Woody

[hapapp]

I'm not in the Fire Satterfield camp yet. But I have to admit something has to happen on the defensive side of the ball. We are beyond awful. I don't know if the players are that bad or is it the scheme that blows?

Teams can pass against us at will. Nobody covers anybody! We broke up maybe three passes tonight. All other incompletions were either bad throws or dropped balls. I can't even think of one reception that was challenged. Every pass is caught with no defender within 5-10 yds. I've been an avid football fan for 44 years and I've never seen a pass defense this bad at any level of the game.

Liberty was 0 for 10 in third down conversions last week. 0 for ten!!! We couldn't stop them.

We need to comb the entire continent for a place kicker to sign this winter. Offer the kid a car, a harem, whatever it takes. We have to have a reliable kicker on the roster next year and don't even THINK about red shirting him. Or her, I don't give a damn.

We already have a commit from a kicker.

[AppinATL]

Good. Glad to hear it. Instant improvement in 2015. Maybe Satt can keep his job.

[AppDawg]

I want to go back to the last drive. Make no mistake, Satterfield made a decision to kick a field goal to win the game. He gave up on the offense and trying to score a td and ran the clock out and tried to kick a field goal on 3rd down. Even if we had a great field goal kicker I could not agree with simply giving up on trying to score a TD. But we've had all kinds of issues kicking field goals. I simply can't understand what he was thinking. And even if it was a good decision he made a rookie mistake. If you decide to kick a field goal on 3rd down you don"t run the clock all the way down. You leave 10 or 15 seconds. That way if you have a bad snap you can get a time out and try the kick again on 4th down. He did a similar thing at the end of the half. He allowed the clock to run so low that if we would have gotten a first down we would have run out of time. I thought maybe just maybe SS wad a good tactician and just a poor head coach. I now have to question his abilities as a tactician as well.

After having a little time to cool down and reflect, as bad as our kicking game has been this season, I really think SS was in a catch 22 situation. There was no good call. Think about our red zone production this year... Numerous fumbles and interceptions. I think we were just around 65% scoring on red zone possessions coming into todays game and were already just 1-2 before the kick in question. Having said that, we fumble or throw an INT, Liberty has a chance to get to the 50 and give their Kicker a shot at a 60 yarder (nailed one last week).

Playing the odds, I think SS made the right call and did go for the win. Bentlee was already 2-2 on FGs for the day and the kicks looked good. By running the clock out, we were at least assured of OT should something go wrong. It was from a makable distance (with only the right hash being debatable). Unfortunately, it didn't work out.

This game in my opinion rests with the D and our inability to stop the other team when everyone and their brother knows what is coming. Scoring 48 points should be enough to win any game.

[AppDawg]

Liberty was 0 for 10 in third down conversions last week. 0 for ten!!! We couldn't stop them.

Not just 0 for 10 last week, but the ESPN3 announcers indicated they were 1 of 21 on 3rd down the last 2 games combined!!! 1 for freakin' 21 and they started out 3 for 3 against us - all of which were 3rd and long situations.

Coming into todays game, Liberty was hoovering around a 25% success rate on 3rd down attempts.

WAKE UP WOODY!!!

[MJ1988]

Really not trying to be smart, but think about what your saying. So before every game we should decide how many points it "should' take to win and if we get there we can just stop playing offense. Coach played not to lose. How'd that work out?

[AppState89]

Liberty was 0 for 10 in third down conversions last week. 0 for ten!!! We couldn't stop them.

Not just 0 for 10 last week, but the ESPN3 announcers indicated they were 1 of 21 on 3rd down the last 2 games combined!!! 1 for freakin' 21 and they started out 3 for 3 against us - all of which were 3rd and long situations.

Coming into todays game, Liberty was hoovering around a 25% success rate on 3rd down attempts.

WAKE UP WOODY!!!

I can take a loss to another Sun Belt team, but to get beat by Liberty after seeing they were 1-21 on 3rd downs and 25% on the year.....HMMMMM...something has to give....right now we FU*&^%N suck ASS!!!!! This team CAN'T, YES, CAN'T BEAT WESTERN THIS YEAR!!!!! I really think Campbell let us score 66 on them to make up feel good ...

We will finish the season 1-11 with the Thanksgiving weekend game having 12K in the stands!!!!! Freaking joke of the Sun Belt and North Carolina. GRRRRRR..

[AppDawg]

Really not trying to be smart, but think about what your saying. So before every game we should decide how many points it "should' take to win and if we get there we can just stop playing offense. Coach played not to lose. How'd that work out?

The way I think, anything over 35 points "should" be enough to win. I would like to think a halfway decent D can hold an opponent to less than 5 TDs. Obviously, our D is not playing event remotely adequate right now.

Regarding playing to win, we'll have to agree to disagree because I think SS did play to win and managed the end of regulation appropriately. He didnt "stop" the offense. He made a calculated call based off of our teams performace year to date inside the 20 yard line and even to a greater extent inside the 15 - which isnt good. By taking the FG (which would have WON) the game, he eliminated anything "bad" that could have come from running another play from scrimmage. It was a tie game. The worst thing could go wrong at that moment was OT. SS managed against a bobby lamb "go for two" occurring. Again - agree to disagree.

[App91]

Really not trying to be smart, but think about what your saying. So before every game we should decide how many points it "should' take to win and if we get there we can just stop playing offense. Coach played not to lose. How'd that work out?

The way I think, anything over 35 points "should" be enough to win. I would like to think a halfway decent D can hold an opponent to less than 5 TDs. Obviously, our D is not playing event remotely adequate right now.

Regarding playing to win, we'll have to agree to disagree because I think SS did play to win and managed the end of regulation appropriately. He didnt "stop" the offense. He made a calculated call based off of our teams performace year to date inside the 20 yard line and even to a greater extent inside the 15 - which isnt good. By taking the FG (which would have WON) the game, he eliminated anything "bad" that could have come from running another play from scrimmage. It was a tie game. The worst thing could go wrong at that moment was OT. SS managed against a bobby lamb "go for two" occurring. Again - agree to disagree.

You are missing the most important point. He left it up to our PUNTER to make the kick, not our PKicker, who was out. You cannot do this when your kicking game is in disaray. remind you we were using a PUNTER to kick our FG's

[huskie3]

Really not trying to be smart, but think about what your saying. So before every game we should decide how many points it "should' take to win and if we get there we can just stop playing offense. Coach played not to lose. How'd that work out?

The way I think, anything over 35 points "should" be enough to win. I would like to think a halfway decent D can hold an opponent to less than 5 TDs. Obviously, our D is not playing event remotely adequate right now.

Regarding playing to win, we'll have to agree to disagree because I think SS did play to win and managed the end of regulation appropriately. He didnt "stop" the offense. He made a calculated call based off of our teams performace year to date inside the 20 yard line and even to a greater extent inside the 15 - which isnt good. By taking the FG (which would have WON) the game, he eliminated anything "bad" that could have come from running another play from scrimmage. It was a tie game. The worst thing could go wrong at that moment was OT. SS managed against a bobby lamb "go for two" occurring. Again - agree to disagree.

You are missing the most important point. He left it up to our PUNTER to make the kick, not our PKicker, who was out. You cannot do this when your kicking game is in disaray. remind you we were using a PUNTER to kick our FG's

No, we were using a kicker to kick FGs. Regardless of his normal position as punter, he practices ALL the kicks during the week.

[hapapp]

Really not trying to be smart, but think about what your saying. So before every game we should decide how many points it "should' take to win and if we get there we can just stop playing offense. Coach played not to lose. How'd that work out?

The way I think, anything over 35 points "should" be enough to win. I would like to think a halfway decent D can hold an opponent to less than 5 TDs. Obviously, our D is not playing event remotely adequate right now.

Regarding playing to win, we'll have to agree to disagree because I think SS did play to win and managed the end of regulation appropriately. He didnt "stop" the offense. He made a calculated call based off of our teams performace year to date inside the 20 yard line and even to a greater extent inside the 15 - which isnt good. By taking the FG (which would have WON) the game, he eliminated anything "bad" that could have come from running another play from scrimmage. It was a tie game. The worst thing could go wrong at that moment was OT. SS managed against a bobby lamb "go for two" occurring. Again - agree to disagree.

You are missing the most important point. He left it up to our PUNTER to make the kick, not our PKicker, who was out. You cannot do this when your kicking game is in disaray. remind you we were using a PUNTER to kick our FG's

Our punter, who is now our place kicker had made two field goals already in the game. My guess is that most coaches would have made the same call. I can't fault the decision to go for the FG. The running play previous to the kick was curious however.

[sixtoes9134]

Woody and his staff have proven now for 2 consecutive years they cannot put a product on the field that stops the opponent.

Whatever happened to the bend but don't break? We can't muster up a stop when it matters, ever.

2013 Stats:
Our total offense last year was 4917 yards versus 4806 (opponents) yet we were outscored 336 to 283.

Similar stat line thus far this year.

[WataugaMan]

Woody and his staff have proven now for 2 consecutive years they cannot put a product on the field that stops the opponent.

Whatever happened to the bend but don't break? We can't muster up a stop when it matters, ever.

Allowing an average FCS team to put up 55 points pretty much speaks for itself.

[mtnjax]

I almost hate to say it, but fire Woody and hand the reigns back over to Dale Jones

he at least ran a decent 3-4 scheme for us a couple years back

[sixtoes9134]

I almost hate to say it, but fire Woody and hand the reigns back over to Dale Jones

he at least ran a decent 3-4 scheme for us a couple years back

Not true, he tried it, it didn't work and switched back to 4-3

[NewApp]

Woody and his staff have proven now for 2 consecutive years they cannot put a product on the field that stops the opponent.

Whatever happened to the bend but don't break? We can't muster up a stop when it matters, ever.

Allowing an average FCS team to put up 55 points pretty much speaks for itself.

