Square peg/round hole
Lehigh 35 Columbia 14
Why Lehigh Won
The Mountain Hawks jumped out to a 14-0 lead thanks to a good combination of stellar execution on their part and early miscues by the Lions. Lehigh QB Michael Colvin controlled the game with four TD passes and overcame an early mistake to guide his team to victory.
Why Columbia Lost
For the fourth straight game, the Lions offense was never able to move consistently, scoring only on a one-play drive off a nice run by RB Marcorus Garrett. Columbia's defense was good but not good enough, allowing wide open receivers to slip past the defense on two Mountain Hawk TD's.
Key Turning Points
-Lehigh took early control of the game with an impressive 75-yard TD drive to open the contest. On that drive, the Mountain Hawks faced just one 3rd down. Needing seven yards from his 41 yard line for a first, Colvin found WR Sergio Fernandez-Soto for eight yards and the drive was alive.
-Columbia appeared like it might answer right back, getting a 1st down at the Mountain Hawk 24. But QB Sean Brackett was intercepted and it was returned all the way back to the CU 30. Two plays later, it was 14-0.
-After a Zach Olinger pick six made it 14-7, Columbia failed to get even one first down on its next two possessions. Lehigh finally took advantage of the Lions offensive ineptitude and scored a late first half TD to make it 21-7 at the break.
Columbia Positives
-Not many, but there were sufficient running holes for Garrett and the special teams play was much improved overall.
Columbia Negatives
-The main problem remains the punchless offense, which cannot sustain drives. Through four games, Columbia has just one sustained TD drive, (the opening drive in the 2nd half vs. Marist). If this keeps up, the Lions will not win another game this season.
-Brackett's passes are still not accurate enough to move the team. He did run a few more times yesterday with decent success, but it's clear he's under orders not to.
-The Lion defense is generally improved, but receivers are still getting wide open for big plays.
Lion MVP
Zach Olinger was pulled from the game early because of a big shot he took to the neck on a tackle in the 3rd quarter. But he still led the team in tackles and showed heads up play on his easy-looking pick six.
But it's going to be a co-MVP award this week because Marcorus Garrett was brilliant as well. Hos 26-yard scamper for a TD was beautiful and he averaged 4.8 yards on 17 carries for 81 yards and did not suffer even one run for a loss. For the season, Garrett is still on pace to become Columbia's second-ever 1,000 yard rusher. He has a total of 435 yard this year through four games.
Lessons Learned?
Head Coach Pete Mangurian deserves plenty of time to turn this around, but after four straight weeks of offensive failures, the "we won't change anything until the guys do it right" mantra will start to be his undoing if he's not careful.
Sometimes players fail at executing certain plays and schemes because they don't match those players' exact abilities. Forcing a square peg through the round hole never works.
Now let me make it clear that I realize that Mangurian is the coach and I stand by the above statement about giving him more time to get things done.
Now, let's all picture how great we'll all feel if the Lions can somehow beat Penn next Saturday.
That's going to be my "happy place" thought for the next six days before I hit the road for Franklin Field.
47 comments:
Jake, I have to take issue with you on one critical point, the system versus the talent. Coach M is playing the best guys he has, on both sides of the ball. He also recognizes that Brackett gives us the best chance to win a few games, but he must keep him on his feet to get him through the season. He is trying to put in place a system on both sides of the ball. It takes a while. Look at the much maligned Coach Surace. It has taken him a few years, but he believed in a system and has been able to recruit the players who can execute it. Coach M took his lumps his first year at Cornell, and by years two and three he beat Harvard. So let's stop harping on square pegs and round holes. Let's give the coaches and the players our full throated support and leave the negativity to the foehis of the world.
We are supporting he team. That's why we do this. But I won't whitewash it when it doesn't work.
Like Jake, I have been disappointed with many aspects of the offensive preparation and game calling as we'll as the play of the secondary. A lot of this comes down to coaching. I was particularly disappointed with the third quarter yesterday which seemed Wilsonian. Good adjustments and a strong point-producing first drive would have really set a tone. I also believe there are a few gems being underutilized. But, Jake, I agree with Old Lion, that you are getting a little histrionic too early. Your blog actually references a first year coach's "undoing", 4 games into his first year. Rather than the players jumping on the AD for whining about Internet postings, they should be jumping on you for turning so early on the new regime. The players and their families do read this blog and negativity is infectious and pervasive at CU. it is part of the problem. You don't have to drink the cool aid but you do set the tone for the blog and you have to lighten up. There are better ways to support this team and change the culture. Recognize this blog is part of a losing tradition and like the players, coaches and administration, be introspective and try to change the culture as well.
Agree with anonymous here. Enough of the negativity. Our coach is a pro. His agenda is to build a winning culture. He needs our support.
The fact of the matter here is that Coach M wants to do it HIS way. The REALITY is that the coach, and his staff, must be chameleons and do what it takes to win with the players and system that works best NOW (and not something that is necessarily in a system that is NOT working)! What does that mean? Put Brackett in the GUN and then see what he can do. I am STEALING the following reference from an old CU curmudgeon, but here it is… How many of you have seen the movie “Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid? I suspect most of you… Do you remember the part when the two men were in Bolivia guarding railroad money? The owner of the security detail asked Sundance to shoot at some cans on a fence. He missed four consecutive times. Just as the owner was going to deny the two the security job, Sundance asked the owner if he could move? The owner looked at Sundance looked at Sundance a little befuddled and said “okay” (but suspecting the same results). All for cans were hit dead center and knocked off the fence. The point here it to keep Brackett in the gun. That is what type of QB he is! Work the next QB into YOUR system, but let Bracket do what he does best. Heck, he’s running for his life half the time anyway!
I find it hard pressed that one of our “best” offensive linemen is a 220 lb Freshman who starts. Hello,move someone from the D-Line over so that Brackett doesn’t get killed! That is Mangurrian making a statement that he is in charge. The freshman DB he has out there hasn’t learned how to tackle yet either? The kid NEVER uses his arms to wrap up players? Playing Freshman who are NOT ready is HUBRIS on Mangurrian’s part, and not coaching! We have one of the “fittest” offensive lines in the Ivies; lowest body fat, and they test off the charts… Good for you, now they are WORSE than last year (and I thought that would be hard to trump!).
Hey, he gets a “pass” this year, and maybe next year, but do we have a Bobby Valentine situation here where it’s either HIS was, or nothing at all? Dare we take into consideration that maybe the college game has passed him by? That “His” way may work in the NFL, but not in College; especially the ivies? Just a thought???
Where is Gerst #1? What about Gerst #2? Can either return punts, KOs? Somethig? Anything? Either of them MUST be better blockers than the current FB for goodness sakes. If we can see it by watching the games, why can’t these coaches?
Fully in support of the team and of our new coaches, and fully aware that I am not a professional coach and should refrain from such comments even after many years of personnel witness at Baker:
With 10:54 left in the 3rd period on a 3rd down with 4 yds to go, yet another straight drop back results in a knock-down -- rather than the intended result of a well-executed play.
Does a rolling pocket -- or something similar that allows Brackett to play better within himself -- vary too much from M's base system?
" ...even after many years of personnel witness at Baker ..."
Let alone, "personal" witness ...
While Brackett's numbers weren't good, he can't complete passes that receivers drop; as Mangurian noted, it takes two for success.
With but perhaps 10 slots to fill, it took Wooden about 3 years to produce a top UCLA MBB team.
We'll give him plenty of time, all we ask is for the Coach to use some common sense... Yes, the Surace comparison may be a good one (and timewill tell), however, we have better talent overall. Remember, the Fordham game was a Coaching loss - play calling! The Princeton game was also a coaching loss IMO - the kids were NOT prepared! In coach M's WKCR interview (after the game PU game), he said as much. They (the staff) needs to look in the mirror because we should be 3-1!
It may not be fair to day the coach should change his system and long term strategy now. But it is fair to say it's not working now. Anyone who complains about us doing the latter is too thin skinned to be a coach or admin in Pop Warner let alone college football.
Sorry, first sentence should read: "it may not be fair to SAY..."
I agree with the lengthy comment by #1 Lion. The coaches should cease blaming the players. Not surprisingly, this commitment to play freshmen is all but a failure. As for the location of the older Gerst, did he make the trip? He was last seen in the stands against Princeton! Of course he should be on the field.
Many Lion faithful believed that we had the talent but not the coaching to win five or six games in 2011. Many of those same faithful opined that Coach M would make the difference, solve the problems on offense, and enable us to win four, five, or six games in 2012. After all, we had many of the key players returning. Additionally, we were told that Coach M recruited 34 outstanding, terrific, great and wonderful players who were BETTER than the upper classmen even before day one. The reality is-absent some turnaround in philosophy, we will finish 2-8 at best. What a disappointment.
My great fear is that our AD is filled with people who primarily aren't angry with the substance of the complaint, but the fact that we complain at all. In my job, my success an failure rate is published publicly EVERY week day!! And I love it! You know why? Because people who hate being judged at failures.
"Are failures" that is. See, I'm having trouble with iPhone typing an it's MY fault, not the phone's.
And to think, this is all happening while we all still get all these emails for "giving day." "Shut up and give us money" is more like it.
Why doesn't he sports psychologist we hired speak to the coaches instead of the kids. What a colossal WASTE of money that is... Giving to that AD and that program is a joke!
It only took Teevens two years to supplant us in the basement (and now they are contenders), Princeton three years, and now we're battling Yale. Let's see how long that takes...
I think we need to support the coach and give him a chance to see what he's got. The last opponent may not lose another game all year. We have a legitimate chance to post a win in any of the next three weeks. Lets stay positive and look forward to adjustments and improvement going forward.
Perhaps the coach didn't do a great job in tempering expectations for the year. However, it appears from many past blog comments, that the disappointment with our record is based upon the fan's belief that we should be better than we are. This covers the current record.
The more troubling concept is if, and only if, the players aren't buying into the coaches program. I have no reason to believe this is or isn't the case, but it is crucial for a new coach to gain some support from the people doing his bidding. He can be as intense and feared as he wants, but that will not win him gains nor will it win him support. Growing pains are to be expected and last I checked he wasn't walking on water, don't believe he proclaimed he could either, so our expectations need to be tempered and if it takes a little longer than expected is that terrible? Last I checked we have been waiting for decades.
"It only took Teevens two years to suppoland us in the basement" Actually, it took longer than that.
Take away the drops by the receivers, the several blown coverages and loss of focus, and you will conclude that the problem is not with the coaching or the preparation but the execution. And from what I can tell the players believe in the coach and his system. So all of this second guessing and harping is not useful. Quite the contrary. If I want negativity I will read voyforums. But not here, the home of true blue.
ask the twenty five -thirty players who sit in the stands at home games and are not allowed in the locker room at various times on game day if they "...believe in the coach and his system." Look at the demeanor of the seventy on the sideline during the Fordham and Princeton games---I did not see much enthusiasm or other evidence of "buying in" on their part. Give the offense a scheme that fits its skills. That would be a system in which to believe.
I stand corrected, sort of... Regarding Buddy Teevens' supplanting us... In 2007 Dartmouth was tied for 4th. 2008, rock bottom, 8th place. 2009-tied for 6th, 2010-tied for 5th, 2011-tied for 2nd. I'm sorry, it took him one year, not two, to supplant us from the basement and three years to be tied for 2nd place.
I agree with everyone that Mangurrian deserves plenty of time. Nobody is asking to replace him, nor has anybody generated a new list of potential replacements. However, there are a lot of things that he is doing that are very questionable. Only dressing a certain amount of players for home/away games because they have to "earn" the right to dress??? A very leat, let the seniors dress for home games. Why was Nick Gerst in the stands for the PU game? If he, or other kids, we're hurt, then let them be on the sidelines for goodness sakes. All Mangurrian is doing is building a decisive bridge. Save that BS for LSU or the NFL. If this guy doesn't allow seniors to dress for the last home game, then YES there will be issues. Hint, that dung didn't work didn't work for Garrett!
