Illinois 23, Rutgers 20 Postgame

#52      
464966ED-0E8A-465C-8CA8-81E5614FEA6E.png
 
#55      

Deleted member 29907

D
Guest
The running game by Brown was opened up by IW’s ability to run also. Peter’s just lost his job if we want to have a functioning offense imo
On the flip side - a QB that is a threat to throw (aka Peters) will open up the run game. Teams are just stacking the box against us right now and Epstein and Brown, while they may rip one occasionally - are being met in the backfield an awful lot. Peters is a decent runner as well.
 
#59      
Hard not to like what we saw from IW but wow does Rod Smith have to improve as a play caller. We also have to get this offense line in sync.

If run the QB is our only offense we won't win much more and will be reaching down the chart at QB in no time.
 
#64      
Did not like using final timeout with :07 left, with clock already stopped, with kicker who has just missed 2 FGAs. Taking timeout there tells me either: (1) our sideline doesn’t understand what to do, or (2) our sideline was more worried about a turnover or penalty, than they were confident in getting a few more yards or at least centering the ball on the field. Even though it worked out, even though we won, I didn’t like that decision.
 
#65      
I’m on the IW band wagon. We’re playing for next year so let’s get him some experience.
“We’re playing for next year”? Who is we? Team’s not playing for next year. I hate when college fans say this. I mean I understand most fans have written off this year, but the players deserve to have the best players out there that give the team the best chance to win each game. If that is IW, then by all means he should start. But if not he shouldn’t start just to get him experience for next year.

I’m torn as to which QB gives Illini best chance to win next week. I just don’t think 7 of 18 is going to beat many teams other than Rutgers — especially when they have tape on IW and prepare for him. Obviously he should likely see more time then he did at WI, but if Peters starts I’m OK with that.
 
#66      

illini80

Forgottonia
Most of you are way more optimistic than I am. Good for you. I just can’t get there. If Rutgers plays an even halfway competent 2nd half we lose. They gave us chance after chance and credit to the guys, they finally took it. IW made some impressive runs for sure but he has to be better at passing to be successful at this level. I like the kid, I‘m just not sure he’s the answer for all this team is lacking. I really don’t know who gives us a better chance against Nebby but if Peters struggles, I expect the leash to be short.
 
#67      
Most of you are way more optimistic than I am. Good for you. I just can’t get there. If Rutgers plays an even halfway competent 2nd half we lose. They gave us chance after chance and credit to the guys, they finally took it. IW made some impressive runs for sure but he has to be better at passing to be successful at this level. I like the kid, I‘m just not sure he’s the answer for all this team is lacking. I really don’t know who gives us a better chance against Nebby but if Peters struggles, I expect the leash to be short.
This probably is the only win we get this year, can't we just enjoy it?
 
#71      
I just read the in game Rutgers fan page, OMG, it was like reading our first three games chats. A few kept alluding to us as IU. They were all over the QB and the OC. Hilarious read.
 
#73      
Great to see IW play, not ready to move on from Peters. We have to many solid WRs not to be utilized. Peters has some mobility. If Peters plays like he did against Wisky then I'll csn see the switch.
 
#75      
Can someone help me with this call? First quarter, Rutgers kicks fg to go up by 10. On the ensuing kickoff: Davidovicz, J. kickoff 52 yards to the ILL13, Thompson,Khmari return 0 yards to the ILL13.

Thompson caught the ball and took off running downfield but the play was whistled dead and the ball returned to the 13 yard line. Why was the play stopped?