The result of N.C. State's laugher against Murray State wasn't the most important outcome for the Wolfpack on Saturday.
When a 5-year-old plays in the sandbox with a 2-year-old, he ought to be able to bully his way into playing with any toy he wants, and that's what N.C. State did in a 65-7 rout of the Racers. The real issue for the Wolfpack was whether the South Carolina defense that bullied N.C. State in a 7-3, season-opening win was for real.
That same South Carolina team lost 41-37 to Georgia on Saturday evening. So forget the company line that the Gamecocks have one of the SEC's best defenses.
Until N.C. State proves otherwise against a capable opponent, its problems on offense in the opener can't be dismissed. The Gamecocks sacked N.C. State quarterback Russell Wilson six times.
They sacked Georgia quarterback Joe Cox twice, and Cox isn't nearly as mobile as Wilson. Keep in mind, South Caraolina was playing against the same Georgia offense that generated just 10 points against Oklahoma State - which then gave up 45 points in a loss to Houston.
Georgia did score once on a kickoff return against South Carolina, and its total offense of 308 yards was a modest amount considering the amount of points it scored against the Gamecocks.
And South Carolina's ability to score against the Bulldogs makes it appear that N.C. State's defense - which allowed only a 14-yard scoring drive by the Gamecocks - is stouter than expected.
But N.C. State, which plays another overmatched opponent this week in Gardner-Webb, still has real questions on offense that can't be answered until the Sept. 26 game against Pittsburgh.
Comments
Get over it Tysiac. Notre
Tue, 09/15/2009 - 09:38 — tailgateGet over it Tysiac. Notre Dame lost. Don't vent your hate on the Wolfpack. Oh, I forgot. You already hate the Pack after you adopted the Tar Heels since relocating to the South. (Pick a team with the best record). Bless your boring little Irish heart.
Ken,Ken,Ken
Tue, 09/15/2009 - 09:06 — MrSenenenmYou sportswriters don't have to do any work or research anymore do you? All you do is troll the message boards..and get paid for it.
Wow... I just read the other
Mon, 09/14/2009 - 15:29 — tjfooseWow... I just read the other posts and realize we are all pretty much making the same argument.
It's too bad the readers of the local paper have more journalistic integrity than the writers.
What about the Heels?
Mon, 09/14/2009 - 16:35 — bradleyb123I'd like to know where is an article that talks about how worried Carolina should be right about now? Carolina played HORRIBLY for about 55 minutes against UConn. They ended up earning the win and stole the victory from UConn.
But..... UConn??? UConn is expected to be a bottom feeder in the...... Big East??? And they really should have beaten Carolina. When Carolina starts playing stiffer competition, with that weak passing game, they're going to start losing some games (if they don't change something). Their defense can't continue bailing them out. And Carolina didn't even have much passing success against the Citadel.
I really think Carolina has more to worry about than State at this point. Especially now that they have lost Pianalto for an unspecified number of games. They could ill-afford to lose a receiver!
I don't think Carolina fans
Tue, 09/15/2009 - 04:17 — tjfooseI don't think Carolina fans should be worrying too much, not yet anyway. The jury is still out on how good UCONN will be this year.
The 'Heels where obviously struggling, but still pulled out a win when the game was on the line - a mark of a good team.
Besides, hasn't H1N1 been running through the team? Not only would that take a physical toll, but it would run havoc to the game prep throughout the week.
speechless
Tue, 09/15/2009 - 10:14 — gvillegatrThere is a first time for everything and this was yours: nice, rational words about UNC. give yourself a pat on the back!
I am shocked
Mon, 09/14/2009 - 19:14 — gvillegatrit took 12 posts to bring UNC into this. not a single UNC fan had come in here and said a word about this blog.
We could have ripped this thread apart b/c we were given plenty of ammo courtesy of Kenny Tys. But, no, we did not.
I'm not shocked
Mon, 09/14/2009 - 22:31 — Heels20It may have taken 12 posts, but the one that did the job lacked intelligence. You've got to love how he failed to mention that we were without two starting O-linemen, our starting FB and our starting FB. Nor did he pay any attention to the fact that UConn was 6th in the nation last season in yards allowed, while returning 7 starters this year, including 4 of their top 5 tacklers. Oh, and they brought in experienced RBs.
At this point you may be asking yourself, why didn't he mention any of this? Why does he talk about UConn as though they're still a team fresh out of 1AA (like the year they were driving to beat State before a Pick 6 with 5 seconds left quickly shifted the game in State's favor)? The answer: pure ignorance.
Akron, 2008 National Champs!
Mon, 09/14/2009 - 15:22 — tjfooseKen, seriously? I thought you were better than that.
So we're back to inserting the transitive property into college football huh?
Team A beat team B who beat team C who beat team D...
So using that logic... Florida lost to Miss, who lost to Vandy... SoCar,Iowa,Pitt, BG, ...who lost to E. Mich, who lost to Akron! Akron, the 2008 National Champs!
Is it too much to ask for something more than that 5 year old sandbox logic from the N&O?
Football is a game about matchups and execution. And as I posted over at statefansnation...
"As far as using the SoCar vs UGA game to benchmark our defense/offense… it is meaningless.
The steepest learning curve in a season is always between games 1 and 2. I wouldn’t put too much stock in our defense by comparing it to UGA’s defensive performance against SoCar. Nor would I be too concerned about RW and crew after UGA’s offensive output against SoCar."
Resorting to trolling a al Dennis Dodd to spike up the web hits?
Maybe we are all wrong.
