All Things Bowling Green at Minnesota Post-Game Thread

Donate To GopherHole
LakevilleBro said:
Our coaches consistently make Tanner Morgan look over to the sidelines, multiple times, as the play clock is winding down. Then they change the play, and Morgan has to frantically change the play at the line, and the ball is snapped, at the last second. This happens way too often. This is not putting Morgan in a position to succeed. This is what you do, when you have a very young QB, not a Senior QB.
Click to expand...
Yes, Morgan and his teammates all turning to the sideline together resemble Meerkats.
 

MRJ said:
Except those guys are soft as hell when push actually comes to shove. They haven't had any stones for years.
Click to expand...

That guy is a troll. He pulls that on other boards too and must be tired of people ignoring him or laughing at how pathetic his attempts at "woe is me" are.

He is literally a running joke on Gopher Puck Live and has been suspended for his antics.
 
Last edited:

LakevilleBro said:
I agree, other schools do this, but it is different. The other schools, decide on a play, much quicker, and do not put so much pressure on the QB, with a last second play call. The other schools also have more creative play-calling than we do.
As FredCoxRocks said above: "It takes a lot of time to decide to run up the 1-hole, or 2-hole".
Click to expand...

The play never really gets adjusted, except where the RB lines up and runs. I mean if you are gonna pull that crap maybe check to a pass play when you see they are in FG block formation and you have Potts running over the guard.

It may work for other teams, but our coaches use it all wrong. It is completely predictable and it never forces any adjustments from the defense. It is basically just killing clock hoping to bore them to death.
 

Why are we all so down after finishing as the first runner-up in the Bowling Green championship season? Coach forgot to tell his quarterback that the ball is the program, but that is an easy fix. Everything else should be solvable with a new uniform combination and another read through Everyone Poops.

This team seems to have bought its own hype coming off of Colorado. What really stuck out to me was that, from both a coaching and playing perspective, it felt like we were just going through the motions expecting everything to eventually work out the way it was supposed to because we were 30+ point favorites. Never picked up any real urgency from anyone to go win the game.

Leverage, roughing the punter, and lining up over the long snapper in the same game? It is tough to imagine a worse coached special teams unit.

This one has been talked to death, but shocked at the 4th and 1 decision and play call after giving them a timeout to get set. I generally like aggressive fourth down decisions, but hated that one at the time, It was fundamentally different than OSU, where you felt like we couldn't stop the bleeding early, and punting would just be delaying the inevitable so we should try to hang onto the ball and hope for the best. Against Bowling Green, we were up 3 and their offense couldn't move the ball, so I don't know why you don't trust the defense instead of risk giving an offense that couldn't create anything a short field and a chance for a cheap score.

Were we trying to kill clock while trailing in the fourth quarter around the 7 minute mark?

Only bright spot for me was the defense. On a crucial drive, they had two third down stops negated by fourth down special teams penalties before getting a third stop with a turnover that prevented the special teams from having another chance to screw it up. Then, after our offense milked in ordinate amount of clock before punting it away, they got the ball back in the offense's hands with a chance to win the game. The offense gave it right back on the next play, and the defense marched out their again and got a three and out to give us a chip a chair and a chance with 30 seconds to play and not horrible field position (which we again through away on the first play). Tough to get too excited about defense looking good against a team that bad, but you can only play the game that's in front of you, and defense gave us chance after chance after chance to win and cover up an otherwise bad performance.
 




bleedsmaroonandgold said:
Why are we all so down after finishing as the first runner-up in the Bowling Green championship season? Coach forgot to tell his quarterback that the ball is the program, but that is an easy fix. Everything else should be solvable with a new uniform combination and another read through Everyone Poops.

This team seems to have bought its own hype coming off of Colorado. What really stuck out to me was that, from both a coaching and playing perspective, it felt like we were just going through the motions expecting everything to eventually work out the way it was supposed to because we were 30+ point favorites. Never picked up any real urgency from anyone to go win the game.

Leverage, roughing the punter, and lining up over the long snapper in the same game? It is tough to imagine a worse coached special teams unit.

This one has been talked to death, but shocked at the 4th and 1 decision and play call after giving them a timeout to get set. I generally like aggressive fourth down decisions, but hated that one at the time, It was fundamentally different than OSU, where you felt like we couldn't stop the bleeding early, and punting would just be delaying the inevitable so we should try to hang onto the ball and hope for the best. Against Bowling Green, we were up 3 and their offense couldn't move the ball, so I don't know why you don't trust the defense instead of risk giving an offense that couldn't create anything a short field and a chance for a cheap score.

Were we trying to kill clock while trailing in the fourth quarter around the 7 minute mark?

Only bright spot for me was the defense. On a crucial drive, they had two third down stops negated by fourth down special teams penalties before getting a third stop with a turnover that prevented the special teams from having another chance to screw it up. Then, after our offense milked in ordinate amount of clock before punting it away, they got the ball back in the offense's hands with a chance to win the game. The offense gave it right back on the next play, and the defense marched out their again and got a three and out to give us a chip a chair and a chance with 30 seconds to play and not horrible field position (which we again through away on the first play). Tough to get too excited about defense looking good against a team that bad, but you can only play the game that's in front of you, and defense gave us chance after chance after chance to win and cover up an otherwise bad performance.
Click to expand...
You make a lot of great points. The only one I disagree with slightly is the idea that it is tough to get excited about the defensive performance. With the offense/special teams/coaches doing nothing to help them they went out and played their butts off and gave the team a chance to win.

Yes, Bowling Green is not a great offensive team but the D still had them under 100 yards of total offense late into the second half. And this is now back to back games where we have put a ton of pressure on the opposing QB after having a pass rush that was nowhere to be found in the first 2 games of the season. If the offense can figure their crap out they can pair with a defense that looks like it has a shot to top half of the conference.

I don't know what to make of the special teams miscues. Penalties like the ones we had are typically the type that Fleck coached teams have avoided in the past. Major props to the defense in surviving not 1 but 2 drive extending penalties on special teams and still coming up with a stop.
 

MNVCGUY said:
You make a lot of great points. The only one I disagree with slightly is the idea that it is tough to get excited about the defensive performance. With the offense/special teams/coaches doing nothing to help them they went out and played their butts off and gave the team a chance to win.

Yes, Bowling Green is not a great offensive team but the D still had them under 100 yards of total offense late into the second half. And this is now back to back games where we have put a ton of pressure on the opposing QB after having a pass rush that was nowhere to be found in the first 2 games of the season. If the offense can figure their crap out they can pair with a defense that looks like it has a shot to top half of the conference.

I don't know what to make of the special teams miscues. Penalties like the ones we had are typically the type that Fleck coached teams have avoided in the past. Major props to the defense in surviving not 1 but 2 drive extending penalties on special teams and still coming up with a stop.
Click to expand...
I agree with the bold and was probably a little inartful in my phrasing. The defense played very well and are the only reason we had a chance to win. There was nothing more they could have been expected to do for us. I was just trying to say that I think it is tough to draw conclusions about how well they will do in B1G play based on a dominant performance against Bowling Green's offense (though when considered in conjunction with how well they played on the road at Colorado, the case definitely gets stronger).
 

Roughing the punter and lining up over the center.

I can see that the RtP was just an honest mistake. Guy got pushed into him. You can argue he shouldn't have been anywhere near him, though. Perhaps. Maybe that's a thing they thought they didn't need to explicitly teach, that it's just common knowledge? Don't know. But I think Fleck said something like "you either gotta go for it [the block], or you gotta get away" in the post game. I'm certain they'll emphasize that in practice this week.

LoC ... ticky tack BS call, to me. Again, probably something they didn't think they actually had to teach. And possibly had been lining up like that all year so far, and just never got called? Don't know. Again, I'm certain they'll emphasize that in practice this week.


The major mistake was on the punt where Potts muffed it. They lined the poor guy wayyyy back. I'm not sure what the thinking was there. He was clearly hurting. Made him run alllll the way up to try to field it, and muffed a shoestring catch.


In hindsight, we should've lost that fumble and then BG should've run it out for the win, right there.

Would've saved Tanner a couple bad INTs that I'm sure he regrets throwing now.
 



goldengophers said:
Kubiak put on a masterclass that should be required watching for Fleck and Sanford today.
Click to expand...
Except we don't have the footspeed mobile players in oline, the finesse at QB to run effective screens. At least none the Gophers have shown so far. These plays are most effective against an aggressive front 7 that pins back and rushes and blitzes a lot. Hard to run screens when you run zone read all the time and defense is playing for the run with 8 or 9 in the box.
 
Last edited:

gopherdudepart2 said:
Except we don't have the footspeed in okine, the finesse at QB to run effective screens. At least none the Gophers have shown so far.
Click to expand...
Disagree. We might not want Faalele or Dunlap out front on the screens, but JMS is an outstanding athlete. I think Olson can get it done too. Not sure about Schlueter and Andries.

Not sure why you think Tanner can't hit a screen pass.
 

MplsGopher said:
Contrast with 2021:

This time, they took what is essentially the equivalent of the 2019 Penn St game, and stuck it as the first game of the year. Instead of pulling out the win, we lose, but lose I think respectably and competitively.

Next three (Miami OH, Colo, BG): this exactly like the first three from 2019. Instead of almost losing at Fresno, we go to Boulder and whip a team with a lot of problems. Losing to BG could've easily been like losing to Georgia Southern if that had happened.

Next five (Purdue, Neb, Mary, NW, Ill): three home games, two away at Purdon't and at NW. This should be similar to the second four from 2019. Seems like an idea setup of teams we "should" beat, given their situation. NW is earily similar to 2019, no QB. ILL down. Neb looks marginally better but still way down from their glory years. Not sure what will happen with Pur and Mary.

Final three (Iowa, IU, Wisc): we will see. IU looks down, but obviously going there won't be like going to Rutgers in 2019.
Click to expand...
The comparisons between this season and 2019 crossed my mind as well, thinking, geez...we could have easily lost any, or all, of the non-conference games with SDSU, Fresno, and GSU. But we didn't. We fought back and it turned into the best season any of us born after The Carol Burnett Show made its debut have ever seen. However, I have a really hard time seeing it this year. Because of one thing. Mike Sanford.
 

I am a Fleck supporter, but that was obviously an extremely bad game. The one word I would use to describe it is joyless. Football is a game and should be fun and it should look like fun. That was like a bad dental appointment; no one wants to see it or be there for it.

The fourth down attempt was unnecessary and a simple up-side, down-side analysis would have thwarted it in about one second (we were the favored team at home and had the lead...little up-side, tons of down-side).

Our offense is not nearly as dynamic as it was two years ago when the trajectory was looking off the charts...it is back on the charts and has a downward slope. Whatever changed, change it back.
 



benlaur said:
I am a Fleck supporter, but that was obviously an extremely bad game. The one word I would use to describe it is joyless. Football is a game and should be fun and it should look like fun. That was like a bad dental appointment; no one wants to see it or be there for it.

The fourth down attempt was unnecessary and a simple up-side, down-side analysis would have thwarted it in about one second (we were the favored team at home and had the lead...little up-side, tons of down-side).

Our offense is not nearly as dynamic as it was two years ago when the trajectory was looking off the charts...it is back on the charts and has a downward slope. Whatever changed, change it back.
Click to expand...
Fleck needs to break out his little improvement chart from a past press conference. Maybe he hung it up sideways and Sanford got confused.
 

Anyone watch Ted Lasso? Are the coaches watching the game film at 10x speed with the Benny Hill soundtrack? What an ugly game.
 

MplsGopher said:
Disagree. We might not want Faalele or Dunlap out front on the screens, but JMS is an outstanding athlete. I think Olson can get it done too. Not sure about Schlueter and Andries.

Not sure why you think Tanner can't hit a screen pass.
Click to expand...
I don't honestly know if Tanner can hit a screen or not, as I cannot recall the last time I saw him attempt one. Maybe a tunnel screen or backside pass but don't recall to many middle screens or set up screens to the running backs. You are right I cannot say if they can execute a screen or not without seeing them really attempt any. Seems like you need mis-direction or the ability to fool the defense on the screen, which with all of our zone read stuff and focus on the run, doesn't seem real likely to execute. Just an opinion on the lack of footspeed up front.
 

A thought - if you're going to go for it on 4th & 1, put the QB under center. Staying in the pistol means the RB is getting the ball 3-4 yards at least behind the line of scrimmage - giving the defense more time to shoot a gap and get into the backfield.

And putting the QB under center keeps the threat of a QB sneak alive, so the defense has to consider more than 1 option.

(and - if the Gophers did a fake and a dump to the TE over the middle, the play could have gone for 50 yards.....)
 

short ornery norwegian said:
A thought - if you're going to go for it on 4th & 1, put the QB under center. Staying in the pistol means the RB is getting the ball 3-4 yards at least behind the line of scrimmage - giving the defense more time to shoot a gap and get into the backfield.

And putting the QB under center keeps the threat of a QB sneak alive, so the defense has to consider more than 1 option.

(and - if the Gophers did a fake and a dump to the TE over the middle, the play could have gone for 50 yards.....)
Click to expand...
Yep.

Don't see too many 1-yard needed, 23 or 13 personnel, situations ... run out of shotgun.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom