The Morning Blitz: Daily Utah links
by JazzyUte on Sep 14, 2009 1:54 AM MDT
17 comments
So is it time to panic yet?
The Utes looked pretty mediocre Saturday and that was against a worse than mediocre opponent. What's going to happen when they're actually tested? Maybe I don't want to find out. In fact, I might spend the entire Oregon game hiding behind my fingers.
Or am I overreacting? I hope so. I do have a flair for the dramatic. But c'mon, you can't tell me that performance inspires confidence. But it is just one game and it certainly won't define the season.
I mean, that game was just weird, wasn't it? For those not actually at the stadium, it felt like they were filming it from some outpost in Antarctica. The crowd looked disinterested and so did the opponent. For Utah, I'm sure that made it harder to find the needed fire to demolish what should have been an easy foe. I don't know. I think road teams tend to play better when the crowd is actually into the game and loud. Neither seemed to be the case Saturday and I'm sure it trickled down to the players on the field.
Of course, that sounds like I'm making excuses and I am. I'm trying to find any logical excuse for what happened Saturday.
Anyone want to offer up some other explanations? I'm all ears.
"Kelly: Utah ‘an extreme test’" | Duck Football with Rob Moseley | The Register-Guard
"Setting the stage for Utah week" | Duck Football with Rob Moseley | The Register-Guard
Utah football: Utes have two wins, but lots of questions - Salt Lake Tribune
The Associated Press: Season doesn't get easier for Oregon
BYU climbs in rankings; Utah rises and drops - Salt Lake Tribune
0 recs |
17 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
credit to San Jose
I guess it’s easy to panic after a game like this.But let’sgive some credit to the San Jose D which frustrated our offense by stopping us on key plays in the first 3 quarters. Yes we should have blown them out looking at the #’s but they stopped us from doing that. We learned a lot about ourself in the process, think it will benefit us to work harder on fixing some of the problems we had this week of practice as we get ready for Oregon.
by utahmanami on Sep 14, 2009 4:02 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
There is some cause for concern
Deep problems exposed in SJSU game:
1. Place kicking. This is unlikely to get better. Utah won’t necessarily miss three field goals every game, but a 36 yard field goal is hardly a gimme now. Utah would probably be better off punting or going for the 4th down conversion for the 50+ yarders.
2. Cornerbacks. Our corners got burned all game long. For the defense Whittingham runs, this is a problem. I do think this will improve with playing time, but it is still going to be a big step down from the two NFL corners Utah had last year.
Fluke problems that aren’t symptomatic:
1. Fumbles. Neither fumble was particularly sloppy. The second one by Asiata just looked like the defender somehow popped the ball out with his helmet.
2. Lack of opposition turnovers. SJSU had one turnover. It occurred with about 1 second left in the game. For all intents and purposes, they were turnover free. Good defenses do tend to force turnovers, but you should also expect the other team to have a few unlucky bounces. Utah is unlikely to lose the turnover battle all season long.
So there were some signs that Utah has taken a step down from last year, but there are also signs that they won’t look that sloppy every game.
by Ute in DC on Sep 14, 2009 7:12 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Corners and kicking
Much bigger worries than our Offense is.
by MeanBobMean on Sep 14, 2009 7:34 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I actually don't think our corners were getting burned.
They were right on top of the receivers (too close, in RJ Stanford’s case) and just didn’t make a play. That’s a technique problem, not an athleticism/talent problem. It’s fixable (but it needs to get fixed in a hurry).
And RJ has got to either turn his head or start playing behind the WR instead of in front of him, because 4 PI calls is ridiculous.
Everyone hates a pink-shirt-wearing communist.
by displacedute on Sep 14, 2009 10:02 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I thinking kicking will be an issue all year.
The CBs, well it’s early, but as displacedute said, it’s a correctable problem.
Fumbles should not be an issue the entire season. It looked flukish, since they both happened early in the game (3rd and 4th drives).
However, your last point DOES concern me because we’ve had two lackluster opponents and have only generated one turnover (I think, don’t quote me on that). Even in our down years (2005 and 2006), we forced enough turnovers against the Aggies to dominate. We didn’t the opening Thursday and we didn’t against the Spartans.
Is that just a coincidence or is this an underlying problem that will bite Utah in the butt later on this season?
One major concern has been the lack of defensive pressure on the opposing QB. Our line isn’t bad, but how many sacks have we recorded this season? And we’re playing arguably our two easiest opponents.
I just hope and pray it’s all coincidental and we’ll crank it up a level Saturday. We’ll need to, or it could get ugly.
by JazzyUte on Sep 14, 2009 11:03 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Turnovers
Turnovers are more susceptible to chance than a lot of other statistics. There are usually only a few for each side per game. They make a big difference in the outcome in a game, but sometimes the difference between a turnover and an incomplete pass is only a matter of inches. Whereas over the course of a game a quarterback will throw maybe 30 passes so that is a much more robust statistic.
The fact that Utah has only forced 2 TO’s (really only one because the last turnover was an interception with no time remaining at SJSU) causes me some concern, but I’d like a larger sample size before I commit to saying that Utah is doomed to being unable to force interceptions. Whittingham kept the team in the locker room for a full hour after the game ended. I imagine the lack of forced turnovers came up and I think it’s correctable.
by Ute in DC on Sep 14, 2009 3:09 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Defense . . .
of ours is not as good as I had hoped.
When we generate 500 yards in offense, we should score more.
They are playing like (oh dare I curse them by saying it) McBride’s teams.
Good news? We’re not cocky or bad, and we can move the ball-that should keep us in most or all of our games.
by MeanBobMean on Sep 14, 2009 7:34 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Some observations watching the game live...
Football is all about a game of momentum. To succeed, you need to capitalize the 5-7 pivotal moments in the game when the momentum swings in your favor. Utah had a solid first drive to start the game. The next 2 drives ended in turnovers which absolutely killed our momentum to start the game. After that, they pick up any momentum until the 4th quarter (similar theme to last year).
I told a friend of mine who was sitting with me at the game… “Well, we are playing in a High School stadium against a High School team, why would we expect to play like a collegiate RANKED team?” Unfortunately, I think Utah played to the level of their opponent yesterday. We have a young team and a bunch of guys playing new positions. Man, do I miss King Louie!!! To be honest, I was just happy watching my team play live (though I expected a much better performance).
I think we’ll re-group and play better next week, and open up the playbook a bit more. I hope the coaches make adjustments and that we get all our players back (Schlauderaff and Asiata didn’t play much in the 2nd half due to injuries). I was very disappointed in the corners, and have no idea where Robert Johnson and Joe Dale are hiding in the secondary. Going into the season, I was confident that our safeties would pick up the slack in the secondary knowing that lacked experience from our new, young corners. Why don’t our corners turn around, ever?
Can the issues on offense and defense be attributed to new coordinators? Does Kalani Sataki know what he is doing out there?
by Ute Fan in San Fran on Sep 14, 2009 9:35 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
A few questions:
1) What is your impressions so far of Cain – poise wise and how well does he do in a hostile environment?
2) How big is it if Asiata is a no go on Saturday?
3) How good are the backups?
by BisonDucks on Sep 14, 2009 1:37 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
answers
1) Cain has the physical attributes to take this team far, poise wise it’s hard to judge how he’ll handle facing the Oregon crowd. Playing San Jose was closer to a high school crowd than a college crowd, there’s no comparison to that and what he’ll be facing in Oregon. So this game will be his first true test on the road in a hostile enviroment.
2) Well it’s too early to predict if he’ll be out or not but if he is, but it would be noticeable if he didn’t play, he’s definitely a big part of our team success.
3) We saw a lot of Eddie Wide, he’s a quick guy, not exactly the typical Utah north-south run you over RB, but he was effective. Shakerin’s a big guy, he had a big run last week but that’s all we’ve seen from him so it’s tough to say.
by utahmanami on Sep 14, 2009 1:46 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Mostly agree with utahmanami
But here are my own answers:
1) Cain is very poised and is getting better. I don’t blame him for our struggles. He threw one interception when the receiver tipped a pass. The ball was catchable so Cain is not to blame. Otherwise he has been turnover free. He has played only one game in a hostile environment and he looked good. Autzen stadium is a different story though.
2) I like Asiata and think he is the best back we have, but Eddie Wide and Sausan Shakerin look capable.
3) I assume you mean the backups to Asiata? As mentioned above, at running back we are covered.
In general, Utah is deeper at some positions than others. Our OL is looking a little thin. Receivers are deep. Corners are struggling and are not deep. DL is deep. Secondary is covered. QB? Who knows. The presumed backup to Cain is a true freshman. He has not played in a game yet and may redshirt.
by Ute in DC on Sep 14, 2009 3:18 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
How good is your dline?
