NC State 23 App State 10 (Updated 9/4, 11am)

'06 Football General74

A more detailed wrap-up is forthcoming. I couldn’t be in the stadium tonight, so I will leave the heavy analysis for a blogger who was there. Since we are mad at the N&O, and merely annoyed with ESPN, we will link their recap.

That said, it doesn’t take being in the stadium to be concerned about 44 yards passing against a 1-AA opponent. That’s not going to cut it, as even stellar backs like Brown and Baker won’t find holes if teams can put 9 men in the box (especially when said teams are better than the Mountaineers). On the plus side, it sounds like our defense was great.

The best insight I can give from the radio broadcast – how embarrassing it was for our crew to crow about it being “the first time in the history of Carter-Finley Stadium that NC State defeated a #1 ranked team.” That would be a pretty good line if accompanied by a chuckle. But it was delivered with gusto and earnestness. Talk about your Kool Aid drinking.

It certainly could be worse – we could have been shut out by a weak 1-AA foe like Richmond. And I would be remiss not to mention UNC’s moment of poetic justice – having a TD taken off the board after the refs looked at the replay, then fumbling on the 4th down try. God is good, and He definitely has a sense of humor…

Bytes – Monday @ 11am
The analysis of what we saw Saturday night is about as straight forward and vanilla as what actually unfolded on the field on Saturday night. There just isn’t that much to it since State (appropriately) chose to reveal about 1% of the playbook vs the Mountaineers.

(After I wrote this section I jumped over to Section Six and saw the exact same adjective of “vanilla” used as the headline. GREAT MINDS THINK A LIKE!!! My comments in this section dovetail nicely with the comments at Section Six)

The following are some quick game-related bytes from Saturday night (we’ll have more anaylsis from the weekend’s events as the week progresses):

* Saturday Summary – Tom Suiter logged some quick comments his thoughts on the weekend over on WRAL’s Blog that succinctly sums the whole thing up:

State has good players and good depth, and I think they’ll be a good football team. As the season gets tougher, though, they will need to have Stone do more than just hand off the ball. Defensively, you couldn’t ask for more, limiting Appalachian State to just 133 yards in total offense. Mario, Manny, McCargo and the rest of those guys from last year couldn’t have done better. I would expect the Pack to make it 2-0 next week hosting Akron.

* Marcus Stone – In his customary fantastic syle, Caulton Tudor truly nailed the whole Quarterback-Marcus Stone issue in his column on Sunday. Make no mistake how important Stone is to the Pack’s success this season.

No one in the Wolfpack camp was about to complain about a relatively painless season-opening victory, nor should they. But the predicted improvement in Stone’s game just didn’t surface against the quick Mountaineer defense.

There’s no way to knock Stone’s winning percentage and it’s entirely possible the Wolfpack can win again next week against Akron — and perhaps even at Southern Mississippi on Sept. 16 without getting big numbers from Stone.

But eventually the ACC schedule is going to hit — starting with Boston College on Sept. 23 in Carter-Finley — and eventually the Pack is going need a more aggressive, potent passing attack.

* The Season – After watching this game, I think that main question for the entire season is simple – CAN Marcus Stone execute a more potent passing attack? I think that NC State can go 6-6 this season playing the style of football that produced last year’s 5-1 finish and Saturday night’s win over ASU. But, NC State can go 8-4 or better if Stone improved more in the offseason than he showed on Saturday night and can complete just 55% of his passes.

* Offense / Play calling – I can understand both sides of the arguments about the offense & play calling that are inlcuded in the comments section of this entry. For now, I am going to choose to believe that State didn’t want to take any risks against a team that we knew that we could beat by running the ball, controlling field position, and forcing to drive the field when they never proved that they could. The goal of playing the game is to WIN. The goal of playing the season is WIN AS MANY AS YOU CAN. Why do anything more than we have to do to win?

* Toney Baker – TB22 fumbled on Saturday night, a problem that continues to plague him and ultimately relegates him behind Andre Brown on the depth chart.

* Passing – The think that bothers me most about Stone/QB is his unwillingness (inability?) to even attempt a pass DOWN THE FIELD. Almost every pass attempt (and definitely every pass completion) are nothing more than little dumps and outs. To join the the critical bandwagon for a moment – if a junior quarterback in the ACC does not have the ability to complete a forward pass that travels more than 10 yards from the line of scrimmage then something is definitely wrong. The Wolfpacker stated the following in their Monday Morning Quarterback:

There were times Pack receivers were open and they did not get the ball. Junior John Dunlap was seen open downfield twice.

* Passing, II – Similarly, I picked this up from the comments section:

Something Terry Harvey said on the postgame show that rang true. This offense needs to prove that they can complete a forward pass when in an obvious passing situation. They haven’t been able to do that since PR left. At some point there will be games where a State QB will have to WIN the game for us and right now that won’t happen.

