Punting and lack of run production really concerns me...

#1
P

Peyton Berry

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2010
Messages
556
Likes
620
#1
Darr looked awful. I would trade him for Montana's punter anyday. Montana's kicker punted the ball like the ones the Colquitt's use to boom in Neyland. Darr didn't show me anything in pregame either, 40-45 yards max and inconsistent.

Hopefully it was first game jitters for him. If not, we are in trouble. Field position will kill us if Darr is unable to produce better results. Palardy can punt OK, but he can't do it all or he will wind up injured again.

And I know Montana stuffed the box on us and dared us to throw, but we still shoulda had better numbers running against them.

Hope these things improve for Cincy. GO VOLS
 
#2
#2
Idk, the coaches weren't real big on darr last year either. He may be a less than desired kicker.
 
#3
#3
Maybe if the walk-on kicker (can't remember name right off) can do PAT's and short FG's accurately and consistently Palardy can focus on long FG's, punting and kickoffs.
 
#4
#4
Peyton Berry said:
Maybe if the walk-on kicker (can't remember name right off) can do PAT's and short FG's accurately and consistently Palardy can focus on long FG's, punting and kickoffs.
Click to expand...

I know he was injured most of last season, but I'm not entirely convinced that a healthy Palardy could consistently put it in the endzone, or at least within the 5.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#5
#5
Darr is a concearn. Poole and the running game not so much. He will wake up. Post game interview he admitted he ran bad. He will fix it and be ready for cincy and fired up for gators.
 
#7
#7
The running game is if little or no concern at this point. Our run blocking was very basic throughout the game. We ran in obvious passing situations. Montana stacked the box the entire game....and we still rolled up over 100 yards on the ground. This was a glorified scrimmage for our coaches, and they got out without showing anything at all.

If Bray had thrown everytime conventional wisdom dictated it we would have hung 80 on them. If Cinci' or Florida stack the box the way the Griz did, we'll take our shots all day long.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#8
#8
According to a few morons on this site our offensive line sucked on purpose so that we wouldnt show florida anything.Im sure they will say the same thing about the punter.BTW you have to believe them or you dont know anything about football.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#9
#9
Unfrozen Caveman said:
According to a few morons on this site our offensive line sucked on purpose so that we wouldnt show florida anything.Im sure they will say the same thing about the punter.BTW you have to believe them or you dont know anything about football.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...
Ease up on the name calling scooter.

Nobody said we sucked on purpose. It's been said we were very vanilla and conservative in our approach. Punting was poor....and it had nothing to do with scheme.

Maybe switching to decaf would be beneficial for you.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#10
#10
Against a Montana type team they should line up and dare us to run and we smash them to pieces running right at them...this ain't Bama, it's Montana.

Running attack is a huge concern and so far we are just as terrible as we were last year. Youth rears it's head again.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#11
#11
MDBJJC said:
Against a Montana type team they should line up and dare us to run and we smash them to pieces running right at them...this ain't Bama, it's Montana.

Running attack is a huge concern and so far we are just as terrible as we were last year. Youth rears it's head again.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

FCS team or not, Montana had a decidedly large and senior laden front seven. Combine that with our intentionally conservative approach, and the Steelers would have had trouble running for big yards.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#13
#13
TDTennessee said:
Almost all of them were inside the 5, but in warm-ups he was putting them 5 deep in the endzone.
Click to expand...

Not true...

Here's some facts instead of conjecture. If these starting drive yardages are correct...and you say/claim "almost all were inside the 5"...we've got some coverage concerns...

Note that 6 of the 8 kicks had starting field position beyond the 30 (with only one touch-back)

Montana Fielded 8 Kickoffs from Palardy.

Their starting point for each drive was:

Montana 17 yard line
Montana 27 yard line
Montana 30 yard line
Montana 20 yard line (touch-back)
Montana 21 yard line
Montana 33 yard line
Montana 29 yard line
Montana 18 yard line
 
#14
#14
Montana's front 7 were all seniors(maybe one junior) going up against sophmores. I'm not that concerned. I'm more worried about the 6 fumbles. Don't matter how well you run if you can't hold onto the ball.
 
