Issues remain, even in victory

ShoreLion85V2 · Tuesday at 6:40 AM

After re-watching the game, sans emotion, purely analytical, there are still a few things that stand out in a negative way:
1. Our QB continues to have iffy pocket presence, and runs right into either our O lineman’s back, or an opposing D lineman;
2. WR #4 does not “high point” the ball, but waits for it, allowing the opposing DB that extra split second to bat it away;
3. Aside from Rojas, our LBs are not up to LBU standards;
4. Tackling, especially on the pass rush, is still a problem.

Frankly, given the above, it isn’t overly surprising that we’re 4-4. However, a W is a W, right?

MtNittany · Tuesday at 6:48 AM

I was encouraged with the running game, but then realized that PU's screen door defense isn't very stout.

LaJollaCreek · Tuesday at 6:50 AM

Every W will still have things to work on. It's not a deep talented roster and PSU will struggle to get to 6-7 wins. There isn't a single player on the DL this year that looks like they will be playing on Sundays as of right now. A few are young so maybe that changes, but when you have an extremely average RB and DL room in the B1G, you're not going to W more than you lose.

DaytonRickster · Tuesday at 6:53 AM

ShoreLion85V2 said:
After re-watching the game, sans emotion, purely analytical, there are still a few things that stand out in a negative way:
1. Our QB continues to have iffy pocket presence, and runs right into either our O lineman’s back, or an opposing D lineman;
2. WR #4 does not “high point” the ball, but waits for it, allowing the opposing DB that extra split second to bat it away;
3. Aside from Rojas, our LBs are not up to LBU standards;
4. Tackling, especially on the pass rush, is still a problem.

Frankly, given the above, it isn’t overly surprising that we’re 4-4. However, a W is a W, right?

All legitimate observations.

upstatelion · Tuesday at 7:22 AM

It looks like eskeldson (#4) is fast, but like you say he does not have a knack for high pointing and getting after the ball. Plus becht tends to under throw him. I think they send him long on a lot of plays just to stretch the field with his speed, but he won't catch many doing that. I wonder if they can start using him more on slants and crossers once howard comes back and can stretch the field. He seems better suited for those types of patterns.

upstatelion · Tuesday at 7:25 AM

I also think becht might be a better runner than he has shown, but he is being super carefull to go down early and not to take hits because there is no backup option for him that they trust.

ShoreLion85V2 · Tuesday at 7:31 AM

agreed on #4 WR, he is fast; however, and this usually applies to baseball, he may be in that category of “great athlete, not a great player”. He has not displayed any of the traits of a great WR, i.e. High pointing the ball, making contested catches, shielding the DB from the ball, seamless change of direction. He’s a freak athletically, yes, fast, jumps out of the gym, etc., but at least up till now, not a very good WR. Maybe try him at returning kicks?

KC-KS-Lion · Tuesday at 7:47 AM

ShoreLion85V2 said:
agreed on #4 WR, he is fast; however, and this usually applies to baseball, he may be in that category of “great athlete, not a great player”. He has not displayed any of the traits of a great WR, i.e. High pointing the ball, making contested catches, shielding the DB from the ball, seamless change of direction. He’s a freak athletically, yes, fast, jumps out of the gym, etc., but at least up till now, not a very good WR. Maybe try him at returning kicks?

I had some hopes for #4 coming in to the season given the lack of a WR pipeline.

Given the missed chances he's had, minus Becht's under throws, I just wonder why we're haven't seen the few young unproven WRs on the team for at least a few plays.

Given Campbell's guideline of having to earn game playing time by your practice performance, you should 'unearn' game playing time with your game performance.....#4 seems like Liam Clifford 2.0 for return on playing time.

I will add a related disappointment to this scenario. His coach prior to this year was a highly-regarded WR coach who developed NFL talent and is now coaching in the NFL...where is the coaching or results of the coaching?

LaJollaCreek · Tuesday at 7:59 AM

KC-KS-Lion said:
I had some hopes for #4 coming in to the season given the lack of a WR pipeline.

Given the missed chances he's had, minus Becht's under throws, I just wonder why we're haven't seen the few young unproven WRs on the team for at least a few plays.

Given Campbell's guideline of having to earn game playing time by your practice performance, you should 'unearn' game playing time with your game performance.....#4 seems like Liam Clifford 2.0 for return on playing time.

I will add a related disappointment to this scenario. His coach prior to this year was a highly-regarded WR coach who developed NFL talent and is now coaching in the NFL...where is the coaching or results of the coaching?

To be fair when healthy Sowell has been better than advertised. Howard if he was healthy was a playmaker. I don't think #4 was ever supposed to he the "guy", but injuries happen and the last staff was so awful with this position...that here we are. That being said, even with this dismal record the WR play overall IMO is better when Howard and Sowell are on the field.

KC-KS-Lion · Tuesday at 8:04 AM

LaJollaCreek said:
To be fair when healthy Sowell has been better than advertised. Howard if he was healthy was a playmaker. I don't think #4 was ever supposed to he the "guy", but injuries happen and the last staff was so awful with this position...that here we are. That being said, even with this dismal record the WR play overall IMO is better when Howard and Sowell are on the field.

I agree on Sowell. He's been a real soldier and has seemed to play and be productive when injured. I look forward to seeing him and Howard playing together...wish that would have been the case during the meat of the B1G schedule.

I got the impression #4 was projected as the third receiver, and unfortunately elevated to 2 with Howard out. A third and especially a number two receiver should take advantage of give or take 50% of their targets.

Alphalion75 · Tuesday at 8:18 AM

upstatelion said:
It looks like eskeldson (#4) is fast, but like you say he does not have a knack for high pointing and getting after the ball. Plus becht tends to under throw him. I think they send him long on a lot of plays just to stretch the field with his speed, but he won't catch many doing that. I wonder if they can start using him more on slants and crossers once howard comes back and can stretch the field. He seems better suited for those types of patterns.

The game announcers pointed that out. That he would be best used on the quick slants.

taryn · Tuesday at 8:26 AM

ShoreLion85V2 said:
agreed on #4 WR, he is fast; however, and this usually applies to baseball, he may be in that category of “great athlete, not a great player”. He has not displayed any of the traits of a great WR, i.e. High pointing the ball, making contested catches, shielding the DB from the ball, seamless change of direction. He’s a freak athletically, yes, fast, jumps out of the gym, etc., but at least up till now, not a very good WR. Maybe try him at returning kicks?

try TRACK team.

KC-KS-Lion · Tuesday at 9:11 AM

taryn said:
try TRACK team.

I always thought recruiting receivers from basketball made more sense than track...better hands and quick cuts ala Norwood (and a number of NFL TEs) who was a guaranteed 6+ yards.

berklion · Tuesday at 9:34 AM

Jackson, #9, had a couple of good catches. I hoped they would have thrown a couple more his way.

PSUAVLNC · Tuesday at 9:40 AM

upstatelion said:
It looks like eskeldson (#4) is fast, but like you say he does not have a knack for high pointing and getting after the ball. Plus becht tends to under throw him. I think they send him long on a lot of plays just to stretch the field with his speed, but he won't catch many doing that. I wonder if they can start using him more on slants and crossers once howard comes back and can stretch the field. He seems better suited for those types of patterns.

If they do send him across the middle I hope he doesn't get killed!

PSUAVLNC · Tuesday at 9:43 AM

MtNittany said:
I was encouraged with the running game, but then realized that PU's screen door defense isn't very stout.

Yup....I think they finally have a No.1 running back. I hope so anyway.

Binder74 · Tuesday at 11:45 AM

KC-KS-Lion said:
I will add a related disappointment to this scenario. His coach prior to this year was a highly-regarded WR coach who developed NFL talent and is now coaching in the NFL...where is the coaching or results of the coaching?

Maybe you need to see him before he was coached up to appreciate it.

Marshall2323 · Tuesday at 12:10 PM

PSUAVLNC said:
Yup....I think they finally have a No.1 running back. I hope so anyway.

Martin was #1 against Buffalo. I hope Wallace is the real deal. Especially because he has overcome so many obstacles.
Only Rutgers has a worse run D in the conference so who knows?

