CFB51 College Football Fan Community
The Power Five => Big Ten => Topic started by: ELA on October 23, 2020, 12:52:18 AM
-
Barely feels real, considering everything both football and non-football related. It's should be a nice warm-up game, but if Michigan State loses, that is an absolute disaster
-
I don't know what MSU is yet. I don't know about the coaching hires much. Not sure if I like it.
-
If Mel can be a good "face of the program/CEO" type, I think it can work. The defensive coaching staff is lights out. It's basically Dantonio's staff, but as position coaches with a new DC hire who I really like.
The offensive staf...eh. I really like the OL coach, but not overly sold on any of the other guys, including the OC.
-
Since Rutgers joined the league, the Spartans have a better record against them than the Wolverines do.
-
Since Rutgers joined the league, the Spartans have a better record against them than the Wolverines do.
MSU is the only school to not lose to Rutgers in either football or men's hoops since they joined.
So it's coming
-
MSU is the only school to not lose to Rutgers in either football or men's hoops since they joined.
So it's coming
Called it
-
The only positive takeaway is that they said Schiano added 15 transfers? I don't think MSU added any.
Problem is building a program through HS recruiting, is who signs up with an 0-9 program?
-
This is extremely concerning
https://twitter.com/StephenM_Brooks/status/1320098438063648768?s=19
-
How many Big Ten teams has Rutgers defeated at least once in both football and basketball since joining the league?
-
MSU is the only school to not lose to Rutgers in either football or men's hoops since they joined.
So it's coming
Wonder what the money line was?Dayem,unfortunately good call
-
New coach, new players, Rutgers is not the same team it was. The B1G East is getting tougher. Tucker will bring Sparty around as well in time.
-
I have no faith in Tucker to do that.
-
Suppose to be a good recruiter,so if accurate that is 1/2 the battle.MD kept the program at a high level for about a decade.But when the bottom fell out it did so in smashing fashion.So Tucker has his work cut out for him,and he's got a hefty contract so hopefly for Sparty things turn around
-
Suppose to be a good recruiter,so if accurate that is 1/2 the battle.MD kept the program at a high level for about a decade.But when the bottom fell out it did so in smashing fashion.So Tucker has his work cut out for him,and he'll he's got a hefty contract so hopefly for Sparty things turn around
Yes, but I don't think you can build that way at MSU. It's what also concerns me about Locksley at Maryland.
-
Yes, but I don't think you can build that way at MSU. It's what also concerns me about Locksley at Maryland.
What way?MD didn't walk into an ideal situation nor did he leave it that way.Have to see if he can make some inroads with kids.Many want to play right away and won't get that at the blue bloods,so he has that angle if he can sell it.He coached under Saban and Tressel so there's that
-
Tucker seems more like the kind of guy that Dantonio would have hired as DC, from the Tressel friends and family tree.
-
What way?MD didn't walk into an ideal situation nor did he leave it that way.Have to see if he can make some inroads with kids.Many want to play right away and won't get that at the blue bloods,so he has that angle if he can sell it.He coached under Saban and Tressel so there's that
He seems like he could be a great face of the program type guy, who kills it on the recruiting trail, more than an Xs and Os guy. That's not how it works at MSU. The problem at the end for Dantonio was (1) his staff, particularly on offense was doing a terrible job developing talent; (2) Blackwell was killing his ability to recruit the state; (3) Kentucky and Cincinnati started going after the Ohio kids that OSU wasn't offering that Dantonio was making a killing on early in his tenure.
Tucker is coming in here, and getting in to some top 5s or whatever from some much bigger fish, but you don't get points for getting recruits to consider you, when they previously would not have. And none of those guys are ultimately picking MSU.
-
I think some of the results this year are going to be extra special. Rutgers had 276 yards and 38 points. Sparty had 7 turnovers. Honestly they look a lot like last year, with their inability to run the ball with any sort of success. Rutgers should be a sort of competent outfit this year.
-
When you get a lot of turnovers, it is tough to rack up a ton of yards.
It's like playing NCAA FB on easy mode, where your offense hardly ever sees the field because you are returning kicks, interceptions and fumbles for TDs, then giving them back the ball. You get a safety, return the kick for a TD, and get the 2 pt conversion, that's 10 points, with zero yards of offense. If you do get the ball, it is inside the red zone and you score on your first play. It's not unheard of to have more points than yards.
-
obviously a tough loss for Sparty, but it's the first game. 7 turnovers.
the TO thing can't be that bad all season
Sparty isn't as bad as they looked Saturday
Rutgers probably not as good
-
When you get a lot of turnovers, it is tough to rack up a ton of yards.
It's like playing NCAA FB on easy mode, where your offense hardly ever sees the field because you are returning kicks, interceptions and fumbles for TDs, then giving them back the ball. You get a safety, return the kick for a TD, and get the 2 pt conversion, that's 10 points, with zero yards of offense. If you do get the ball, it is inside the red zone and you score on your first play. It's not unheard of to have more points than yards.
Yes, but even on a per play basis, they were bad. They recovered a fumble at the 1, and it took 5 plays for them to score.
Rutgers averaged just 3.8 ypp, meaning after one game, MSU's defense is #4 nationally in that stat. Granted Penn State is #2