gv vs Indy game thread

[dvaara]

Re: gv vs Indy game thread

If Moss stays healthy we'll be just fine. He's a game-changer based on tonight.

he the Pitt transfer?

[Redwing]

Re: gv vs Indy game thread

Frankly, from the stands, it looked like a pretty solid game for GV overall. Some drops, (bad) some earlier passes that were off target turned into completions as the game progressed. Oline and possibly the play calling wore down the D line of Indy. RB's for GV looked better than solid. Each has their strengths.

On D, it seemed like the opposite of Indy. The Dline became more effective as the game went on. Maybe it's because GV can roll multiple guys out there. As for the comment of "mobile" QB is killing GV. Uh, sure. I don't consider him mobile and honestly, I'm not so sure the D was thinking much about him running. They appeared to clean that up though.

As is usually the case, there are things that can be cleaned up in all phases. But Indy is a solid team and after a slow GV start, Indy looked overmatched on both sides of the ball. But, Indy's strength is their oline and running. I haven't seen the stats, but from the stands, I think the GV D adjusted well to stopping that running game. They gave up only one score.... one score to a team ranked in every poll.

I'll give the Lakers a B grade for this game. Solid, but things need to get better (especially hoping the WR's drop a few less.) And I did enjoy the playcalling a bit more tonight. Missed seeing a toss or two to our TE's, but I thought there was a pretty good mix with plays- especially some draws.

[Redwing]

Re: gv vs Indy game thread

he the Pitt transfer?

yeah, from Pitt.

[OhioDadGVSON]

Re: gv vs Indy game thread

Frankly, from the stands, it looked like a pretty solid game for GV overall. Some drops, (bad) some earlier passes that were off target turned into completions as the game progressed. Oline and possibly the play calling wore down the D line of Indy. RB's for GV looked better than solid. Each has their strengths.

On D, it seemed like the opposite of Indy. The Dline became more effective as the game went on. Maybe it's because GV can roll multiple guys out there. As for the comment of "mobile" QB is killing GV. Uh, sure. I don't consider him mobile and honestly, I'm not so sure the D was thinking much about him running. They appeared to clean that up though.

As is usually the case, there are things that can be cleaned up in all phases. But Indy is a solid team and after a slow GV start, Indy looked overmatched on both sides of the ball. But, Indy's strength is their oline and running. I haven't seen the stats, but from the stands, I think the GV D adjusted well to stopping that running game. They gave up only one score.... one score to a team ranked in every poll.

I'll give the Lakers a B grade for this game. Solid, but things need to get better (especially hoping the WR's drop a few less.) And I did enjoy the playcalling a bit more tonight. Missed seeing a toss or two to our TE's, but I thought there was a pretty good mix with plays- especially some draws.

Indy had -5 yards rushing in the 2nd half.

[RetiredAU]

Re: gv vs Indy game thread

Ashland going to lose again to iup... nothing new

And then beat everyone in the GLIAC... Nothing new ;) We had our chances to come away with the W. IUP is extremely talented. QB had very little time to throw the ball today and the IUP drive for a score to end the 1st half is what did it. If we can get the oline shored up we will be fine! Congrats on finally beating Indy...
a GLVC team ;)

[BeachinLaker]

Re: gv vs Indy game thread

My analysis of the night...

Offense:
Passing - C
Rushing - A
Play Calling - B
Overall, the play calling differed from last year and I actually liked it. I just wish we would establish the run more on 1st down. Run to set up the pass rather than the other way around. Thankfully we found a couple of great running backs that can make that happen. Bart overthrew the ball to a few wide open guys to start the game. He improved from there only to have issues with the receiving corps dropping passes. They acted like it was 30 degrees out there. At the end of the day, it resulted in a 50% completion night. I like that they went for it on 4th down, going to the same guy suffering with butterfingeritis to get the TD to go up 23-7 though. Hopefully that built up some needed confidence. Moss is a beast with great vision on the field. He's the kind of guy that sees the hole breaking down and cuts to the nearest opening. He also is not afraid to level a tackler and dive forward for an extra yard or two as opposed to just taking the hit. Provencher is that do everything back that we have been missing since Smolen.

Defense:
Rush D - A
Pass D - A
What a night for the defense. Aside from a few big plays for Indy, they absolutely shut them down. Overall a great performance. Hopefully they can keep that up against the likes of Ferris and Ashland.

[BillyGV]

Re: gv vs Indy game thread

D was outstanding last night - the O did well running and average at best throwing the ball - passes were errant and receivers weren't coming to the ball to make the catch - the only way you can throw that high, slow, thing down the field to the sideline is the receiver HAS to come to the ball - catching it at the high point NOT waiting for it and trying to catch it in your body - and yes, we need to open the field with a few passes to the TE down the middle - agreed, the O line did a great job controlling the line and opening holes for our backs - we need lots of that all year - looked like a first game for the O and D looks like they may be able to lead the team - we will see more with the more balanced offenses as the season rolls along - tough, long road trip to Cleveland, MS to play Delta - will try to make it if possible - GO LAKERS !!

[OhioDadGVSON]

Re: gv vs Indy game thread

One ranked team down 2 to go.

[Irishlaker]

Re: gv vs Indy game thread

One ranked team down 2 to go.

Once you learn more about how the playoff selections work, you'll realize that whether we (or anyone else) is "ranked" in a poll means absolutely nothing.

Now, is that a solid opponent we beat the other night? Sure. But, I look at that from the angle that they had a lot of people back from a squad that made the playoffs and nearly beat a team that went to the Finals. Again...rankings in polls don't qualify the win IMO.

All of that said, having slept on this a bit I think we should be encouraged:

- D was tremendous: 'Hounds made some good adjustments and ran a couple of things we hadn't seen on that one good drive they had in the 2Q. Other than that, (and particularly in the 2nd half) we rendered them largely ineffective. Our adjustments against their run game headed into 2H were outstanding, and I'd like to think they would have netted nearly similar results even if #4 had been full-go in the 2H.
- Playcalling was better: It looked like we were trying to use things to set up other things. We looked willing to adjust what we did situationally. We seemed more willing to take what was there vs. forcing things that weren't. I think as that hat breaks in for JG, this will continue to improve. Am pretty pumped to see what that can look like by October.
- Bart: Looked sharp at times, and not so much at others. Seemed a little off on a lot of the deeper balls, but that can be cleaned up.
- WR's: For as many balls as BW had that weren't ideal, he had at least that many where our WR's didn't help him out. Paritee had an awesome game, and could have had an unbelievable one if he hung onto a couple more. Another area that can be cleaned up.
- Ground game: Seemed like we weren't committed to it enough in the 1H, but we really stomped on them with it in the 2H. Provencher will get even better as the season progresses, and he does fit that Langston/Smolen type mold we have made some hay with in the past. Moss strikes me as a kid who wants the ball all the time. I don't even know if I saw that from Marty on every carry like we did from Moss. Only one game, but he appears to be worth being excited about.
- Intangibles: Not sure if we were just deeper or more fit, but we wore them the hell out. They looked gassed in the 4Q, and we didn't. In terms of deeper/more fit, I hope it's both.
- Didn't like how we couldn't finish drives in the 1H, but I think drops and passes that were just off were more the culprits. When we operate with some urgency and some attention on O, you can tell the difference. Some of those possessions early we didn't look entirely interested.
- How about that 96-yard drive to seal the deal? Shouldn't have been in that position, as a senior DB should know to knock that ball down so we could have set up shop at the 40 instead of the 4. Nevertheless, it's been a while since we have put a drive together like that to hose someone out...2016 at Saggy to clinch the GLIAC comes to mind. Either way, that drive was awesome.

Delta will have more and better athletes, and we always seem to make road games an adventure. Southern teams seem to be sloppier and less-disciplined than the rest of the country, so not sure if they'll be as well-coached as what we saw from Indy. Looking forward to seeing how we handle bidness...

[KleShreen]

Re: gv vs Indy game thread

Once you learn more about how the playoff selections work, you'll realize that whether we (or anyone else) is "ranked" in a poll means absolutely nothing.

Now, is that a solid opponent we beat the other night? Sure. But, I look at that from the angle that they had a lot of people back from a squad that made the playoffs and nearly beat a team that went to the Finals. Again...rankings in polls don't qualify the win IMO.

All of that said, having slept on this a bit I think we should be encouraged:

- D was tremendous: 'Hounds made some good adjustments and ran a couple of things we hadn't seen on that one good drive they had in the 2Q. Other than that, (and particularly in the 2nd half) we rendered them largely ineffective. Our adjustments against their run game headed into 2H were outstanding, and I'd like to think they would have netted nearly similar results even if #4 had been full-go in the 2H.
- Playcalling was better: It looked like we were trying to use things to set up other things. We looked willing to adjust what we did situationally. We seemed more willing to take what was there vs. forcing things that weren't. I think as that hat breaks in for JG, this will continue to improve. Am pretty pumped to see what that can look like by October.
- Bart: Looked sharp at times, and not so much at others. Seemed a little off on a lot of the deeper balls, but that can be cleaned up.
- WR's: For as many balls as BW had that weren't ideal, he had at least that many where our WR's didn't help him out. Paritee had an awesome game, and could have had an unbelievable one if he hung onto a couple more. Another area that can be cleaned up.
- Ground game: Seemed like we weren't committed to it enough in the 1H, but we really stomped on them with it in the 2H. Provencher will get even better as the season progresses, and he does fit that Langston/Smolen type mold we have made some hay with in the past. Moss strikes me as a kid who wants the ball all the time. I don't even know if I saw that from Marty on every carry like we did from Moss. Only one game, but he appears to be worth being excited about.
- Intangibles: Not sure if we were just deeper or more fit, but we wore them the hell out. They looked gassed in the 4Q, and we didn't. In terms of deeper/more fit, I hope it's both.
- Didn't like how we couldn't finish drives in the 1H, but I think drops and passes that were just off were more the culprits. When we operate with some urgency and some attention on O, you can tell the difference. Some of those possessions early we didn't look entirely interested.
- How about that 96-yard drive to seal the deal? Shouldn't have been in that position, as a senior DB should know to knock that ball down so we could have set up shop at the 40 instead of the 4. Nevertheless, it's been a while since we have put a drive together like that to hose someone out...2016 at Saggy to clinch the GLIAC comes to mind. Either way, that drive was awesome.

Delta will have more and better athletes, and we always seem to make road games an adventure. Southern teams seem to be sloppier and less-disciplined than the rest of the country, so not sure if they'll be as well-coached as what we saw from Indy. Looking forward to seeing how we handle bidness...

The biggest thing to take away from the Indy game is that it should end up being a quality win come the playoff rankings. I don't think they're as good as last year's squad, and with that said, I could see them losing to Wayne State, Hillsdale, and maybe S&T in conference. Hoping they'll end up being 8-2 or 7-3, but could be 6-4, which at least wouldn't be a bad win.

I had high hopes in Delta being a quality opponent come the end of the year, but based on them getting absolutely shelled by Tarleton, I don't know if that will be the case.

[OhioDadGVSON]

Re: gv vs Indy game thread

Once you learn more about how the playoff selections work, you'll realize that whether we (or anyone else) is "ranked" in a poll means absolutely nothing.

Now, is that a solid opponent we beat the other night? Sure. But, I look at that from the angle that they had a lot of people back from a squad that made the playoffs and nearly beat a team that went to the Finals. Again...rankings in polls don't qualify the win IMO.