Okay, the clock is starting this year... I ask you all what is an acceptable record in year 1-4.
2012 1-9 (should be 3-1 NOW by the way) Ivy basement
2013 3-7 - T 6th
2014 4-6 -T /4th
2015 6-4 3rd/2nd place
Otherwise this is the same old CU...
Teevens took over Dartmouth again following the 2004 season. 2005 (not 2007) was the first season of Teevens II.
Dartmouth didn't have a decent season until 2010.
In 2004 Teevens was 4-7 at Stanford
2005 2-8; tied for 7th
2006 2-8; Tied for 6th
My POINT was to show a point in time where they we at their lowest, and the short amount of time it took him to fully turn it around. I would love to have a Teevens, Murphy, or Estes here (sorry, still hate Penn).
Not asking for change (now), but at some point Coach M may have to "adjust" his coaching philosophy... If he proves inflexible, then we know we have another Garrett here. Maybe that's a good thing for some, but not for me.
Coach M is no Garrett. Coach M is an experienced, mature level headed guy who will dress the best 64. He has found that having 100 players on the sideline is suboptimal. So there is a competition every week to be one of the 64. Tough, I agree, but so is life. For those of you who forget, Garrett became unglued after his first game and things got so out of hand that Al Paul had to attend practices. So please, no more invidious comparisons between Garrett and Coach M.
To anonymous above, I have watched the 70 young men on the sideline. Their demeanor shows me how enthusiastic they are, waiting and ready to play.Watching every aspect of the game and cheering on their team mates.It is much different than what I watched last year. To me it looked like they were counting down the minutes for the game to end. The coaches did so much yelling, screaming and carrying on that they lost all credability with their team. I see NONE of that this year. I continue to support Coach Mangurian and his staff. I think the team is all in with him, and I think our full support is what he , his staff and MOST of all our Lions need at this point.Go Lions.I still believe in you!
PS Please don't fault me for not having watched Columbia for the last 50 years, I understand your pain and frustration, doesn't mean though that I am any less passionate and want to see them become a winning team.
Excellent point on the Staff and the grave departure from the previous administration!
so, if the coaches are all good and the players buy in it would appear that we are left with the fact that as avid fans we have expectations that are not in line with the reality of where we are at as a team right now or we dont have the talent. Which is ok and normal, but we should be cognizant of this when we review the games every week.
Just because these coaches aren't yelling and demeaning the players, doesn't make them good coaches. That is presumptious of you. I'm not saying that they are bad, although "coaching" cost us the Fordham and PU games. Also, having 70 players on the sideline who are enthusiastic is great, however, who is to say that the entire 100 can't be equally enthusiastic on the sidelines?
It eas a response to the demeanor of the 70 on the sideline. Did not say all 100 should not be out there. I stand by it, the 70 put there are enthusiastic and not hanging their heads!!!
The problem with any defense of the coaches starts with Brackett. In 2010, he was the best QB in the league. Good passer, great runner, terrific competitor. Unfortunately, he is now arguably the least effective QB in the league. Can't or won't run, inaccurate passer, awful 3rd down conversion rate. How does that happen? Yes, CU fans are consistently unrealistic about our talent level, but we all saw Brackett's sophomore year. Clearly, he has been ill-served by the coaching staff. In my view, the performance on the field is no better than last year and, worse, our best player has become a weakness. Hopefully the team will improve as the season goes on, but so far they haven't shown improvement at all. That's worrisome.
I would guess Mangurian is trying to build the team for the long haul and having the QB scramble all around this year for the sake of a few wins is not what he thinks is imperative for the long term success of building the program.
Give him some time to establish his culture and philosophy
Do you think recruiting off a 1-9 record is going to be easier than off a 3-7 record? Is he going to explain to recruits that our all-Ivy quarterback regressed but it's okay because we never waivered from our system? [Which is what, exactly? Keeping undersized linemen in the game to be trampled by DLs?] If he wants to build for the long haul and he's that contemptuous of Brackett, put in a freshman and give him the reps. We go 1-9 either way. I am pretty sure Pete said the only measuring stick that counts is wins, and at this rate he's not going to generate more than two for us this year. Early days, but not a good beginning.
Some deviation from "the system" for the "sake of a few wins" would be a refreshing change from current and past experience ....
Just to be clear, Columbia's best years in the last 30 years have been due to the coach ADJUSTING on the fly. Wiley was switched to DL. Schwalbe and Cavanaugh were SHUTTLED as QB's, etc.
Give the guy a fickin' break.
There have been less snarky snipping since the blog went to subscriptions. But I for one am getting tired of all the extremely NEGATIVE comments by "anonymous".
Dads and moms who don't want a tag or give their name should maybe shut up. The rest of you: "Grow a pair, and own up to your expert(?) opinions.
As they said on SNL;"Discuss amongst yourselves".
Has anyone divined what about the new "system" is so difficult to get? So far it looks like straightforward blocking, tackling, running, throwing and catching without a lot of wrinkles or surprises. The complicated stuff - options, pitches and 3-5 defenses are gone. Am I missing something?
We are all frustrated, I've been frustrated since the 80's, but giving up on Mangurian and/or wanting him to compromise his program this early into it is ridiculous
My previous post came out snippier than I intended. I really am curious if there are aspects of Mangurian's new system that the guys haven't been able to master. Sometimes people rely on cliches like that to explain results, and it just obscures the problem. Is it the talent level; lapses in focus; poor reaction to game pressure; something else? Aside from Brackett staying in the pocket, it doesn't seem like anyone is being asked to do anything radically different from before. Am I missing something?
again, i ask, and i dont have the answer, but when you are just trying to do the basic X's and O's with nothing outlandishly complicated, doesnt that point to a talent issue or perhaps a communication issue? i am not bashing here, just trying to figure out what the areas of improvement should be.
i dont expect nor should we think that a coach is going to come in during his first year and magically create a winning team.
If coaching was the problem why not?
If these kids have been doing things contrary to Mangurian's way (and not to say wrong, just a different approach) for as many as three years it is not crazy to think it might take some time to get them to alter the way they did things. No one likes change.
so, coaching has been the problem since the 1960's? hard to fathom.
This is looking like a circular firing squad.
Last year's big problem was the offensive line play. Nonetheless, the only coach Mangurian retained was the O-line coach. That suggests he thought the problem was something other than coaching. Wilson plainly focused on the line in recruiting, and got a bunch of big, quality guys - I've never seen so many 6'5"-plus guys on the roster. The O-line is an issue again this year. It'd be interesting to watch film to see whether the undersized right side is a problem, both in pass protection and in forcing the running game left, making it more predictable. Has anyone else noticed anything along these lines?
The coaching has stunk forever...and it starts with the administration...these clowns don't care about Football. they never have and never will. Coach M should be given time to do his thing. He needs to weed out the players who don't really care or don't have a passion for the game. He didn't recruit them. They are not on scholarships. So who cares if there are 65 or 25 players on the sidelines. If you are angry over the poor coaching or poor quality of the athletes then you should send emails to the guy who has driven this program for the last 25 years...none other than Bill Campbell. he has been behind the scenes influencing the hiring of all the coaches which has roomed the sidelines during those years. The problem with Mr. Campbell and his football advisory committee is that they are oblivious to how bad this program really is. They speak as if CU has this great tradition of football etc. Its this kind of ridiculousness that has lead to the decisions that have kept CU football in the basement. The fact that they are building the Campbell Center at "Baker" field and not somewhere near campus on the many acres the Univ owns is a joke. And had doomed this program forever.
Post a Comment