 50 times for 50 yards and threw 2 times for 100, i'd still say runnig the ball was the team's method of operation.

50 runs for 50 yards, 2 passes for 100 yards.

I'd say that's a coach that would truly need to be fired. :oops:

Here is another example of balance. Yards gained per play.

Our running game had 48 carries for 244 yards. This is subtracting the 7 rushes by Ochs that were sacks for 47 lost yards. I am counting the one planned QB draw that was a 9 yard TD.

That's 5.08 Yards per rush play.

Our passing attack was generally the short game because of the Defensive formations Portland gave us.

We were 15-22 for 159 yards.

That is 7.22 yards per pass play.

So we had pretty good balance in that we gained close to the same whether we ran or passed.

fired? certainly, lol. I was just using an extreme #'s thing to show my point.

If someone wants decide on weather a team is balanced it does make sense, as you say, to look at the total yards, and total plays.
however, i think ave yards per play tells only how effective each type of play was.

Again, i like the balance. I like it a lot...but if they have to run every play to beat NAU so beat and the same for passing. what ever works in a particular game.
 
Argh - thanks for blessing us with that win. Ummmm - about next week. We have a little favor to ask of you.... :wink:

As for Waller, the paper said that he had been hurt. I didn't know anything about it. Did anyone else?
 
Back
Top