PonyFans.com

Alright...for sh-ts & giggles, I took a look last week at the UAB/SMU matchup. It was obvious that buttonholing Joe Webb was key, and UAB supported this idea given that the only reason they remained in it was due to turnovers and a reverse for a TD.

So now I'm gonna say that SMU will also win this game vs. Washington State. However, there are some assumptions I'm making...namely, that our guys are healthy enough for game time, stay healthy during the game, and this flu thing doesn't get ugly between now and then. My oldest has this crap, and it is absolutely no fun.

Washington State on defense is susceptible to the pass...granted, they will prepare better given that they have seen it with Hawaii...but Bradley and Salas torched WSU 345 yards, including bomb TDs. I say that if their safeties are slow and/or stupid, BLM should pick on them early and often. However, if they did learn their lesson and play a deep zone, BLM should hit the drags and out-routes in the middle...maybe a screen or two to McNeal or Line. I think they should run traps and draws with McNeal too. IMHO, he is a better back than Hawaii's, and although they didn't break 100 yards, two RBs put up a pair of TDs to pad the score.

Now, all that said, SMU doesn't match up the same way Hawaii did. This won't be easy. This WSU team will require that Jones step on their neck during the second half. Can't turn the ball over. These WSU guys shouldn't quit, and they will be playing for pride.

On offense, WSU is pretty balanced. I think Hawaii has a stronger D than SMU on balance, but SMU can create turnovers, so I think Washington State has a big target on their backs here. Our run D is going to need to bottle Montgomery without giving up the big play. Their QB is pretty accurate, but he turned the ball over twice vs. Hawaii, so given the secondary's success, that gives me hope.

I think this one will be ugly, but I believe SMU has a shot. I'll call it 48-36 with SMU coming up with a defensive touchdown and a special teams TD. (okay, I'll pulling that out of my [deleted], but oh what the hell....)

Hmm do you realize the most WSU scored on a Division 1A team last year was 28 and they probably averaged about 12 points per game against Division 1A teams

I am not making any guesses on this game. I think it could go either way. I will say that Hawaii beating them down gives me hope though.

Stallion wrote:Hmm do you realize the most WSU scored on a Division 1A team last year was 28 and they probably averaged about 12 points per game against Division 1A teams

ouch

Stallion wrote:Hmm do you realize the most WSU scored on a Division 1A team last year was 28 and they probably averaged about 12 points per game against Division 1A teams

Nope. Didn't. I'll take it, though.

I'll take 29-28

My view is that we still need to plan on scoring at least 35 a game to have a chance to win. Our defense is high risk, high reward. Sooner or later, we're going to get burned for 45 points in some game. But judging from our progression, our offense is steadily improving and our defense is making some plays. Let's give our offense a short field early, this week.

My hope is that the "Preliminary Breakdown of Washington State" will continue for another week.

I really worry about how the travel to this game affects this game. It's supposed to be a very long trip.

I love that we are 2-0, but I think it is one thing to go on the road and play at a mostly empty stadium as opposed to travelling across the country to play a BCS school in front of a packed house... we capitalized on a lot of mistakes on Saturday. Hawaii is good enough to make their own plays. Hopefulyl, our offense continues to grow and becomes a bit more consistant. That will be necessary for us to have a shot in this one.

yeah one of these days we are going to face a team that doesn't make 5-6 turnovers

OC Mustang wrote:This won't be easy.

The Ponies might be 2-0, but they are still SMU.

No game will be easy.

the defense is high risk high reward, but they are on the field a lot seeing as thats how our offense operates. im not as worried about these high yard totals because of that. The key to success is the turnover ratio being in our favor. I think we'll win the games that we have a positive ratio in all season.

SMU 42
WSU 20

homer pick, pony up

MustangLaxer wrote:the defense is high risk high reward, but they are on the field a lot seeing as thats how our offense operates. im not as worried about these high yard totals because of that. The key to success is the turnover ratio being in our favor. I think we'll win the games that we have a positive ratio in all season.

SMU 42
WSU 20

homer pick, pony up

Laxer, I do agree with you that the defense yardage stat means dittily-squat given the amount of time that they can be on the field vis-a-vis the run/shoot offense. However, I don't know if I'm ready to call SMU's D "high risk-high reward". I only saw SFA, so if you saw UAB on video-feed, or if anybody else did live, what kind of blitz packages did SMU run? SMU vs. SFA had SMU's D sending only four most of the time, but it was a different four just about every time, either by virtue of substituting, mixing zone blitzes, lining up LBs at DE spot, or just sending the extra LB from left, right, or center. That just doesn't seem "high-risk" as much as "good scheming". Our corners and safeties have played very well and produced turnovers, but they haven't seen All-Conference receivers yet...um...check that...I guess they line up against two, maybe three of them in practice...but you know what I mean.

I think you are right, though. Given that the D (and O, I suppose) lives and dies by turnovers, then as long as the ratio is tipped in SMU's favor (and hopefully heavily in SMU's favor), then the guys have a real chance. Caveat: Houston...IMHO, I think they are tops in conference unless OSU was a fluke and/or looked past them.

you wouldnt look past houston. they really have a good team.

I seem to remember SMU bringing five regularly with delayed blitz calls, but that could have been the fuzzy webcam screwing with me. it was hard to tell.