Mon, 09/14/2009 - 15:58 — JPDOhioThe more I think about it, maybe this is the way we determine who will play for the National Championship and KT is just more forward thinking and creative than the rest of us. With that in mind- GO ZIPS!
What a waste.
Mon, 09/14/2009 - 12:17 — JPDOhioWhen I saw the headline article on the Sports home page, I thought it was a mistake. What does South Carolina's defense have anything to do with now? Answer-nothing.
The only fair point was in the last sentence. We won't know how good State is until Pitt comes in. That will be a test. In the meantime, the Pack took care of business against Murray State and will do the same thing against Gardner-Webb if they don't get cocky and decide to mail it in.
I won't repeat the very valid criticisms posted earlier, other than to say that the biggest improvement occurs between the first and second games because teams learn things about themselves that they cannot learn in preseason camp. I would say the State and USC adjusted very well to what they learned and it was reflected in the way they played on Saturday. To compare the first and second games in drawing any other conclusion is just plain stupid.
Allow me to retort
Mon, 09/14/2009 - 11:49 — bradleyb123State had several dropped passes against SC, some where the receiver had both hands on the ball. At least one was in the endzone.
We had a near-50 yard pass play negated by a penalty where our O-lineman bullied an SC defender across the line of scrimmage. That penalty had nothing to do with the reception, but it negated it. That one play alone could have changed the entire complexion of the first half. We'd have been near midfield, having finally changed the field position.
I believe we were rusty, and just shot ourselves in the foot all night. And SC's defense was pretty stout, too. I don't mean to take anything away from them.
In a nutshell, we don't have anything to worry about yet. Key word being "yet".
And I'd hardly call the Murray State game a matchup between a 5 year old and a 2 year old. It was more like a 15 year old against a 2 year old. We could have hung 100 on that team if we wanted to, and held them scoreless. They had NEGATIVE yardage at halftime, and finished with 36 for the game.
Granted, this win doesn't PROVE anything in the slightest. All we can say for sure is we need to see more evidence before reaching any conclusions. Had the Murray State been a 28-17 game, then we'd have something to worry about.
"And South Carolina's
Mon, 09/14/2009 - 11:30 — Surfer"And South Carolina's ability to score against the Bulldogs makes it appear that N.C. State's defense - which allowed only a 14-yard scoring drive by the Gamecocks - is stouter than expected." "Stout"? You can't be serious. (Ref. 2 FG miscues and the TD called back).
This statement was in the first article last week, but now it appears that anytime S.C. scores this year, it is going to make NCSU's D look better and better. Yep, that makes sense.
It goes both ways
Mon, 09/14/2009 - 12:01 — bradleyb123State had a near-50 yard pass play negated by a penalty that had nothing to do with the play. That SC "touchdown" was almost a hail mary pass of 40-50 yards, and the receiver was WELL-defensed. He only made the catch because he pushed our defender away from him. I honestly believe that push off is the only reason we didn't intercept that pass. Our guy had inside position, until he was shoved in the back. I would hardly consider that a "touchdown called back". That makes it sound like a touchdown that "should have been", when it was nothing of the sort.
As for the missed FG's, they only got TWO Fg opportunities like that because they had a short field all night. State had their backs against their own endzone and couldn't change that. Our field position surely affected our play calling to a degree. When you're inside your own 15, you tend to be more conservative than you may want to be. All we did was punt the ball back to them for another short field and they got close again.
SC had about 100 yards more offense than we did. With all the dropped passes that were in our hands, it VERY EASILY could have been different. It just wasn't, probably due to some rusty play, with this being the first game and all. Neither team looked good all night.
And as bad as it was, if we make that endzone catch, we surely win the game. SC couldn't move the ball much better than us. They just had better field position for the entire first half.
And I think we actually looked better than them in the second half. We moved the ball. We just couldn't finish and get to the end zone. One could argue that we really only had one truly miserable half.
agree with other comments
Mon, 09/14/2009 - 10:52 — braskamyrnaYes, I agree. I first wanted to throw our offense totally under the bus after watching the first gam. But, I agree that you can't use the transitive property. SC might have played their best defensive effort against NC STate for the season. We might have played the worse all year on offense. We were probably a little over confident as well.
Bad prospective
Mon, 09/14/2009 - 10:38 — aideanIt is ridiculous to compare two different games involving totally different teams.
Yawn
Mon, 09/14/2009 - 10:30 — mad_maxSo all of a sudden it's okay to use the transitive property in college football? C'mon, you know better than that. I've got two points that totally dismiss this article's potential of being read-worthy:
1) Almost everyone will tell you that the biggest improvement curve you will see for most teams happens between week 1 and week 2.
2) Use the logic from this article and look back at last year. SC whooped the Pack 34-0. I guess that means they would have been even more dominant against ECU, Wake, Miami, and UNC. Also, Vanderbilt beat SC in week two, so I guess they would have dominated all those teams too, huh? Oh wait, Wake and Duke, DUKE, beat Vanderbilt...now I'm confused.
To say that SC's performance against UGA holds more weight than State's actual game is just ridiculous. Seriously, you should know better.
ughh
Mon, 09/14/2009 - 10:27 — izzykareemyou're so depressing dude (Ken).
As State fans we know beating Murray State and (hopefully) Gardner-Webb are not measuring sticks by any means especially when it was so lopsided. But i think alot of the offensive woes against Carolina had to do with it being our first game, being out of synch, losing a key lineman and not recovering until it was too late. And its well known that some teams just matchup better with others. You can have a great defense for example but a suspect corner/free safety and you QB can exploit them all day. Yet the next opponent may have a bad QB who can't exploit the mismatch etc.