Saturday, October 20, 2012

Same Old, Same Old

Dartmouth 21 Columbia 16

Why Dartmouth Won

The Big Green controlled the line of scrimmage for most of the game and came up with the big plays in pressure situations. Coach Buddy Teevens brilliantly shuffled his two QB's in just about the best way, and the Dartmouth defense was generally stingy.

Why Columbia Lost

The defense ran out of gas as the game wore on and the offense took too long to finally get into a rhythm. For the second straight week, the Lions allowed a long TD drive late in the game to blow a lead.

Key Turning Points

-With Dartmouth leading 7-3 midway through the 2nd quarter, Chad Washington sacked QB Dalyn Williams, forcing a fumble that was recovered by Josh Martin at the Dartmouth 29. The Lions proceeded to lose nine yards and go three and out.

-With Columbia clinging to a 10-7 lead late in the third quarter, Dartmouth took over at their own 33 yard line. Running QB Dalyn Williams came in to the game, but anyone who really knows Teevens knew that he was going to have Williams throw the ball deep while the Green still had a few plays left with the wind at their backs. Sure enough, Williams faked a run and then found a streaking Bo Patterson wide open for the 67 yard TD. 

-After Columbia climbed back to a 16-14 lead with 2:40 left in the game, good Lion coverage on the ensuing kickoff nailed the Big Green back at their own nine. But you knew the game was turning after Dartmouth and QB Alex Park converted the initial first down. In fact, after the first play resulted in the an incomplete pass, the next six were all good gainers for a total of 83 yards. Two plays after that, Dartmouth had its winning score.

Columbia Positives

-RB Marcorus Garrett got nowhere most of the day, until it counted most. He finished with 72 total yards and a spectacular series on Columbia's final scoring drive to stay on pace for a 1,000 yard season.

-With the exception of a desperation 4th down and 30 heave that was intercepted, the Lions did not turn the ball over. 

Columbia Negatives

-The Lions O-line did not protect Brackett well or open enough running holes most of the day. This cannot go on.

-The Columbia defense, despite all the emphasis on going lighter and being better conditioned, ran out of gas for the second week in a row.

Columbia MVP

The Lion coaches chose LB Mike Waller for the John Toner Homecoming game MVP award and it was well deserved. He had 13 tackles and an INT. 

I also thought Garrett had a great game; refusing to quit and making a huge impact down the stretch.

What We Learned

Sadly, the culture of losing is still alive and well at Baker Field. Coach Mangurian will have to learn the lessons that every new coach here has to learn: there IS something different about our program. I'm not sure what it is, but the usual rules don't apply. 


Anonymous said...

Mangurian said in an interview that he and the other coaches study films to see what opponents tend to do. Apparently, they didn't learn that Tevens likes to throw long in certain situations, as Jake noted above.

But, games are decided by which teams executes better. That's the story of today.

Anonymous said...

Let Brackett run with the ball the Harvard quarterback...the Columbia coach must be asleep ..he has a great runner in Brackett..use him

#1 Lion said...

Observations and Statistics...

GREAT job by Diane and her Staff putting on a wonderful HC event! It was very kid-friendly and the Staff was wonderful. The Lou Gehrig Lounge is a bit too small for all of the alums that showed up. Maybe the new Campbel Center will be better suited for this event next year.

RE: The game... Dartmouth had 125 yards in penalties! Dartmouth controlled the ball 33 min to our 27. We were 4-15 on 3rd down conversions. Dartmouth had 411 yards of offense (300 in the air), versus our scant 220. And Once again with under 3 min. left in the fourth quarter (2:46) we couldn't close (again). I counted three balls that went through our receiver's hands and then went through Dartmouth's DB's hands. these are the facts...

InwoodTiger said...

Well, on the plus side, Princeton won! Here are some links for the upcoming league roundup:

And Penn lost too. So at least the league has been shaken up.

oldlion said...

I think Jake is too negative. Look, this loss was a killer. But to put things in perspective, the coach is starting with one exception a rookie OL, we haven't had Adebayo or Gross since the beginning of the season, we lack experience and closing speed at the corners, and our WRs cannot get separation or drop balls much too frequently. But we have played pretty decent teams to the final gun the lat two weeks in a row. We are playing competitive ball after half a season under a new coach. SomI am not prepared on the basis of two close losses to say there are endemic problems which are insurmountable. And one final note about being undersized in the fourth quarter, on both the OL and DL, it is hard to move somebody who is 40 pounds heavier out of the way unless that guy is completely gassed, which didn't happen to Dartmouth. I am looking forward to how we react to Yale.

jock/doc said...

The game that I saw was very gritty on our part with no give up. But we failed to score any points with our sack/fumble recovery at the D 29 yard line. With the game on the line late in the fourth quarter, we could not make a stop defensively. How many times this year have we been burned by the long pass?(D gets a 67yd TD !)
Currently, our player are not as good as they need to be to win. I don't blame the coach; the players have to perform. We need another year of recruits (no six seasons) and then we will know if the program is going somewhere good.

oldlion said...

In response to Doc, we play a very loose pass defense since our corners are inexperienced and may not have closing speed which would permit them to jam the receiver. That can only work with a ferocious pass rush, blitzes and a QB who gets rattled. Without Adebayo and smallish LBs we are having difficulty with the pass rush against a big OL.

Jake said...

I'm not blaming the coach either. But i do point out that his learning curve is as steep as the players' . This happens to every new coach at CU. The real test is whether Mangurian will learn the how to win here within 3 years or about 6 years like it took Tellier.

Anonymous said...

Since I only heard it, what happened after the Lions had the ball on the 50 after the Dartmouth TD? They seemed to have become unglued.

Anonymous said...

Mangurian is the guy you want. Stick with him as long as it takes. Teevens is now in his 8th year back at Dartmouth - his first winning season came in YEAR 6 and he has had many advantages as a favored son and returning alum to Dartmouth that Mangurian doesn't have at Columbia. Mangurian will put the many moving parts off a successful program in place. Stay the course, Lions!

Anonymous said...

Remember Princeton's Surace opened with back to back 1-9 seasons before apparently striking gold in year 3.

oldlion said...

I agree that we need to stay the course with Pete. PS, the QB who switched to Yale from us, Scott, was a hero yesterday. My recollection is that McDonagh was rated more highly by our coaches and hopefully he will be the drop back passer we are going to need after this season.

#1 Lion said...

This is the second week in a row that we've had a lead and haven't been able to sustain it. We're not in the business of moral victories or statistics. We’re in the business of finding a way to win.

RedTiger61 said...

I choose not to get in this debate about Mangurian and how long it will take .... what I see on the field is what I'll comment on ... no team ever plays a game without making mistakes ... players jump offsides and coaches call the wrong play against a particular situation ... it happens ... since the 1st game, we have seen teams kill us with no-huddle offense ... through game 6 we have not solved how we will defend it ... yeaterday maybe the defense was on the field too long (33 minutes) ... the offense was again, INCONSISTENT ....OC's fault ? Brackett's fault, inexperience upfront .... few if any of us can see on game films what happened .... all we know is we all want IMPROVEMENT ... the Penn game gave me hope that maybe the O was finally coming around ... yesterday's game set back that hope ... we lack consistency on both sides of the ball ... inconsistent not just on offense, but on defense too .... we play great on one play and stuff them for a 2 yd gain, and the give up a 8-9 yd run or short pass on the next play .... I would love to see WINS, but I will settle right now for IMPROVEMENT and CONSISTENCY .... Penn, Dartmouth and Yale are all about the same level in terms of quality this year ... we need to show we can get up off our butts and be tough and take out our frustration on the other team .... Yale can be beat ... we need to play hard on both sides of the ball for 60 minutes with the team we have not next year's team .... there are stil 2-3 possible wins left on our schedule //// let's go after them ...

Anonymous said...

Re: defensive inconsistency.

The ghost of Vinnie Marino lives in our play calling --- predictable and premised upon a game plan that doesn’t seem very adaptive to the facts on the ground. I get the idea that three quarters worth of dives into the middle set up Garrett’s 4th quarter. I recognize that 2 or 3 passing plays, better executed, made a huge difference. And I also see how those dives created some options for Brackett.

What I don’t see are the offensive adjustments comparable to those of our opponents that take advantage of our defensive tendencies.


Anonymous said...

I think it's important to keep reminding ourselves that any FB coach needs at least 3 years to show how he's doing. However long some of us have been waiting and however frustrated we've been over the decades, neither of those factor can can change that.

That said, I'm losing faith in our QB. Yes, our WRs drop some passes etc., but he's just not hitting receivers in critical situations. We had a receiver open in the end zone in the series following the Dart turnover, and he overthrew him. The TD pass to Carter made Carter turn around to catch the ball. I'm simply baffled by how Brackett could have looked so good two years ago and so much less so this year.

I agree with those who suggest that our offensive play calling is not very imaginative.

