1. Texas A&M 38 rushes for 333 yards, 8 ypc. Nope, the key stat is not anything to do with Weigman. The offensive line consistently opened up holes, got surge, and McNeese helped out with some sloppy tackling as the Aggies gained yards in chunks on the ground almost at will. It was spread around to six different ball carriers, who while none had over 100 yards, combined to be all the offense we would have needed.
2. McNeese State, only two first downs in the first half. A&M's first string defense lassoed the Cowboy offense. While they did have some success later with most the first teamers out the Aggie defense looked stout.
3. Texas A&M with two interceptions. This game the disruptive defense generated some turnovers.
4. Okay, I'll finally throw Weigman a bone. Notwithstanding superficially good stats of 11/14 for 125 yards I was not really impressed. Weigman continued to show many of the same problems we saw in the Notre Dame game, with happy feet, not finding receivers, and an inability to look down range while scrambling. As a consequence once he starts scrambling it almost always ends up being him tucking and running. Against a much weaker opponent he had more open receivers to hit, and was better at doing so. Sometimes the OL gave him time to read a book back there and I sometimes wondered if that's what he was doing. He did seem to improve as the game went on and I think he should have been given at least one more series to settle into his groove. Reed actually looked more confident, and came closer to running the offense as designed, even though he was only 5/11 passing.
Some stats to worry about.
-Did Nic Scourton play? He is not credited with a single tackle or assist.
-Texas A&M had 0 sacks. That's one now for the defense in two games.
2. McNeese State, only two first downs in the first half. A&M's first string defense lassoed the Cowboy offense. While they did have some success later with most the first teamers out the Aggie defense looked stout.
3. Texas A&M with two interceptions. This game the disruptive defense generated some turnovers.
4. Okay, I'll finally throw Weigman a bone. Notwithstanding superficially good stats of 11/14 for 125 yards I was not really impressed. Weigman continued to show many of the same problems we saw in the Notre Dame game, with happy feet, not finding receivers, and an inability to look down range while scrambling. As a consequence once he starts scrambling it almost always ends up being him tucking and running. Against a much weaker opponent he had more open receivers to hit, and was better at doing so. Sometimes the OL gave him time to read a book back there and I sometimes wondered if that's what he was doing. He did seem to improve as the game went on and I think he should have been given at least one more series to settle into his groove. Reed actually looked more confident, and came closer to running the offense as designed, even though he was only 5/11 passing.
Some stats to worry about.
-Did Nic Scourton play? He is not credited with a single tackle or assist.
-Texas A&M had 0 sacks. That's one now for the defense in two games.
