Derek Burns thoughts

Donate To GopherHole

paulser21 said:
I call BS on the lack of talent viewpoint.
Click to expand...
NfL talents. Yes we're lacking NFL talents on skill positions
Not above average B1G talents. It sounds like some of our coaches can win games only with NFL talents.
 

BoatRacer said:
NfL talents. Yes we're lacking NFL talents on skill positions
Not above average B1G talents. It sounds like some of our coaches can win games only with NFL talents.
Click to expand...
I can agree more with that statement.

Our two losses with the “ugliest” play were Illinois and Bowling Green. By using the “lack of talent” excuse you are saying that those teams have better talent than we do.

Players need to be put in a position to succeed or at least have a chance.

Running players into double coverage does not do this.

Running long developing routes when the QB has consistently not had the time to wait for those routes to progress does not do this.

Running the same predictable running plays does not do this.
 


BoatRacer said:
NfL talents. Yes we're lacking NFL talents on skill positions
Not above average B1G talents. It sounds like some of our coaches can win games only with NFL talents.
Click to expand...
I think CrABand Wright are above average BIG talents (both have missed a lot of time too). The others are below average (not that they can't improve down the road).
 



paulser21 said:
I can agree more with that statement.

Our two losses with the “ugliest” play were Illinois and Bowling Green. By using the “lack of talent” excuse you are saying that those teams have better talent than we do.

Players need to be put in a position to succeed or at least have a chance.

Running players into double coverage does not do this.

Running long developing routes when the QB has consistently not had the time to wait for those routes to progress does not do this.

Running the same predictable running plays does not do this.
Click to expand...
I agree with you 100%. That's what I am trying to say. Sarcasm didn't do well on the message board. 😆
 

paulser21 said:
I can agree more with that statement.

Our two losses with the “ugliest” play were Illinois and Bowling Green. By using the “lack of talent” excuse you are saying that those teams have better talent than we do.

Players need to be put in a position to succeed or at least have a chance.

Running players into double coverage does not do this.

Running long developing routes when the QB has consistently not had the time to wait for those routes to progress does not do this.

Running the same predictable running plays does not do this.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure anyone is saying we have no talent. I don’t think we have the talent to do what we were trying to do Saturday. Which was run two man routes and try to just flat out beat a guy one on one.

that’s not saying it was a good plan but we had no talent,
That’s saying we didn’t have the talent to use the same plan we could use in 2019
 

Word said:
I think CrABand Wright are above average BIG talents (both have missed a lot of time too). The others are below average (not that they can't improve down the road).
Click to expand...
MBS, Micheal Brown-Stephans, and Daniel Jackson are not below Big 10 level Wide receivers, I think both are very talented dudes, and can run. Given the right routes and a chance to make a play and both of these guy's will make plays. The Quarterback was in his own head on Saturday against Illinois. He was fairly upset after the one interception which you have to let go of as a Big 10 QB. We couldn't get any traction in the running game because they were bringing a linebacker to the line of scrimmage and bringing a CB or Safety off the line to stop the run. At this point what does Tanner Morgan want his final three games to be as the Minnesota QB? It is up to him and life is exactly the way he thinks it is. This dude is plenty capable of rising to the occasion and being a good QB and leading this team. He has won us a lot of football games, but against Iowa and Wisconsin no so much. This is going to be where the rubber meets the road these last three games. To me they have to give him the freedom to call the adjustments at the line of scrimmage and react to what he is seeing, get the team moving and give him the 1-4 plays you have on the script and let him make the call on what to run. He has played enough football that they should trust Morgan to be able to do that at this point.
 



gopherdudepart2 said:
MBS, Micheal Brown-Stephans, and Daniel Jackson are not below Big 10 level Wide receivers, I think both are very talented dudes, and can run. Given the right routes and a chance to make a play and both of these guy's will make plays. The Quarterback was in his own head on Saturday against Illinois. He was fairly upset after the one interception which you have to let go of as a Big 10 QB. We couldn't get any traction in the running game because they were bringing a linebacker to the line of scrimmage and bringing a CB or Safety off the line to stop the run. At this point what does Tanner Morgan want his final three games to be as the Minnesota QB? It is up to him and life is exactly the way he thinks it is. This dude is plenty capable of rising to the occasion and being a good QB and leading this team. He has won us a lot of football games, but against Iowa and Wisconsin no so much. This is going to be where the rubber meets the road these last three games. To me they have to give him the freedom to call the adjustments at the line of scrimmage and react to what he is seeing, get the team moving and give him the 1-4 plays you have on the script and let him make the call on what to run. He has played enough football that they should trust Morgan to be able to do that at this point.
Click to expand...
They’re good wideouts. They’re not as good at what they’re being asked to do last Saturday

which is beat a Corner AND a safety on a route with only 1-2 options
 

MaxyJR1 said:
How would you describe the relationship with Matt Simon and play calling and influencing the calls that you make?

Sanford: "It's been good. I think a lot of that happens during the week, as Matt's such a creative mind. I think he's a left hander and I'm a right hander, so it's the creative side vs. kind of the pragmatic side.
Click to expand...
Pragmatic? Not sure you actually understand what this word means, Mike Jr.

matt said:
This raises a great question: what exactly are the coaches deciding in the one or two pre-snap check with me’s on each play? Surely they see that they are running into a plus one box or that the defense is well positioned to defend a stop route and shallow slant. Why are they not adjusting the play during that check? That is the entire purpose of the check with me. Do they just choose to stick with the same play on every check? Or do they simply change which side they run to or who the RB is picking up on pass plays? The offensive issues become more frustrating when you realize they are checking and then choosing to run those same plays.
Click to expand...

I've wondered this same thing myself. I am starting to think it's mainly for show. Even when they line up early, they drag it out down to the limits of the playclock, sometimes even calling adjustments twice. Then they run the same dive that was probably called to start with. Maybe they are hoping to give defense time to jump offsides or players to give away some kind of tell....as a secondary objective to the main purpose, which is eating as much clock as possible.
 

gopherdudepart2 said:
MBS, Micheal Brown-Stephans, and Daniel Jackson are not below Big 10 level Wide receivers, I think both are very talented dudes, and can run. Given the right routes and a chance to make a play and both of these guy's will make plays. The Quarterback was in his own head on Saturday against Illinois. He was fairly upset after the one interception which you have to let go of as a Big 10 QB. We couldn't get any traction in the running game because they were bringing a linebacker to the line of scrimmage and bringing a CB or Safety off the line to stop the run. At this point what does Tanner Morgan want his final three games to be as the Minnesota QB? It is up to him and life is exactly the way he thinks it is. This dude is plenty capable of rising to the occasion and being a good QB and leading this team. He has won us a lot of football games, but against Iowa and Wisconsin no so much. This is going to be where the rubber meets the road these last three games. To me they have to give him the freedom to call the adjustments at the line of scrimmage and react to what he is seeing, get the team moving and give him the 1-4 plays you have on the script and let him make the call on what to run. He has played enough football that they should trust Morgan to be able to do that at this point.
Click to expand...
I think Morgan is way down on the list of issues. Play calling is #1 by a mile. Lack of pass protection was issue #2 vs Illinois. Receivers not able to beat anyone was issue #3. Morgan was issue #4.
 

Word said:
I think Morgan is way down on the list of issues. Play calling is #1 by a mile. Lack of pass protection was issue #2 vs Illinois. Receivers not able to beat anyone was issue #3. Morgan was issue #4.
Click to expand...
Yeah. People can intermix 1-3 in first half
Play calling not adjusting became number 1 by the middle of the game

Any way you slice it I think Morgan is about the 4th biggest issue with the offense
 



Word said:
I think Morgan is way down on the list of issues. Play calling is #1 by a mile. Lack of pass protection was issue #2 vs Illinois. Receivers not able to beat anyone was issue #3. Morgan was issue #4.
Click to expand...
Not trying to pin these issues on Morgan on Saturday, he is pretty decent QB. He seemed pretty down on himself after the first interception on Saturday. I would expect a QB of his pedigree and game experience to flush that type of tipped ball and let it go, that is all I am saying. He is better than that. We did have some major issues with pressure from the left side of the line in the first half especially and the holding calls did us in. The holding calls will only get worst in Iowa City if the guy's are not on there P's and Q's. Iowa City the Big 10 crews really seem to get after the flags down there. I expect improvement out of #2 TMS, and the Wide receivers on Saturday in Iowa City, we need the coaches and the guy's up front to be part of the solution and beat Iowa. Like others have said all of there better options and opportunity of finishing on a high note are in front of these guy's yo end the season.
 

gopherdudepart2 said:
MBS, Micheal Brown-Stephans, and Daniel Jackson are not below Big 10 level Wide receivers, I think both are very talented dudes, and can run. Given the right routes and a chance to make a play and both of these guy's will make plays. The Quarterback was in his own head on Saturday against Illinois. He was fairly upset after the one interception which you have to let go of as a Big 10 QB. We couldn't get any traction in the running game because they were bringing a linebacker to the line of scrimmage and bringing a CB or Safety off the line to stop the run. At this point what does Tanner Morgan want his final three games to be as the Minnesota QB? It is up to him and life is exactly the way he thinks it is. This dude is plenty capable of rising to the occasion and being a good QB and leading this team. He has won us a lot of football games, but against Iowa and Wisconsin no so much. This is going to be where the rubber meets the road these last three games. To me they have to give him the freedom to call the adjustments at the line of scrimmage and react to what he is seeing, get the team moving and give him the 1-4 plays you have on the script and let him make the call on what to run. He has played enough football that they should trust Morgan to be able to do that at this point.
Click to expand...

