brophog

The median carry per back isn't all that different, it's the ability to break one that separates YPC. He doesn't really have that ability.

There were a few runs where they just had the numbers, and a few he may have been able to bounce outside, but he played well above his weight today. Taking on defensive lineman, dragging piles...he was a lot of fun to watch today.

Impossible to answer until the QB question is answered. I'm not about to just assume it's Lee's job for life.

What is his job? To build a program, to become a consistent winner. You then judge him on his ability to do the things that lead to winning. If you just look at wins this year, how do you know winning this year leads to wins next year?

I can't wait to hear why.

Tell me how to win. You can tell me how to block, tackle, throw a pass....you can't tell me how to win.

I want onea them smashmouth offenses.

Other than forgetting how to call an offense, he seemed fine. Sorry if I scared you.

In a big way, not that they seemed to notice.

I'm sure a lot of people in this profession would love knowing how to determine that.

Do we know that, though? Certainly you could make the argument this defense is untested, having faced back to back terrible offenses that were also missing key players. There are some coverage matchups that I fully expect teams to exploit. But what if that defensive line is really legit? What if we do replace the QB?

No. But anything before 2000 was vastly different due to TV money. If I remember correctly, and I may not, Spurrier made 1 million as the highest paid coach that year.

It shouldn't be decided on wins. Performance is what leads to wins. Measure him on what he can control.

With that offense, 10 is an entire game's worth.

And maybe some of those guys missing shouldn't be starters.

Can't wait to see how UCF pulled this off. Very impressive stats.

That's why I agree with an above poster that this is in some ways more frustrating than a loss. This should have been like 58-3. Teams have those kinds of wins without it meaning they're all world...they're just playing a terrible team.

Situational football matters, not silly ratios.

It was quite hot, and the game was beyond over at that point. Rutgers had all but conceded.

You guys know my opinion of pass/run ratios and such things....and even I'm yelling that today. Absurd at times, tbh.

They were also without their lead wr/returner. That had to affect them. Kill ran fewer play types than your average option team. The run defense was much improved, though, in function. Didn't seem like as many missed assignments, even in comparison to a week ago.

They did. My worry, again not having the benefit of anything but the live watch, is how many known free blitzers got through. Rutgers ran the same set almost the entire game, yet never adjusted to how we aligned to it. Blitzes look great when they get there. Where are we when they don't? I'm happy today, unsure about 2 weeks from now.

The book is still out on Diaco, but he'll get more breathing space after this week. I was very surprised at Kill, tbh. That was sad.

From the stands the defense looked far better than last week. Saw some weaknesses, but a lot more strengths. Obviously a neutered opponent without their only semi-threat, and a tendency to use one ineffective set is no real test. But I saw some opponent neutral, too. Anxious to see this d-line against a real opponent. I've felt good about that group all season.

Kill this ugly game off and get to the real opponents.