Lastly, for whatever reason, the Ath Dept changed its mind about arranging an open house at the Campbell Center. Initially, it was to be open between 11 and 12, but it was closed and later open for a reception but only to donors to the Center. If anyone saw the place, please share your impressions.

-Dr. V

Anonymous said...

Very reasonable comments this week, ESP RedTiger. I've been to every game at home and away and have studied avidly. Here are my observations:
1) The best team we played all year was Princeton (yes I'd taken them over Lehigh on neutral turf in a pickem).
2) The worst team we played this year was Penn (yes I'd take Marist over Penn on neutral turf in a pickem).
3) The winnable games for us were Penn and Fordham.
4) The only thing that kept us in the game yesterday was penalties and TO. We were dominated on the Line, esp our O vs their D.
5) For every "dropped" pass yesterday there were 2 good grabs on poorly thrown balls.
6) QB had a bad game yest compared with Penn. Run or roll out or whatever, this year, we will not win any more games unless his passing accuracy and touch match his effort in the Penn game.
7) Our OC is having a bad year! Way too predictable. Horrible 3rd qrt yesterday.
8) DC needs to work on hurry-up and 2 min drill big time.
9) Players need to pick up their intensity for 4 qrts. They need to view their assignment is a man on man street fight every play. OL needs to fire off like they did on our final TD drive every play of every down.
10) Coach is on the right tract. Hope the turnaround is as quick as Princeton's.

Anonymous said...

i think we have had 3 chances at wins and we missed out on them (fordham, penn, and dartmouth).
i am not as down on the QB as everybody else, but the D and O line are really not playing well and this has been the case, particularly the O line, for a while.
the players are responsible, but to think the coach doesnt deserve some accountability is just wrong. Dartmouth should have had 500 yards of offense, i dont recall that being considered improving or competitive on any level.
i hope he recruits well, albeit he didnt at Cornell given he had his best season with Hofher's kids, and the coach after him at Cornell had terrible years.
another tough loss for the kids.

oldlion said...

Justmgotmback from the Giant game. It reminded me of yesterday's Columbia game with the exception of the result. Basically the Skins rolled over the Giants and then went ahead at the end of the game. It took Eli two,plays to take the lead back and to steal the win. Yesterday Dartmouth outplayed us but we had the game in hand at the end, until the 91 yard final Dartmouth drive in which our pass defense and pass rush were non existent. But we had we ball back at the 50 with plenty of time and a golden opportunity to steal the game. So what happened? Offsides, an unnecessary sack , a badly thrown ball and an interception. The Brackett of two years ago would have won that game. Brackett is a gamer who plays hard but either the schemes aren't well designd or he doesn't have an Andrew Kennedy or an Austin Knowlin. Garrett deserves a lot of credit. He runs hard and effectively.

#1 Lion said...

Mangurrian has a pass this year and next year. That is a fact, so there is nothing that we can do about it. Then again, nobody is asking for a replacement. However, what we (ex-football alums, HOF Members, and alums ranging 6 decades of watching CU Football), expect is at least a competitive team out there. Instead, what we have are an offensive and defensive line that are undersized and gets pushed around. This week was clear evidence of that (again). Unfortunately, it looks like we've taken a step backwards from even last year's team. I think playing players too early is a mistake, and we've see other coaches exploit those weaknesses...

Anonymous said...

These are the Ivy League Stats for teams and individuals through game 6. Study the stats and you'll find the facts and answers your looking for rather than shooting from the hip and playing the blame game. They win as a team and lose as a team period. Finger pointing accomplishes one thing, it creates division and the players won't stand for it. Give these guys a break already. No one likes to lose especially the coaches and team. I for one have always believed quitting is not an option and I feel this team will surprize us all before the season ends.

Anonymous said...

as they say about stats, there are lies, damn lies and then statistics....i agree the numbers dont look that bad, but something seems to give every week. For example, Dartmouth is averaging what 325 yards per game, yet against us we let up over/at 400 yards per game?
why the let down all the time, why do we hit the proverbial wall when we are supposed to be in such good shape? i dont have the answer, but i hope there is a remedy. However, i am not as forgiving that i think we will find a way or it will come to us as our history has a way of suggesting otherwise.

i hope we can figure it out and can take leaps and bounds forward.

Anonymous said...

The Campbell Center:

Dr V,

I attended the dedication and reception in the new building. All was festive,with Bollinger, Kraft, Campbell, Murphy, the architect, the many financial donors and assorted hangers on (All of the named above, btw -- and especially Bollinger - are desparately in need of someone nearby who will give them an honest opinion and not brown nose).

The principals assured the audience the building -- still in need of many finishing touches -- is iconic. It is not, I fear. The inside is sleek and modern. The views spectacular, both northward toeward the Bronx and southward. The outside, alas, is hideous. It appears to be the a new subway station for the Number 1 subway line and its scale is out of scale with the neighborhood.

Bill Campbell, or someone, said Bollinger has the final call on all new architecture. So I guess the blame (as with the Northwest Science Center) is his. It is nonetheless an improvement on what was there before and for that we should thank the donors and the administration. But what an eye sore.

Meanwhile, let's keep the focus on Jake's bottom line:

Sadly, the culture of losing is still alive and well at Baker Field. Coach Mangurian will have to learn the lessons that every new coach here has to learn: there IS something different about our program. I'm not sure what it is, but the usual rules don't apply.

InwoodTiger said...

Architecture is a pretty subjective topic, so you'll excuse me if I disagree. As the person on this blog who lives the closest to Baker Field and who must actually pass by the Campbell Center each and every day, I think it's fabulous. A standard red brick building on this corner matching the field house or the low-grade coops across the street would have been geotechnically difficult and completely blah. Columbia had shown very little investment in the public face of its Inwood campus until recently (the barbed wire, removed a couple years ago, was particularly hideous), but things are looking great now. Holl is not your normal architect, and this is not your normal building, but count me thrilled.

By the way, this building looks positively demure compared to the new tower at the medical center. Whoa.

Anonymous said...

I've long respected your contributions to the Blog, Inwood T, but on this we must agree to disagree (nor did I suggest a standard red brick building. The bland Chrystie Field House should never be matched. Ever). The opinion of friends who saw the Campbell Building with me on Saturday was the same as mine. Take a look at how much better some of the new facilities are at Penn and Harvard by comparison. But as I said, it is an improvement over a shed and the inside is very nice. (The Boathouse Marsh Project, btw, does not appear finished).

So, an opportunity not fully seized. I supposed we will get used to it. I'd better since I helped pay for it. But I'd rather focus on Jake's remark about a losing culture, and how Mangurian plans to change it. Beneath the new guy's bluster and the AD's endless calls for patience (Ever repeated by some contributors to this blog), the last two weeks have shown that things are so far still much the same. I will give Mangurian the 3-4 years he probably needs. But if things contune as they are it will be more difficult for loyal alumni to open the checkbook for future facilties, no matter what how "thrilling" or ugly they look.

Anonymous said...

As a former player I appreciate the efforts made by the players. It is not an easy task to turn around decades of a bad history. I wish them the best.
However, I have met with the coach and have been less than impressed with the feeling I have upon walking away. It is fine to be determined to turn around a program, but all I have seen so far is a lot of bluster and very little in the way of progress.
I fear, but hope against this, that we will suffer through another period of years where the powers that be have placed a coach that appears better on paper than he does in reality.
For all of those who want my head on a board and dont like what i have to say; I suggest looking at his past records and his progress on different levels. They arent that good and were not good at Cornell.
I am not trying to be devisive, but I have not been witness to the progress that many of the other writers here seem to have seen. The Penn loss, giving up over 400 yards to a mediocre Dartmouth team do not suggest progress, but rather status quo.

CULionPride said...

Two weeks in a row the winning score was made in the last two minutes of the game. What is causing the defense to give these scores up that late in the game, especially when the total points allowed aren't that high? I am not a coach, but it appears that 1) the offense needs to score more points (when was the last time CU scored 30 or more?); 2) the defense needs to have some more rotation on the DL to keep people fresh; 3)If it isn't working, fix it. Reading the box score on the CU Athletics website is very interesting, especially the play by play in Dartmouth's last drive. There is a pattern.

I know the FBS schools have much more depth that FCS schools, but I do think we need to develop depth, and the only way is to get more players on the field. I have not given up hope, but it appears that the only new players we are seeing get playing time are freshman. Is this a signal to the upperclassmen or was the cupboard that bare in those positions?

InwoodTiger said...

Fair enough, Anonymous, fair enough -- there are certainly locals in the neighborhood who dislike Campbell also (they were the ones who planted the "red brick building" thought in my head). Holl's work is usually quite divisive.

Perhaps as a Princeton alum I have more tolerance than most, since we've had to live with Jadwin Gym and the loss of Palmer Stadium and various other architectural atrocities visited on our lovely campus over the years.

I too was calling for Bob Surace's head at this time last year and am quite shocked the Tigers have been competitive (and then some). I hope Columbia is lucky enough to see the same sudden improvement very soon.

WOF said...

Were there any provisions for football alumni this year?