PDA

View Full Version : Spring ball thoughts.



UTEopia
04-22-2013, 01:42 PM
The best thing to happen in spring ball was that the projected starting OL was able to work together every practice, without injury or distraction. In fact, with the exception of York, who missed a number of practices due to a lingering foot injury, the entire projected starting offense was able to get a lot of reps together. It appears that with the exception one WR and possibly the RB position, the starters solidified their positions and made positive strides. I believe that without question, the biggest addition to the offense was Erickson. From all accounts he arrived without ego and is a very positive influence on the offensive side of the ball.


QB: When all was said and done, it appears that Wilson, while not spectacular, showed improvement and the potential for additional improvement. While he still has a funky delivery and does not throw a great long ball, his decision making improved and he showed that he can make the majority of throws necessary for the offense to execute at a high level. He is able to use his feet in the run game and when the pocket breaks down and that is a big deal in keeping drives alive. IMO, Wilson struggled most during the 3rd week of camp when Shultz was making a push and challenging for the number 1 spot. Wilson seemed to settle down after that and finish camp on an upswing.


Shultz continues to impress with his big arm and bullet passes. He had some very good days causing some to believe that he could possibly take over the No. 1 QB spot, but IMO he then began to push the envelope a little too much, taking chances that he had not taken earlier in camp, and probably finished on a bit of a slump. Shultz can throw the long ball and can fire the ball into tight quarters. He has good pocket presence and moves his feet well. I like Shultz and think he is a QB that can win games for us if called upon to do so. I don’t think the war for the QB position is over, but I would say that Wilson won this battle.


It is a shame that Cox could not complete the spring. He showed very well in the second scrimmage and appeared to be heading in the right direction. He runs well and has a better and more accurate arm then I expected. If given time to mature and improve, I think he has a future at QB.


It will be interesting to see what happens this fall when Manning and Thomas join this group. Five young QB’s and after the first couple of weeks of fall camp only two can get meaningful reps when the team switches to game prep mode. Will Wilson and Shultz be 1 and 2? Will they have a Cox package? I know, I know. Can Manning really make all of the throws? What does Thomas bring to the table?


RB: I believe that if York can stay healthy he will be the guy. He brings the most to the running game. Although Lucky is a personal favorite and had a very good camp, his spring game showed what has kept him off the field in previous years. A fumble and an almost fumble. If Lucky continues to have this problem he will see limited action. I really like Poole. He runs well to the outside. Is the best receiver out of the backfield and showed some toughness running between the tackles. Karl Williams is a trooper and my guess is that he will be in the mix for backup. If he loses some weight he might even push for regular reps. With 4 RB’s coming in the fall, it is clear that the battles are far from over. While a couple of these guys might eventually move to other positions, it will be interesting to see if any can get in the mix for real playing time.


WR/TE: Both Dres and Scott picked up their games. Pedroza, Denham and Fitz each got a shot at the No 3 WR spot but nobody grabbed. Both McClellen and Allen showed glimpses but are still behind the other 3. Juco Lewis will get a shot to show that he can be the third receiver in the fall, but my guess is that it will ultimately come down to Pedroza and Denham and that the battle may go back and forth throughout the year. The lack of a clear 3rd WR is not a real problem IMO as we clearly have two sold TE’s who need to get on the field. One thing I liked about the spring is although the two outside receivers will always be WR, the slot guy can just as easily be a TE as a WR.


OL: Continuity is the name of the game along the OL and it is a huge positive that the group played together throughout the spring. I don’t see any of those guys losing their positions in the fall unless there is an injury. They seemed to improve individually and as a group. The good news is that the 2’s also made significant improvement and closed the gap from the beginning of camp to the end.


While I am bullish on the O, I have huge concerns about the D. I don’t think there is one group that does not have question marks. More importantly, they consistently showed themselves to be terrible tacklers, a problem that we saw a number of times a year ago.


DT: Palepoi is solid, but none of the other 3 stepped up and performed on a consistent basis. Stevie started strong but seemed to disappear as camp went along. Not unusual for a RM freshman, but I think we all hoped he could really step up. LT and Seni are both what they are. High energy, undersized guys who rely on speed and technique. IMO they are going to have a hard time being every down guys. Hopefully the JUCO kid will be ready and that the two freshmen can play immediately.


DE: Wow. We struggled here a year ago and although we did not see Reilly or Orchard, the other guys did not step up and show that they can play the edge. It seems a little desperate to move Whittingham, another LB, to DE. Orchard will need to be much better against the run then he was a year ago and Reilly will need to return to his pre-injury form to make this a serviceable group.


LB: Injuries and lack of athleticism still abound. The more athletic guys like Hooker and Hale don’t seem to be able to stay healthy. The other guys don’t seem to be able to cover anyone out of the backfield. I know the coaches keep saying that the LBs will be okay with Blechen and Reilly, and maybe they will, but we were unable to see that in spring and will need it to happen quickly in fall.


S: The two guys who stepped up on the defense this spring were both at this position. Charles Henderson and Tyron Morris, both had solid if not spectacular springs, and I think their improvement made it possible for the coaches to believe that Blechen can move full time to LB. If Carter can make it in the fall and is everything they say he is, then it looks like we will have a solid group at safety.


CB: Another group that scares the crap out of me. I am not sold on any of them. A lot of inexperience. McGill is as soft as can be. Thomas was burned repeatedly. The backups did not show any better. This group will need to make huge strides in fall camp to be serviceable.


I heard a number of people at the spring game talk about how this team should win 8 or 9 games and to be honest I just don’t see it. Although we had chances to win a couple more games last year (USU and Oregon St.) and were in a couple of others until late (Ariz., UCLA, USC and Wash), it is hard for me to see room for a drastically improved record when you add Oregon and Stanford. I hope that we can win 6 games and get bowl eligible. I think that would be an accomplishment for this team with this schedule. The key will be the start. We need to go 3-1 or 4-0 in the first 4 games in order to have a shot to get bowl eligible and that will be no easy task. USU is a good team that returns a lot of experience and a dynamic QB. They will miss Andersen, but they will not be a push over. Oregon St. is a good, solid team and BYU will be better offensively then they were a year ago and I believe will be almost as good defensively. October is a bitch - UCLA, Stanford, at Arizona, at USC - is there a win in that group? Arizona State (who has owned us) and Oregon to start out November at is not beyond the realm of possibility that we are on a 6 game losing street heading to Wazzu and hosting Colorado, needing both games to reach .500.


I am excited to see how this plays out.

Applejack
04-22-2013, 02:12 PM
Fantastic write-up. I share your concerns on defense, especially the DBs. I'm glad to hear that safety looks like a position of strength, but if we have weak D-ends, weak DBs, and our usual LBs, we are in trouble on that side of the ball.

LA Ute
04-22-2013, 04:06 PM
UTEopia's posts are always a great antidote to preseason Kool-Aid.

Jarid in Cedar
04-22-2013, 09:40 PM
For me, the bellwether game for the season is Oregon St. at home. If we can't win that one, it is going to be another long season. Win it, and I think we will be ok. I don't worry much about the addition of Stanford or Oregon as they replace Washington and Cal(who we went 1-3 against). Oregon and Stanford are obviously better teams, but we didn't really prove that we could play with the teams that they replaced on our schedule. WSU and Arizona are going to be our best bets for road wins in conference, USC is likely next on that list. With OSU, UCLA, ASU, Stanford, and Colorado at home, we are going to need a win against one of UCLA, ASU, or Stanford to have a shot for a winning record in conference(and that assumes a split on the road).

So that is a long route to say that OSU is probably the most important game on the schedule next season.

Hadrian
04-22-2013, 10:32 PM
I think the USU game will decide the character of the whole season, much like last year. If we lose that game, it's going to be another long, probably losing season. If we win, and I do think we will, we'll have good momentum/confidence going into the OSU and BYU games.

Bacana Ute
04-23-2013, 08:22 AM
Barring major injuries, I don't see why this team shouldn't at least be bowl eligible next year. 5 of the first 6 games are at Rice-Eccles and all 6 are within the state of Utah. That should be a huge confidence boost for the team. There is no reason in my mind that the team should not be at least 4-2 after that initial stretch. All 6 of those games are very winnable. Having the first 3 conference games at home should be a boost and allow for a good start to conference play. If they are 4-2 to start I think they end with 7-8 wins. Of course there is also the possibility that the team starts 2-4 and then finishes with another 5-7 season. I don't see that happening, mainly because no matter who it is, there will be a competent PAC 12 QB lining up behind center this year unlike last year.

I'm not too worried about the defense, they are injured right now so the spring game showed nothing, but they should be healthy by fall and I think bringing in Erickson really allows Whitt to focus more on Defense this year.

LA Ute
04-23-2013, 10:31 PM
Won't the coaches redshirt at least one of the incoming QBs?

jrj84105
04-24-2013, 06:59 AM
Great post.

In previous years we managed through special teams and points off turnovers to have more points per game than our anemic offensive states would indicate. Without Dunn and our departed defensive standouts, that source of scoring is going to dry up. I can very well see this team increasing offensive performance in most statistical categories without really making much of an impact on the final scoreboard tally. We are definitely going to take a drop in scoring defense, and for the reasons outlined above, I think it could be substantial. The end result will be pretty similar to last year (predict 5-7 again), but with a few more embarrassing ASU-like losses.

UTEopia
04-24-2013, 08:16 AM
Won't the coaches redshirt at least one of the incoming QBs?
My guess is that both Manning will redshirt unless he can move into the 1 or 2 slot and Thomas will redshirt if he stays at QB. Cox redshirts if his foot is not 100%.

concerned
04-24-2013, 08:40 AM
LB: Injuries and lack of athleticism still abound. The more athletic guys like Hooker and Hale don’t seem to be able to stay healthy. The other guys don’t seem to be able to cover anyone out of the backfield. I know the coaches keep saying that the LBs will be okay with Blechen and Reilly, and maybe they will, but we were unable to see that in spring and will need it to happen quickly in fall.

You seem generally upbeat or neutral about the defense, but your statement about the linebackers is concerning. From everything I have heard (secondhand), the linebackers could/will be as big a liability as last year. You seem to think the same, and a chain is only as strong as its weakest link. Lots of drag routes in our future.

UTEopia
04-24-2013, 09:14 AM
In previous years we managed through special teams and points off turnovers to have more points per game than our anemic offensive states would indicate. Without Dunn and our departed defensive standouts, that source of scoring is going to dry up. I can very well see this team increasing offensive performance in most statistical categories without really making much of an impact on the final scoreboard tally. We are definitely going to take a drop in scoring defense, and for the reasons outlined above, I think it could be substantial. The end result will be pretty similar to last year (predict 5-7 again), but with a few more embarrassing ASU-like losses.


The key to most years, including next year will be turnover margin. I believed this was the case and started to post it, but then decided a little research would helpful so here are our last two years:

2011 Utah TO OPP TO W/L Score


Montana State 0 2 W 27-10
*USC 1 3 L 14-23
BYU 2 7 W 54-10
Wash 5 1 L 14-31
ASU 5 0 L 14-35
Pitt 0 3 W 26-14
Cal 4 0 L 10-34
OSU 1 4 W 27-8
UA 0 3 W 34-21
UCLA 1 2 W 31-6
WSU 2 5 W 30-27 OT
*CU 1 2 L 14-17
GaTech 1 1 W 30-27 OT


2012
No. Colo. 1 2 W 41-0
USU 2 1 L 20-27 OT
BYU 0 2 W 24-21
ASU 3 0 L 7-37
USC 2 2 L 28-38
UCLA 1 1 L 14-21
OSU 4 0 L 7-21
Cal 1 3 W 49-27
WSU 1 2 W 49-6
Wash 2 1 L 15-34
UA 1 2 L 24-34
CU 1 5 W 42-35




+1 3-2 (loss CU and UA)
+2 3-1 (loss USC)
+3 or greater 6-0
even 1-2 (loss USC and UCLA)
-1 0-2 (loss USU and Wash)
-2
-3 0-5

The concerning thing to me is that we are 4-6 when turnovers are either even or +/- 1. The other two statistics are pretty self-evident, 9-1 when we are +2 or better and 0-5 at -2 or worse. If our defense is going to be less effective at forcing punts, we will need to be better holding onto the ball (although I think we have been pretty good in the past) and do more to generate more takeaways.

UTEopia
04-24-2013, 09:16 AM
You seem generally upbeat or neutral about the defense, but your statement about the linebackers is concerning. From everything I have heard (secondhand), the linebackers could/will be as big a liability as last year. You seem to think the same, and a chain is only as strong as its weakest link. Lots of drag routes in our future.


No, I am concerned about the defense, it is just that with so many injuries it is tough to gauge from spring. Also, I think there are more people who may be able to help coming in the fall on the defensive side of the ball then on the offensive side.

Bacana Ute
04-24-2013, 10:16 AM
LB: Injuries and lack of athleticism still abound. The more athletic guys like Hooker and Hale don’t seem to be able to stay healthy. The other guys don’t seem to be able to cover anyone out of the backfield. I know the coaches keep saying that the LBs will be okay with Blechen and Reilly, and maybe they will, but we were unable to see that in spring and will need it to happen quickly in fall.

You seem generally upbeat or neutral about the defense, but your statement about the linebackers is concerning. From everything I have heard (secondhand), the linebackers could/will be as big a liability as last year. You seem to think the same, and a chain is only as strong as its weakest link. Lots of drag routes in our future.

Certainly moving Blechen to LB helps with the athleticism and ability to cover, hopefully anyway he seemed to get lost on coverage in the secondary at times. Assuming Hooker is healthy he also has the athleticism needed. Then you have a beast in Fehoko in the middle to make tackles. The big question with the LBs is going to be health. Personally I am more concerned with the ability to get pressure on the opposing QB. Last year with Star consistently taking up double teams, there was very little pressure on the QB at times. Hopefully Reilly and Orchard can bring that needed pressure off the ends this year. I feel our problems in coverage were often a problem with applying pressure on the QB, even the best secondary gets burned if given the time.
Obviously we shouldn't take too much from spring ball, particularly the televised spring game of hey let's show how great all our RBs are. The true battles for playing time and roster depth will take place during fall ball leading up to the season. That pathetic base defense with no stunting, no blitzes, no nothing, and missing several starters; that was put on display last Saturday to make the offense look great and excite the fan base is not what we will see come fall.

Diehard Ute
04-24-2013, 10:45 AM
No, I am concerned about the defense, it is just that with so many injuries it is tough to gauge from spring. Also, I think there are more people who may be able to help coming in the fall on the defensive side of the ball then on the offensive side.

Do you think they went even more vanilla on defense for this years spring game than previous years due to injury and the game being televised?

U-Ute
04-24-2013, 11:09 AM
Do you think they went even more vanilla on defense for this years spring game than previous years due to injury and the game being televised?

I remember the D being vanilla last year too. So it isn't new for TV this year.

Diehard Ute
04-24-2013, 11:11 AM
I remember the D being vanilla last year too. So it isn't new for TV this year.

It's always been vanilla, however some people have suggested it was even more vanilla this year. Since they always schedule the thing on marathon day/gymnastics nationals I haven't been able to watch in person in years, thus I can't chime in lol

UTEopia
04-24-2013, 11:22 AM
Do you think they went even more vanilla on defense for this years spring game than previous years due to injury and the game being televised?

The rules for the spring game have always been the same. No stunting upfront, No blitzing, Cover 2 (two deep safeties). They are allowed to run the nickel. I didn't see anything different this year.

Hot Lunch
04-24-2013, 11:34 AM
Certainly moving Blechen to LB helps with the athleticism and ability to cover, hopefully anyway he seemed to get lost on coverage in the secondary at times. Assuming Hooker is healthy he also has the athleticism needed. Then you have a beast in Fehoko in the middle to make tackles. The big question with the LBs is going to be health. Personally I am more concerned with the ability to get pressure on the opposing QB. Last year with Star consistently taking up double teams, there was very little pressure on the QB at times. Hopefully Reilly and Orchard can bring that needed pressure off the ends this year. I feel our problems in coverage were often a problem with applying pressure on the QB, even the best secondary gets burned if given the time.
Obviously we shouldn't take too much from spring ball, particularly the televised spring game of hey let's show how great all our RBs are. The true battles for playing time and roster depth will take place during fall ball leading up to the season. That pathetic base defense with no stunting, no blitzes, no nothing, and missing several starters; that was put on display last Saturday to make the offense look great and excite the fan base is not what we will see come fall.


Speaking of Hooker, I know he was injured during spring ball but does anyone know if he did add some girth to his frame? I love the kids speed, he is a bit on the small side for an LB. Obviously I want it to be good weight in order to maintain the speed that he has, I do hope that he has added 10 to possibly 15 pounds this off season.

UteBeliever aka Port
04-24-2013, 12:37 PM
It's always been vanilla, however some people have suggested it was even more vanilla this year. Since they always schedule the thing on marathon day/gymnastics nationals I haven't been able to watch in person in years, thus I can't chime in lol

I think the defensive rules were most likely the same as recent years, but what I did notice was a lot of offensive players playing on defense. Even offensive starters. It was really like they were just screwing around on defense.

I'm hoping that the involvement of so many offensive players on defense, particularly the backfield, was responsible for the poor tackling.... they looked like they were afraid to hit, lots of arm tackling.

Applejack
04-24-2013, 01:50 PM
Certainly moving Blechen to LB helps with the athleticism and ability to cover, hopefully anyway he seemed to get lost on coverage in the secondary at times. Assuming Hooker is healthy he also has the athleticism needed. Then you have a beast in Fehoko in the middle to make tackles. The big question with the LBs is going to be health. Personally I am more concerned with the ability to get pressure on the opposing QB. Last year with Star consistently taking up double teams, there was very little pressure on the QB at times. Hopefully Reilly and Orchard can bring that needed pressure off the ends this year. I feel our problems in coverage were often a problem with applying pressure on the QB, even the best secondary gets burned if given the time.
Obviously we shouldn't take too much from spring ball, particularly the televised spring game of hey let's show how great all our RBs are. The true battles for playing time and roster depth will take place during fall ball leading up to the season. That pathetic base defense with no stunting, no blitzes, no nothing, and missing several starters; that was put on display last Saturday to make the offense look great and excite the fan base is not what we will see come fall.

Adding Orchardhafua and Reilly will certainly help our pass rush. But what it won't help--and where my largest concern for the defense lies--is the ability to contain the edges in the run game. Not having contain exposes the linebackers (who are already the weak spot on our defense) even more. I hope we get that fixed, but honestly, I don't know how we do it. I hope Whittingham-Sitake have an answer.