Just asking, but why do you think it was not the players failing to execute the right defensive set ups?
IMOp, where any blame lies is with the assistant coaches/position coaches not being able to instill the fundamentals in the players no matter how young they are.

[mtnjax]

I almost hate to say it, but fire Woody and hand the reigns back over to Dale Jones

he at least ran a decent 3-4 scheme for us a couple years back

Not true, he tried it, it didn't work and switched back to 4-3

i guess i remember it being successful against the non-TO teams we played. i do remember us going back to 4-3 whenever we played Wofford and GaSou

[WataugaMan]

Woody and his staff have proven now for 2 consecutive years they cannot put a product on the field that stops the opponent.

Whatever happened to the bend but don't break? We can't muster up a stop when it matters, ever.

Allowing an average FCS team to put up 55 points pretty much speaks for itself.

Just asking, but why do you think it was not the players failing to execute the right defensive set ups?
IMOp, where any blame lies is with the assistant coaches/position coaches not being able to instill the fundamentals in the players no matter how young they are.

Agreed

[Apptiger]

Woody and his staff have proven now for 2 consecutive years they cannot put a product on the field that stops the opponent.

Whatever happened to the bend but don't break? We can't muster up a stop when it matters, ever.

Allowing an average FCS team to put up 55 points pretty much speaks for itself.

(Opinion disclaimer on)
If I am correct, the lines role in the 3-4 is to occupy the offensive line and allow the linebackers to run free and rush the passer. Key here is rush the passer, we have virtually no up field push or pass rush.

Crucial to the success of the 3-4 is to keep the offense guessing. That and you have to physically beat or out man them at every turn. No one is guessing with this defense and/or our guys are getting physically beaten a lot.

I don' see enough of a mix, it's like we just line up and react. I'd like to see more act than react and get someone in the backfield dang it.

It seems we are in constant prevent mode with no real LB pressure. That or the line is not doing its job and allowing the LB's to run free. A speed rush threat in passing situations would help here. Get in the backfield and disrupt. Anyone remember Sticks and company? We don't seem to be able to consistently beat double teams or go around them. It's a tough job but thinking more line rotation and fresh bodies would help this as well.

We have to find a way to get the defense off the field quicker.

The defensive backfield can't cover the entire field all day long. Anyone notice how they seem to improve when the field is shorter (redzone)? Not as much ground to cover and the extra time the QB's have to throw is less important.

Edit- One more thing- good coaches coach to the strength of what they have. if our guys aren't suited to the 3-4 change it. If Woody and crew can't.......

[ASUPATCH]

Really not trying to be smart, but think about what your saying. So before every game we should decide how many points it "should' take to win and if we get there we can just stop playing offense. Coach played not to lose. How'd that work out?

The way I think, anything over 35 points "should" be enough to win. I would like to think a halfway decent D can hold an opponent to less than 5 TDs. Obviously, our D is not playing event remotely adequate right now.

Regarding playing to win, we'll have to agree to disagree because I think SS did play to win and managed the end of regulation appropriately. He didnt "stop" the offense. He made a calculated call based off of our teams performace year to date inside the 20 yard line and even to a greater extent inside the 15 - which isnt good. By taking the FG (which would have WON) the game, he eliminated anything "bad" that could have come from running another play from scrimmage. It was a tie game. The worst thing could go wrong at that moment was OT. SS managed against a bobby lamb "go for two" occurring. Again - agree to disagree.

Something BAD did happen we missed another kick. Something worse could have happened. We have had 3 kicks blocked already this year. They could easily have blocked it and ran it back as FG units generally have very few athletes to run someone down....loaded up with linemen and TE's. He did not play for the win. Woody was even worse and our personnel blows for a 3-4.

[ASUPATCH]

Really not trying to be smart, but think about what your saying. So before every game we should decide how many points it "should' take to win and if we get there we can just stop playing offense. Coach played not to lose. How'd that work out?

The way I think, anything over 35 points "should" be enough to win. I would like to think a halfway decent D can hold an opponent to less than 5 TDs. Obviously, our D is not playing event remotely adequate right now.

Regarding playing to win, we'll have to agree to disagree because I think SS did play to win and managed the end of regulation appropriately. He didnt "stop" the offense. He made a calculated call based off of our teams performace year to date inside the 20 yard line and even to a greater extent inside the 15 - which isnt good. By taking the FG (which would have WON) the game, he eliminated anything "bad" that could have come from running another play from scrimmage. It was a tie game. The worst thing could go wrong at that moment was OT. SS managed against a bobby lamb "go for two" occurring. Again - agree to disagree.

You are missing the most important point. He left it up to our PUNTER to make the kick, not our PKicker, who was out. You cannot do this when your kicking game is in disaray. remind you we were using a PUNTER to kick our FG's

Our punter, who is now our place kicker had made two field goals already in the game. My guess is that most coaches would have made the same call. I can't fault the decision to go for the FG. The running play previous to the kick was curious however.

He also missed a PAT. Pulled it 12 feet wide.