2019 is currently our toughest schedule in 6 years

Donate To GopherHole
Gophers_4life said:
Our offense was explosive, because we had Brooks back for that game. As soon as he tore his knee, it was like our offense lost its soul.

And once our offense couldn't do anything suddenly, our defense couldn't stop a wet paper towel from scoring. We probably should not have won that game, in hindsight. Maybe Fleck would've fired Robb Smith a week earlier, and then we could've beaten Illinois instead.

Hindsight is 20-20.
Click to expand...

Didn't Brooks fumble the ball multiple times?
 



Gophers_4life said:
How can it not be, if you're predicting that 2020 is a step-back?? It logically has to be. No way around that.


Your only escape now is to come out that you want 2019 to be the start of a string of success. But if 2020 is going to be a success, then I have you. Because I can say that we can just wait for 2020. So I don't see a way for you to win here.
Click to expand...

Hey LB, how would someone thinking ‘19 is set up for success better than ‘20 possibly dictate they would <b>prefer </b>one good year now over a string of good years starting next year? You understand what a preference is about as well as you understand what an expectation is.

This conversation is gibberish. I’m done.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Spoofin said:
Hey LB, how would someone thinking ‘19 is set up for success better than ‘20 possibly dictate they would <b>prefer </b>one good year now over a string of good years starting next year? You understand what a preference is about as well as you understand what an expectation is.

This conversation is gibberish. I’m done.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

No you're not. You can't help yourself.
 


Gophers_4life said:
That’s trivially true, when you define the two in a row as 2019 + 20.

The point was a flash in the pan in 2019 vs long term success 2020 and onward. In the hypothetical where you can only have one, any true fan picks the latter.

And yet the PMW, Spoofin, PE cadre are trying to sell as hard as they can that we're going to take a step backwards next year.
Click to expand...

None of us have posted that...we have posted the schedule is less favorable on paper than this year due to the crossovers of Mich/MSU and five B1G games on the road.
 

PMWinSTP said:
None of us have posted that...we have posted the schedule is less favorable on paper than this year due to the crossovers of Mich/MSU and five B1G games on the road.
Click to expand...

Post #58, which started off this string of discussion.
 

Spoofin said:
how would someone thinking ‘19 is set up for success better than ‘20 possibly dictate they would <b>prefer </b>one good year now over a string of good years starting next year?
Click to expand...

Red herring - no one, including me, ever said prefer.

I said choose. You can choose something even if you don’t actually prefer it. However, I do think that true fans would choose having sustained success starting in 20, over a flash in the pan 19, if that was the choice.
 

I'm not sure what the argument is.

Next year's schedule looks to be tougher. Michigan and Michigan St instead of Rutgers and Penn St.
Also another road game.

The team should be better though. A lot of guys will be in their junior year, and maybe the last year with Faalele.

Team might be better. Tougher schedule. Result?
 



Face The Facts said:
Team might be better. Tougher schedule. Result?
Click to expand...

If history and Fleck’s method works here the same as it does at WMU, then year four (2020) will be a breakout year while year three (2019) will be similar or a moderate improvement to year two.
 



Gophers_4life said:
If history and Fleck’s method works here the same as it does at WMU, then year four (2020) will be a breakout year while year three (2019) will be similar or a moderate improvement to year two.
Click to expand...

His methods aren’t working the same here as they did at WMU


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 



Gophers_4life said:
No one, myself include, disputes that we have a talented roster, we have a slightly better schedule than the previous three seasons, and that the West is wide open.

Why have you arbitrarily defined "making a move" as 9+ wins ??? That's the illogical part.

I contend that 8-4 would be just as equally satisfying "making a move".
Click to expand...

8-4 will be 9-4 after the bowl win.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 


Spoofin said:
9*-4. Rutgers on schedule again.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

If we go 9-4 with a lot of close wins against the weak opponents, the narrative will be about how clutch we are and that allows us to pull out the close games. So even if we beat Rutgers on a last second field goal, we wont need to worry about * wins this year.(which is the way it should be)
 


Gophers_4life said:
Granted, the play that sealed the game was a freak play by Winfield. He was out of position ... but happened to be in the wrong place at the right time.
Click to expand...

You're not giving Winfield nearly enough credit. He bit on the fake, came forward, then recognized that it was a pass. He made an incredibly athletic and instinctive move to reverse field into position and intercept the ball when it appeared that he could barely even see it.

That's not remotely him being "in the wrong place at the right time."
 

Urbandale said:
You're not giving Winfield nearly enough credit. He bit on the fake, came forward, then recognized that it was a pass. He made an incredibly athletic and instinctive move to reverse field into position and intercept the ball when it appeared that he could barely even see it.

That's not remotely him being "in the wrong place at the right time."
Click to expand...

Doesn’t help his narrative.
You’re right, Winfield made an awesome play. Read run first and came up to stop it, realized it wasn’t a run, quickly changed direction and was able to make an incredible play on the ball for the game saving pick.
He was in the right place at precisely the right time.
His initial read was the only part of that play that wasn’t perfect, although had he read run and covered the receiver, I doubt the RB would have thrown it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Spoofin said:
9*-4. Rutgers on schedule again.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I believe Rutgers is a road game this year, so the * wouldn't apply.

Any Big Ten road win is a gutty performance. This has been proven for years.
 

Urbandale said:
You're not giving Winfield nearly enough credit. He bit on the fake, came forward, then recognized that it was a pass. He made an incredibly athletic and instinctive move to reverse field into position and intercept the ball when it appeared that he could barely even see it.

That's not remotely him being "in the wrong place at the right time."
Click to expand...

You’re not wrong at all.

By “wrong place” I meant that he was out of position according to what Robb Smith’s scheme dictated.

He made a tremendous play and deserves all the credit for it.
 

Face The Facts said:
I believe Rutgers is a road game this year, so the * wouldn't apply.

Any Big Ten road win is a gutty performance. This has been proven for years.
Click to expand...

I'm happy with any win. Whenever I'm frustrated/disappointed/annoyed with a season by a team I cheer for, its never the case that my problem with their performance was the games they won. I don't believe in * wins, but using your standards, is Illinois at home a candidate this year?
 

bleedsmaroonandgold said:
I'm happy with any win. Whenever I'm frustrated/disappointed/annoyed with a season by a team I cheer for, its never the case that my problem with their performance was the games they won. I don't believe in * wins, but using your standards, is Illinois at home a candidate this year?
Click to expand...

Yes.

If Illinois' average margin of loss is 35 points in Power 5 games this year, then they absolutely can be a *. (Rutgers average score was 7-42 in 2016).
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom