• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Next year’s football team

What's funny is that against Clemson, our first possession featured zero mesh plays. Our 2nd possession our first mesh play went for 12 and a first down, our 2nd went for a nice gain on the ground. Then we ran a fake handoff then a shotgun pass with protection, both sacks.

Third time around we tried an immediate throw wide to get Roberson in space, lost a yard. Then two more shotgun throws, no mesh. Out.

We were going to attempt a mesh run on 2nd and 1 the next possession but a false start killed the play, we didn't try another. All told first 4 possessions we had 2 mesh plays for 17 yards and I believe only one other positive yardage play with like 4 sacks on the rest.

The mesh has been a popular punching bag for why we lost to Clemson but it feels a little misplaced. Seems like an offensive line scheme issue more than anything else, plus when you rewatch the game it's pretty clear the coaches agreed with posters here that the mesh wouldn't work consistently against Clemson.
 
We had a lot more batted balls the last 4-5 games as well. That is dangerous, as they could become INTs. It seemed like most of those were were Sam was closer to the LOS from the RPO.
 
DCDeac said:
What's funny is that against Clemson, our first possession featured zero mesh plays. Our 2nd possession our first mesh play went for 12 and a first down, our 2nd went for a nice gain on the ground. Then we ran a fake handoff then a shotgun pass with protection, both sacks.

Third time around we tried an immediate throw wide to get Roberson in space, lost a yard. Then two more shotgun throws, no mesh. Out.

We were going to attempt a mesh run on 2nd and 1 the next possession but a false start killed the play, we didn't try another. All told first 4 possessions we had 2 mesh plays for 17 yards and I believe only one other positive yardage play with like 4 sacks on the rest.

The mesh has been a popular punching bag for why we lost to Clemson but it feels a little misplaced. Seems like an offensive line scheme issue more than anything else, plus when you rewatch the game it's pretty clear the coaches agreed with posters here that the mesh wouldn't work consistently against Clemson.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Would love Cam or one of the stat wonks to maybe give us true mesh calls by game as it sure seemed we went more traditional play fakes in second half of season.
 
Side note, rewatching that opening 3rd down play where Clemson tackled our receiver for no call was even more absurd than I remembered.
 
DCDeac said:
Side note, rewatching that opening 3rd down play where Clemson tackled our receiver for no call was even more absurd than I remembered.
Click to expand...

Would love to see the outcome of that game in the alternate universe where we get that call.
 
DCDeac said:
What's funny is that against Clemson, our first possession featured zero mesh plays. Our 2nd possession our first mesh play went for 12 and a first down, our 2nd went for a nice gain on the ground. Then we ran a fake handoff then a shotgun pass with protection, both sacks.

Third time around we tried an immediate throw wide to get Roberson in space, lost a yard. Then two more shotgun throws, no mesh. Out.

We were going to attempt a mesh run on 2nd and 1 the next possession but a false start killed the play, we didn't try another. All told first 4 possessions we had 2 mesh plays for 17 yards and I believe only one other positive yardage play with like 4 sacks on the rest.

The mesh has been a popular punching bag for why we lost to Clemson but it feels a little misplaced. Seems like an offensive line scheme issue more than anything else, plus when you rewatch the game it's pretty clear the coaches agreed with posters here that the mesh wouldn't work consistently against Clemson.
Click to expand...
Excellent take.
 
DCDeac said:
What's funny is that against Clemson, our first possession featured zero mesh plays. Our 2nd possession our first mesh play went for 12 and a first down, our 2nd went for a nice gain on the ground. Then we ran a fake handoff then a shotgun pass with protection, both sacks.

Third time around we tried an immediate throw wide to get Roberson in space, lost a yard. Then two more shotgun throws, no mesh. Out.

We were going to attempt a mesh run on 2nd and 1 the next possession but a false start killed the play, we didn't try another. All told first 4 possessions we had 2 mesh plays for 17 yards and I believe only one other positive yardage play with like 4 sacks on the rest.

The mesh has been a popular punching bag for why we lost to Clemson but it feels a little misplaced. Seems like an offensive line scheme issue more than anything else, plus when you rewatch the game it's pretty clear the coaches agreed with posters here that the mesh wouldn't work consistently against Clemson.
Click to expand...

