2021 unranked Nicholls vs 2022 #16 SLU

[Policarp]

I know there is room for improvement in OL/run game etc from what we saw last night.not the reason for post. Thought the ragin review podcast last night did a great job of identifying strengths & improvement areas.


Looking to keep things in perspective.

2021 vs unranked Nicholls we were LOADED with returning starters on both sides. We lost a winnable game @ Texas the week before so we had a game already played. Maybe its me but I had more concerns after watching last year's Nicholls game compared to last night's opening SLU victory.

2021.After Nicholls the big question was why isn't our team stacked with veterans playing better? No oneliterally no one was sold on the possibility of winning the next 12 in a row (except me ;-).

2022.with mostly new guys starting overall, UL played BETTER than last year vs somewhat comparable (if not better competition). The SLU secondary in particular & defense overall was IMO clearly better than the 2021 Nicholls defense. As painful as the 2nd half was to watch at times, 2022 was the better overall team win.

Just get better in week 2 and my prediction for 27 straight wins can happen!!!!

[Turbine]

I'm all in, elbows and earbuds.

I love your logic and came wait for the ride.

Also, I seem to recall a bunch of articles about how close SLU has played quality competition in recent years. If true, the margin of victory is notable.

[mxpxfr690]

I'm all in, elbows and earbuds.

I love your logic and came wait for the ride.

Also, I seem to recall a bunch of articles about how close SLU has played quality competition in recent years. If true, the margin of victory is notable.

We also beat the spread by 4 points and should have won by more…. This Offense led by fields will put up more points than last years team. I like our vertical passing game…. We dropped some balls that should have been caught but the weather was nasty and overall we played well. Very optimistic and the next 2 games will give us a measuring stick to where we are at.

[Crawfish]

As most everyone else, I was encouraged by some things last night and concerned about a few others. That said, it was the first game of the year and hopefully a lot of the mistakes that were made will be corrected before the EMU game. I think our QB situation will be fine, and the defense had some really nice moments.

[Cajun Soldier]

Today I don't see us going undefeated in conference play but that is today. We have room to improve after the first game with lots of new players. I think the next three games should be wins especially if we continue to improve. If we do correct and improve the rest of the schedule would get very interesting with more big wins. Overall, I liked what I saw from the Cajuns it's just game one with practically a new team. If the defense continues to fly to the ball, they will hold us up until the offense really gets it rolling. Today I would guarantee 9 victories with the other three games in the air but who know just win baby win.

[Cityp42]

Crawfish, I agree. It was just the first game and is why I like our schedule. If there were ever a year we needed the early portion of our schedule to be a little soft, it was this one. It was a tale of two halves for our offense but it got off to a good start. The first two drives of the game, led by Fields, were sustained drives and resulted in points. We kept their offense off the field, dominated TOP and led 10-0.

We became a victim of our own success afterwards. Garror's punt return for a TD and SLU's next drive taking nearly 8 minutes off the clock kept our offense on the sidelines too long. We kicked the field goal at the 5:54 mark of the 1st quarter and didn't get the ball back until the 4:49 mark of the second quarter. It was nice to get Wooldridge in the game with a lead but doing so kept Fields on the sidelines after two good drives. That may have contributed to his play (lack of rhythm) in the second half.

Overall, I am a little concerned but it's only game one. We have time and the right opponents to get up to speed. By the way, it was also encouraging to see Wooldridge's drive be sustained. It was an 11 play 79 yard drive. I thought we should have kicked the field goal on 4th down to make it 20-0 going into half.

[KajunKrazy]

I heard everything Des said about the QBs and reasons he's playing Ben. With chandler being a first years starter and lacking game experience IMO he needs all the reps he can get. Taking him out only allows for him to get cold and out of the rhythm of the game. Which contributed to the offensive lull in the middle of the game.

[CajunNation]

We have seen that Fields is the legit starter.

We have seen that Woolridge is a very capable backup.

There is no reason anymore to take away snaps from Fields.

This is a good thing.

If Ben transfers out because of this, I wish him only the best. Completely understandable. I probably would too.

[Cityp42]

I heard everything Des said about the QBs and reasons he's playing Ben. With chandler being a first years starter and lacking game experience IMO he needs all the reps he can get. Taking him out only allows for him to get cold and out of the rhythm of the game. Which contributed to the offensive lull in the middle of the game.

Yep.

[ULGrad@HOU]

At this point of the schedule, I don't mind seeing Wooldridge get some playing time. I think he needs live action play.

[Cityp42]

We have seen that Fields is the legit starter.

We have seen that Woolridge is a very capable backup.

There is no reason anymore to take away snaps from Fields.

This is a good thing.

If Ben transfers out because of this, I wish him only the best. Completely understandable. I probably would too.

I would too.

[Cityp42]

At this point of the schedule, I don't mind seeing Wooldridge get some playing time. I think he needs live action play.

If Garror doesn't score the punt return, Ben gets in on our 3rd possession with the 4th, and possibly 5th possession, going to back to Chandler. Because Chandler had been sitting on the sidelines for so long, I would have gone back to him and waited to give Ben his possessions later in the game.

[ULGrad@HOU]

If Garror doesn't score the punt return, Ben gets in on our 3rd possession with the 4th, and possibly 5th possession, going to back to Chandler. Because Chandler had been sitting on the sidelines for so long, I would have gone back to him and waited to give Ben his possessions later in the game.

Wooldridge had his first series at 4:49 left in the 1st half. We were up 17-0. Yes, I realize it could have been sooner, but we ran back the punt return. His first pass was a strike to Michael Jefferson, which was dropped. It was a perfectly thrown ball and he had lots of room to run. The offense still drove to the 8 with 1:16 left on the clock. We then proceed to hand off 3 times in a row to Smith. Bad play calling, IMO. Then to top it off, we hand it off again to Smith on 4th down. We should have scored, that was a terrible call. We should have been up 24-0, and at the very least 20-0. The problem wasn't giving Wooldridge time at QB, the problem was the play calling with around a minute left in the half. Of course, my opinion anyway.

[SlickRick]

Wooldridge had his first series at 4:49 left in the 1st half. We were up 17-0. Yes, I realize it could have been sooner, but we ran back the punt return. His first pass was a strike to Michael Jefferson, which was dropped. It was a perfectly thrown ball and he had lots of room to run. The offense still drove to the 8 with 1:16 left on the clock. We then proceed to hand off 3 times in a row to Smith. Bad play calling, IMO. Then to top it off, we hand it off again to Smith on 4th down. We should have scored, that was a terrible call. We should have been up 24-0, and at the very least 20-0. The problem wasn't giving Wooldridge time at QB, the problem was the play calling with around a minute left in the half. Of course, my opinion anyway.

Solid take.

[Turbine]

Wooldridge had his first series at 4:49 left in the 1st half. We were up 17-0. Yes, I realize it could have been sooner, but we ran back the punt return. His first pass was a strike to Michael Jefferson, which was dropped. It was a perfectly thrown ball and he had lots of room to run. The offense still drove to the 8 with 1:16 left on the clock. We then proceed to hand off 3 times in a row to Smith. Bad play calling, IMO. Then to top it off, we hand it off again to Smith on 4th down. We should have scored, that was a terrible call. We should have been up 24-0, and at the very least 20-0. The problem wasn't giving Wooldridge time at QB, the problem was the play calling with around a minute left in the half. Of course, my opinion anyway.

I remember a game where Bustle did the very same thing.

Desormeaux may have been the QB on that drive, I can't remember.

At times some call it outthinking yourself