Watching Utah and Michigan and a very inexperienced Michigan team threw on Utah all night. If not for unforced turnovers, could be a different game.

*Utah was very pedestrian on offense.
*Utah will fall prey to the same thing we did tonight and overlook us. We can jump out early on them and seize the momentum, kinda like the last time we beat them.
*Edmund Faimalo played tonight. Good for him.
*We didn't miss Jojo on punt returns
*Our defense is better than ever.
*It was a weird night. Breaking in all the new stuff as well as adjusting to construction made a weird vibe.
*I saw the Akaggie in the parking lot. Forgot how much fun that guy is.

Bad news:

*Our fans like to overreact. SUU had 3-4 nfl guys on defense. This is exactly the same or more than every other team we play this year. (Good news.)
*Our O-line is broken. We should just ask if we can run six wide and not have an o-line. We'd be better.

*If you are a parent and you are one of the ones who lets their kids run amok on the South concourse, it's a bad idea. We had several kids get hurt out there tonight. Do your best to keep your kids with you. Any pervert could pick them up and walk off and by the time it became known, it'd be too late. I'm fine if you don't want to be a parent now and I have to deal with your kid when he's a grownup, but it's lame to have to do it now as well.

According to CBSSports, Utah as well has three guys on defense projected to be drafted, as well as at least two others that are ranked. And even the guys outside of them are better than SUU's other 8.

I fully expect coaches to rip the players a new one over the next couple of days for their overall performance. Yes, we should have manhandled SUU. But as much as coaches tried to prevent it, I think there was a lack of focus by the players on this week and instead focusing on next week against Utah.

At the same time, looking at the game states I am not as pessimistic about Utah next week. Michigan is not very good this year and from the stats alone Michigan outperformed Utah except in rushing yards and turnovers (and Utah's rushing yards were not anything to write home about). Utah's third-down conversion rate was not much better than ours and we had more rushing yards. Our quarterback was implementing a new system and has not really played in close to two years.

I have no idea if we will beat Utah next week (which is why the games are played) but our performance, win or lose, will be much more indicative of what we should expect for the season. If we are blown out then we are probably in for a long season. If the game is close or a win then it could be a great season.

bwcrc wrote:I fully expect coaches to rip the players a new one over the next couple of days for their overall performance. Yes, we should have manhandled SUU. But as much as coaches tried to prevent it, I think there was a lack of focus by the players on this week and instead focusing on next week against Utah.

At the same time, looking at the game states I am not as pessimistic about Utah next week. Michigan is not very good this year and from the stats alone Michigan outperformed Utah except in rushing yards and turnovers (and Utah's rushing yards were not anything to write home about). Utah's third-down conversion rate was not much better than ours and we had more rushing yards. Our quarterback was implementing a new system and has not really played in close to two years.

I have no idea if we will beat Utah next week (which is why the games are played) but our performance, win or lose, will be much more indicative of what we should expect for the season. If we are blown out then we are probably in for a long season. If the game is close or a win then it could be a great season.

I cannot see how we score any points vs. Utah. You can't win with 0 points.

I think fans are properly reacting to this game. Regardless of whether SUU has NFL draftable guys on their team, we should've moved the ball. We had a total of 250 yards all game. We were 1-16 on 3rd downs. We couldn't sustain a drive. Did we ever even have a play within the redzone? Chuckie's QBR was 7.0. We didn't have an offensive touchdown. Whatever corrections that were made during halftime were imperceptible. We didn't generate a turnover. By any measure this was a catastrophic performance on the offensive side of the ball.

What did MW have to say in the post game?

NM I just found the link:

http://www.610kvnu.com/podcaster/utah-state-podcasts

Aggieblue11, can't listen as I'm at work can you summarize what wells said?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think the good news here is that we gave Utah absolutely zero opportunity to watch film and game plan for our offense.....because the offense didn't even show up!

Seriously though, Utah's D is pretty legit.

paaron46 wrote:I think fans are properly reacting to this game. Regardless of whether SUU has NFL draftable guys on their team, we should've moved the ball. We had a total of 250 yards all game. We were 1-16 on 3rd downs. We couldn't sustain a drive. Did we ever even have a play within the redzone? Chuckie's QBR was 7.0. We didn't have an offensive touchdown. Whatever corrections that were made during halftime were imperceptible. We didn't generate a turnover. By any measure this was a catastrophic performance on the offensive side of the ball.

One more big problem: 11 penalties for 123 yards. This killed us on any drive where we were starting to move the ball.

Dwigt wrote:

paaron46 wrote:I think fans are properly reacting to this game. Regardless of whether SUU has NFL draftable guys on their team, we should've moved the ball. We had a total of 250 yards all game. We were 1-16 on 3rd downs. We couldn't sustain a drive. Did we ever even have a play within the redzone? Chuckie's QBR was 7.0. We didn't have an offensive touchdown. Whatever corrections that were made during halftime were imperceptible. We didn't generate a turnover. By any measure this was a catastrophic performance on the offensive side of the ball.

One more big problem: 11 penalties for 123 yards. This killed us on any drive where we were starting to move the ball.

Speaking of this, what the hell are we teaching our OL that is causing us to get so many chop block penalties? I swear we get at least one per game. I've never seen a team get these flags as consistently as we get them. It has to be something we're teaching.

Michigan had some really good players in the trenches, and some very big, fast athletic skilled players. They handled the mighty Ute D line very well. Gave up 0 sacks... The utes did get 3 Int's. Booker was very much held in check.

We missed Jojo like crazy. We got nobody with his elusiveness and quickness. We missed him in the run game. We had nobody on O that has home run capability like Jojo did.

Elkaggie wrote:Michigan had some really good players in the trenches, and some very big, fast athletic skilled players. They handled the mighty Ute D line very well. Gave up 0 sacks... The utes did get 3 Int's. Booker was very much held in check.

We missed Jojo like crazy. We got nobody with his elusiveness and quickness. We missed him in the run game. We had nobody on O that has home run capability like Jojo did.

The presence of Jojo last year allowed the team to go through the season without addressing fundamental problems. They didn't need to address and fix these problems because they could just get the ball to Jojo. Why fix the problem if you can work around it? Well, we have to fix it now. This is a good thing.

brownjeans wrote:

Elkaggie wrote:Michigan had some really good players in the trenches, and some very big, fast athletic skilled players. They handled the mighty Ute D line very well. Gave up 0 sacks... The utes did get 3 Int's. Booker was very much held in check.

We missed Jojo like crazy. We got nobody with his elusiveness and quickness. We missed him in the run game. We had nobody on O that has home run capability like Jojo did.

The presence of Jojo last year allowed the team to go through the season without addressing fundamental problems. They didn't need to address and fix these problems because they could just get the ball to Jojo. Why fix the problem if you can work around it? Well, we have to fix it now. This is a good thing.

After seeing this for 2 plus season, I doubt it changes.

braydan32 wrote:Aggieblue11, can't listen as I'm at work can you summarize what wells said?

MW is not happy. He sounded mad in the interview IMO.

Here's my take on the Michigan vs Utah game (I attended it instead of watching the suu debacle). Michigan struggled to run the ball with any consistency against the ute d-line, especially between the tackles. They did have a few decent runs and these were mostly to the outside or designed to go outside and the running back found a cutback lane. Michigan's tight end, Butt, had a big game. He is big and strong and ate the Utes up with curls and outs. Can we use our tight ends like this? Do we have the protection to get the throws off? The Michigan qb, in my uninformed view, would make his decision before the snap and lock on the receiver giving the defense a clear indicator of where the ball was going. This led to the pick six for the Utes. The long ball was there and Michigan had wrs behind the defense (twice I can think of) and the wolverines were unable to connect. I don't think the ute secondary looked very impressive last night but I am definitely no expert. The Michigan o-line did very well in pass protection against the vaunted u d-line but struggled run blocking. Michigan also had success in throwing the quick hitch with the other receiver making a block on the db and getting the receiver down the sideline for some decent gains. Can we pull that off? I would like to hope so, but do we have receivers that can block?

In watching the ute offense, Wilson was very effective running the ball and in completing his passes. He made good decisions in when to scramble/run and also in the zone read. Many of the passes were close to the line of scrimmage and he never had to throw down the field much. Britain Covey is good. He made people miss and looked great with the ball in his hands both in receiving and punt returns. Booker is Booker. He didn't have a great game running the ball, but was very effective in the pass game catching balls out of the backfield

I think our defense matches up well with their o. The ute receivers (other than Covey) did not show much last night and I believe that is what we need to do is stack box and try to make Wilson throw down the field and beat us.

Sorry for the long post.

foreveranaggie wrote:Here's my take on the Michigan vs Utah game (I attended it instead of watching the suu debacle). Michigan struggled to run the ball with any consistency against the ute d-line, especially between the tackles. They did have a few decent runs and these were mostly to the outside or designed to go outside and the running back found a cutback lane. Michigan's tight end, Butt, had a big game. He is big and strong and ate the Utes up with curls and outs. Can we use our tight ends like this? Do we have the protection to get the throws off? The Michigan qb, in my uninformed view, would make his decision before the snap and lock on the receiver giving the defense a clear indicator of where the ball was going. This led to the pick six for the Utes. The long ball was there and Michigan had wrs behind the defense (twice I can think of) and the wolverines were unable to connect. I don't think the ute secondary looked very impressive last night but I am definitely no expert. The Michigan o-line did very well in pass protection against the vaunted u d-line but struggled run blocking. Michigan also had success in throwing the quick hitch with the other receiver making a block on the db and getting the receiver down the sideline for some decent gains. Can we pull that off? I would like to hope so, but do we have receivers that can block?

In watching the ute offense, Wilson was very effective running the ball and in completing his passes. He made good decisions in when to scramble/run and also in the zone read. Many of the passes were close to the line of scrimmage and he never had to throw down the field much. Britain Covey is good. He made people miss and looked great with the ball in his hands both in receiving and punt returns. Booker is Booker. He didn't have a great game running the ball, but was very effective in the pass game catching balls out of the backfield

I think our defense matches up well with their o. The ute receivers (other than Covey) did not show much last night and I believe that is what we need to do is stack box and try to make Wilson throw down the field and beat us.

Sorry for the long post.

People on here love to joke about Treviso Wilson, but I would MUCH rather have him quarterbacking our team


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

BleedAggieBlue0 wrote:

foreveranaggie wrote:Here's my take on the Michigan vs Utah game (I attended it instead of watching the suu debacle). Michigan struggled to run the ball with any consistency against the ute d-line, especially between the tackles. They did have a few decent runs and these were mostly to the outside or designed to go outside and the running back found a cutback lane. Michigan's tight end, Butt, had a big game. He is big and strong and ate the Utes up with curls and outs. Can we use our tight ends like this? Do we have the protection to get the throws off? The Michigan qb, in my uninformed view, would make his decision before the snap and lock on the receiver giving the defense a clear indicator of where the ball was going. This led to the pick six for the Utes. The long ball was there and Michigan had wrs behind the defense (twice I can think of) and the wolverines were unable to connect. I don't think the ute secondary looked very impressive last night but I am definitely no expert. The Michigan o-line did very well in pass protection against the vaunted u d-line but struggled run blocking. Michigan also had success in throwing the quick hitch with the other receiver making a block on the db and getting the receiver down the sideline for some decent gains. Can we pull that off? I would like to hope so, but do we have receivers that can block?

In watching the ute offense, Wilson was very effective running the ball and in completing his passes. He made good decisions in when to scramble/run and also in the zone read. Many of the passes were close to the line of scrimmage and he never had to throw down the field much. Britain Covey is good. He made people miss and looked great with the ball in his hands both in receiving and punt returns. Booker is Booker. He didn't have a great game running the ball, but was very effective in the pass game catching balls out of the backfield

I think our defense matches up well with their o. The ute receivers (other than Covey) did not show much last night and I believe that is what we need to do is stack box and try to make Wilson throw down the field and beat us.

Sorry for the long post.

People on here love to joke about Treviso Wilson, but I would MUCH rather have him quarterbacking our team


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You Serious Clark?

I would much rather have his o-line, but, not him. I believe CK would be killing it right now with a good o-line.

Elkaggie wrote:

BleedAggieBlue0 wrote:

foreveranaggie wrote:Here's my take on the Michigan vs Utah game (I attended it instead of watching the suu debacle). Michigan struggled to run the ball with any consistency against the ute d-line, especially between the tackles. They did have a few decent runs and these were mostly to the outside or designed to go outside and the running back found a cutback lane. Michigan's tight end, Butt, had a big game. He is big and strong and ate the Utes up with curls and outs. Can we use our tight ends like this? Do we have the protection to get the throws off? The Michigan qb, in my uninformed view, would make his decision before the snap and lock on the receiver giving the defense a clear indicator of where the ball was going. This led to the pick six for the Utes. The long ball was there and Michigan had wrs behind the defense (twice I can think of) and the wolverines were unable to connect. I don't think the ute secondary looked very impressive last night but I am definitely no expert. The Michigan o-line did very well in pass protection against the vaunted u d-line but struggled run blocking. Michigan also had success in throwing the quick hitch with the other receiver making a block on the db and getting the receiver down the sideline for some decent gains. Can we pull that off? I would like to hope so, but do we have receivers that can block?

In watching the ute offense, Wilson was very effective running the ball and in completing his passes. He made good decisions in when to scramble/run and also in the zone read. Many of the passes were close to the line of scrimmage and he never had to throw down the field much. Britain Covey is good. He made people miss and looked great with the ball in his hands both in receiving and punt returns. Booker is Booker. He didn't have a great game running the ball, but was very effective in the pass game catching balls out of the backfield

I think our defense matches up well with their o. The ute receivers (other than Covey) did not show much last night and I believe that is what we need to do is stack box and try to make Wilson throw down the field and beat us.

Sorry for the long post.

People on here love to joke about Treviso Wilson, but I would MUCH rather have him quarterbacking our team


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You Serious Clark?

110% serious. Sorry. I've been of this opinion for a couple years now. I don't think chuckie is good.
P.s. This opinion has nothing to do with the game last night. Has everything to do with the opinion of his receivers


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

BleedAggieBlue0 wrote:

Elkaggie wrote:

BleedAggieBlue0 wrote:

foreveranaggie wrote:Here's my take on the Michigan vs Utah game (I attended it instead of watching the suu debacle). Michigan struggled to run the ball with any consistency against the ute d-line, especially between the tackles. They did have a few decent runs and these were mostly to the outside or designed to go outside and the running back found a cutback lane. Michigan's tight end, Butt, had a big game. He is big and strong and ate the Utes up with curls and outs. Can we use our tight ends like this? Do we have the protection to get the throws off? The Michigan qb, in my uninformed view, would make his decision before the snap and lock on the receiver giving the defense a clear indicator of where the ball was going. This led to the pick six for the Utes. The long ball was there and Michigan had wrs behind the defense (twice I can think of) and the wolverines were unable to connect. I don't think the ute secondary looked very impressive last night but I am definitely no expert. The Michigan o-line did very well in pass protection against the vaunted u d-line but struggled run blocking. Michigan also had success in throwing the quick hitch with the other receiver making a block on the db and getting the receiver down the sideline for some decent gains. Can we pull that off? I would like to hope so, but do we have receivers that can block?

In watching the ute offense, Wilson was very effective running the ball and in completing his passes. He made good decisions in when to scramble/run and also in the zone read. Many of the passes were close to the line of scrimmage and he never had to throw down the field much. Britain Covey is good. He made people miss and looked great with the ball in his hands both in receiving and punt returns. Booker is Booker. He didn't have a great game running the ball, but was very effective in the pass game catching balls out of the backfield

I think our defense matches up well with their o. The ute receivers (other than Covey) did not show much last night and I believe that is what we need to do is stack box and try to make Wilson throw down the field and beat us.

Sorry for the long post.

People on here love to joke about Treviso Wilson, but I would MUCH rather have him quarterbacking our team


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You Serious Clark?

110% serious. Sorry. I've been of this opinion for a couple years now. I don't think chuckie is good.
P.s. This opinion has nothing to do with the game last night. Has everything to do with the opinion of his receivers


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

let's not hide the fact that you are Darrell fan/friend either. that has a lot to do with with your opinion. there are quite a a few Freshman thru Junior students that hold the same opinion -mainly because they have not seen much out of CK in their time as a student. there's also that thing where you feel like your generation is the best or your class is somehow better so you are less accepting of upperclassmen.

The Truth wrote:

BleedAggieBlue0 wrote:

Elkaggie wrote:

BleedAggieBlue0 wrote:

foreveranaggie wrote:Here's my take on the Michigan vs Utah game (I attended it instead of watching the suu debacle). Michigan struggled to run the ball with any consistency against the ute d-line, especially between the tackles. They did have a few decent runs and these were mostly to the outside or designed to go outside and the running back found a cutback lane. Michigan's tight end, Butt, had a big game. He is big and strong and ate the Utes up with curls and outs. Can we use our tight ends like this? Do we have the protection to get the throws off? The Michigan qb, in my uninformed view, would make his decision before the snap and lock on the receiver giving the defense a clear indicator of where the ball was going. This led to the pick six for the Utes. The long ball was there and Michigan had wrs behind the defense (twice I can think of) and the wolverines were unable to connect. I don't think the ute secondary looked very impressive last night but I am definitely no expert. The Michigan o-line did very well in pass protection against the vaunted u d-line but struggled run blocking. Michigan also had success in throwing the quick hitch with the other receiver making a block on the db and getting the receiver down the sideline for some decent gains. Can we pull that off? I would like to hope so, but do we have receivers that can block?

In watching the ute offense, Wilson was very effective running the ball and in completing his passes. He made good decisions in when to scramble/run and also in the zone read. Many of the passes were close to the line of scrimmage and he never had to throw down the field much. Britain Covey is good. He made people miss and looked great with the ball in his hands both in receiving and punt returns. Booker is Booker. He didn't have a great game running the ball, but was very effective in the pass game catching balls out of the backfield

I think our defense matches up well with their o. The ute receivers (other than Covey) did not show much last night and I believe that is what we need to do is stack box and try to make Wilson throw down the field and beat us.

Sorry for the long post.

People on here love to joke about Treviso Wilson, but I would MUCH rather have him quarterbacking our team


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You Serious Clark?

110% serious. Sorry. I've been of this opinion for a couple years now. I don't think chuckie is good.
P.s. This opinion has nothing to do with the game last night. Has everything to do with the opinion of his receivers


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

let's not hide the fact that you are Darrell fan/friend either. that has a lot to do with with your opinion. there are quite a a few Freshman thru Junior students that hold the same opinion -mainly because they have not seen much out of CK in their time as a student. there's also that thing where you feel like your generation is the best or your class is somehow better so you are less accepting of upperclassmen.

Man you got me! Go sophomores!!! Hate seniors;)

Edit: just to be clear- battle of the classes I'd not a thing at all.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk