• 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

#1 thing our quarterbacks need is a running game and a commitment to it

I was disappointed that when Griffis came in vs. Pitt, he handed the ball off out of the mesh on every single play - even when, on both third downs, the DE crashed down. At that point the read is QB keeps. Yes, we were getting throttled, and yes, we were deep in our own end, but run the offense.
 
For what little it may be worth, Dane Brugler from The Athletic released his top-15 draft prospects at each position, and there are no WF players on the list. No Hartman, no Tom, no Roberson.
 
Are people thinking will we be better or worse next season? Tough to find more wins than this season, and it will be tough to score more points. On the other hand, we are returning the bulk of our main contributors and the ACC will have a bunch of new coaches. Our non-conference games are VMI, Vandy, Liberty and Army, which all should be wins.
 
TimmyClutch said:
Are people thinking will we be better or worse next season? Tough to find more wins than this season, and it will be tough to score more points. On the other hand, we are returning the bulk of our main contributors and the ACC will have a bunch of new coaches. Our non-conference games are VMI, Vandy, Liberty and Army, which all should be wins.
Click to expand...

Liberty is no bargain with Freeze still there, neither is Army, but yeah we should be able to get all of those. Tough to say, with most of our guys back, we certainly will have the potential to be as good, but will depend on injuries, turnovers and breaks.
 
Our success next year will depend mostly on whether we have a legitimate defense. We didn't for most of this season.
 
I think it’s possible we have a “better” team next year and end up with a slightly worse record. We got by a few games this year on a very narrow margin and 10-2 was like the best, best case scenario.
 
OldGoldBeard said:
For what little it may be worth, Dane Brugler from The Athletic released his top-15 draft prospects at each position, and there are no WF players on the list. No Hartman, no Tom, no Roberson.
Click to expand...

That sucks but to be fair, The Athletic didn’t list Wake as one of the top 80 football programs in the country either.
 
I've said it before and I'll repeat it. The long mesh point is a "gadget" to try to cover up the plain fact that our o-line isn't good enough to blow the opponents off the ball in a typical running game. The o-line also isn't good enough to do a traditional pass protection. Against better competition we can't hold up. Clemson and Pitt are not anomalies, they are TRUTHS. Don't blame Hartman. Dropped balls defenses not threatened by the run, and no time in the pocket are to blame. Clawson is keeping us in the game with the scheme because we can't line up and dominate on either side of the ball. Hartman, Perry, Roberson, Morin, Stewart and the whole group do excel most games and keep us in the game.
 
Fusiondad10 said:
I've said it before and I'll repeat it. The long mesh point is a "gadget" to try to cover up the plain fact that our o-line isn't good enough to blow the opponents off the ball in a typical running game. The o-line also isn't good enough to do a traditional pass protection. Against better competition we can't hold up. Clemson and Pitt are not anomalies, they are TRUTHS. Don't blame Hartman. Dropped balls defenses not threatened by the run, and no time in the pocket are to blame. Clawson is keeping us in the game with the scheme because we can't line up and dominate on either side of the ball. Hartman, Perry, Roberson, Morin, Stewart and the whole group do excel most games and keep us in the game.
Click to expand...

Wish the OLine had been good enough at the end of the State game to eat up almost seven minutes and score on an Ellison run to go up 10. That would've been crucial in a tight game...
 
Fusiondad10 said:
I've said it before and I'll repeat it. The long mesh point is a "gadget" to try to cover up the plain fact that our o-line isn't good enough to blow the opponents off the ball in a typical running game. The o-line also isn't good enough to do a traditional pass protection. Against better competition we can't hold up. Clemson and Pitt are not anomalies, they are TRUTHS. Don't blame Hartman. Dropped balls defenses not threatened by the run, and no time in the pocket are to blame. Clawson is keeping us in the game with the scheme because we can't line up and dominate on either side of the ball. Hartman, Perry, Roberson, Morin, Stewart and the whole group do excel most games and keep us in the game.
Click to expand...

You can say it as many times as you want. That doesn’t make it true. Our offensive line has consistently been above average for the last several years and has legitimate NFL prospects. The slow mesh is an offensive systems designed to maximizing production for a school that is never going to get the pure stud prospects at skill positions. By freezing the defenses we are able to consistently outplay teams with significant talent advantages on paper. If anything, the extended mesh is probably more of a detriment to the line than a benefit because many of the plays take so long to develop.
 
I'm no Nature Boy (old posters will remember his excellent football takes), but I think our offensive line is a big part of the problem. I turned the Pitt game off during the 4th quarter, but it seemed to me that Hartman had no time to do anything after the first couple of drives.
 
WRS said:
You can say it as many times as you want. That doesn’t make it true. Our offensive line has consistently been above average for the last several years and has legitimate NFL prospects. The slow mesh is an offensive systems designed to maximizing production for a school that is never going to get the pure stud prospects at skill positions. By freezing the defenses we are able to consistently outplay teams with significant talent advantages on paper. If anything, the extended mesh is probably more of a detriment to the line than a benefit because many of the plays take so long to develop.
Click to expand...

He's just buying into the media and other fan's narrative that anytime Wake has success in football it's due to smoke and mirrors on offense and anytime we win the division it's because the ACC stinks. The media was still talking about our smoke and mirrors, misdirection and option offense when Riley was here and our offense was pretty traditional.
 
WRS said:
You can say it as many times as you want. That doesn’t make it true. Our offensive line has consistently been above average for the last several years and has legitimate NFL prospects. The slow mesh is an offensive systems designed to maximizing production for a school that is never going to get the pure stud prospects at skill positions. By freezing the defenses we are able to consistently outplay teams with significant talent advantages on paper. If anything, the extended mesh is probably more of a detriment to the line than a benefit because many of the plays take so long to develop.
Click to expand...

Yet we've been pretty damn good at skill positions.
 
PhDeac said:
Yet we've been pretty damn good at skill positions.
Click to expand...

No doubt, our development of guys like Perry has been unreal. But then even a guy like Surratt goes undrafted because he’s well below NFL level athleticism.
 
WRS said:
No doubt, our development of guys like Perry has been unreal. But then even a guy like Surratt goes undrafted because he’s well below NFL level athleticism.
Click to expand...

I think not playing last year hurt him and Newman a lot honestly.
 
Yeah, our ability to compete at the skill positions hasn't been the problem. OL and DL and LBs are a bit different.

With that said, there's some truth to each of the last several posts in this thread. We're still a level below being able to consistently beat big, physical teams like Clemson and Pitt. Unless TAMU has a lot of guys opt out, I fear it'll be the same story in Jville.

Also agree that we could (and I think we will) be better next year but it won't show in the record, just based on the law of averages alone. I'd love to knock off Clemson at home, but we might have missed our best chance at them for a while as they'll round back into form soon. The Pitt loss was painful because championship game appearances don't come along very often. But if anybody can get us there on a semi-regular basis, it's Clawson. Pretty pumped to see how he and the staff will follow up on this season's beauty of a performance.
 
inspectah said:
Yeah, our ability to compete at the skill positions hasn't been the problem. OL and DL and LBs are a bit different.

With that said, there's some truth to each of the last several posts in this thread. We're still a level below being able to consistently beat big, physical teams like Clemson and Pitt. Unless TAMU has a lot of guys opt out, I fear it'll be the same story in Jville.

Also agree that we could (and I think we will) be better next year but it won't show in the record, just based on the law of averages alone. I'd love to knock off Clemson at home, but we might have missed our best chance at them for a while as they'll round back into form soon. The Pitt loss was painful because championship game appearances don't come along very often. But if anybody can get us there on a semi-regular basis, it's Clawson. Pretty pumped to see how he and the staff will follow up on this season's beauty of a performance.
Click to expand...

The success this season should get Wake noticed by some 23 and 24 recruits who might not have looked at Wake otherwise. A good follow-up season should get some in the fold next fall. This season's success will have limited (but not zero) impact on the 22 class. Probably will have more impact on portal prospects. The portal should fill more once academic years end at most schools.
 
WRS said:
I think it’s possible we have a “better” team next year and end up with a slightly worse record. We got by a few games this year on a very narrow margin and 10-2 was like the best, best case scenario.
Click to expand...

I disagree. Could have and should have beat UNC. But yes true a couple games (Louisville, NC St) could have been different. Cuse should have been different but that game should have never been close.
 
We get Clemson and UNC at home next year but we have FSU, Louisville, and State on the road. Those could be tough games.
 
PhDeac said:
That sucks but to be fair, The Athletic didn’t list Wake as one of the top 80 football programs in the country either.
Click to expand...

Retribution for Clawson's comments?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top