All of that said, having slept on this a bit I think we should be encouraged:

- D was tremendous: 'Hounds made some good adjustments and ran a couple of things we hadn't seen on that one good drive they had in the 2Q. Other than that, (and particularly in the 2nd half) we rendered them largely ineffective. Our adjustments against their run game headed into 2H were outstanding, and I'd like to think they would have netted nearly similar results even if #4 had been full-go in the 2H.
- Playcalling was better: It looked like we were trying to use things to set up other things. We looked willing to adjust what we did situationally. We seemed more willing to take what was there vs. forcing things that weren't. I think as that hat breaks in for JG, this will continue to improve. Am pretty pumped to see what that can look like by October.
- Bart: Looked sharp at times, and not so much at others. Seemed a little off on a lot of the deeper balls, but that can be cleaned up.
- WR's: For as many balls as BW had that weren't ideal, he had at least that many where our WR's didn't help him out. Paritee had an awesome game, and could have had an unbelievable one if he hung onto a couple more. Another area that can be cleaned up.
- Ground game: Seemed like we weren't committed to it enough in the 1H, but we really stomped on them with it in the 2H. Provencher will get even better as the season progresses, and he does fit that Langston/Smolen type mold we have made some hay with in the past. Moss strikes me as a kid who wants the ball all the time. I don't even know if I saw that from Marty on every carry like we did from Moss. Only one game, but he appears to be worth being excited about.
- Intangibles: Not sure if we were just deeper or more fit, but we wore them the hell out. They looked gassed in the 4Q, and we didn't. In terms of deeper/more fit, I hope it's both.
- Didn't like how we couldn't finish drives in the 1H, but I think drops and passes that were just off were more the culprits. When we operate with some urgency and some attention on O, you can tell the difference. Some of those possessions early we didn't look entirely interested.
- How about that 96-yard drive to seal the deal? Shouldn't have been in that position, as a senior DB should know to knock that ball down so we could have set up shop at the 40 instead of the 4. Nevertheless, it's been a while since we have put a drive together like that to hose someone out...2016 at Saggy to clinch the GLIAC comes to mind. Either way, that drive was awesome.

Delta will have more and better athletes, and we always seem to make road games an adventure. Southern teams seem to be sloppier and less-disciplined than the rest of the country, so not sure if they'll be as well-coached as what we saw from Indy. Looking forward to seeing how we handle bidness...

Was at the game. All very good points.

[Redwing]

Re: gv vs Indy game thread

The biggest thing to take away from the Indy game is that it should end up being a quality win come the playoff rankings. I don't think they're as good as last year's squad, and with that said, I could see them losing to Wayne State, Hillsdale, and maybe S&T in conference. Hoping they'll end up being 8-2 or 7-3, but could be 6-4, which at least wouldn't be a bad win.

I had high hopes in Delta being a quality opponent come the end of the year, but based on them getting absolutely shelled by Tarleton, I don't know if that will be the case.

I was surprised with that Delta loss... even more by that margin. I hope that doesn't fire them up even more for GV, but staring at on 0-2 start has got to add some incentive. I had thought DSU would be a plus for the schedule. GSC has some tough teams, now I'll be happy with DSU being .500 (I think they play only 10 games) Of course, GV has to come away with that win first. Though I'm not sure if GV's SOS gets impacted with that out of region contest... at least for the regional seadings...it would for the semis. And Ashland...losing at home in the opener, grrr. Not a routine result for them.

[BillyGV]

Re: gv vs Indy game thread

Mobile QB's give every team fits - that is my only knock on Bart - he can't move and we lose multiple opportunities because of it

[OhioDadGVSON]

Re: gv vs Indy game thread

Mobile QB's give every team fits - that is my only knock on Bart - he can't move and we lose multiple opportunities because of it

[BillyGV]

Re: gv vs Indy game thread

You obviously haven't watched many games - better hold your opinion until you do