NC State 35, South Alabama 13: Media Roundup
Reactions to State's win over South Alabama:
-- South Alabama falls to N.C. State 35-13, losing first game in program's history
"We played our guts out the entire game," said Jags linebacker Jake Johnson, a Virginia Tech transfer. "We had our mistakes here and there on defense, myself included. We played a great game, but mistakes in big-time football kill you. I'm optimistic and proud of how we played.
"I think this was real eye-opening for some of the guys on the team to see what the speed is like. I'm proud of our guys. I'm disappointed we lost but that's football. You have your wins and losses."
Kid's got a good sense of perspective. They acquitted themselves pretty well, I thought.
-- South Alabama learned valuable lesson at NC State.
-- Pack dispatches South Alabama.
-- Wolfpack shows progress in romp past South Alabama. I suppose progress is the right word, for lack of a better term. I mean, at least we outgained a team finally. That's a start.
-- Glennon sparks Wolfpack past South Alabama.
-- Backfield too much for Jaguars. Okay but could we cut out some of the fumbles please? I expect more from running backs with a combined 24 years of college football experience. The Taylor Gentry carry watch continues--through three games and two I-AA opponents, Gentry still hasn't gotten the carry he's been promised. It would've been easy to find a no-stakes spot in either home game, but it's clear Tom O'Brien is a fan of suspense. My guess: Gentry gets a goalline carry against Central Michigan and kills three defensive backs en route to the end zone.
-- Grading week 3 in the ACC. Andrew Jones gives State a C- for its performance on Saturday, wonders if "maybe this just isn't a very good football team." I'd say that's a fair thing to wonder about at this point in the season.
-- Brett Friedlander is troubled by State's giveaways against South Alabama.
Expansion items:
-- ACC's break from tradition helps preserve its tradition. That's a good way of putting things, and it's illustrative of the between-a-rock-and-a-hard-place atmosphere that's defining the college sports landscape right now. It's hard to like any changes from the standpoint of tradition, and what this is doing to college basketball really stinks, but in doing this the ACC has helped secure its future by eliminating its closest competition for the fourth superconference. Assuming we're heading that way, it at least solidifies the ACC alongside the Pac-X, Big Ten, and SEC.
-- Syracuse, Pitt add possibilities to ACC.
-- These are the comments from Swofford that had the Big East "steamed":
ACC commissioner John Swofford said on a teleconference with news reporters Sunday morning that "we'd probably be remiss if we didn't think in those terms. ... We would be open to that as part of our rotation."
See, no one's drinking anyone else's milkshake here. In this specific case, anyway. We just want to roll up there on occasion and offer a painfully immediate reminder to the Big East of what it once was.
-- In an interview that will air on 620 AM on Monday morning, Debbie Yow said that the ACC will move to North/South divisions. Now the challenge is finding new division names that are as confusing and forgettable as the current set.
14 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
How can we move to N/S Divisions with 14 teams?
That leads to either:
1) Breaking up the Big Four into one team going to one division and three to the other OR
2) Breaking up the VA schools and the NC schools, so something like:
North: BC, Syracuse, Pitt, MD, VT, UNC, Duke
South: Miami, FSU, GT, Clemson, UVA, NCSU, Wake
The only other thing that could mean is that Rutgers & UConn are as good as in, which then makes a N/S alignment much better (although if I’m UVA, UMD,and VT I’m a little pissed about essentially being in the old Big East).
Duke would be in favor of
going to the north division if they could schedule all away games at MSG.
by PACKHOOLIGAN on Sep 19, 2011 8:44 AM EDT up reply actions
It will be 16
Just a question of who. Probably UConn and Rutgers.
We can then go to the Lee and Grant divisions. If 4 divisions, then we can have Grant/Sherman and Lee/Jackson. Or we could do it the pansy big 10 way and have the pride and character divisions.
Would GT
go into the Sherman division, because, ya know . . .
by PACKHOOLIGAN on Sep 19, 2011 8:43 AM EDT up reply actions
UConn and Rutgers?
Ugh. I’m all for Cuse/Pitt (because they’ve actually been good at FB before) but Rutgers brings almost nothing to the table.
by Panthers FTW on Sep 19, 2011 9:25 AM EDT up reply actions
i don't get rutgers either
I suppose they’re a fit academically and there’s that TV market everybody’s always talking about, but… meh. Give me Louisville and screw that other stuff.
You can never go wrong
with a Bloodsport reference.
by PACKHOOLIGAN on Sep 19, 2011 10:38 AM EDT up reply actions
Watched the game on Sunday, most of it for the first time
and it was not nearly as bad as I thought it would be. This was a much better game than against Liberty. The primary mistakes (missed tackles, fumbles/bad QB-center exchanges, dropped INTs and passes) are correctable, and in some cases may have resulted from the wet ball.
We outgained them 6.6 YPP to 4.4. That’s a whipping. Through the first 7 possessions per side we were up 21-3, USA had not reached the red zone and was averaging less than 4 YPP, and our OL was blocking so well on runs that even James Washington was getting chunks of yards. This game would have been completely out of reach by the early third quarter if Washington had not fumbled in the first.
Seems like we lost concentration in the 3rd Q and staggered a bit before putting them away. I think being down 4 of our top 8 DL started hurting us on D. Regardless, this game was not the disaster many are making it out to be.
Glennon was great. His 3 INCs consisted of two drops and one throw away. In other words, he did not miss a target all night.
Here are the systemic problems I see through 3 games:
1) RBs are not good. This will be better if/when Greene comes back. In the meantime it’s time to make Underwood the starter, Washington the 3rd down back, and give Creecy some reps.
2) OL sometimes loses focus pass blocking, letting a guy basically run free to the QB, and with Glennon in this = sack. Not sure if this can be fixed.
3) We are playing guys on the DL right now who are not at all ready for prime time (McGill, Ferguson, Rich, Crawford). Fingers crossed that this will be fixed by the 2nd half of the season at the latest with guys coming back from injury.
4) Our bend but don’t break zone does not work against QBs who are accurate and patient enough to hit targets and not make mistakes. This is a big problem, and we will have a very hard time against Cincinnati, UNC, and Maryland, among others.
If North/South for ACC football and no more members are added...
…expect the Triangle schools to be in the South with Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech and Miami, while Wake Forest would be in the North with the Virginia schools, Maryland, Boston College, Pittsburgh and Syracuse.
There would be a nine-game conference schedule: 6 games within your division, 1 annual game against a cross-division rival (e.g., UVa-UNC, Wake-Duke), and 2 games (1 home, 1 road) against the other division, rotating pairings and sites over a six-year cycle. So, for example, if NCSU’s annual cross-division game was against Maryland, it might host Wake and be at Pitt one season, host BC and visit Virginia Tech the next, and host Virginia and play at Syracuse in season 3, with pairings reversed for seasons 4-6.

by 










