Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Murray out for the season

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Murray out for the season

    1. This was brewing for at least a year. There are two systemic issues that Murray appears to be battling from what I understand.
    A. Term GPA and Credit issues are easier to salvage as a Freshman/Sophomore. You can take interim and summer school classes to repair those two. Failure to not make progress on these leads to suspensions as I understand it.
    B. As you get further and further along the NCAA tacks on a couple more requirements. Graduation progress and cumulative GPA. I believe there is a suspension potential here as well (but I am not entirely sure how it works) and ineligibility. This can be appealed for hardship.
    --In any case, A typically leads to B if it happens a bunch and it is more difficult, and sometimes impossible to fix without getting to ineligibility. Most colleges prefer their players to take reduced course loads during the season, and if you fail a class it puts increased pressure on Spring and Summer. You do that too often and it becomes difficult to overcome. If it is A that is at root the issue, then I think we'll most definitely see him back. If it is B, even with a redshirt year, the road is much hard in my experience. I do wish him the best. School and football are a difficult combo. Smart move by the MSU staff to try to fix rather than band-aid the problem.

    2. MSU might be better at QB from a wholistic level, but in the process I think it does two things:
    A. MSU loses their best running back, or at least the most positionally difficult person on the field to defend.
    B. Makes MSU easier to defend. Like defending Cal Poly, MSU was hard to defend last year because of the requirement to account for Murray in the run game. They were essentially a Veer/option team. You can now better account and the schemes are less contrived to defend them.

    3. Indirect impact:
    A. I wonder how much of the clock this offense, without Murray as running back 1A, will grind. One of the reasons their defense appeared to be better was they didn't see a lot of snaps. Will this lead to more exposure for Gregorak's defense?
    B. Does this lead to putting Anderson as a Murray type guy at quarterback. I'd think Rovig would probably have a leg up intially considering the Oregon kid was injured and needs to play catchup. I don't think it is clear who wins it. If they have to put Anderson at QB to be successful, I think it dilutes their depth at running back. IMHO, I'd like to give the kid some position certainty to further accelerate his growth. I don't know they have this luxury.

  • #2
    Choate has to coach an offense now.

    Comment


    • #3
      Like I said above, the removal of Murray creates some significant margin for error. I could see a step back or two this year, rather than a leap forward. Their offensive scheme covered up a lot of inefficiencies both offensive and defensively. Just see some unintended consequences and outcomes cropping up this year.

      I like Rovig. He's miles ahead of where Murray was as a Freshman, but that comes with some significant issues. I think the pivoting as to where the offense was or is centered is going to be significant. Basically you are going from a Veer centered offense where the ball is in the hands of Murray, to centering it around your running backs. Having Cole as the OC helps, but it is going to be significantly more difficult to protect Rovig as he develops with the scheme. To me that scheme change or philosophy change is more of hte story than losing Murray. This is of course if Rovig gets the nod. I don't know enough about the other guy honestly.

      Comment


      • #4
        It's going to actually force the QB who suits up for the scats to be able to throw the ball. Takes one less runner out of the equation to plan for, however requires the secondary to actually be focused on the pass. This development may actually make them a more well rounded offense.

        FTC and FTV however

        Comment


        • #5
          I think you are right, but as I said before I think they become easier to defend within a traditional scheme and one that more coaches and players see on a weekly basis.

          One of the reasons they were able to do what they did, is that their offense was a smart move back to an offense that was and always is difficult to stop. To have Murray throwing the football 30-40 times a game is a quick way to get you fired. If Choate would have stuck with his preferred Washington like offense, Murray wouldn't have been the quarterback at any point.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Grizfan-24 View Post
            I think you are right, but as I said before I think they become easier to defend within a traditional scheme and one that more coaches and players see on a weekly basis.

            One of the reasons they were able to do what they did, is that their offense was a smart move back to an offense that was and always is difficult to stop. To have Murray throwing the football 30-40 times a game is a quick way to get you fired. If Choate would have stuck with his preferred Washington like offense, Murray wouldn't have been the quarterback at any point.
            My apologies, I didn't specify. I did not intend for "more well rounded" to come out as better. They may not score as much, or be as hard to defend w/o that rb Murray playing qb1. They will however get closer to a 50/50 run to pass ratio. Hence the well rounded part of my post. All going to depend on who they have as QB1, and forces their wideouts/tight ends to become better receiving threats. I believe they do have a pretty damn good O-line and tough RB's. we'll see

            FTC and FTV

            Comment

            Working...
            X