In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 493
Online now 474 Record: 10351 (3/11/2012)
The largest and most active MSU Spartans board on the web
The place to ask questions to SpartanTailgate's recruiting experts
"The Duff" is dedicated to Michigan State football recruiting discussion
"The Bres" is dedicated to Michigan State basketball recruiting discussion
This is your pulpit to preach to the masses about everything from politics to religion
The place to buy, trade or sell Michigan State tickets
For fantasy football and other fantasy sports discussion
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
No, we just abandoned the run, period. Nothing new.
Right, but do you think any of that has to do with the fact we never really had a viable second option, apparently? I mean, Bell had 32 carries. That's about as many as you can expect from one guy at this point in the season. Keith Mumphery was the only other guy to get a carry (not counting Maxwell), and he had 2. How do we not have any other running back to run the ball at least 5-10 times?
He had 2 carries for 30 yards in the Nebraska game and then never got put back in. I just would like to see what he might do with 5-10 touches a game. He's the backup for a reason, might as well give him 5-10 carries with the 1st string offense to give Bell a breather.
Admittedly, I didn't get a chance to watch that game. I agree with you, though. Whether it was Hill or Caper, I haven't understood the strategy behind refusing to run the ball with anyone but Bell. His two primary backups each have just 16 rushes on the year, and Caper's averaging more than 5 yards a carry. Albeit that's a small sample size, but I'd rather give him or Hill more touches than have Maxwell throwing 40 times a game.
Yes and if our backup running backs are so bad that they shouldn't have seen the field then why did we convert Langford to a WR and then claim that we needed to do that because he was so talented that he had to see the field. Seems like there would have been plenty of opportunity for him at RB behind Bell.
This post was edited by jimmywalker 17 months ago
If you mean Langford, then I agree.
My bad, I don't know why i was thinking Mumphrey. I am reading an article right now about how much he was going to contribute to the team and how he was so talented that he has to be a WR so he can get on the field. Apparently that wasn't the case as he didn't
Yea, when it comes to talking about the way guys perform in practice and how that's going to translate to more time on the field, I take everything Dantonio says with a grain of salt.
I simply cannot believe it. Rock - you're towing the line that "plenty of blame to go around", "MSU needs more options", "the OL had injuries", blah-blah-blah...
Nonsense. Consider this:
In 2010 UM's defense ranked 109 out of 120. In points allowed, they ranked 108, surrendering 35 points a game. RichRod gets canned.
In 2011 UM hires a high-level DC, (they didn't trade any players - can't do that in the NCAA). Guess what? UM now has the #8 ranked defense, surrendering 16 points a game.
I think MSU's OL, WR, RB, TE, and QB corps are fine, if they were coached properly and executed an effective game-plan. To me, it's 90% on coaching.
This post was edited by Dicks Fake Eye2 17 months ago
Caper has never been the same since he got a concussion at Lincoln in '11 that kept him out for several games. He reportedly got another concussion or symptoms in the spring'12 practices. Another what might have been.
That's apples to potato salad. UM also lost 4 CBs before or during '10. UM's D wasn't as simple as chnaging schemes and neither is MSU's O.
MSU had 7 snaps from the 1 & couldn't convert. Had a fumbled QB C exhange. Had the RB run into the FB. That's poor execution.
There are other times where the playcalling has been poor as well. I don't understand the insistence that the blame has to fall in just one place.
Michigan State does not and will not run the 3-4 defense.
More than anything else, it's coaching.
This post was edited by has been 17 months ago
It was just a mistake;
I didn't mean to let them take away my soul.
Am I too old?
Is it too late?
Maybe its time you move your fandom 63 miles SE and shouldn't you be interviewing people.
Your retention rate is worse than Urban Meyer's
they haven't beat one decent team on their sked, lost to bama and noter lame, the rest were big ten dumpster fire teams or non con rejects
Thing is you can't make a final judgement on a player. I'd agree that Hill hadn't looked great, but starting in the Iowa game, and continuing in a couple of games after that, Hill looked good in the few carries he had. In the UN game he came in ran a couple of good plays then disappeared.
I get the impression that the coaches don't have a very good grasp of the weapons at hand and default to what they know best. A second back would help LeVeon by keeping him fresher at the end of the game and the end of the season. Not using a second back is imo a real questionable call by the staff.
How can you watch MSU football this year and say the OL and WR corps are fine? Compare them both to 2011 and can see they have seriously regressed in talent. The OL mainly due to injuries but even with the improved WR play, they still are a shell of what we had last year with Cunningham, Martin and even Nichol.
I don't believe the talent on O is 110th best (scoring O) in the division. If it is, who recruited those guys?
I give UM a lot of credit, but also notice that 1) they returned 3 SRs in '11 on their DL and 2) got all their CBs back and healthy, along with the guys who went through trial by fire in '10. That, along with a shift back to the 4-3 helped a ton. Mattison is a good coach, but you also have to take into account returning players, etc.
It's not "Coaching. Period.". It's coaching + healthy players. UM's DL is younger than MSU's OL? 1) that's not true in terms of classes (UM has 2 SR, 1 JR, 1 Soph, MSU has 1 SR, 2 JR, 1 Soph, 1 FR on the OL) and 2) UM's DL hasn't had to undergo personnel shifts throughout the year at multiple spots due to injury.
It's just been a horrific season in the Murphy's Law kind of way. Coaching has plenty to do with it, but it's not the only reason things have gone to hell in a hand basket.
This is probably my biggest issue with the coaching staff. The only way "new blood" seems to get time is if the starter goes out or graduates, and it seems to be almost exclusively an offensive issue.
Caper breaking his hand was the only reason Bell played in 2010. Cousins only played in blowouts as a RS FR. Mumphery didn't play hardly at all in '11, despite there being blowouts.
The 2nd RB issue is huge, IMHO. Bell is being run into the ground, and though he's awesome, you can't help but think he would be even better if he had 5-10 fewer carries/game. The only time MSU has had a 2 RB system (2007 and 2010) were the best years they've had rushing. Despite that, they seem enamored with the "workhorse" back mentality.
Don't think i necessarily agree with that.
Dell started as a true freshman in 2007. Taiwan Jones saw the field a lot last year.
Caper, Keshawn Martin, Baker, Dennard, Norman, Jack Allen and quite a few others have had significant impacts/playing time as freshman. Burbridge this year as well.
I truly do believe the staff avoids "playing favorites". Its just been a rotten year overall. I will forgive all of it if we can make a bowl, though.
It's one thing to not play certain players that maybe were holdovers from a previous regime, but these are all MD's recruits now. More and more this season I have felt like the offense was playing like it had one hand tied behind it's back. This is all on the coaching. Max doesn't call his own plays or determine who plays on any given down. I think the main reason they only run Bell is that no matter how much he is gashing the D they don't want to use other RB's to spell him so they (Roushar) just go back to the passing game instead. I think Nick Hill would give them some versitility and give the defense more to defense but apparently they don't trust him back there. There are so many more offensive plays that could be run to keep the defense off balance and honest but Roushar doesn't seem to have the smarts to know how to use them to his advantage. Let's just run the same handful of plays from the same sets that every defense in the country...and every fan in the stands...KNOWS is coming because this is who we are and we aren't going to deviate from who we are...win or lose. Guess what coaching staff...it ain't working...and hasn't all year!
This post was edited by SpartyHardy 17 months ago
"I love March!" - Tom Izzo
This has happened maybe twice before but I agree with this. +1
you have a real think skin for a poster whose major purpose is to show up here and give posters a raft of crap.
Have you always been such a sef-centered twit or just after junior high?
Copying the tanner and gHost personna's/ expressions shows you can't be original either.
Need more Chapstik before you start kissing Hoke's ass again?
As I said, it's almost exclusively an offensive issue. Plenty of young guys have gotten PT on D over the years.
In 2009, RBs kept getting hurt, which led to Baker having his RS pulled.
Jack Allen is playing because Treadwell was injured, then Jackson went out, which further illustrates that the staff won't put a young guy in unless there's an injury. Clark, who showed some flashes, didn't get in at OG at all, and only was at OT once France went out.
I don't think the staff "plays favorites" on O, rather they're afraid of taking any sort of risk. Bell won't fumble/will get 4-6 yards/carry? Great, let's ride that because we know what we'll get. Could Hill/Caper/someone else provide a spark? Sure, but the staff seems too afraid of the possible negatives.
It took them until the Iowa game to try more than 1 end around in a game.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports