Game Grades

[Wildcat05]

Wow, it feels good to be back. What's your overall grade for tonight's game?

I'm gonna give the team a C+ and here's why:

Clearly the defense really won the game for us. The offense drove well, but just couldn't find the endzone. The game could have gone to sh*t real quick if our defense wasn't as strong as they were. Other than that one drive in the 3rd, they played pretty well.

Speaking of which, where did this guy Elmore come from? I was expecting great plays by Reed and some other notable names, but Elmore was in LeFevour's face almost every time he dropped back.

Our running game was on, led by Grigsby of course. I almost felt that we ran the ball more because Dikes wasn't confident in Scott's arm. But, with that said, Scott didn't do all that bad. Especially without The Gronk in the lineup.

So, a C+ game, I'd say. Won't work against a better team, but worked enough tonight. We just need to get in the endzone.

Bear Down!

 

[green machine]

I'd say a B. They took care of business. Defense gets an A, Offence C+.

I really think this is the game the Cats would lose every year, only instead of being in week two or three it was week one. They won a game against a solid team that they should have won, so yeah, it was ugly, but I'll take the win.

 

[ozzfloyd]

The team was just fine other than not being able to close the deal on several really good drives. 440 yards of offense with 280 just coming the the freshman qb is not bad at all, just gotta punch in those tds.

 

[Lefty]

The defense looked great and the offense was very vanilla, not showing much. In the first half, Scott looked like a kid who was making his first college start, but by the second half he was looking more comfortable.

Dykes kept the offense simple and did not open it up. I think we will see the same against NAU. Also, the Cats were missing their biggest weapon in Gronkowski. I hope Stoops keeps Rob out next week and that he will be ready for Iowa.

I knew the defense was going to be good, but yesterday they played better than I thought. They were all over the field and LeFevour was not able to do anything. We could be seeing the making of Desert Swarm II.

 

[TJ]

At first I thought this was going to be an easy win for us. I did not do my homework on CMU. They went to back to back bowls and are the reigning MAC championships. Im not saying that is the equivalent to the Nobel Peace Prize, but they proved they can compete with BCS conference teams.

I think Matt Scott is going to be something special. He has a missile for an arm, can scramble and runs one of the best QB draws I've ever seen in football. He needs to work on throwing on the run, finding his check downs and sliding feet first when he chooses to run.

I also think the one-two punch with Grigsby and Antolin is going to keep defenses honest. Last night, when one started to become ineffective, the other went in and had success. For example, Antolin had some very nice gains up the middle, which he does very well. Then, CMU zone in on filling those holes and stuffing him at the line of scrimmage. Then Dikes puts in Grigsby and the defense has to fix their game plan for a faster back that can go outside. This transition will happen all season long.

Bear Down!!

 

[MaoTosiFanClub]

Eh, we really didn't learn anything last night. We knew the defense would be good and the offense would be a work in progress since January. The offense does have a very high upside however just has to work out some kinks and get Gronkowski healthy.

Defense gets an A. Either Arizona's defense is legit or LeFevour is vastly overrated because he looked awful. Good pressure by front 4, playmaking by LB's and good coverage and tackling by the secondary. Rob Golden is going to be All-Conference at least once.

Offensively you can tell one of Dykes or Stoops was reigning things in. Very few passes downfield, limited motion, and a lot of I-formations and off-tackle runs. Pretty vanilla all the way around. Scott looked above average for a a true soph taking his first meaningful snaps. Nice having Grigs and Keola to lean on. Juron Criner (Stoops' Gerrell Robinson fallback) is going to be a terrific player and future NFL draft pick. Offensive line protected well too.

Nothing's really changed for me, still think it's a 6-7 win football team.

 

[Lefty]

Nice mention about the Cats defense on SI.com.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/stewart_mandel/09/06/mandel.overtime/1.html

 

[TJ]

Nice mention about the Cats defense on SI.com.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/stewart_mandel/09/06/mandel.overtime/1.html

• Arizona coach Mike Stoops has spent six years trying to mold the Wildcats' defense into the type of fast, aggressive outfit he engineered at Oklahoma. How's this for a statement: The Wildcats held prolific Central Michigan QB Dan LeFevour -- he of 9,214 passing yards and 2,235 rushing yards over three seasons -- to just 182 total yards in a 19-6 win. "We're trying to be a greedy defense and bring back the old days," said safety Cam Nelson, presumably referring to Arizona's "Desert Swarm" D from the '90s. Continued efforts like that will take a lot of pressure off sophomore QB and first-time starter Matt Scott.

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/20...el/09/06/mandel.overtime/1.html#ixzz0O1BdMoab
​

Good find and I agree with that. Anybody with a wrinkle of college football knowledge understand that a team such as CMU, who has gone to back to back bowl games, can run with BCS teams. I'm not trying to swing the pendulum to make UofA look like a much superior team, but rather acknowledging the accomplishments of our opponent and demonstrate that we did not play a cellar dweller like Idaho State last Saturday :ahemasu:. The game could have very well ended 26-7 if we didn't elect to run the clock on their 1 yard line .

Here's hoping to the 2nd coming of Desert Storm!

 

[Mr. Boldin]

If we are going to get back to 8 wins our defense is going to have to be very strong again.

The offense is going to lag all year, unless we can start hitting targets down the field.

I think the defense has the talent to carry us and should be just as good if not better than last year's unit.

 

[PoolBoy]

didn't get a chance to see the rivals play. My friends at UA have said that Matt Scott, ill give you the edited version, is not good. Are they overreacting or are both of our schools challenged at the qb position for this year?

 

[MaoTosiFanClub]

Matt Scott looked okay, just about what was expected from a true sophomore making his first start. Not great, not horrible. Luckily we have a run game with two RB's and Scott's legs along with a short-range passing game to hopefully lean on until the kinks get worked out in the intermediate and downfield passing game. Throwing the ball down the field is where Scott mostly struggled.

 

[TJ]

didn't get a chance to see the rivals play. My friends at UA have said that Matt Scott, ill give you the edited version, is not good. Are they overreacting or are both of our schools challenged at the qb position for this year?

Slight overreaction. It was evident that he is a raw player that needs some experience to be a respectable QB. His decision making was sub par in the first half and air mailed a few passes, but seemed to get more comfortable towards the end. Further, he remembered that he has mobility (4.5 40) and ran the ball when his receivers weren't open. Perhaps when Gronk recovers from his back injury, he'll have one extra target, which will help keep defenses honest in coverage. The true litmus test for him and the offense will be Iowa and the PAC-10 schedule.

From your ASU perspective, your colleagues spitting puke and venom towards UofA's QB situation is the pot calling the kettle black. Danny Sullivan was the front runner getting the job, but he's proven to be nothing special. The difference between your situation and ours is that Sullivan has shown major deficiencies in his game the first three seasons playing mop up work for Carpenter. He reminds me a lot of Brian St. Pierre of the Cardinals. His decision making is suspect, his mobility is very limited, and he is quite inaccurate with his throws. For your sake, there had better be a better option at QB next season, because he is not going to lead an already questionable offense to respectability (under 50% completion percentage in his career).

 

[PoolBoy]

From your ASU perspective, your colleagues spitting puke and venom towards UofA's QB situation is the pot calling the kettle black. Danny Sullivan was the front runner getting the job, but he's proven to be nothing special. The difference between your situation and ours is that Sullivan has shown major deficiencies in his game the first three seasons playing mop up work for Carpenter. He reminds me a lot of Brian St. Pierre of the Cardinals. His decision making is suspect, his mobility is very limited, and he is quite inaccurate with his throws. For your sake, there had better be a better option at QB next season, because he is not going to lead an already questionable offense to respectability (under 50% completion percentage in his career).

Point totally taken, I agree, but it was my UA buddies that said it so not pot's and pans were name calling

 

[MaoTosiFanClub]

From your ASU perspective, your colleagues spitting puke and venom towards UofA's QB situation is the pot calling the kettle black. Danny Sullivan was the front runner getting the job, but he's proven to be nothing special. The difference between your situation and ours is that Sullivan has shown major deficiencies in his game the first three seasons playing mop up work for Carpenter. He reminds me a lot of Brian St. Pierre of the Cardinals. His decision making is suspect, his mobility is very limited, and he is quite inaccurate with his throws. For your sake, there had better be a better option at QB next season, because he is not going to lead an already questionable offense to respectability (under 50% completion percentage in his career).

If Arizona is going to have a successful program and Matt Scott have a good career within it then the measuring stick should never be a lameduck Arizona State QB.

 

[ASUCHRIS]

If Arizona is going to have a successful program and Matt Scott have a good career within it then the measuring stick should never be a lameduck Arizona State QB.

Exactly, I think we all know Sullivan sucks, and is a stop gap until Osweiler is comfortable with the system. Sullivan is the pewter standard.

 

[MaoTosiFanClub]

Exactly, I think we all know Sullivan sucks, and is a stop gap until Osweiler is comfortable with the system.

Not everybody, look at the ASU board.

 

[ASUCHRIS]

Not everybody, look at the ASU board.

Ha, well not being an insider, I appear to be missing the boat on Sullivan.

 

[MaoTosiFanClub]

Ha, well not being an insider, I appear to be missing the boat on Sullivan.

I also think it's a bit premature to label Osweiler as the savior (although I heard he has a chance to be very good) when Erickson went so hard after transfer QB's this summer after he had the entire spring with Oz. I doubt Threet came to ASU to ride the pine. Scakczky or whatever appears to be a bust.

ASU has really crapped the bed recently on QB recruiting. Even if Osweiler is the real deal, I'm guessing the last decent QB they recruited before him was Max Hall and Rudy way back when.

 

[Wildcat05]

Not to change the subject or anything, but what do you think of ESPN's power rankings?
http://espn.go.com/blog/pac10/post/_/id/2427/pac-10-power-rankings-17

 

[O]

I am not bringing smack, I come in peace.
I watched the game and;
Scott is going to get hurt if they continue to play him the way they did in this game.

 

[TJ]

Not to change the subject or anything, but what do you think of ESPN's power rankings?
http://espn.go.com/blog/pac10/post/_/id/2427/pac-10-power-rankings-17

I like ASU being down in the dumps

As for ours, it should say "TBD" Ask me after Iowa