Rice

by **Stallion** » Sun Oct 03, 2004 10:58 am

before some of you all get too giddy about Rice's loss-it should be pointed out that they had something like 570 yards rushing and 63 points last nite which are about how much we've had in each category all year. I don't know if Rice had an injury in the secondary or what but SJSU had about 359 yards passing on only 10 completions-almost 40 yards per catch. That will be difficult to duplicate. SMU hasn't played well in Houston since before Mustangs35SMU was born so this won't be a walk in the park especially playing against an offense which we play once a year.

by **PonySnob** » Sun Oct 03, 2004 11:14 am

We played pretty well in Houston in that game that Roy Rios lost on a missed field goal back in the Cave-in era.

by **Stallion** » Sun Oct 03, 2004 12:02 pm

More: Rice won the time of possession by 42-18 minutes. You could go 100 years and not see a team get beat after scoring 63 points with 570 yards rushing and 42 minutes of TOP. I smell walk-ons in the secondary. Was Rice beat-up after the UT game?

by **Uncle Morty** » Sun Oct 03, 2004 2:43 pm

I sort of wondered the same thing after seeing the game stats. San Jose's shortest touchdown was a 28 yard interception return, everything else was 40 yards or more. I took a quick look at Rice's website, and apparently they have had alot of injuries in the secondary. I found a couple of quotes from Hatfield about having just 1 cornerback suited out for practice, and having to move other players around to different positions. That may have been a big factor, and I think they probably had a few concentration lapses after they took a 34-7 lead early in the game.

One other injury i saw on their webpage was Ben Wiggins, the tight end who had a career day against us last year. Knee injury has pretty much finished his career.

by **Charleston Pony** » Sun Oct 03, 2004 3:06 pm

The thought of this SMU team having to outscore anyone to win a game is frightening, but our skill guys won't be quite so overmatched for the remainder of this season. If we can defense the option, I like our chances...but Bennett hasn't shown me yet that he can stop option offenses (Navy and Rice games come to mind). I'm looking for Harris and McCray to come up big in this game.

by **SWC2010** » Sun Oct 03, 2004 4:00 pm

Charleston Pony wrote:The thought of this SMU team having to outscore anyone to win a game is frightening, but our skill guys won't be quite so overmatched for the remainder of this season. If we can defense the option, I like our chances...but Bennett hasn't shown me yet that he can stop option offenses (Navy and Rice games come to mind). I'm looking for Harris and McCray to come up big in this game.

-
Well, Charleston, let's hope that we copy Coach Tomey's UT scheme on stopping Rice:

[1] Dont' guess. Sell out on the Fullback EACH down;
[2] Hit the QB on every option;
[3] Swarm wide on the pitch.

By the way, Henderson (Rice QB), got banged up quite a bit against UT & SJSU.

by **The PonyGrad** » Sun Oct 03, 2004 4:46 pm

I am assuming this post is facetious since those 3 are pretty much mutually exculsive. :shock:

by **Stallion** » Sun Oct 03, 2004 9:05 pm

better yet maybe we can borrow Coach Schumann for a week as a Visting Coach Emeritus as he is the only defensive coordinator since the DP that has shown he had any clue on how to stop the Rice wishbone.

by **Lotus** » Sun Oct 03, 2004 10:46 pm

There were those who thought Coach B couldn't keep TT out of the end zone, either. He said all along that he had a scheme that would work, but that he needed the athletes to run it. It's a little different in this case -- that was DB-intensive, stopping the option is more LB-intensive -- so guys like Don Ieremia-Stansbury, Rico Harris and especially Wilton McCray and Avery Cleveland will have to come up big this weekend. High-motor DEs (Justin Rogers, etc.) will help a lot, too. Sure would be nice to have Cory Muse in the lineup Saturday.

by **SWC2010** » Sun Oct 03, 2004 11:29 pm

The PonyGrad wrote:I am assuming this post is facetious since those 3 are pretty much mutually exculsive.

______________________________

Ya know PGrad, I just complemented you on another thread-- I guess I spoke too soon!

So, let's hear from the Rice Coach (after getting dismantled by UT) from the Sunday newspaper...

"[deleted] Tomey knows in triple-option football, you stop the fullback first," Hatfield said Saturday after his team's 35-13 defeat at Texas..."

OVER & OVER, PGrad-- YOU DON'T GUESS...

Then, PGrad, you either hit the QB or force him wide. If, last option, he pitches everyone else swarms to the pitch. You make them beat you there!

The 'option' has become a high school offense- it's not rocket science to defend if you're consistent.

by **The PonyGrad** » Mon Oct 04, 2004 10:29 am

[1] Dont' guess. Sell out on the Fullback EACH down;
[2] Hit the QB on every option;
[3] Swarm wide on the pitch.

VS

"[deleted] Tomey knows in triple-option football, you stop the fullback first," Hatfield said Saturday after his team's 35-13 defeat at Texas..."

OVER & OVER, PGrad-- YOU DON'T GUESS...

Then, PGrad, you either hit the QB or force him wide. If, last option, he pitches everyone else swarms to the pitch. You make them beat you there!

I agree with your second assessment, perhaps it is a matter of degree, but to "sell out on the fullback" is not the same as "you stop the fullback first". The former implies to me that everyone is sucked in by the fake to the FB and will not be in position for the other options.

"hit the QB or force him wide" does not seem the same as "Hit the QB on every option"

However, #3 looks to be the same.

I guess I was hung up on "sell out"

by **PonySnob** » Mon Oct 04, 2004 10:38 am

Wasn't there a game we played with Rice in the not to distant past where they killed us with a lot of pass plays that they ran out of the option?

by **Dark Horse** » Mon Oct 04, 2004 10:39 am

I've talked to players before who have had to defend the option. (I'd love to tell you I've done it, but I was the worst high school LB you ever saw.) They tell me that the scheme for stopping the option is easy - and exactly as SWC2010 says. Stop the FB, clobber the QB and string out the RB to the sideline and swarm him with fast LBs and DBs. Knowing how to stop it is fairly easy. Actually doing it is another matter. If we pull off the win Saturday (I mean WHEN we pull off the win Saturday), I see Wilton McCray and Rico Harris with 15+ tackles apiece.

by **FloridaMustang** » Mon Oct 04, 2004 11:00 am

Dark Horse wrote:I've talked to players before who have had to defend the option. (I'd love to tell you I've done it, but I was the worst high school LB you ever saw.) They tell me that the scheme for stopping the option is easy - and exactly as SWC2010 says. Stop the FB, clobber the QB and string out the RB to the sideline and swarm him with fast LBs and DBs. Knowing how to stop it is fairly easy. Actually doing it is another matter. If we pull off the win Saturday (I mean WHEN we pull off the win Saturday), I see Wilton McCray and Rico Harris with 15+ tackles apiece.

I'm sorry, but when did Channing Crowder enroll at SMU?

by **SWC2010** » Mon Oct 04, 2004 11:36 am

PonySnob wrote:Wasn't there a game we played with Rice in the not to distant past where they killed us with a lot of pass plays that they ran out of the option?

You could be right, PS, but teams run the option because their QB's are runners not passers. And Henderson (Rice QB) was recruited for his 4.4 40-- not his arm. Saturday, I'll prefer Henderson and/or Armstrong passing than sprinting against our D.

Our biggest issue will be wrapping up the ball carrier by our LB's...

Rice

Rice

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Who is online