* What Penalties? – 3 penalties for 20 yards. AWESOME!! Turnovers continue to be another story for the program; but, after the improvement in penalties at the end of last year this issue should be put to rest. GREAT JOB!!

* Offensive Line – other than the play of Marcus Stone, the offensive line was the next most worrisome performance from Saturday night. Coach Amato said after the game that he was pleased with their play, so I will defer. But, the OLine appears to be much better at run blocking than at pass protecting. Marcus is going to need everything that he can get from them.

* John Deraney – no comments about NC State football in 2005 or 2006 would be compete without highlighting John Deraney’s play.

* Defense – Heading into the season I wasn’t nearly as worried about the defensive line as the rest of the world seemed to be and it looks like I got that one right. On the whole, the defense played great. The linebackers missed some assignments and have a lot of room to improve but they are sandwiched by a lot of talent in front and behind them.

About BJD95

1995 NC State graduate, sufferer of Les and MOC during my entire student tenure. An equal-opportunity objective critic and analyst of Wolfpack sports.

'06 Football General

74 Responses to NC State 23 App State 10 (Updated 9/4, 11am)

  1. Micky McCarthy 09/03/2006 at 1:36 PM #

    Hahn and Evans pimping the “first ever win over a #1 team” thing is sickening.

  2. tvp 09/03/2006 at 1:41 PM #

    ^I thought they were joking at first. But no, they were serious. Gag me.

  3. Cardiac95 09/03/2006 at 2:01 PM #

    Terry Harvey said it best in the post-game show. When a 1AA team stacks it up to stop the run & leaves your receivers in single coverage, you HAVE to like your chances of having a big day.

    Did we even attempt a pass further than 5 yrds down field? How much longer can the program wait for a QB to emerge? I can’t see more than 6-7 wins based on yesterday’s offensive performance.

    Fortunately, the Defense has not appeared to drop off nearly as much as the pundits had hoped.

  4. packpigskinfan23 09/03/2006 at 2:37 PM #

    some of you guys make me sick… I think its a good sign that a lot of you moaning DIDNT GO TO THE GAME… Sure the passing game wasnt good- THERE WHERE NO PASSING PLAYS CALLED. after halfway through the 3rd quarter there werent any needed. The O line wasnt good. again. you cant throw the ball if your O line is horrible and your TE’s are non-exsistent. Our defense was amazing… I was loving that the whole game. THAT looks good for us in the long run. now everyone quit acting like a bunch of girls. if you want to blame someone, blame Trusman… or whever the hell he is. He is experienced enough that he should be able to make calls that fit the QB. for the past 2 years he has been trying to fit the QBs we have into HIS plan… he should work his plan around them. I enjoyed the game… so some good things, and some bad things… but from my point of view we should all be glad that our d played great, and we had like 2 penaltys the whole game.

  5. packpigskinfan23 09/03/2006 at 2:59 PM #

    manny lawson picked off Charlie Whitehurst this weekend…. nice.

  6. Delete-Me 09/03/2006 at 3:47 PM #

    ^ agreed packpigskinfan, being there made a difference. More than just about the QBs, what about the center hike that went straight up resulting in a fumble? TB’s fumble? Punt return fumble? That’s not all on the QB. We had some things go wrong, so it could have been worse, but we survived those things. Flipside, it could have been better w/o those TOs. TB’s fumble setup their only TD. TB did recover on his next series with a TD. Things could have gone smoother, but I’ll take the win after being there an seeing all that transpired. One final thought, Bowens is going to get a lot of action it appears.

  7. Wolfpack4ever 09/03/2006 at 3:49 PM #

    Regarding Chuck not trying to run up the score by going deep in the 4th quarter, good for him! It disgusts me to see an Ohio State slinging the ball deep, running up the score on some hapless patsy scheduled to fatten their record and gunning for high rankings. We may disagree on how Chuck is doing as a win/loss coach or even if he can coach, but he did train under Bobby Bowden and Bobby shows respect for every team and coach he plays against. Chuck could use some class in some regards but he shows respect for other teams and coaches.

    Speaking of showing respect for teams, getting up and walking out on a team on the field is a low-classed, chicken-squat thing to do. Every player may not be a star, but all, including walk-ons pay their dues in the weight rooms and on the practice fields. I know this isn’t a cheerleading blog, but the gloom and doom here is best seen on the tarhole blogs.

    Last call: had to love Mario on the sidelines cheering his old mates on. That’s the spirit Chuck brings to the party — I just wish he would ride in on his Harley. 😉

  8. wufpaxno1 09/03/2006 at 3:55 PM #

    I have to agree that some of you need to back down a little, you know who you are. This was game one of a long season and why should the Pack expose more of its play book then is necessary against an over matched opponent. Though ASU is not as light as many of you would seem to believe; the game was in hand early and there was no need show more of our arsenal then we did to future opponents, nor to risk injury.
    This schedule is favorable and I don’t expect that we will show much more then is needed next week, or the week after that for that matter. Every early game is a game to build on until we reach the conference schedule; and each of our first three opponents is tougher then the previous one. We need to take them one at a time, do what is needed to win and move on to the next, we will have ample opportunity to open it up as the season progresses.
    I did not come into this season with great expectations, just a lot of hope, and nothing of yesterday did anything to change that. We are a work in progress and as long as we continue to progress I will be happy. One game does not give any of us anything to compare to, just a bench mark to build upon. Next week gets tougher and will give us a much better idea from which to form an opinion.
    We were without our most experienced receiver and the center of our offensive line, our freshman receivers are young and not yet battle tested, and Justin Burke has not been around long enough to have a complete grasp of a complex offense. I, for one, hope that they are hold Burke out for the season, no matter what happens with the Q.B. situation this year. Better to give him time to get adjusted and build his confidence then to waste a year of eligibility, risk injury, or damage his psyche when his future seems so bright and that of the Pack along with it.
    Not much was expected of this team, anything better then 5th in the division is better then predicted, and I think we will achieve that easily. We are undefeated, the defense looked better then expected, the offense will arrive and we will be all right.
    Chill, take it game by game, support this team and focus your aggression at the administrations tailgating policy which is the source of more frustration then winning our first game.

  9. packpigskinfan23 09/03/2006 at 4:29 PM #

    over all, I think the biggest dissapointment was once again the O Line…

    lets look forward and focus on that Akron team that is VERY tough.

  10. VaWolf82 09/03/2006 at 4:54 PM #

    I was told by several PP posters that State would air the ball out against ASU. How’s that for ignoring all available evidence?

    We’ve seen this same offense long enough to know exactly what to expect. Yet it seems that alot of people were expecting something different or were disappointed/surprised in last night’s performance. I have had long enough to come to grips with State’s offensive deficiencies that I was neither disappointed nor suprised.

    How many people remember the BC game last year? State will definitely suffer some losses just like that one this year. The only question is how many.

  11. Mike 09/03/2006 at 5:02 PM #

    Its not that we needed to run up the score. We needed to run some plays we will need to use later. Ask anyone who has played, running them in practice is no comparison to game time.

    I am thrilled we won, a win is a win. However, the offensive (in more ways than one) performance MUST get better if we want to beat better teams. Yes, App St is better than people gave them credit for, but 36 yards? Joke.

  12. tvp 09/03/2006 at 5:24 PM #

    Question – If instead Stone’s numbers were something like…12-18, 160 yards, 2 TD 1 INT, would people’s reaction be any different? It would just be, “OK performance but let’s see if he can do it against a real team.” This game wouldn’t prove anything either way.

  13. BJD95 09/03/2006 at 6:23 PM #

    There’s just no spinning the passing performance. Games against a 1-AA opponent aren’t just meant to “get a W” – that SHOULD be a given, Colorado and Duke notwithstanding. We needed to get some positive momentum (and confidence) in our passing game, and establish solid play from our defensive front seven.

    We achieved 1 out of 2.

  14. WolfRed 09/03/2006 at 6:36 PM #

    We have TWO very good passing QB’s on the team. One of them is not yet ready to play and one of them has to wait a year. This offense is being prepared for THEM, not Stone.

    I agree with wufpaxno1, we are not going to expose our capabilities until we have to. We won this game without passing, and that is all to the good. We will use more of the playbook when we must.

  15. VaWolf82 09/03/2006 at 7:07 PM #

    Question – If instead Stone’s numbers were something like…12-18, 160 yards, 2 TD 1 INT, would people’s reaction be any different?

    Against a 1-AA opponent, “good” play is expected…thus it would be foolish to heap praise on a given unit or player based on a single performance against one of the weakest opponents on the schedule. However, poor performance against a I-AA opponent shows a real weakness….and you can only assume it will be even worse against the tougher teams on the schedule.

  16. choppack1 09/03/2006 at 7:27 PM #

    Here’s my .02.

    To me – this is a coaching issue. It’s just one game, but if this game is indicative of the kind of game plan and offense we’re going to see all year, it will be 3 consecutive years of subpar QB/OL play. That is 100% – either in evaluation of talent, game planning or development of talent.

    The thing that concerns me most is that there were times when our first option (or first 2) weren’t open. On a key 3rd down play, Stone’s main option was totally covered, he looked around and saw nothing and made a good decision to throw the ball away. I saw another play where he went to his 3rd option, a dump pass for a few yards.

    We’ll see – it’s just one game – and we’re going to find out more about our team w/ each week. I was thrilled by the d – I thought they played fantastic. Also, as usual, Delraney was very solid. However, I think his leg will start to wear out if he has to kick this much all year.

    I think we have a ton of talent in Brown, Blackman, Baker, Hill, and Eugene. We should be scoring more than 3 TDs vs. even the best Division 1-AA team.

  17. Cardiac95 09/03/2006 at 7:54 PM #

    In a few weeks, NC State will need a 3rd conversion in an obvious passing situation.

    Right now, I have little confidence that we can complete those at a clip any better than last year (when we were worst in the conference).

  18. Wolfpack4ever 09/03/2006 at 11:55 PM #

    Whose spinning the “passing performance?” No coach is going to start airing it out to create a “passing performance” and put his D on the field unduly. As far as positive momentum goes, read 160yds total offence allowed and 212 yds rushing with 9 in the box. And a lack of confidence in the passing game might exist here amongst the gloom and doomers but most of us aren’t privy to confidence where it counts — in the locker rooms, offices and practice fields of the Wolfpack.

    Do we have issues to address? of course. I’d be more impressed with the knowledge concerning athletic endeavers demonstrated here if some basic tenents of athletic success were demonstrated such as build on the postive and less attention to creating a “whine and cheese” party.

  19. Wolfpack4ever 09/04/2006 at 12:03 AM #

    Oh, you mean like the 54-10 “passing performance” and confidence builder Jay Davis had against Eastern Kentucky last year before we lost to UNC, Clemson, Wake Forest and BC? Get real.

  20. Slader4881 09/04/2006 at 12:16 AM #

    I think once we lose 2 games we may see some Evans, and then we will rotate between to the two. Which actually is worse than Stone just playing, bc neither can get a real feel for the game. Then with two games left in the season some how we will find it a good idea to blow Burke’s redshirt year bc we are stupid.

    Bottom line is Stone is a head case. This is why the play calling will put you to sleep. No change will be made until we lose a couple of games bc of Stone’s stellar winning % (gimme a break). Is it possible to run a west coast O with a QB that cannot throw the ball, and who looks clueless at all times?

    I don’t care if we put John Deraney in there, give me someone who will throw it more than 5 yds down the field.

    You can blame play calling all day long, but even with the perfect play call it must be excecuted on the field. Stone had a few chances to make plays, and if he was worth anything Tresman would given him more. But he can’t do it he is too afraid.

  21. forst8 09/04/2006 at 12:23 AM #

    Beginning of the second season for the Trestman offense and that was the best he could do? Makes me wonder what is ahead. He is supposed to be a good QB coach. Did anyone here see any improvement over last year? I do hope it was first game jitters or they didn’t want to show the real offense. If what I saw is what we have its going to be a long season.

  22. newswolf 09/04/2006 at 8:43 AM #

    I have to agree that some of you need to back down a little, you know who you are. This was game one of a long season and why should the Pack expose more of its play book then is necessary against an over matched opponent.

    This type of posts continues to amaze me. you act like the “forward pass” is some kind of new secret weapon. We aren’t talking about, multiple formation sets, we are talking about a completed pass in the second half. Look up at all the other teams that started with with D2 opponets. Did they complete a pass (to their own team) in the second half of their game

  23. redfred2 09/04/2006 at 10:13 AM #

    “exposing the playbook….respecting other teams….”

    What the hell is that all about? I don’t think we have any huge offensive weapons that we are trying to keep secret. Are you guys saying that the team shouldn’t try to execute in real game situations or do anything different until it is absolutely necessary?

    A game against App is a perfect opportunity for Stone to throw the ball down field and at least become comfortable with his set up. I guess we’ll wait until it becomes an absolute necessity and then force the offense to come up with game changing plays when it’s a do or die situation. I hope we’re not in for another year of too much emphasis placed on the defense and offense not being a factor.

  24. class of 74 09/04/2006 at 11:30 AM #

    I thought Tresman was a disciple of the “west coast” offense but it would appear he studied under Woody Hayes.

  25. packpigskinfan23 09/04/2006 at 11:38 AM #

    to all the comments about Trestman being afraid to let Stone throw the ball… I think thats true… but should he really be? Stone DID NOT LOOK UNCOMFORTABLE…. he may not have thrown the ball down feild, but he did not look scared, skiddish, or anything of the sort… he made good game decisions on when to throw the ball out of bounds, and when to attempt a pass. he looked comfortable to me. sure he missed a few guys down feild that would have been great plays… but that just shows his inexperience. The play calling was horrendous, and I think the boring offense is more on him then the QB.

1 2 3

Leave a Reply