Saturday, September 19, 2015

Game Day Open Thread

Comment here about today's game. 

22 comments:

Chen1982 said...

D line looks solid. Secondary looks porous. Offense not bad nice drive

alswingman said...

Am I dreaming or is Columbia playing at Fordham's level in the first half?

Chen1982 said...

So....the view from HK is that our secondary (as Jake pointed out) is still a weak link

Having said that, I do think the team looks more tough, better organized and the offense has shown some potential.

tbone55 said...

why is Hill playing QB in the 4Q he;s been ineffective...

msgCC'60 said...

Puzzled by Al's staying with Hill. Why???

Chen1982 said...

Clearly Morinwheg runs a more effective offense. But my guess is Bagnoli had specific objectives for what he wanted to learn about his team in this game and that meant playing a certain number of reps with each QB. Something the OC said in the video was that their objective was to be at our best at the tenth game of the season.

My view is that Jakes requirement for a moral victory were achieved. Less than three TD margin, no injuries and clear signs of progress. Actually, we knocked three Fordham players out of the game, which is by no means an objective but does show we are physical.

Good nite from Asia

2 manno said...

you guys panicked an cancelled the series after a few bad season with mangurian.

forget the score, that was a competitive game. shame on CU for cancelling the series. i feel sorry the players & new coach... and to the fans of NY who enjoyed the series.

winning matters. winning is an attitude and understanding that seems absent at columbia. CU may or may not succeed with their new schedule. but they'll never be winners as quitters.

alswingman said...

We don't need Fordham to prove anything. Moorehead's arrogant statement in the pregame "If they cancel the series, we'll give them a final game to remember" just shows poor sportsmanship. This also confirms what we have all suspected - they intentionally embarrass CU football with blowouts because they can. Let them talk smack and take their inflated egos elsewhere. The 9/11 tribute was an excellent idea in 2001 but thankfully, we can all now move on from the tribute game in good conscience.

Jay Dee NYC said...

I am very encouraged by the team's performance. We played them pretty tough on the road and kept the game competitive, despite what the score reads. Our receivers generally did a solid job catching balls that would've been dropped last season.

We showed great effort and grit and came out to play, especially since this was our first game of the season. Hopefully we can build on this and have a great season.

Jeremy Mingo said...

The game only got out of hand the last two years with an insane coach, Columbia was blown out by other teams in our league! and Columbia plays other teams with scholarships I see no point in canceling the series. This move makes Columbia look scared and spineless, Michigan has a longer losing streak to Ohio State should they cancel their series too?

oldlion said...

I thought that Hill actually played pretty well, as did Mornhinweg. I thought the Fordham coach was a jerk; he got the benefit of two awful calls against us: the phony TD at the end of the first half when the ball was trapped; and the bogus pass interference call in the end zone. Then with three minutes to go and a safe lead he started throwing the ball. We lost the game despite superior line play from both the DL and the OL because our LB play was weak; too slow in getting off blocks and not wrapping up the ball carrier; and because our DBs are flat footed and still do not know how to play the ball. I counted several long Fordham completions which actually should have led to interceptions. But look, this was our first game and their third. Our LT Kendall Pace had an excellent game both in pass protection (no real sacks) and in the run game as well. Too bad that Watson slowed down on the deep ball after he had split the safeties; that was tough. And finally, great game from TE Hunton with some tremendous catches in heavy traffic. And I will not miss going to Fordham, a terrible place for a visiting team and its fans with no sideline to call our own.

2 manno said...

"We don't need Fordham to prove anything. Moorehead's arrogant statement in the pregame "If they cancel the series, we'll give them a final game to remember" just shows poor sportsmanship. This also confirms what we have all suspected - they intentionally embarrass CU football with blowouts because they can. Let them talk smack and take their inflated egos elsewhere. The 9/11 tribute was an excellent idea in 2001 but thankfully, we can all now move on from the tribute game in good conscience."

a confusing statement alswingman. we don't need X to prove anything... or whatever loser sentiment encompasses that idea. CU and FU are immeasurable without something to measure against. measure yourself against shit, and you're a grade of shit. that's sport, and that's life, welcome to it.

FU didn't embarrass anyone. To the contrary, CU played admirably and was deserving of our effort, if not more so. it's MORE than a shame you can't congratulate your team rather than bash your adversary. A telling point about you, hopefully not the program.

a 9/11 tribute was more than a great idea in 2001, it was a reality. right up until you pussies cancelled it. i hope bagnoli turns your program around for the players that suit up everyday, and certainly not for 'fans' like you that troll CU players unwittingly whenever circumstance presents an opportunity to open your mouth.

alswingman said...

Ah, a Fordham fan. Actually Manno, you completely misinterpreted my statement. Moorhead did his best to set up a run up the score embarrassment send off and the idea failed. That's what I implied so try to pay attention next time. For now, go to the back of the class.

And calling CU football fans pussies labels you as the troll.

Mr. Gelegenheit! said...

Manno's post is strongly worded but the thought is correct. Again and again over the years I've seen griping about how our opponent was "bush" or whatever because they didn't let up on one of our pathetically losing efforts. Let's just skip that part, shall we, and start to win. And this CU team does indeed deserve congratulations. There's no comparison between what we saw today and anything from the recent past -- and by recent I mean the last twenty years or so. CU will win some games this year, very possibly starting next week. We're definitely on the right track at last.

Bob Kent said...

We have the beginning of a program and a completely different team from last year. Best day watching CU football in twenty years. D-line and O-line both dominated. Both QBs played great and the receivers caught the ball. We returned a kick return for a TD, blocked an extra point, sacked their QB 6-7 times, and ran the ball! Up he middle for a first down. Fordham did not sack our QB and we consistently moved the football and scored points. Most important, the team looked well coached, poised, and looks like they expect to win, CU football is fun again. Best moment for me was watching our O-line blow the Fordham defense off the line for a CU first down. Great to see CU fans cheer for the players after the game. This team may surprise a few this year.

Thank you Coach Bagnoli, Mr. Billings, and the CU Administration. I believe.

Bob Kent '92

Chick said...

I liked Coach Bagnoli's candor in his postgame remarks. He praised his players for supporting each other and staying the course but he added there were many things "to clean up." I'm sure he's working on that already.

Most important, he said he doesn't want the players thinking of this game as some kind of "moral victory." He's exactly right.
His proper purpose and theirs is to win, not merely to lose competitively. That's part of the losing mentality that has to
disappear immediately.

We diid, after all, lose for the 22nd consecutive time. It's good to know that Coach Bagnoli is aware of all this and shows no complacency. Still, it was a good effort and the team should be praised for a good first step.

Chick said...

I liked Coach Bagnoli's candor in his postgame remarks. He praised his players for supporting each other and staying the course but he added there were many things "to clean up." I'm sure he's working on that already.

Most important, he said he doesn't want the players thinking of this game as some kind of "moral victory." He's exactly right.
His proper purpose and theirs is to win, not merely to lose competitively. That's part of the losing mentality that has to
disappear immediately.

We diid, after all, lose for the 22nd consecutive time. It's good to know that Coach Bagnoli is aware of all this and shows no complacency. Still, it was a good effort and the team should be praised for a good first step.

Chen1982 said...

Even the Fordham announcers faulted the refs for those two bad calls. I have to compliment those two announcers for a well called game. They said more good things about our team during the broadcast than our announcers ever do about our opponents. Kudos from me.

However, any coach who is up by three scores with only a few minutes to go that calls pass plays is not a class act.

oldlion said...

Agree that this was the best line play by Columbia in years. DL outplayed Fordham OL and OL protected both QBs and kept them on their feet plus opened holes for first downs. Special shout out to LT Kendall Pace, who just dominated his man. Loved Hunton's catches in traffic. Take away the two homers and give Watson the catch which he should have made when he slowed down after splitting the safeties and we just might have pulled it out. Agre with Al's comments after the game. Classy of Al not to trash the refs or the Fordham coach who was still calling pass plays at the end. We need to fix two things in a hurry, our pass defense technique and our linebacker play. PS, we should stay with a four man front on third and long and pressure the QB instead of going into a three man front and giving the QB more time.

Chick said...

Help me out here, someone. At the end of the 3rd period, we trailed by only four points. I think the consensus is Morhinweg is the better all-around qb right now. He'll be back next year and Hill will still be here in 2017. Bagnoli wants to get a good handle on both, no doubt before Ivy play begins. So the idea was to give them equal time in the first couple of games. That sounds reasonable. And I have no bias at all for either one.

But when you find yourself just four points out with a quarter to play, don't you want to try to win any game, especially to upset Fordham?

I find it hard to imagine Bagnoli disagreeing. Hill will get more chances this year and is only a soph. Especially with Bagnoli saying he wants actual wins, not moral victories. It's not like Hill is the only option when Morhinweg graduates. There are other good qb prospects coming every year. It's infinitely more important to break the current losing streak--especially by beating Fordham--than it is to get a few more reps for Hill.

Did Al decide they couldn't beat Fordham after 3 periods? and if so, why? That's the burning question.

Chen1982 said...

I think Chick's question is fair....since Skyler had moved the offense to two TDs, should Bagnoli have ridden the hotter QB on the day? Having said that, Anders was one length of outstretched hands away from making it 34-31.

oldlion said...

And that pass was perfect but Watson had slowed up. A WR rather than a RB would have known never to slow down on a deep ball.