Big_O · Tuesday at 12:15 PM

ShoreLion85V2 said:
agreed on #4 WR, he is fast; however, and this usually applies to baseball, he may be in that category of “great athlete, not a great player”. He has not displayed any of the traits of a great WR, i.e. High pointing the ball, making contested catches, shielding the DB from the ball, seamless change of direction. He’s a freak athletically, yes, fast, jumps out of the gym, etc., but at least up till now, not a very good WR. Maybe try him at returning kicks?

When it comes to being a football player, for him it’s like a he looks like Tarzan, but plays like Jane situation. He’s a good athlete but just not a great football player. Then there are players that are the opposite, not the greatest athlete, but just great at playing football. Unfortunately, I can’t think offhand of anyone on the team this year that fits that description.

razpsu · Tuesday at 12:18 PM

ShoreLion85V2 said:
After re-watching the game, sans emotion, purely analytical, there are still a few things that stand out in a negative way:
1. Our QB continues to have iffy pocket presence, and runs right into either our O lineman’s back, or an opposing D lineman;
2. WR #4 does not “high point” the ball, but waits for it, allowing the opposing DB that extra split second to bat it away;
3. Aside from Rojas, our LBs are not up to LBU standards;
4. Tackling, especially on the pass rush, is still a problem.

Frankly, given the above, it isn’t overly surprising that we’re 4-4. However, a W is a W, right?

“I would say you are a glass half empty kind of guy”

razpsu · Tuesday at 12:19 PM

ShoreLion85V2 said:
After re-watching the game, sans emotion, purely analytical, there are still a few things that stand out in a negative way:
1. Our QB continues to have iffy pocket presence, and runs right into either our O lineman’s back, or an opposing D lineman;
2. WR #4 does not “high point” the ball, but waits for it, allowing the opposing DB that extra split second to bat it away;
3. Aside from Rojas, our LBs are not up to LBU standards;
4. Tackling, especially on the pass rush, is still a problem.

Frankly, given the above, it isn’t overly surprising that we’re 4-4. However, a W is a W, right?

He didn’t have his two best receivers on the field for all the love that is holy!!! Gotta give them a little break there.

BillyPoe · Tuesday at 12:30 PM

MtNittany said:
I was encouraged with the running game, but then realized that PU's screen door defense isn't very stout.

I realize that, now explain the Temple game running game.

Bison13 · Tuesday at 1:16 PM

Big_O said:
When it comes to being a football player, for him it’s like a he looks like Tarzan, but plays like Jane situation. He’s a good athlete but just not a great football player. Then there are players that are the opposite, not the greatest athlete, but just great at playing football. Unfortunately, I can’t think offhand of anyone on the team this year that fits that description.

That is the big issue with recruiting rankings. Lots of guys who are fantastic athletes and achieve major receiving stats by just being the best athlete on the field.

JWB389 · Tuesday at 2:45 PM

upstatelion said:
I also think becht might be a better runner than he has shown, but he is being super carefull to go down early and not to take hits because there is no backup option for him that they trust.

I thought going into the season Becht was like a McSorely type runner. He’s more like a Clifford. Probably a step slower.

AvgUser · Tuesday at 8:37 PM

razpsu said:
He didn’t have his two best receivers on the field for all the love that is holy!!! Gotta give them a little break there.

Receivers aren’t the issue. I take that back. Eskeldsen is an issue. However, Becht is a below average QB. On the bright side, I don’t think I recall any batted balls from him on Saturday.

AvgUser · Tuesday at 8:38 PM

JWB389 said:
I thought going into the season Becht was like a McSorely type runner. He’s more like a Clifford. Probably a step slower.

Clifford had an arm. Becht does not

Binder74 · Tuesday at 9:48 PM

AvgUser said:
Clifford had an arm. Becht does not

And grit. I never thought he was an exceptional qb but he left his heart on the field every game.

Nittering Nabob · Tuesday at 10:02 PM

ShoreLion85V2 said:
After re-watching the game, sans emotion, purely analytical, there are still a few things that stand out in a negative way:
1. Our QB continues to have iffy pocket presence, and runs right into either our O lineman’s back, or an opposing D lineman;
2. WR #4 does not “high point” the ball, but waits for it, allowing the opposing DB that extra split second to bat it away;
3. Aside from Rojas, our LBs are not up to LBU standards;
4. Tackling, especially on the pass rush, is still a problem.

Frankly, given the above, it isn’t overly surprising that we’re 4-4. However, a W is a W, right?

Breaking in a new moniker? Your schtick is getting rather tiresome.

@Tom McAndrew needs to pre-emptively kill the Pitt roach

The same modus operandi. Start with a long winded harmless post to engage others while building a post count.

the V2 (version 2) is a new twist at the end. Do Pitt trolls run out of identities?

Phils rug · Tuesday at 11:10 PM

AvgUser said:
Clifford had an arm. Becht does not

Becht needs some moxie

PSUForever · Tuesday at 11:42 PM

Eskildsen is not very good which has been pointed out here. He can't catch the ball unless wide open which does not happen much. I wonder about the PSU legacy guys that are riding the pine, Samuel, Gonzalez, are they that bad that they can't see the field at all? Especially in a game with our top two WRs out.

ShoreLion85V2 · 2026-11-04T06:39:11-0600

Nittering Nabob said:
Breaking in a new moniker? Your schtick is getting rather tiresome.

@Tom McAndrew needs to pre-emptively kill the Pitt roach

The same modus operandi. Start with a long winded harmless post to engage others while building a post count.

the V2 (version 2) is a new twist at the end. Do Pitt trolls run out of identities?

What the hell are you talking about? I’m a PSU graduate, which even a mid wit could see by my screen name: Shore Lion85, I.e. graduated from Penn State in 1985 and I’m from/live at the Jersey Shore. It’s always been my screen name, the V2 was because of the combo/changes in Rivals/Scout boards. The Pitt accusation is ridiculous. Do better, for all of our sakes.

LaJollaCreek · 2026-11-04T06:50:10-0600

ShoreLion85V2 said:
What the hell are you talking about? I’m a PSU graduate, which even a mid wit could see by my screen name: Shore Lion85, I.e. graduated from Penn State in 1985 and I’m from/live at the Jersey Shore. It’s always been my screen name, the V2 was because of the combo/changes in Rivals/Scout boards. The Pitt accusation is ridiculous. Do better, for all of our sakes.

You see he uses multiple handles and literally holds conversations with himself.....it's all projection by someone that really should be on meds.

JWB389 · 2026-11-04T11:14:16-0600

AvgUser said:
Clifford had an arm. Becht does not

Yes, i specifically said runner.

yboby · 2026-11-04T20:35:49-0600

upstatelion said:
It looks like eskeldson (#4) is fast, but like you say he does not have a knack for high pointing and getting after the ball. Plus becht tends to under throw him. I think they send him long on a lot of plays just to stretch the field with his speed, but he won't catch many doing that. I wonder if they can start using him more on slants and crossers once howard comes back and can stretch the field. He seems better suited for those types of patterns.

That's exactly the point that the BTN game analyst made on a completed slant to #4. He pointed out #4 may be better suited to those types of routes rather than going deep. Becht's deep passes have way too much air under them. Allar was guilty of this too.

yboby · 2026-11-04T20:44:28-0600

JWB389 said:
I thought going into the season Becht was like a McSorely type runner. He’s more like a Clifford. Probably a step slower.

Some ISU fans commented that he started sliding too soon (at ISU) after a couple of cheap shots that led to injuries.

rigi19041 · 2026-11-04T23:01:48-0600

PSUForever said:
Eskildsen is not very good which has been pointed out here. He can't catch the ball unless wide open which does not happen much. I wonder about the PSU legacy guys that are riding the pine, Samuel, Gonzalez, are they that bad that they can't see the field at all? Especially in a game with our top two WRs out.

Let's get our priorities straight. Eskildsen making 800k is irrelevant.

Shouldn't we be batching about Franklin paying clifford 500k?

Issues remain, even in victory

Sophomore

All-American

Heisman

All-Conference

Redshirt

Redshirt

Sophomore

Freshman

Heisman

Freshman

All-Conference

Sophomore

Freshman

Junior

All-Conference

All-Conference

Senior

All-American

All-Conference

Heisman

Heisman

Redshirt

All-American

All-Conference

All-Conference

All-Conference

Senior

All-Conference

Senior

All-Conference

Sophomore

Heisman

All-Conference

Senior

Senior

Junior