EMU

The question is whether a change makes us better, I am not sold on the idea of "trying out" players if the coaches see no real chance to improve AND the player is not a strong candidate to win the job next year. And there have been those games where Paddock becomes a different player in the second half and keeps us moving making good plays.

The impression I get from many here is that the OL would fail any of the QBs, but that Kelly might have a chance to run for his life and make a play.

Making a change where that is a big factor or where the real culprit is play calling or system not fitting the talent, is not a recipe for great improvement or much use in planning for the future. There is some reason to think that we could install some plays for Kelly, slip him into the lineup as something of a surprise or in situations where a designed run or rpo would be a better call than what we have been seeing, and the defense has also seen... Goal line packages or plays predictably a run come to mind.

At least one of the oline recruits from last year didn't make it to campus. (Sam Buras) Don't know if that's a problem or if he's actually a greyshirt and will be there in January. I just know he's huge. Maybe we've lost some depth guys to transfer or just giving up football. Our guys just don't seem to move all that well and don't get much push. We could use an infusion of big dudes who are either very strong at the point of attack or can move and create space for backs, and passing lanes for the QBs. How many yards would Steele have if they did generate push up front? Our run game is also limited in play selection-- all between the tackles. no sweeps with a guard pulling. No cut back lanes. Very few pitch plays. In other words, extremely vanilla and very much IN the box. (literally and figuratively) Steele makes a ton of yards after contact, but he also takes a helluva beating. I don't think he can hold up long term. He's already had a couple times this year when he's gotten a little dinged up. There is ZERO change of pace with the backs. If we have a speed/scat back we've not seen him. No home run hitters. Pemberton is pretty much a Steele clone in how he runs. What little I saw of barfield vs. Murry, he's the one with a little bit of wiggle. Not a lot, but more than the other guys. But, if he can't power run like Steele and Pemberton he can't get anywhere behind the current line. It would just be nice to see a quicker back from time to time to see if one could run around the end, or, accelerate through whatever hole might be there and go into high gear and outrun people.

Nichols might have gotten hurt in our game. I haven't seem him show up in the boxscore since.

I wouldn't have a scatback/speed back run up the gut, but, sadly Lynch would. It's what we did with Donny Marcus, which was a total waste. That kid played so well in our bowl win and then we buried him and couldn't seem to find a role for him. I would have a quicker kid out there to run sweeps and cut backs and get same catches in the open field. And I'm only thinking maybe 10 carries a game in our offense. Just for a different look and to spread out the defense a little. What we do is designed to have Steele bang away out there. In lieu of not using a quicker back for a change of pace to run against a worn out defense I'd at least give Pemberton 5 more carries a game. Keep Steele fresher plus Pemberton is a dude--he's gonna be good. Give him some more shots out there.