I see this as a concern for Oregon on the oline, which has been manhandled for 6 straight quarters up to the 2nd half of Purdue. We’ve got highly recruited prospects on our oline. Bo Thran is our best player but he was dinged up and seems to be getting better. I think our oline gets better as the season wears on but right now they’re a work in progress. We got the three juniors in Holmes (center), Thran (left tackle or guard), and Kaiser (right tackle). Asper (right guard) started one game for last year in the Holiday Bowl. Behind them are 4 star guys in York (starting left guard), Weems (back up left tackle), Cody (back up right guard), and Charmichael (back up left guard). All in all, this is a group with tons of upside but lacking in experience. They show up really light on the rosters (Cody at 270) but no one believes that they’re as light as listed. However, we’ve recruited guys for the spread that play well in space, so undersized is okay to a certain extent. Undersized and inexperienced (25 combined starts to begin the season) has been a bad combination. After the three juniors are a redshirt sophmore and freshman on the starting rotation and the guys after that are redshirt sophmores and freshman (2).
In any case, I’d love to hear about your dline.
by BisonDucks on Sep 14, 2009 4:54 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Or d-line looks good against the run.
One concern has been the lack of pressure we’ve put on the quarterback (not many sacks or even near-sacks in the first two games against bad lines).
But that could just be a mix of different things and not necessarily connected to the line.
If Oregon’s o-line is having issues, I feel A LOT better about Saturday’s game.
by JazzyUte on Sep 14, 2009 6:26 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah,
they’re a work in progress for sure. A lot of upside and it showed in the second half against Purdue when we got going and show flashed of last year’s offense. Purdue is actually good against the run as well.
In any case, that is a battle to watch for.
by BisonDucks on Sep 14, 2009 6:49 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Even though they've been answered...
I’ll get in my two cents.
1. Cain has looked better than expected. Granted, the opponents haven’t been tough, but he looks better today than Brian Johnson did two games into the 2005 season. I’m not saying Cain will go on to lead us to the highs Johnson did, but he’s certainly looking like an extremely capable quarterback.
One of his best assets seems to be his poise. I don’t think he’s forced one really bad pass in two games and can take off like a bat out of hell if the defense collapses. I’m excited to see how well he does in a very hostile environment like Autzen. Hopefully he doesn’t see much dropoff.
2. Asiata will most likely go. He seemed fine on the sidelines, but if he’s out, I think we’re ok. Eddie Wide & Shakerin are capable of stepping in and feeling the role if Asiata is gone. But like I said, I think he plays. Maybe not as much as against SJSU, but he’ll see the field.
3. Backups depend on the position, as Ute in DC said. QB is our biggest question mark because beyond Cain is a true freshman and we’re hoping it doesn’t come down to that.
by JazzyUte on Sep 14, 2009 3:36 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is a game that, for both teams, is a year too late. What a great match-up this would have been a year ago. I would have liked Oregon in a close one. This year, who the hell knows.
by Oregonfan_03 on Sep 14, 2009 3:05 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
My grades....
Offense: C
The Utes were moving the ball very well all night, the problem is they couldn’t finish drives. This is an area the Utes REALLY need to work on. The running backs were great and really kept us from melting down offensively, so cheers for them. Problem 2: TURNOVERS! the Utes gotta take care of the rock. silly fumbles should be avoided
Defense B+
I give the defense more credit because they are truly what kept us in the game, despite all the offensive hiccups, the D was smothering the run and stoping the Spartans on most of their third downs. I am concerned however at the chunks of yardage the Spartans were getting in the air. I also expected a better pass rush with the return of Koa Misi. This Utah defense can do a LOT better than just one sack.
The corners also need to tone down on the penalties (even if some of the calls were questionable at best).
Special Teams: D-
After a great performance against Utah St., the ST unit really took a major step backwards, I know following an all American kicker is tough but three missed field goals is not good. The reason I don’t put an F on the grade is for the fact our kick rutuners did a great job in giving Cain short fields, that and the fact Joe Phillips did a great job in picking up the slack, ((who cares if it was a chip-shot? after three misses we’ll take what we can get)
Coaching: B-
Dave Schramm called a pretty good game but he really needs to improve the game calling on red zone situations (particularly goal line offense). Kalani Sitake did great on the defensive side.
All in all I was really bothered that we struggled to beat a team that we should have handled easily. I guess part of the reason I’m frustrated about the win is the fact our rivals had NO trouble whomping their opponent. If the Holy was tomorrow BYU would have the advantage without question. I really hope Kyle Whittingham and his coaches can iron our our inconsistency before our key games on the road.
by GambitUte on Sep 14, 2009 5:28 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Block U
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
