Sunday, October 2, 2022

Reality Bites


The new jumbo video score board was a really nice surprise on an otherwise disappointing day



Princeton 24 Columbia 6


Why Princeton Won 

The Tigers played excellent defense and their offense was able to take advantage of a number of Columbia turnovers and other errors at key moments. 

Why Columbia Lost

The Lions couldn't get a consistent offensive attack going, and then made crucial turnovers and special teams failures. 


Key Turning Points

-With Princeton leading 7-6 and just over 7 minutes left in the 1st half, Columbia faced a 4th and 1 at the Tiger 5. The Lions elected to go with a wildcat play, but the snap was mishandled by Ty'son Edwards and the Tigers took over on downs. 

-With Princeton still leading 7-6 and just over 2 minutes left in the half, the Lions had a 1st down at their own 43, before a Joe Green pass that should have been caught was bobbled and then picked off at the Tiger 48. Princeton then cashed in just before the half with a TD to make it 14-6 at the break.

Columbia Positives

-The Lion defense played very well, holding the Tiger offense to just 276 total yards, 19 yards rushing, 1-12 on 3rd down, and six sacks, three of them from sophomore Justin Townsend.

-The Columbia TD came on a very heads up play by Aaron Brebnor, who scooped up a lazy screen pass that was legally a fumble for the score. 

Columbia Negatives

-The Lions showed none of their vertical passing game, turned the ball over numerous times, and had no answers for the Princeton defense. Some of the coaching decisions were dubious as well, especially the decision to go for it with a shotgun wildcat play on that 4th and 1, and choosing to go for a 2-point conversion on Columbia's one and only TD of the game. 

Columbia MVP

-Justin Townsend had his breakout game in just his third start of his career. He will be someone opposing teams will have to account for years to come. 

Going Forward

Columbia lost to a very good Princeton team that has definitely lost something on offense, but not much on defense. To salvage the season, the Lions must eliminate the mistakes on offense and make sure that special teams -- long a strength for this team -- does not become a glaring weakness. 


28 comments:

oldlion said...

To continue the dialogue from earlier, the defense played well enough to win. Their #9 was kept reasonably under control, and thanks to some bonehead plays or mistakes we gave Princeton a short field. 4 turnovers to 1 will cause a loss every time. But the offense — while good enough to roll over creampuff opponents -is not working against a good defensive team like Princeton. Putting aside the terrible coaching decisions which cost us a first half lead, the playbook is not designed to take advantage of Green and the WRs’ strengths. And why is our supersized ??TE never targeted except on little dump offs? Why no deep crossing patterns? Why no deep balls? and why no Wills Meyer?I am not saying that we should have won, of that Princeton got lucky, or that we are better on a man to man comparison. Princeton is good; not great on offense, but solid and competent. What i am saying is that our offensive game plan was not good. ?sure the coaches don’t muff direct snaps or drop passes or misplay punts. Players aren’t perfect. But the offensive coordinator seems to be missing something.

Roar Lion said...

We rarely throw vertically, almost never over the middle. To me, the defining play of the game was the drive late when we were down 20-6. Third and 10 from the 16. The one throw Joe seems to struggle with is the little screen to the RB. So that's what we run. He lobs the ball to Giorgi, who has to wait for it. By the time it arrives, P has swarmed him. 4th and 10. Joe gets sacked on the next play, game over. Why not actually throw the ball toward the end zone, or at least the first down marker? We have good WRs!

Princeton is better than CU, but as cited elsewhere, giving up a PAT and chip shot FG was four points in the first half that we needed. Throwing a screen on 3rd and 10 against a good D defending a short field is nutty, especially when the QB lobs the ball.

robert pelletreau said...

Princeton scouted us well. They knew that we prefer the run and when we do pass it's what I call The Two Yard Terror. Subsequently, they filled the box, brought the LBs and Dbs closer and dared us to throw deeper.. Constant pressure from the front four didn't help either...QB draws, regular draws? Our game plan? Roll the QB out more which we finally figured out in the second half....I hate a number of things that we do.. How about the Wildcat? Consign that to another era. What a disaster yesterday! How about what I call the Hurry Up and Wait Offense...We get set, let the clock run, get up, look to the sideline, get set again and then play.. I know that you want to control the clock but di you notice that we had earlier offensive success with speeding up the offense and dictating tempo? The punt returner had a terrible game.. Not only the costly fumble but the decisions on fielding the punts, as in when and where were awful..I would recommend replacing him due to inexperience..Posters above showed their knowledge of the game and I concur.. Coaching decisions were off but let's regroup and move on..Kudos to all players for playing so hard right to the end

oldlion said...

Our OC is primus inter pares among the assistants. So as much as I disagree with the offensive game plan I have to conclude that Al sees the same things that I see and must have a reason for signing off on the offensive game plan. since he knows a lot more football than I do, it may well be that he has good and sufficient reasons to let the offense run in a manner which is driving so many of us to distraction.

Stan Waldbaum said...

Basically, our offense was shutout by Princeton so the question of course, is why that happened--faulty game plan, poor execution, or something else. One glaring stat is that nearly all of Joe Green's passes were "short passes. Since we all know that he has a great arm and has several excellent wide receivers, the question is why did he throw short nearly all of the time. Is that what the Princeton defense gave him or was it something else?

Anonymous said...

I agree oldlion however coaches makes mistakes too, sometimes a lot. Just because Al knows more than you doesn’t mean he’s alright right. It’s obvious our offense has been towards the bottom of the league under Fab other than 2017. A group of consultants can come up tell us what’s the problem. However it’s a long season, so things could change. But that should be a focal point during the off-season if this season does not meet expectations.

Anonymous said...

I trust Al and his hall of fame coaching vs armchair quarterbacks. Princeton has a damn good defense

One of the “Cardiac Kids” said...

Before we anoint this Princeton Defense, the second coming of the 1970 Dartmouth Indians, (That was before they were the Big Green. They gave up 42 points the entire season, 28 points in Ivy League play, shutting out five of their seven Ancient Eight opponents, including us, 55-0 in Hanover. And by the way, they finished the year 14th in the Associated Press poll and 13th in the Coaches Poll, nationally) we need to ask ourselves, did we offer the Princeton Defense much of a challenge? Did they look unprepared at any point in the game? Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but, to many, it is stretch to believe, it was the Princeton defense that thwarted our offensive capabilities. And, if that is your belief the Princeton Defense is “lights out”, you should be concerned, and ask yourself, “why can Princeton attract and admit better athletes than we can?”
The point being, it does not matter. However, as posted earlier, this is not the first time our Offense has been made to look impotent, especially “under the kleig lights”. It is not “sour grapes” to blame coaches for defeats. Coaches are human, and can get “out coached”. They can have on an off day. Unfortunately, this year’s team of coaches and players, no longer has the luxury of an off day.
There is a whole season left, over the next seven weeks we will find out if yesterday was an anomaly, or a recurrence,

Anonymous said...

You guys don’t know if the football is stuffed or blown up…
Bagnoli knows what he is doing. Tough loss!

InwoodTiger said...

Two non-football notes:

- The weather was dismal, but nonetheless that attendance was disappointing. The announced 4,071 was not as low as the 3,638 in 2016 but for the first home game, and an Ivy match at that, I was hoping for more. At least the rains mostly stopped before the game.

- Columbia Athletics did not let the Princeton game play on the field at pregame or halftime, even there really was nothing going on at those times. Princeton sent only a token mini-band in response. I get that Columbia is embarrassed over not having a band and apparently have not formed their new one yet, but you can't end a century of tradition by preventing the other bands from playing. That stuff won't go over very well with the massive Cornell band in November.

Anonymous said...

Who anointed them as an all time defense? All I said was that they are a damn good defense. And a better team than the Lions. How soon everyone forgets the years prior to Al and his staff

Anonymous said...

Last year game against Princeton was closer, but am I wrong to say this was a more winnable game?

oldlion said...

Both were winnable but for different reasons; last year we ran out of gas plus we had a few bad calls go against us; this year we made two coaching errors early in the game and then had 4 turnovers, at least two of which were self induced. I would say that a better passing game plan was the principal reason for this year’s loss however.

Anonymous said...

Really?

Anonymous said...

Ummm. Coaching was horrible. Bagnoli is the head coach. He is responsible for Saturday. Second season of bad offensive calls.

Anonymous said...

I get Joe is loved by all here but putting in another qb to see if he could change momentum or attitude of the team should have been an option. They did this last year…there are times to put in other options. Team was flat. Moral got worse as the game went on. Teams have to be resilient and have the ability to dig themselves out of holes. This team was done early.

Anonymous said...

Clarification…”they did this last year”…they left QB1 in when other options should have been used.

oldlion said...

Joe Green is our QB and a good one. I didn’t see him miss too many passes to open receivers. If Princeton concluded that we are a run first team and crowded the line of scrimmage we should have stopped trying to run on first down and started attacking down the field. And those bubble screens just don’t work against a fast defensive team. How about more crossing patterns, deep balls, RPOs, etc.? Look, despite all of the handwringing we should have been up 10-7 at half time. If we hadn’t mishandled a punt on our 2 yard line Princeton would not have been given a gift touchdown. So while they outplayed and out coached us, don’t say we were outclassed or that our QB should be replaced.

Anonymous said...

CU has a senior qb that can run and sling it. Why would you not put another qb in after the interceptions? At least to change the pace of the game amd boost morale. Leadership was lacking. But die on the hill of Fabish and Greene. Too hard to watch.

Roar Lion said...

Such a poor comment. We have a good backup who has played very limited snaps in his career and made no meaningful throws. P is the best defense we'll see this year, so a pretty tough place to test the backup. Joe wasn't wild. His receivers caused one INT that led to a touchdown and he threw way too many bubble screens that went nowhere. Do you think our backup is stronger armed and would have made more vertical throws?

Super conservative play calling and risk aversion to the point of predictability is more of an issue than the QB. And, in fairness, Princeton kicked our butt physically, limiting what we could do.

Anonymous said...

We had no run game at all on Saturday. What plan do they have to change that? It’s hard to be a good qb if the defense doesn’t fear the run.

DOC said...

Changing or substituting the QB is off the table. Green is our guy for the remainder of this season! The talent is there but our utilization of it is and offensive game plan is the culprit. This game turned on a few crucial plays featuring poor execution that led to short fields for Princeton and took points off the board- there is no room for error here. Hopefully we can turn it around before our next Ivy opponent.

Anonymous said...

While I am still very sad that we lost this game, I think it may be time to start moving forward. I think we all agree that we left points out there on the field. Whether it was the coaching fault, players’ fault, or a combination of both, that’s all semantics now because it doesn’t change the fact that we are 0-1 in conference play. Time to move forward and focus on our competition ahead. While I do think we shot ourselves in the foot with this game, I still think we are competitive for the Ivy League championship. Since 2018, the Ivy League champ had one loss. It wouldn’t even surprise if this year winner ends up having two losses just because that’s how close I think the league is other than the two bottom teams (think 1982). Even Dartmouth during a “down year” has the ability to beat the likes of Princeton, Yale, and Harvard. The line between the top of the pack and middle of the pack of very murky this year in my opinion.

Anonymous said...

Very true. No dominant team in the league this year. And anyone who is suggesting CU change QBs needs to get their head examined

Anonymous said...

Hmmmm looks like my head examination went well!!!

Anonymous said...

Off the table???

Anonymous said...

Poor comment??? Did you watch the game today? Penn

Anonymous said...

Poor comment???