Replace Greg Harbaugh Jr. With?

Donate To GopherHole

GopherGrit said:
So here's my thing...

I think (at least in major P4 staffs) we need dedicated OC and DC. Just like in the NFL. They should not also be coaching a position group.


I think our safety play this year has suffered because now Collins is also the DC and can't focus his full attention on safeties.

I'd put Collins back coaching safeties and hire a dedicated DC.
Click to expand...
Assign Collins back to assistant and hire Rossi back as DC when Michigan State fires their staff.
 



Panthadad2 said:
RG3 (wrongly) pointed out how receivers/TEs were open but Lindsey wasn't patient enough to let the play develop. Problem is, it's impossible to be patient when the right tackle barely even touches the DE. It's been a big problem all year.
Click to expand...
I strongly agree. Right tackle has been very bad all year. What is scarier is they have choose not to replace him. What does that say about the talent level behind him. Oh my god we are in trouble!
 


Gophergrandpa said:
Iowa set a simple goal a few years back: on average, score a minimum of at least 25 points per game. This year Iowa is scoring at 27.5 points per game in the B1G. The Gophers are scoring a pace of only 18 points per game in the B1G this year. It is a near miracle that the team's record in the B1G is 4-3. The Gophers should set a goal of 28 points per game on average in 2026 (essentially what opponents are scoring on the Gophers this year). Simple. Aim realistically high. All recruiting, player development and offensive, defensive and special teams schemes should should be judged by how they contribute to (or negatively affect) that goal. Simple.

The Gophers could also set a minimum point differential goal: in 2026, outscore opponents, on average, by at least 7 points per game. This year the Gophers have been outscored by opponents 199 to 124, producing a negative average point spread of 10.8 points per game. And the season feels like it. Reverse it. Set a team goal of a positive point spread, on average, of at least 7 points per game. Again, measure recruiting, player development, and all schemes, including special teams, against that goal.

If you don't set a couple of goals that are easy to articulate and measure, you can become complacent and accept lower performance as OK and “on task.” Goals force you to coach to complementary play by the O, the D and STs, not just throw the term around in banter. The goals I've set forth above aren't outrageous for a P5 team with a mid-level NIL and revenue sharing base.
Click to expand...
They already have team offensive goals, d goals, team goals its not that simple. To me its ovious we have a talent issue this year.
 

Gopher Mac said:
I strongly agree. Right tackle has been very bad all year. What is scarier is they have choose not to replace him. What does that say about the talent level behind him. Oh my god we are in trouble!
Click to expand...
Things change pretty quickly year to year in today’s ncaa football.
 

BigGopher69 said:
They already have team offensive goals, d goals, team goals its not that simple. To me its ovious we have a talent issue this year.
Click to expand...
I know it sounds naive, but I am suggesting a couple of uber-goals, against which all the subsidiary goals related to scheme, personnel, etc. are measured. It's like a company setting a revenue goal of $10M per year. There will be a plethora of subsidiary goals and strategies and tactics, but are those judged individually, in a vacuum, or against the company's uber-goal of revenue production? All football teams have a mix of goals, strategies and tactics that, as they become more numerous, can tend to become disparate and disassociated from one another. Individual goals are great, but might not lead to complementary ball. Too many goals, difficult to integrate, might even excuse the head coach from making tough decisions about coaches, personnel and scheme.

An uber-goal or two can serve as a logic check for the team. If you set a goal of 28 points per game on average, do you judge your offensive game plans differently? Does running 55-60 plays at 3.5-4.0 yards per play serve the goal of 28 points? Do you encourage the QB to make more throws downfield if your yards per play are consistently insufficient to meet the 28 point goal? Apart from points, is the offense moving the ball well enough in its own territory to help win the field position battle in a game with punts back and forth? Does the defense produce good individual stats yet allow far too many explosive plays? Do special teams, as coached, contribute to the 28 point goal or detract? Again, it might well be naive of me, as I didn't play college ball--but I have led organizations and firmly believe that a couple of uber-goals act as a logic check not only on the employees (players) but on the "managers" themselves: the coaches, including the HC.
 
Last edited:

Some guy said:
Problem is we don’t have the guys necessary to run this scheme….IMO

TEs are okay wideouts but not good wideouts.
OL isn’t good enough to run against heavy boxes.
TEs create heavy boxes.

Need to get better at TE receiving/route running and OL to be successful in this offense

TEs too slow to get separation but their presence brings extra defenders into the box and OL can’t get it done.
Just a bad mix against the good teams.

TEs good enough to be good wideouts vs the bad teams. And OL doesn’t show as bad against the bad teams.
I should rewatch Nebraska and figure out why it actually worked against them.
Click to expand...
This is why Voss and getting Petersohn would help. We have to get better at WR/TE. I agreed OL is an issue as well.

Losing OL, who are starting at other P4 schools did not help the competition and depth of the OL

A healthy #1 helps also.

Defense is another story.
 



swelna said:
Apart from the run game being non-existent (which I blame on the OL more than anything) the thing the bothers me the most this season is how many times we throw behind or at the line of scrimmage and either get immediately stood up or only 1-2 yards. It feels like any time we have a player roll out that way opposing defenses always bite on it because we haven't been able to make them pay for it.

I'm not sure if Drake is going to the check down too early, if he's missing down field reads, if the TE and WR are giving him nothing so he's forced to throw it, or if the OC is just continually calling plays where this is the first or second read and it's just not working.
Click to expand...
Need more north-south; too much east-west.
 

Tim from Rosemount said:
Now 11-0. Hire Pease. Won today 63-17
Click to expand...
Nothing against Pease, but Montana, coached by Bobby Hauck, won 63 17 and is 11-0. Montana State, Pease’s team, only put up 38 yesterday and has two losses. One was a 59 13 loss to Oregon. So his offense did manage to put up as many points as Harbaughs. By that metric alone he did more vs Oregon than did Harbaugh, and he did it with less. Hell you convinced me, hire Pease!
 

MaxyJR1 said:
This is why Voss and getting Petersohn would help. We have to get better at WR/TE. I agreed OL is an issue as well.

Losing OL, who are starting at other P4 schools did not help the competition and depth of the OL

A healthy #1 helps also.

Defense is another story.
Click to expand...
i Assume if fleck brings him back it’s because he thinks that given the issues the OC did a good job.
And if he doesn’t bring him back I assume it’s because he blames OC for some of the issues

And that decision should really be flecks. If it isn’t flecks decision, it’s time for a new HC. W
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom