Good post; hard to argue with. I once worked for a Marine two-star who liked to say that "you can't make chicken salad from chicken ". Not to say we don't have some kids that can play, but not nearly enough and too many glaring gaps. Especially wrt depth. It's why HCBD doing everything he can to shorten games and avoid track meets makes great sense to me but we have a number of deficiencies - some we can cover up and some are badly exposed in certain match-ups:
1) you can't play soft on D if your offense can't maintain some possession;
2) you can't live on three-step outs and slants if you can't back up the coverage with a downfield threat;
3) you can't establish a consistent downfield passing threat if you can't protect the QB;
4) we simply can't cover the crossing patterns behind lbs in front of the safeties and letting recievers outrun tackles underneath exacerbates that weakness;
5) we really can't handle up-tempo without better depth than we've developed to this point.
HCBD has this roster playing competitive football and I want to give him credit for that, I'm not on the 'no wins=no progress' bandwagon. I'm waffling on whether or not I consider the Cincy game to be some kind of regression, I'm more inclined to think that it was just a nightmare matchup in terms of a team designed to take advantage of the things we're not good at. What is largely unmentioned, but I think was pretty decisive, was their defensive game plan to jump short routes and crowd the line; once they either adjusted to BrS running (or we decided he'd taken enough hits...), we couldn't keep our offense on the field and our defense was basically thrown to the wolves....