Go look at the week 1 running stats for all of college football if you want to know about where our defense sits right now. There's not a lot of good ways to spin it.

The offense is fine.

Moss had 3 carries and averaged over 6 yards per carry. That's all you need to know about the game plan.

On 4th and goal at the 1, when we didn't just power over them with Moss or Reed up the middle, but instead decided we had to give away our best goal line misdirection play, says we didn't believe our OL could push a UTSA DL one yard and showed a good play we will now NOT be able to use against ND, should tell you we weren't "hiding " our good plays from being on tape.

Except we can use that play again because it had multiple options.

So obtuse.

Guy on a Buffalo said:

---

C2 Ag 93 said:

---

Night and day difference thinking about our game vs what I saw watching So Car vs VT or Miami vs ND (players dialed in, play calling to win, etc.).

---

For what it's worth, we scored more points than any of those other teams did.

Our defense was schemed based on film from last year, and UTSA changed their approach for our game. By the second half Bateman and Elko had it figured out and with the exception of one play (where supposedly someone ran the wrong defense) we shut them down until garbage time.

---

Right. VT's QB was 1-13 on South Carolina's side of the field. That's hard to do. They scored zero TD's.

ND had 7 points through 3 Qtrs. Their Heisman candidate RB had 10 carries for 33 yards.

I doubt either of those schools thought their players were dialed in and the play calling was to win. Grass is always greener I guess and BAS is gonna BAS, but I thought those were interesting examples.

Every coach says you have to wait 4 years until I have all MY guys in place.

Principal Uncertainty said:

---

On 4th and goal at the 1, when we didn't just power over them with Moss or Reed up the middle, but instead decided we had to give away our best goal line misdirection play, says we didn't believe our OL could push a UTSA DL one yard and showed a good play we will now NOT be able to use against ND, should tell you we weren't "hiding " our good plays from being on tape.

---

Thats exactly how I saw that play. It was a great call but it was wasted against what should have been inferior competition. LSU, ND, t.u, all know that play now

C2 Ag 93 said:

---

I am the least apt to believe in any conspiracy theories. I like logic, science and reason.

That said, I went to the game, and my buddy and I were irritated how we looked. Yes, of course, first game, players are being looked at, rusty, blah blah blah. But we also postulated we weren't showing our whole play book to save it for ND. Night and day difference thinking about our game vs what I saw watching So Car vs VT or Miami vs ND (players dialed in, play calling to win, etc.). And yet, we recruit very well, played "well" last year under first year head coach (no blow outs, sad we lost games we could have won, etc., but on the whole, it's reasonable to expect a better year this year than last).

So watching the replay today, I am surprised how well UTSA was able to control the line. We looked pretty bland play calling. We rotated a lot of plays to different receivers and different running backs, etc.

Do you think Elko is intentionally holding a lot back, even telling the lines to "play conservative" to avoid injury or even give LBs and DBs time to mature, etc.?

I never thought the game was out of hand or truly swinging UTSAs way. It seemed when we dialed in more, we moved it, or defended it well. But my rare conspiracy theory thoughts --- maybe they are intentionally playing conservative to not give ND tape?

---

You do have a few good points, none of those first string players want to risk serious injury on a meaningless OC game, and it's incredibly pragmatic to play conservatively in such a game. Now, remember, since 2021 season, the starting QB in the beginning of the season was not the starting QB at the end of the season.

It might be wishful thinking that Elko and staff are doing a Machiavellian play against Notre Dame with film; showing that we have these new passing receivers and we won't be so dependent on the running game, or defense has problems with stopping the run, and basic tackling, etc. Then again Elko removed Weigman for Reed in the middle of the 3 quarter against LSU when they never game planned for a running QB and we know what Reed did.

C2 Ag 93 said:

---

I am the least apt to believe in any conspiracy theories. I like logic, science and reason.

That said, I went to the game, and my buddy and I were irritated how we looked. Yes, of course, first game, players are being looked at, rusty, blah blah blah. But we also postulated we weren't showing our whole play book to save it for ND. Night and day difference thinking about our game vs what I saw watching So Car vs VT or Miami vs ND (players dialed in, play calling to win, etc.). And yet, we recruit very well, played "well" last year under first year head coach (no blow outs, sad we lost games we could have won, etc., but on the whole, it's reasonable to expect a better year this year than last).

So watching the replay today, I am surprised how well UTSA was able to control the line. We looked pretty bland play calling. We rotated a lot of plays to different receivers and different running backs, etc.

Do you think Elko is intentionally holding a lot back, even telling the lines to "play conservative" to avoid injury or even give LBs and DBs time to mature, etc.?

I never thought the game was out of hand or truly swinging UTSAs way. It seemed when we dialed in more, we moved it, or defended it well. But my rare conspiracy theory thoughts --- maybe they are intentionally playing conservative to not give ND tape?

---

There was really no reason for the first line of your little post.