This valid back and forth is a testament to how good Coach R's offense is against many opponents. Coach R needs Top 10 level lineman to get to this next level, imho. And I think we will get there one day.
But yes, I would really like to have seen what would have happened if the mugging of our receiver on that first possession had been called.
 
DCDeac said:
What's funny is that against Clemson, our first possession featured zero mesh plays. Our 2nd possession our first mesh play went for 12 and a first down, our 2nd went for a nice gain on the ground. Then we ran a fake handoff then a shotgun pass with protection, both sacks.

Third time around we tried an immediate throw wide to get Roberson in space, lost a yard. Then two more shotgun throws, no mesh. Out.

We were going to attempt a mesh run on 2nd and 1 the next possession but a false start killed the play, we didn't try another. All told first 4 possessions we had 2 mesh plays for 17 yards and I believe only one other positive yardage play with like 4 sacks on the rest.

The mesh has been a popular punching bag for why we lost to Clemson but it feels a little misplaced. Seems like an offensive line scheme issue more than anything else, plus when you rewatch the game it's pretty clear the coaches agreed with posters here that the mesh wouldn't work consistently against Clemson.
Click to expand...

Completely agree and would be willing to bet it would be a stark contrast for unc game as well as we seemed to go full series without mesh and seemed when we did do mesh it was very successful. Would love an analysis for that game as that seemed to be first game where we went away from mesh for large portions of game.
 
I really wasn't expecting these "way too early" polls to put Wake in the top 15. I was hoping to finish top 15 tomorrow and be top 20 in the preseason polls. This is a very good sign.
 
PhDeac said:
I really wasn't expecting these "way too early" polls to put Wake in the top 15. I was hoping to finish top 15 tomorrow and be top 20 in the preseason polls. This is a very good sign.
Click to expand...

PhD: "pretty good sign"? Do you mean for pre-season hype and attention? Or, do you mean a good sign that WF should be top 15 quality? Not trying to be LOWF but trying to get a sense of what others think a decent poll ranking really means pre-season when all sports fans have seen pre-season rankings blow up through the many years of college football?
 
DeacAssured said:
PhD: "pretty good sign"? Do you mean for pre-season hype and attention? Or, do you mean a good sign that WF should be top 15 quality? Not trying to be LOWF but trying to get a sense of what others think a decent poll ranking really means pre-season when all sports fans have seen pre-season rankings blow up through the many years of college football?
Click to expand...

pre-season rankings mean you don't have to hope others lose to reach a mid-season ranking. If we had started ranked last year, we would have been ranked the whole season.
 
Since school started today, we may have a better sense if anyone else is leaving.
 
Deacfreak07 said:
Would love to see the outcome of that game in the alternate universe where we get that call.
Click to expand...

Once I saw that (live) I knew we were going to have a rough time. It changes the entire Clemson game plan as they were mauling dudes on the outside all game. I don't expect this to be as big of a problem in WS.
 
we already knew he was moving on, but ty hardimon is in the transfer portal.

 
Another interesting sign is who gets more QB hype coming into the season: Hartman or Leary?
 
PaddyWF said:
Another interesting sign is who gets more QB hype coming into the season: Hartman or Leary?
Click to expand...

nobody really whos who leary is. seems like tyler van dyke is gonna be the media darling of the offseason. and then you've got armstrong and malik cunningham coming back along w/ hartman.
 
IAppreciateIt said:
nobody really whos who leary is. seems like tyler van dyke is gonna be the media darling of the offseason. and then you've got armstrong and malik cunningham coming back along w/ hartman.
Click to expand...

Yeah, Armstrong is in the same convo. I don't think TVD is ready to jump any of those 3. He and Cunningham maybe a half notch behind, for now.

Leary had a really good season and is getting overlooked, as much as I don't want to give State any recognition.
 
PaddyWF said:
Yeah, Armstrong is in the same convo. I don't think TVD is ready to jump any of those 3. He and Cunningham maybe a half notch behind, for now.

Leary had a really good season and is getting overlooked, as much as I don't want to give State any recognition.
Click to expand...

I disagree, Leary wasn't highly rated by any advanced stat: https://www.espn.com/college-football/qbr/_/group/1 (EPA seems to everyone's favorite these days -- I think it's my preference too, although haven't done much research)

This is all backed up by NC State having a middling offense despite (ostensibly) good running backs and wide receivers.

Also by my limited eye test. It's so much easier to play defense when the opposing QB isn't mobile with these spread offenses.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top