Maybe the biggest positive I saw was in the second half, we actually started to wear them down a bit with the O-line. That might not seem like a big deal since it was WMU, but I don't know if we could've done that last year w/o having to wade through a bunch of false starts & holds. Having depth at RB is refreshing. Still, there was a play in the 1st half when we were in the red zone, 1st & ten and lined up in an empty backfield, which is nuts.
Van Dyke needs to be better moving forward, but his combination of running ability & throwing is a step up from last season. I see people complaining about not throwing more deep, vertical routes. I kinda agree, but on the other hand they really don't have receivers built for that or an offensive philosophy that integrates it. I'd like to think part of it is holding back the playbook for B10 opponents, but they never really did it last year either. Maybe Vinny Anthony, as the year unfolds..........
They got good stuff from the TEs, and I liked the formation with both of them on the field. Helps to make up for no fullback, and as pass catchers they both fit the 3-7 yd flips out in the flat that Longo loves to throw.
The front seven mostly didn't impress. But Neal plugged pretty well, and Pius & Hills made plays later on. Too soon to judge, but the depth could really be a problem.
I was actually disappointed that the secondary didn't make more plays, but I saw they never threw at Hallman (which I didn't notice, embarrassingly) & there wasn't enough of a consistent pass rush to help them out. Need to find a way to get someone like Peterson on the edge because I remember one safety blitz, and the rotation to cover for the safety was non-existent.
All in all, much stuff to clean up, and people like Barten & Neal HAVE to stay healthy. But after one week, saying they're "this" or "that" is IMO a fools' errand.