#15
#15
supersmo18 said:
I know he was injured most of last season, but I'm not entirely convinced that a healthy Palardy could consistently put it in the endzone, or at least within the 5.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

The coaches had Palardy working on his "hang time" in the offseason rather than kicking into the endzone. Palardy will never be a kicker that kicks into the endzone! TIFWIW
 
#17
#17
'Boro-vol said:
FCS team or not, Montana had a decidedly large and senior laden front seven. Combine that with our intentionally conservative approach, and the Steelers would have had trouble running for big yards.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Thats another BS excuse. The steelers would have had trouble running the ball on them?They are a freaking FCS team. They don't have near the talent that our players do, I dont give a crap if they were seniors. Thats a ridiculous argument. The line played like crap and even Dooley said so. Do you know more than he does? Hell no!
 
#18
#18
Unfrozen Caveman said:
Thats another BS excuse. The steelers would have had trouble running the ball on them?They are a freaking FCS team. They don't have near the talent that our players do, I dont give a crap if they were seniors. Thats a ridiculous argument. The line played like crap and even Dooley said so. Do you know more than he does? Hell no!
Click to expand...

They may be more athletic but they are also very young and inexperienced compared to a line full of seniors. Montana's D-line confused them all night with different shifts and looks. Yes, they played bad but Montana's line is talented, experienced, and well coached. Now get over yourself.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#19
#19
The same player can kick and punt without injuring themself jeez.

Darr did not hit the ball with the sweet part of his foot. That first punt he hit the ball with his friggin toes, missed by 6 inches
 
#20
#20
Unfrozen Caveman said:
Thats another BS excuse. The steelers would have had trouble running the ball on them?They are a freaking FCS team. They don't have near the talent that our players do, I dont give a crap if they were seniors. Thats a ridiculous argument. The line played like crap and even Dooley said so. Do you know more than he does? Hell no!
Click to expand...

Whatcha mad about dude? You do realize we're on the same side?

Taking a game you have no bearing on a little too seriously, aren't you?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#21
#21
BigOrange15 said:
They may be more athletic but they are also very young and inexperienced compared to a line full of seniors. Montana's D-line confused them all night with different shifts and looks. Yes, they played bad but Montana's line is talented, experienced, and well coached. Now get over yourself.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Get over myself? Up yours pal! The bottom line is that Im tired of people on here that always want to make excuses.That makes the fan base sound weak. The o-line played like crap...period.The defenses only get bigger, stronger, and better from here so get your excuses ready.BTW I never said that our line sucked or they wouldnt get better,I said that they played like crap against Montana. Dooley said the same thing.
 
#22
#22
Unfrozen Caveman said:
Get over myself? Up yours pal! The bottom line is that Im tired of people on here that always want to make excuses.That makes the fan base sound weak. The o-line played like crap...period.The defenses only get bigger, stronger, and better from here so get your excuses ready.BTW I never said that our line sucked or they wouldnt get better,I said that they played like crap against Montana. Dooley said the same thing.
Click to expand...

hey,simple pimple,I bet you say that to all the guys:"up yours pal"....its ironic that your next phrase is "the bottom line"...the bottom line is people on here are tired of your pissy azz way of conducting business .all your posts call someboby a name or just has a negative feel...go back to the cave and practice that "up yours pal" thing you do.
 
#24
#24
'Boro-vol said:
FCS team or not, Montana had a decidedly large and senior laden front seven. Combine that with our intentionally conservative approach, and the Steelers would have had trouble running for big yards.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Look in the thread where the size of MT d line was posted. They avged abt 40 lbs less than our o line and were about on par with our d line ( which has got to still be one of the smallest in the sec).

The sky is not falling, but if we couldn't get a push against that line, especially in the fourth qtr, that is a major concern.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#25
#25
Just hope we see a lot more O line positives after Cincy game.Time to grow into an SEC caliber unit, youth non-withstanding.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top