PonyFans.com

Some other things stood out about the game, besides turnovers:

1) Negative plays. ECU forced them, we didn't. Besides the key Martin fumble and recovery, there were several times where Romo took a big sack, which stalled our drives. There were several times where we had the ECU RB or QB locked up in the backfield and couldn't make the play.

2) OUr playmakers didn't make plays. Martin is a great runner, but in the open field he doesn't make moves, he runs people over. Which is great, but we don't get the huge play. None of our players who were involved int eh game yesterday could make a guy miss in the open field. The only guys it seems like have that ability are Henderson and Warren who touched the ball less than 5 times between them yesterday, Henderson the big zero.

3) We can't make defensive plays in the open field. Their QB gets outside, we have him lined up, he makes a move an runs past. RB gets wide, in a little space, first player misses him every time. WR catches the ball in open space on a blown coverage, and makes 5 guys slip down and gets 70 YAC.

Our offense made more negative plays and couldn't make the big play in the open field. Their offense kept negative plays to a minimum and made some plays in the open field. That had as much to do with the result as the turnovers.

JasonB wrote: .... 1) Negative plays. ECU forced them, we didn't. Besides the key Martin fumble and recovery, there were several times where Romo took a big sack, which stalled our drives. There were several times where we had the ECU RB or QB locked up in the backfield and couldn't make the play.

Really? Nnabuife had a fantastic interception, Haywood had a sack and Bonds and Haywood (according to the DMN, anyway) had five tackles for loss. Aren't those negative plays for the ECU offense?

JasonB wrote: .... 2) OUr playmakers didn't make plays. Martin is a great runner, but in the open field he doesn't make moves, he runs people over. Which is great, but we don't get the huge play. None of our players who were involved int eh game yesterday could make a guy miss in the open field. The only guys it seems like have that ability are Henderson and Warren who touched the ball less than 5 times between them yesterday, Henderson the big zero.

I agree with you there, JasonB -- it looked like the ball had been tossed in the clothes dryer before all the kickoffs. The ECU guy not only split the uprights twice, he even reached the first row of the stands. And that was AGAINST the wind. I'm sure that kid has a cannon, but come on. And McMurtray was knocking the laces out of the ball on kickoffs, too -- even going into the wind. That was amazing.

JasonB wrote: .... 3) We can't make defensive plays in the open field. Their QB gets outside, we have him lined up, he makes a move an runs past. RB gets wide, in a little space, first player misses him every time. WR catches the ball in open space on a blown coverage, and makes 5 guys slip down and gets 70 YAC.

I agree with you -- sort of. We didn't make enough plays in the open field, that's true, but Ro Humphrey (as always) had a few big open-field tackles, and Nnabuife and Lee stopped Pinkney in the open field when he looked like he had a sure first down. Those were good. But you're right, we need more.

JasonB wrote: .... Our offense made more negative plays and couldn't make the big play in the open field. Their offense kept negative plays to a minimum and made some plays in the open field. That had as much to do with the result as the turnovers.

Now here I do disagree with you. For all of those mistakes -- and they were rough -- you take away the turnovers and we're talking about a two-touchdown win and a two-game winning streak. The sights on Romo's gun were off. Here's hoping he gets that squared away before Tulsa.

Martin has played 6 games. Dickerson was humbled after his first 6 games. Line him up 8 yards deep give him a FB and then tell me he can't see the holes. SMU's offense makes it damn difficult the see holes-it is not a runners offense especially with a runner of his build. He is a protype I formation TB. They keep talking about Martin looks like he's running downhill when he makes a nice run-translation when he gets a head of steam he's much more difficult to stop-that's why you line the TB deep in the backfield. He's one of the best prospects we've had since the DP-definitely good enough to modify the offense a little around his skills.

here here! give me more I formation and the M&M boys (McKinney/Martin/Massey) with a little Dorsey mixed in

Stallion wrote:Martin has played 6 games. Dickerson was humbled after his first 6 games. Line him up 8 yards deep give him a FB and then tell me he can't see the holes. SMU's offense makes it damn difficult the see holes-it is not a runners offense especially with a runner of his build. He is a protype I formation TB.

---
Damn right, Ive said several times D Myron was the Sleeper of that recruiting class.

Lineup some in the I & wear him out. Then run play action out of the I to a streaking Columbus Givens. The OC needs to tweak the play calling to the talent he has.

OK he's not a sleeper-he is one of the legitimate recruits we've got.

Martin wasn't exactly a sleeper, we had to fight the Aggies right up to signing day.

For a little sunshine (just for Jtstang and Ponysnob), but more importantly to bring fairness to my previous gripes on special teams, the STs played an error free game yesterday and even provided field position on 2 punts that should have resulted in points for us had we held them against their goal line. Too bad we could not get a kickoff return into the mix. We need much more consistency (the good kind), much fewer mistakes, and some big play makers. Congrats to Columbus Givens for stepping up and making big catches and allowing us to forget the drops.