Richmond got blitzed with a quick 17-0 hole in the 1st quarter that we couldn’t climb out of. Would I have liked to see more out of the Spiders? Of course, but at the end of the day I’m never putting too much weight into these FBS matchups. UVA was better than most thought, and although some outstanding questions remain unanswered there are positives to be found.

Drives

1st half drives on the left, 2nd half drives on the right

Offense

60 snaps | 10 drives – 6 punts (60%), 2 FGs (20%), 1 TD (10%), 1 turnover (10%)

Not what I was expecting to see. After we locked down the fall scrimmage to the public, I was optimistic we had some tricks up our sleeve. The defensive struggles early in the game put the game out of reach, however the simplicity and inability of our offense to string drives together was more deflating to me.

1st downs – I’m guessing the gameplan was centered around staying on schedule, which is great if you execute but difficult to recover from if you don’t. Richmond had 23 plays on 1st downs in the game – 18 runs, 5 passes. Running over 78% of the time on 1st down allowed UVA to defend closer to the line of scrimmage and made things difficult inside. That resulted in 24% of UR rushing attempts being stopped for no gain or a loss (excluding the one sack). Impossible to hang with an ACC team if 1/4 of your rushing attempts are going nowhere and you’re continually running early on.

3rd downs – For as bad as those numbers look, the Spiders did manage decent 3rd down opportunities. Our average yards to gain on 3rd down was 6 yards, which isn’t bad considering the level of our opponent. The issue is we were 3/15, and we especially struggled in short yardage.

On 3rd & 4 or less, UR converted only 2/7 attempts. For as many things that went wrong, had we converted in short yardage better we likely would’ve hung around a bit longer. It was a game I was hoping we’d compete better upfront – once we struggled to run for consistent yardage and failed to convert 3rd & short opportunities, it wasn’t happening. Opening things up in the passing game likely would’ve helped as well, as the LOS was crowded all night.

Passing chart – Below is Wickersham’s passing chart for the game:

A lot of ‘September 2023’, rather than ‘November 2023’, in this chart. Nearly 60% of attempts within 5 yards of the LOS, and only two throws that really stretched the defense. The interesting part was our pass protection was excellent, allowing only one sack and two QB hurries. The UR O-line was as good as they needed to be in pass pro, yet we didn’t capitalize on that. The result was only two Spiders finishing with multiple receptions, led by DeGennaro with 7. The Cavs did drop 7 or 8 into coverage a fair amount, but there were a lot of early down looks that could’ve seen us attack through the air. Based on what we learned last year, I was shocked to see us not let Wickersham turn it loose more often given the circumstances.

Running backs – We did see all three backs, with Jamaal Brown getting the start. They all played roughly the same number of snaps (22, 19, 18) but surprisingly Brown only finished with four carries. ZPS got seven touches and Aziz 14. For now, things continue to favor Foster-Powell. We’ll continue to learn more about this young group throughout non-conference play.

O-line – Spiders played both Gabe Carbajal and Trey Gray at LT, along with Cade Salyers and Scott Hummel at RG. Seemed like they were just being cautious with Salyers early on, however he looks ready to go. Hummel and Salyers received the two highest PFF grades for the game, which is encouraging moving forward.

Play clock – Not our most efficient day getting the plays in. A couple timeouts due to a dwindling play clock, one delay of game, and plenty of excitement from Coach Huesman on the sidelines. The easiest thing of the list to cleanup, so while it was frustrating to watch I’m not concerned moving forward.

Defense

63 snaps | 11 drives – 4 TDs (37%), 3 FG attempts (27%), 2 turnovers [1 on downs] (18%), 2 punts (18%)

We didn’t force UVA to punt in the 1st half, which is a pretty good indicator that things didn’t go great. The Cavaliers continually beat us in space, which isn’t unheard of when playing an FBS team. The quick 20-0 lead made things feel a little worse than they might’ve been, but any chance the Spiders had to keep this a game in the 2nd half was lost in the first few possessions.

Tackling – Ouch. So many chances to keep UVA to short gains turned into chunk plays, and it snowballed from there. It’s mostly red in the PFF grades for tackling as there weren’t bright spots. I always try to not overreact to negatives in our FBS matchup, so until this issue continues against an FCS foe, I’ll chalk this up to ACC talent for now.

Big Plays – 59% of Virginia’s offense came on just 7 plays. Yep, they totaled 295 yards on five passing and two running plays alone. On the other 54 plays, they averaged less than 4 yards/play. Big plays are part of the game so you can’t just remove these seven and say we played well, however it definitely shows how much closer this game could’ve been. The worst part is we were in good position on a few – Stocker was right with the receiver on the first TD but couldn’t make the deflection. Hoilette, guarding a RB in the flat on a disguised blitz, had him covered but then fell. 57 yards later, it was 17-0 UVA.

Big plays have burned the Spiders in our latest games, with both Central and Albany capitalizing on numerous chunk plays during last years’ playoff run. They aren’t something you can completely avoid but watching a team rack up 60% of their offense in just over a handful of plays drains the energy quickly.

3rd down – Spiders defense held their ground, holding Virginia to 3/11 on 3rd down. The Cavaliers were only 2/6 on short yardage 3rd downs, so while our offense struggled in this area it was nice to see the defense step up. It was a grueling game but ultimately the D-line found their footing and played well.

Virginia’s average yards to gain on 3rd down was 8.3, as when the Spiders weren’t giving up a big play we won plenty of early downs. Credit to the D-line again, with Jeremiah Grant and Matei Fitz tallying critical 1st down sacks.

Matthew Traynor – #7 was flying around the field Saturday. Five tackles, a deflection, and an INT in 32 snaps. With Bryson Parker wearing a cast on his wrist, Traynor may be called on more than we expected, so it was great to see him ready to roll. A for-sure starter next season, expect Traynor to continue his rise and keep impacting the Spiders in 2024.

Linebackers – Clearly UVA liked this matchup and they attacked us early. Really forced all three linebackers to play in space, and our overall team tackling wasn’t enough to support them.

On the plus side, Zach Chambers and true freshman Peyton Seelmann had the two highest PFF grades of any Spider. They only played about 20 snaps each against the UVA reserves, so it’s an unfair comparison to the starters, but that competition is fairly equivalent to what we’ll see in CAA play. Nice to see some younger guys play well in an early opportunity, and I’d expect this starting group to bounce back well in the coming weeks.

Special Teams

Aaron Trusler averaged 44 yards/punt and gave up a whopping 12 return yards. That’s mostly sarcastic however he did only allow 22 yards all of 2023. Another good day for the Aussie punter.

Brandon Peskin had a nice UR debut, making both of his field goal attempts and the one PAT. Peskin’s range will be needed at some point this season, but it was good to see him knock down the easy ones (33 & 35 yards). As a whole, the kicking/punting operation was very sound, with Catanzarite having no issues with the rainy conditions. Solid start to the season for a veteran unit.

Next Post

Game 2 – 2024: Wofford Preview – Friday, September 6th