Rivera identified the same factors, but I come to a much different conclusion ... I don't see this 2016 version of the team as lethargic or unprepared.
The offense works best with a DUAL threat quarterback. The struggles in getting the running game going against BYU is primarily on Solomon's unwillingness to make himself a threat. So the opposing team takes away the run and he's not sharp enough to beat teams when it's consistently 3rd and long. I do agree that Dawkins should have got a few series to change things up when we were so stagnant, and the new look D should have played it differently on the last drive.
Grambling and Hawaii were good tune-ups and much needed to get Dawkins comfortable. With Wilson already out and Bradford off the team, JJ Taylor was a revelation. He's a special talent especially when coupled with a running threat at QB. That's why I had thought we had a good shot at an upset heading into the Washington game. The offense was clicking and the D was competing early in that game. Loosing JJ on top of missing Wilson (and Bradford) really limited the offense at a bad / critical time again. Turnovers killed us as well, but we were right there with one of the top teams in country.
I felt we had a reasonable shot against UCLA. Our offense before Dawkins started feeling the affects his injury was effective. I think he got hurt on the scoring drive or possibly the series after. You could see it in the body language, ability to run, and accuracy in throwing. UCLA is certainly fast and talented on D, but it was discernable that something was amiss ... It wasn't just what UCLA was doing to us. You could definitely see it in Dawkin's execution. He has grit and was trying, but he couldn't make any throws (accurately) and he couldn't or wouldn't really run. Just a step slow when he did and in obvious pain when he would get up. The offense completely sputtered and became one dimensional (or rather no dimensional). We traded 3 and outs for most of the 2nd quarter.
What do you do though? Proverbial rock and a hard place with time slipping away. Coaches tried to let him work it out, tried to let Werlinger take an opportunity as the next man up, but he was just as ineffective as a hurt, but game Dawkins. Last resort was to burn Tate's redshirt.
UCLA adjusted their play calling to the pressure we were bringing which also happens to exploit to a weakness we have in our secondary. Once again a very poorly timed injury to a critical position ... One that limits the playbook.
However, I thought Tate was super impressive. Physical, competitive, gritty. He's the real deal especially as he develops as a passer. Tough decision to burn his shirt, but we didn't really have an alternative. If Werlinger could have given us anything, perhaps it works out differently. On the other hand, the game experience will be invaluable to Tate who I think succeeded mainly with sheer physicality. He sounds like an open book and a student of the game and will be greatly motivated. Who knows how long Dawkins will be out if his injury is ribs or an oblique? Obliques for baseball pitchers often take 3 weeks to resolve. Who knows Solomon's state of mind or his knee? I think they tried everything in the first half and one more time in the first series of the second half then had to jump in with Tate. This wasn't just a decision about winning at UCLA, but preparing for USC and Utah as well.
By the way, Magloire ended up hurting himself on the 3rd play in that first defensive series of the game (3 and out). I thought it looked awkward the way he fell. RR never liked to talk injuries. I wouldn't take his comment on Magloire not playing at face value.
Wins and losses matter, but I think we've competed hard. Once again injuries, but more importantly, the timing of injuries has played a major factor. I think the team and coaching staff has done a good job adapting to what they have available and the circumstances that they've found themselves in. It's just frustrating. It's just unfortunate. We are so close ... But I think we're on the right track.
The offense works best with a DUAL threat quarterback. The struggles in getting the running game going against BYU is primarily on Solomon's unwillingness to make himself a threat. So the opposing team takes away the run and he's not sharp enough to beat teams when it's consistently 3rd and long. I do agree that Dawkins should have got a few series to change things up when we were so stagnant, and the new look D should have played it differently on the last drive.
Grambling and Hawaii were good tune-ups and much needed to get Dawkins comfortable. With Wilson already out and Bradford off the team, JJ Taylor was a revelation. He's a special talent especially when coupled with a running threat at QB. That's why I had thought we had a good shot at an upset heading into the Washington game. The offense was clicking and the D was competing early in that game. Loosing JJ on top of missing Wilson (and Bradford) really limited the offense at a bad / critical time again. Turnovers killed us as well, but we were right there with one of the top teams in country.
I felt we had a reasonable shot against UCLA. Our offense before Dawkins started feeling the affects his injury was effective. I think he got hurt on the scoring drive or possibly the series after. You could see it in the body language, ability to run, and accuracy in throwing. UCLA is certainly fast and talented on D, but it was discernable that something was amiss ... It wasn't just what UCLA was doing to us. You could definitely see it in Dawkin's execution. He has grit and was trying, but he couldn't make any throws (accurately) and he couldn't or wouldn't really run. Just a step slow when he did and in obvious pain when he would get up. The offense completely sputtered and became one dimensional (or rather no dimensional). We traded 3 and outs for most of the 2nd quarter.
What do you do though? Proverbial rock and a hard place with time slipping away. Coaches tried to let him work it out, tried to let Werlinger take an opportunity as the next man up, but he was just as ineffective as a hurt, but game Dawkins. Last resort was to burn Tate's redshirt.
UCLA adjusted their play calling to the pressure we were bringing which also happens to exploit to a weakness we have in our secondary. Once again a very poorly timed injury to a critical position ... One that limits the playbook.
However, I thought Tate was super impressive. Physical, competitive, gritty. He's the real deal especially as he develops as a passer. Tough decision to burn his shirt, but we didn't really have an alternative. If Werlinger could have given us anything, perhaps it works out differently. On the other hand, the game experience will be invaluable to Tate who I think succeeded mainly with sheer physicality. He sounds like an open book and a student of the game and will be greatly motivated. Who knows how long Dawkins will be out if his injury is ribs or an oblique? Obliques for baseball pitchers often take 3 weeks to resolve. Who knows Solomon's state of mind or his knee? I think they tried everything in the first half and one more time in the first series of the second half then had to jump in with Tate. This wasn't just a decision about winning at UCLA, but preparing for USC and Utah as well.
By the way, Magloire ended up hurting himself on the 3rd play in that first defensive series of the game (3 and out). I thought it looked awkward the way he fell. RR never liked to talk injuries. I wouldn't take his comment on Magloire not playing at face value.
Wins and losses matter, but I think we've competed hard. Once again injuries, but more importantly, the timing of injuries has played a major factor. I think the team and coaching staff has done a good job adapting to what they have available and the circumstances that they've found themselves in. It's just frustrating. It's just unfortunate. We are so close ... But I think we're on the right track.
Last edited:
