Depth chart versus SDSU and Monday interviews

[wbtfg]

Looks like those injured players, Taki (DB), Daily (LB), have recovered and are listed on depth chart. Great news.

In the past it has been fairly common for players to still appear on the depth chart but miss games due to injury. I believe that the coaches only take guys off the depth chart completely if they're going to be out for the season or for an extended period of time. So it's probably good news that Taki and Daily are still there but I wouldn't take it as a guarantee that they'll both play on Saturday.

I watched Vigen's press conference, and he said that there wasn't an update on those two, and because it was a Monday holiday, they probably wouldn't know more until Tuesday (today). So I wouldn't be shocked if one or both end up not playing this weekend.

[TomCat88]

Looks like those injured players, Taki (DB), Daily (LB), have recovered and are listed on depth chart. Great news.

In the past it has been fairly common for players to still appear on the depth chart but miss games due to injury. I believe that the coaches only take guys off the depth chart completely if they're going to be out for the season or for an extended period of time. So it's probably good news that Taki and Daily are still there but I wouldn't take it as a guarantee that they'll both play on Saturday.

I watched Vigen's press conference, and he said that there wasn't an update on those two, and because it was a Monday holiday, they probably wouldn't know more until Tuesday (today). So I wouldn't be shocked if one or both end up not playing this weekend.

There’s almost always last minute scratches from the depth chart. MSU usually puts that on its football webpage either an hour or half hour before the game. Such as it did with Mastel shortly before kickoff vs. Oregon.

[tetoncat]

Vigen agreed with what I posted in another thread, and what several others have posted. "Sometimes good tackling, sometimes poor tackling."

And leverage. but be careful saying so, Cats played Oregon so any of those negatives are justified due to their speed and athleticism. No positive plays were due to these things.

Except that’s not exactly how it played out. Catatac’s initial post was in the Good, bad, ugly thread. Under Bad, he said tackling and didn’t say anything about tackling under Good.

He made the comment he’s holding up now after several people pointed out the tackling wasn’t that bad. Those people never said there weren’t any bad tackles, they were just pointing out that the tackling overall wasn’t bad.

And if he’s quoting Vigen correctly, he’s saying “some good, some bad” same as the posters correcting catatac and several others, and he doesn’t just say it was bad.

Vigen specifically said they needed to improve in tackling and leverage that is what several posters mentioned in various threads. Others defended tackling by saying prove it by finding misses or that there were not that many and it was due to good offensive plays.
Overall result was about what I expected offensively but the only good stop was after the blocked punt holding Oregon to a FG. I was expecting at least a few for how hyped the d line was. I don't think there was 1 negative play.
Definitely many things to work on

Vigen said, we can continue to improve upon just pure fundamentals against a team like Oregon if you slip in your fundamentals whether that’s leverage or pad level, it’s going to be hard anyways but that makes it that much harder. I didn’t hear him say specifically say they needed to work on leverage and tackling.

And when he said, some good, some bad, he was talking about the cornerbacks not the entire defense.

My whole point is there are things to work on and some things that were not good. If you tried to point it out Saturday that was frowned on. Leverage , pad level, tackling , run blocking, WR other than Taco not getting targets, D Line with no pressure or push to create a negative play. All areas that must improve vs SDSU.

[PortlandCat90]

Lamson really impressed me in Eugene. Watching him during pre-game, he was all business.

On the 4th and 1 he ran over the Duck DB who had words for Lamson...and he fired right back. Loved it. During the game he appeared to light somebody up on a pre-snap penalty. His ability to stand in that (insert the word "pocket" here) and go 23-31 was pretty impressive. Even watching the replay last night he had nice ball placement, which is often overlooked. On two incompletions (Taco and Long) under pressure it hit the outstretched receiver's hands. 7 different receivers had receptions.

I like it. Get this running game going against competition that won't be playing for the FBS Natty and I can clearly see Cats vs. Bizon again. From Game 1 it appears that we are in good hands and his ability to throw puts us at another level of offensive balance.

[Bobcatsinmso]

Lamson really impressed me in Eugene. Watching him during pre-game, he was all business.

On the 4th and 1 he ran over the Duck DB who had words for Lamson...and he fired right back. Loved it. During the game he appeared to light somebody up on a pre-snap penalty. His ability to stand in that (insert the word "pocket" here) and go 23-31 was pretty impressive. Even watching the replay last night he had nice ball placement, which is often overlooked. On two incompletions (Taco and Long) under pressure it hit the outstretched receiver's hands. 7 different receivers had receptions.

I like it. Get this running game going against competition that won't be playing for the FBS Natty and I can clearly see Cats vs. Bizon again. From Game 1 it appears that we are in good hands and his ability to throw puts us at another level of offensive balance.

I agree, we have a solid guy at QB, not a TM as you cannot replicate the guy, but with Lamson we are in good hands. What I want to see in game 3 and 4 is how good are the backup QB's. With a solid running game not as much pressure on a new QB to make plays. My concern is injuries, and how durable is our QB. We will find out of course, and to see these backups get some quality game reps sooner rather than later.