That would be something. I’d love to see it. Have we ever heard if Morgan has any autonomy to change any aspect of the play?
 

Derek Burns was really good on the Gopher Gridiron Podcast per usual. Both Derek and Ryan (also Burns no relation) went through a number of examples of the Gophers running plays that just had little chance to work against what Illinois was doing. One play, Minnesota kept 8(!) in to protect and Illnois only rushed 3 and still got a sack...why? Nowhere to go with the ball when only 2 guys are out on routes and 8 guys are in coverage! They both admitted Tanner did not play well which is refreshing. I also loved that they called out the complete complete lack of physicality from the Gophers in the trenches on both sides of the ball. Derek mentioned that both are Oline and Dline were losing the battle up front early. It did improve on defense as the game continued, but Derek (correctly IMHO) noted that Illinois also didn't need to score any more points and we struggled to get them off the field when we really needed to allowing them to drain clock. The offensive line stayed a problem the entire game and Ryan Burns suggested that Minnesota loses the last 3 if they get this type of performance from the Oline again.
 

EG#9 said:
Derek Burns was really good on the Gopher Gridiron Podcast per usual. Both Derek and Ryan (also Burns no relation) went through a number of examples of the Gophers running plays that just had little chance to work against what Illinois was doing. One play, Minnesota kept 8(!) in to protect and Illnois only rushed 3 and still got a sack...why? Nowhere to go with the ball when only 2 guys are out on routes and 8 guys are in coverage! They both admitted Tanner did not play well which is refreshing. I also loved that they called out the complete complete lack of physicality from the Gophers in the trenches on both sides of the ball. Derek mentioned that both are Oline and Dline were losing the battle up front early. It did improve on defense as the game continued, but Derek (correctly IMHO) noted that Illinois also didn't need to score any more points and we struggled to get them off the field when we really needed to allowing them to drain clock. The offensive line stayed a problem the entire game and Ryan Burns suggested that Minnesota loses the last 3 if they get this type of performance from the Oline again.
Click to expand...
They are related (2nd cousins) or so he says on every, single introduction.
 

EG#9 said:
Derek Burns was really good on the Gopher Gridiron Podcast per usual. Both Derek and Ryan (also Burns no relation) went through a number of examples of the Gophers running plays that just had little chance to work against what Illinois was doing. One play, Minnesota kept 8(!) in to protect and Illnois only rushed 3 and still got a sack...why? Nowhere to go with the ball when only 2 guys are out on routes and 8 guys are in coverage! They both admitted Tanner did not play well which is refreshing. I also loved that they called out the complete complete lack of physicality from the Gophers in the trenches on both sides of the ball. Derek mentioned that both are Oline and Dline were losing the battle up front early. It did improve on defense as the game continued, but Derek (correctly IMHO) noted that Illinois also didn't need to score any more points and we struggled to get them off the field when we really needed to allowing them to drain clock. The offensive line stayed a problem the entire game and Ryan Burns suggested that Minnesota loses the last 3 if they get this type of performance from the Oline again.
Click to expand...
What I don’t get is why, if we are in Max protect, with 7 or 8 blockers, and the defense rushes only 3, the QB doesn’t simply hand off to the RB for a “draw” play. There should be several running gaps wide open and the unused blockers at OL might be able to make some second level blocks.

If Illinois has 8 hats on our 2 or 3 receivers, waiting and waiting to throw is pointless. If simultaneously, the Gophers have 7 or 8 hats on 3 Illinois DL, a RB with vision should, on a draw play, dance past the LOS for at least a 3 or 4 yard gain (more if our unengaged OL can step out and meet a LB).

The Gopher offense seems very brittle; it seems unable to make adjustments in real time, post-snap. Might be related to the fact that the coaches (on many teams besides the Gophers) apparently refuse to let the QB and maybe the RB and WRs make “read and react” judgments after the snap. Or maybe it is just too difficult to coach these moves at the amateur level?
 

Apologies for not reading this whole thread. That said, I see some commentary on WR play and I thought I'd chime in.

(1) Wright has - by far - the highest ceiling of any of the receivers.

(2) CrAB has - far and away - elevated his floor towards his ceiling to an extent that the other WR's have not. CrAB also has a trait that the others have not shown and probably do not possess. He is the best contested-ball receiver I've seen on a Gopher squad ever. If he's healthy, he's a reliable "stud" although not because he's particularly fast or a game-breaker. It's because he reliably runs his routes and catches the ball even when coverage is tight. The man moves chains.

(3) MBS and DJ show certain traits (speed and adequate hands, for example) that lead me to believe they could be above-average receivers. Game-breakers? I haven't seen that yet. That doesn't mean "TDV says they'll never be game-breakers." It means the jury's out. They need to run precise routes every time, and either RELIABLY create separation (even when - one day - they are the subject of secondary preoccupation), or develop into CrAB-level contested-ball receivers. I think each has a better chance of developing into the former rather than the latter.

(4) Wright has the best chance to be the next game-breaker. I know nothing of his character or habits. If those are lined up properly, he'll be breaking games wide open. He's faster, taller, more fluid, and has a larger catch-radius (longer arms) than either MBS or DJ. But he also needs to develop precise route running, and get more physical. Do those two things and he's a first-round pick.
 

Gophergrandpa said:
What I don’t get is why, if we are in Max protect, with 7 or 8 blockers, and the defense rushes only 3, the QB doesn’t simply hand off to the RB for a “draw” play. There should be several running gaps wide open and the unused blockers at OL might be able to make some second level blocks.

If Illinois has 8 hats on our 2 or 3 receivers, waiting and waiting to throw is pointless. If simultaneously, the Gophers have 7 or 8 hats on 3 Illinois DL, a RB with vision should, on a draw play, dance past the LOS for at least a 3 or 4 yard gain (more if our unengaged OL can step out and meet a LB).

The Gopher offense seems very brittle; it seems unable to make adjustments in real time, post-snap. Might be related to the fact that the coaches (on many teams besides the Gophers) apparently refuse to let the QB and maybe the RB and WRs make “read and react” judgments after the snap. Or maybe it is just too difficult to coach these moves at the amateur level?
Click to expand...
The key words “might be able to make some second level blocks”. I’m not convinced that our line has the ability/instinct/or willingness to make that effort. Nor do I believe that they are coached to make that happen.
 

I don't know of any level that can snap the ball and then based on the defense rushing only three, change the play while it is going on from a pass to a draw play. It might be possible to throw a pass to the running back slipping out into the flat or over the middle but then everyone would be screaming why are we throwing the ball short of the first down and we'd look like the Vikings offense. :)
Along with that, in those situations where Illinois rushed three it was on 2 or 3rd and long. Running a draw would almost certainly not get a first down.
Pete S, you really think our OL doesn't have a willingness to block? They've looked plenty willing every time I have watched them this year and their instinct/ability has been quite good. Yes, they had some breakdowns vs. Illinois and didn't do as good of a job at blocking that they had been, but that happens sometimes. The play calls had more to do with our ineptness in that game than the OL ability or instinct and they were willing blockers all game just not as effective as prior games.
 
Last edited:

All comes down to play calling and the players being comfortable within the system. Against Northwestern I said I was disappointed we didn't try and work in our passing game more and some posters ( @MNVCGUY ) thought the idea was ludicrous.

The Illinois game is why. If all you do is run 80% of the time it is hard to flip the switch and do something you are not used to doing.
 

gopheraschells said:
All comes down to play calling and the players being comfortable within the system. Against Northwestern I said I was disappointed we didn't try and work in our passing game more and some posters ( @MNVCGUY ) thought the idea was ludicrous.

The Illinois game is why. If all you do is run 80% of the time it is hard to flip the switch and do something you are not used to doing.
Click to expand...
You get it, this is the drum I've been banging. That NW game was actually unnecessarily detrimental.
 

gopheraschells said:
All comes down to play calling and the players being comfortable within the system. Against Northwestern I said I was disappointed we didn't try and work in our passing game more and some posters ( @MNVCGUY ) thought the idea was ludicrous.

The Illinois game is why. If all you do is run 80% of the time it is hard to flip the switch and do something you are not used to doing.
Click to expand...
Since you called me out specifically - do you really think throwing a few more passes in the Northwestern game would have had a massive impact on what happened against Illinois?

Game was 20-7 at the end of 3 which is hardly out of reach. So you want to take some extra risk by putting the ball in the air when the running game is dominating? Yep, makes total sense to me.
 

GophersInIowa said:
The offense itself isn’t the problem. The inability to make adjustments of any kind is a huge issue.
Click to expand...
I haven't been watching wall-to-wall this season, but if you're facing +1 in the box (before you add in the blitzing which complicates matters even more), you have to counterpunch that somehow. We don't have the Bateman/Johnson tandem and that really changes things on the outside so the staff really needs to put on its thinking cap.
 

50PoundHead said:
I haven't been watching wall-to-wall this season, but if you're facing +1 in the box (before you add in the blitzing which complicates matters even more), you have to counterpunch that somehow. We don't have the Bateman/Johnson tandem and that really changes things on the outside so the staff really needs to put on its thinking cap.
Click to expand...
Part of why the team was so good in 2019 was against bad matchups Morgan could underthrow a ball and one of those two could make a play anyways.
Part of it in 2019 was when we ran 2 man routes we would be good in the box because either one of them would be 1 on 1 and win at a 90% clip or they’d both be doubled leaving just 7 in the box for the 7 blockers.

the one team that tried to actually single everything Morgan had a historic big ten day against Purdue.

this year, they can play us 9 on 8 (because our QB doesn’t run and they are singling the two on the outside). Im honestly surprised we have won as much as we have and have ran as well as we have.

In games when Autman bell has at least two catches the team is 4-0 with wins against teams with winning records like Purdue and Maryland.
In games when he doesn’t the team is 2-3 with wins against northwestern and Miami of Ohio
 

Some guy said:
Part of why the team was so good in 2019 was against bad matchups Morgan could underthrow a ball and one of those two could make a play anyways.
Part of it in 2019 was when we ran 2 man routes we would be good in the box because either one of them would be 1 on 1 and win at a 90% clip or they’d both be doubled leaving just 7 in the box for the 7 blockers.

the one team that tried to actually single everything Morgan had a historic big ten day against Purdue.

this year, they can play us 9 on 8 (because our QB doesn’t run and they are singling the two on the outside). Im honestly surprised we have won as much as we have and have ran as well as we have.

In games when Autman bell has at least two catches the team is 4-0 with wins against teams with winning records like Purdue and Maryland.
In games when he doesn’t the team is 2-3 with wins against northwestern and Miami of Ohio
Click to expand...
I agree with every single thing you've said in this post.

This is why, in another thread, I've said that rare WR talent that is concentrated in 2 receivers is better than 4+ above-average-to-good WR's, even though the 4+ bring to the field - together - more aggregate receiving capability. It's about 2 WR's with rare talent each forcing doubles, or punishing a defense to the tune of 150+ yard RELIABLY if the defense is stubborn and doesn't double one of them. Do that, and you can have passing success with the sort of QB that is findable.
 

touchdownvikings said:
Apologies for not reading this whole thread. That said, I see some commentary on WR play and I thought I'd chime in.

(1) Wright has - by far - the highest ceiling of any of the receivers.

(2) CrAB has - far and away - elevated his floor towards his ceiling to an extent that the other WR's have not. CrAB also has a trait that the others have not shown and probably do not possess. He is the best contested-ball receiver I've seen on a Gopher squad ever. If he's healthy, he's a reliable "stud" although not because he's particularly fast or a game-breaker. It's because he reliably runs his routes and catches the ball even when coverage is tight. The man moves chains.

(3) MBS and DJ show certain traits (speed and adequate hands, for example) that lead me to believe they could be above-average receivers. Game-breakers? I haven't seen that yet. That doesn't mean "TDV says they'll never be game-breakers." It means the jury's out. They need to run precise routes every time, and either RELIABLY create separation (even when - one day - they are the subject of secondary preoccupation), or develop into CrAB-level contested-ball receivers. I think each has a better chance of developing into the former rather than the latter.

(4) Wright has the best chance to be the next game-breaker. I know nothing of his character or habits. If those are lined up properly, he'll be breaking games wide open. He's faster, taller, more fluid, and has a larger catch-radius (longer arms) than either MBS or DJ. But he also needs to develop precise route running, and get more physical. Do those two things and he's a first-round pick.
Click to expand...

Which makes me wonder why Wright wasn't on the field more this past Saturday.
 

stocker08 said:
Which makes me wonder why Wright wasn't on the field more this past Saturday.
Click to expand...

Other than the absence due to the death in the family I have been wondering the same thing about Wright for some time. Why are the staff not dialing up the deep balls that went to TJ and Bateman in 2019 for Dylan Wright?
 

"Live by the run, die by the run"

- somewhere in the Bible
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom