Adrian Martinez out on Friday

TheNorthernAmir

New member
Joined
Nov 16, 2021
Messages
11
Reaction score
13
Points
3
Every time I watch Martinez play he makes some remarkable play then throws like 2 picks that completely give away the game
 

Face The Facts

Fleck Superfan
Joined
Feb 26, 2013
Messages
9,545
Reaction score
2,195
Points
113
I'm not a betting man, but if I were, I'd put down about $200-300 on Iowa on the money line. I'd gladly pay $200 as a hedge for the Gophers game to be for the West title.
 

Replacement Gopher

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 29, 2009
Messages
2,074
Reaction score
749
Points
113
You might want to look at the Maryland/Minnesota game before looking foolish in regards to who was injured before the game.

Every team gets lucky at some point with key injuries to an opponent.
We are saying the same thing.
I saying luck was on our side against Iowa.
 

Some Day...Maybe

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 17, 2010
Messages
2,331
Reaction score
740
Points
113
Bad news for the Gophers, though beating the Badgers and going 8-4, plus a bowl game would be a good-looking season. Smothers, the Nebraska back-up, is bigger (more muscular) than Martinez, is faster than Martinez, but can't throw the long ball. So some designed QB runs, shorter pass routes, probably; but Martinez is such a presence, so talented and such a captain and field general, that the bookies are right. Iowa should win.
You never know. I think Martinez has been overrated the last 2 years. Maybe the back up makes better decisions and shows better leadership during the game and gets the guys to play better.
 

Replacement Gopher

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 29, 2009
Messages
2,074
Reaction score
749
Points
113
Good lord this is such a tired narrative.

The only time we "played" for a field goal was right before the half in order to go into the locker room up 3. The rest of the drives we weren't trying to get field goals it just worked out that way. Just because you call a running play it doesn't mean you are trying to play for a field goal. Not sure if this concept is just too difficult for some to grasp or if they are just so desperate to find something to complain about that this conservative idea is what they are going with.

The goal in every drive (when it is realistic) is to get points, preferably a TD but at least a FG depending on how things play out. You run the plays you think will make that possible. Just because we aren't chucking the ball on every play doesn't mean we aren't trying to get in the Endzone.
Well, we will just have to agree to disagree. I felt like making the decision to kick a field goal from the 2 yard line was playing for a field goal. That would make two times. You already noted the other.

Not sure why it is just too difficult for some to grasp or if they are just so desperate to argue about something [we didn’t play for field goals!!! We only did that once!!!!]
 


MNVCGUY

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
11,692
Reaction score
5,848
Points
113
Well, we will just have to agree to disagree. I felt like making the decision to kick a field goal from the 2 yard line was playing for a field goal. That would make two times. You already noted the other.

Not sure why it is just too difficult for some to grasp or if they are just so desperate to argue about something [we didn’t play for field goals!!! We only did that once!!!!]
Kicking a field goal on 4th down is not playing for a field goal, it is ensuring a drive ends in points. Playing for a field goal means you call plays specifically with the idea of ending the drive in a field goal as opposed to trying to score a TD.
 

Replacement Gopher

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 29, 2009
Messages
2,074
Reaction score
749
Points
113
Kicking a field goal on 4th down is not playing for a field goal, it is ensuring a drive ends in points. Playing for a field goal means you call plays specifically with the idea of ending the drive in a field goal as opposed to trying to score a TD.
So you’ve said we played for a FG once. The other time, didn’t meet your definition of playing for a FG. Got it.

You didn’t have a different username at one point did you?
 

Nax5

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 24, 2012
Messages
2,000
Reaction score
1,334
Points
113
It really stinks this game is a full 24 hours before ours. I hope the players don't latch onto the results of that one and let it affect the effort against WI.
 

MNVCGUY

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
11,692
Reaction score
5,848
Points
113
So you’ve said we played for a FG once. The other time, didn’t meet your definition of playing for a FG. Got it.

You didn’t have a different username at one point did you?
Not sure what is difficult here. We played for a field goal before halftime. The other drives we failed to get a TD and had to settle for a field goal in order to get points.

I find it hard to believe there is a team anywhere at any level of football that plays a normal drive (not end of half, end of game, OT) with the intent of getting a field goal. They kick a field goal when the drive fails to produce a TD for one reason or another but when the drive starts the goal is to score a TD.

I don't feel like this is a confusing concept.

Edit: Pretty sure this is the only username I have ever had on this site so not sure what you are getting at with that question but I am not some other former poster in disguise if that is what you meant.
 



Replacement Gopher

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 29, 2009
Messages
2,074
Reaction score
749
Points
113
Not sure what is difficult here. We played for a field goal before halftime. The other drives we failed to get a TD and had to settle for a field goal in order to get points.

I find it hard to believe there is a team anywhere at any level of football that plays a normal drive (not end of half, end of game, OT) with the intent of getting a field goal. They kick a field goal when the drive fails to produce a TD for one reason or another but when the drive starts the goal is to score a TD.

I don't feel like this is a confusing concept.

Edit: Pretty sure this is the only username I have ever had on this site so not sure what you are getting at with that question but I am not some other former poster in disguise if that is what you meant.
Holy smokes.

Me: “We played for field goals.”
You: “We played for a field goal before halftime.”

Seems like we are saying the same thing, but here you are arguing and pontificating.

I was wondering if you were previously Dpodoll. To me, he also went out of his way to find things to argue about.
 

Replacement Gopher

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 29, 2009
Messages
2,074
Reaction score
749
Points
113
It really stinks this game is a full 24 hours before ours. I hope the players don't latch onto the results of that one and let it affect the effort against WI.
This is a good point.
Despite what say and want, impossible to think an Iowa victory would have no impact on the teams psyche.
 

PMWinSTP

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 11, 2015
Messages
11,401
Reaction score
1,865
Points
113
Well, we will just have to agree to disagree. I felt like making the decision to kick a field goal from the 2 yard line was playing for a field goal. That would make two times. You already noted the other.

Not sure why it is just too difficult for some to grasp or if they are just so desperate to argue about something [we didn’t play for field goals!!! We only did that once!!!!]
You could add the ill-fated long attempt lead to an IA TD...
 

GopherWeatherGuy

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
10,152
Reaction score
4,502
Points
113
It really stinks this game is a full 24 hours before ours. I hope the players don't latch onto the results of that one and let it affect the effort against WI.

It's for the axe. The players will be up for it regardless if it's for the division or not. Even if the Gophers can't go to Indy, I'm sure they'd love to prevent Wisconsin from winning the division and taking the axe.
 



MNVCGUY

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
11,692
Reaction score
5,848
Points
113
Holy smokes.

Me: “We played for field goals.”
You: “We played for a field goal before halftime.”

Seems like we are saying the same thing, but here you are arguing and pontificating.

I was wondering if you were previously Dpodoll. To me, he also went out of his way to find things to argue about.
DPO is still around but doesn't post on here much anymore as far as I can tell. I am starting to understand why. This place (like most places that allow discussion on the internet anymore) has gotten pretty toxic.
 

Dakota2

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 9, 2020
Messages
647
Reaction score
447
Points
63
Not sure what is difficult here. We played for a field goal before halftime. The other drives we failed to get a TD and had to settle for a field goal in order to get points.

I find it hard to believe there is a team anywhere at any level of football that plays a normal drive (not end of half, end of game, OT) with the intent of getting a field goal. They kick a field goal when the drive fails to produce a TD for one reason or another but when the drive starts the goal is to score a TD.

I don't feel like this is a confusing concept.

Edit: Pretty sure this is the only username I have ever had on this site so not sure what you are getting at with that question but I am not some other former poster in disguise if that is what you meant.
He obviously did not play for the first field goal. Took the points on 4th and two. The question should be about why they didn't run four times with first and goal from the four.

Should score but if not you give them the ball next to the goal line and play defense. Calling the pass resulted in a bad play by Morgan and wasted a down.
 

Replacement Gopher

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 29, 2009
Messages
2,074
Reaction score
749
Points
113
DPO is still around but doesn't post on here much anymore as far as I can tell. I am starting to understand why. This place (like most places that allow discussion on the internet anymore) has gotten pretty toxic.
Toxic?
Read through this.
I’m sorry, but you are the one putting words in people’s mouths and then claiming they are idiots. Just looking for arguments.

Simma down now.
 

Xerxes_

Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2021
Messages
41
Reaction score
41
Points
18
This is brutal. It would be nice if luck in sports was evenly distributed. If Penn State's QB doesn't get hurt, the Iowa at Nebraska game wouldn't matter. Now Iowa potentially wins a second game due to playing a backup QB. That's 22.2% of their conference games and the difference between 7-2 and 5-4.

Of course if Minnesota just won the game in Iowa City like they should have, Iowa's luck wouldn't matter. It also wouldn't matter for purposes of the West Division if Minnesota simply beat Illinois as 14.5 point favorites. I went back after that game and tried to find the last time Minnesota won a game when they were underdogs of 14 or more points. I had no luck. The closest I could find was the win at Michigan under Jerry Kill which was in 2014 and was like a 12 point spread.

So good luck for Iowa, bad luck for Minnesota, but Minnesota also put themselves in a position for the luck to play a major role. I definitely don't want to lose to Wisconsin again, but I also don't want to see Iowa get a 2nd West Title before we even have one. Going to be a pretty gross weekend.

Kinda sounds like the Gophers in 2019 when they kept playing B1G teams with their backup QB in the game.
 

upnorthkid

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 23, 2011
Messages
6,354
Reaction score
1,449
Points
113
Line has swung all the way back to in favor of Nebraska again
 




MGGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
4,773
Reaction score
1,469
Points
113
Line has swung all the way back to in favor of Nebraska again
Yeah I saw that yesterday and couldn't believe it. Crazy Nebraska fans or general looks faith in Iowa? No idea. But weird for sure. I don't think there's any chance Nebraska wins this game now.
 

Stan The Caddy

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 19, 2010
Messages
1,711
Reaction score
55
Points
48
Yeah I saw that yesterday and couldn't believe it. Crazy Nebraska fans or general looks faith in Iowa? No idea. But weird for sure. I don't think there's any chance Nebraska wins this game now.
72% of the tickets and 58% of the money is on Iowa.

This line was, and always has been, a commentary on what Vegas thinks of Iowa. I mean…a 1-7 team favored over a 6-2 team looking to clinch their division? That reeks.
 

fmlizard

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 19, 2012
Messages
3,667
Reaction score
2,453
Points
113
It really stinks this game is a full 24 hours before ours. I hope the players don't latch onto the results of that one and let it affect the effort against WI.

I doubt our guys need the West title to get hyped for the Axe game at home on senior day on national TV.
 

fmlizard

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 19, 2012
Messages
3,667
Reaction score
2,453
Points
113
72% of the tickets and 58% of the money is on Iowa.

This line was, and always has been, a commentary on what Vegas thinks of Iowa. I mean…a 1-7 team favored over a 6-2 team looking to clinch their division? That reeks.

"Vegas" is mostly an algorithm these days and that algorithm thinks Iowa lost handily to Minnesota at home 2 weeks ago.
 

upnorthkid

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 23, 2011
Messages
6,354
Reaction score
1,449
Points
113
Yeah I saw that yesterday and couldn't believe it. Crazy Nebraska fans or general looks faith in Iowa? No idea. But weird for sure. I don't think there's any chance Nebraska wins this game now.
i'm tempted to lay good money on Iowa getting plus money, especially now that Martinez has had surgery and is for sure out
 


upnorthkid

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 23, 2011
Messages
6,354
Reaction score
1,449
Points
113
I think Nebraska wins it.
can i ask based on what?

Iowa has the better defense (Nebraska is pretty banged up still on D with some of their big guys) and ST (Nebraska kicker is rough). Nebraska better offense when Martinez was playing. New QB is a total wild card so can't really give them the edge plus Iowa feasts on turnovers, which he may be prone to. Ferentz is a better coach than Frost. It just is baffling me a little to see the Nebraska love
 

MNVCGUY

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
11,692
Reaction score
5,848
Points
113
can i ask based on what?

Iowa has the better defense (Nebraska is pretty banged up still on D with some of their big guys) and ST (Nebraska kicker is rough). Nebraska better offense when Martinez was playing. New QB is a total wild card so can't really give them the edge plus Iowa feasts on turnovers, which he may be prone to. Ferentz is a better coach than Frost. It just is baffling me a little to see the Nebraska love
I don't know if Nebraska will win but they just got done giving Wisconsin all they could handle and they have played basically everyone including Ohio State tight and the game is in Lincoln. Won't surprise me one bit if Iowa wins the game but also won't be shocked at all if Nebraska is able to make a battle of it and if they get a few breaks for a change could come out on top.
 

MGGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
4,773
Reaction score
1,469
Points
113
i'm tempted to lay good money on Iowa getting plus money, especially now that Martinez has had surgery and is for sure out
Before the Martinez news I put a little on Nebraska as part of a parlay that would've given Minnesota the division. I just put double that amount on Iowa on the M/L.
 




Top Bottom