Coach Jay Sawvel takes a nice little dig at Tom Dienhart on Twitter

Donate To GopherHole
BleedGopher

BleedGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 11, 2008
Messages
61,077
Reaction score
16,660
Points
113
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Go Gophers!!
 

"may be favored in just three [conference] games - tops" That statement doesn't even make sense. Maybe there's no way they could be favored in more than 3 games?
 

I'll say it again scUM is getting overrated at a record pace. They won't have the horses for two years
 

I am not sure a good coach can't turn them around in a hurry. From things I've seen around here they have had good recruiting classes. Just under performed.
 

meeeeegeeeeegan

MNSpaniel said:
I am not sure a good coach can't turn them around in a hurry. From things I've seen around here they have had good recruiting classes. Just under performed.
Click to expand...

They need a QB before anyone can give them a chance.
 



I don't remember but did Dienhart help us find Antonio Thompson. I thought he said that he was going to start for our 10th rated conference DBs this year. I know Sawvel was looking for him
 

Considering that Jay is the 220th best college football recruiter and our top recruiter, I'll give Tom a little leniency on this one.
 

Dean S said:
Considering that Jay is the 220th best college football recruiter and our top recruiter, I'll give Tom a little leniency on this one.
Click to expand...

Yeah, our secondary sucks. Can't believe the players he brings in. 220th best recruiter is spot on.
 



Dean S said:
Considering that Jay is the 220th best college football recruiter and our top recruiter, I'll give Tom a little leniency on this one.
Click to expand...

I'd love to see how this is figured out.

Either way, if you can't see that Sawvel is a very good coach, then you're not paying attention.
 



Dean S said:
Yeah. That is why our secondary stopped the Tigers. Get back to me when we win the bowl games.
Click to expand...

You mean the same secondary that gave up less than 100 yards passing and had two picks against the tigers?
 



Dean S said:
Yeah. That is why our secondary stopped the Tigers. Get back to me when we win the bowl games.
Click to expand...

You're right. Our secondary did do a great job against Missouri's passing game.

Also, not sure how us losing bowl games every year proves anything. Anyone who knows anything about football knows we have a good secondary. It is possible to have good players/position groups even when we've lost three bowl games in a row.
 

GophersInIowa said:
You're right. Our secondary did do a great job against Missouri's passing game.

Also, not sure how us losing bowl games every year proves anything. Anyone who knows anything about football knows we have a good secondary. It is possible to have good players/position groups even when we've lost three bowl games in a row.
Click to expand...

I know you're referencing only JK's tenure, but I feel it necessary to say that we've lost 7 in a row.
 

die hard gopher said:
You mean the same secondary that gave up less than 100 yards passing and had two picks against the tigers?
Click to expand...

Yes, that secondary. The one that played Matty Mauk, a notoriously bad/inconsistent passer, on one good leg.

They should have held them to almost nothing through the air. Any halfway decent power 5 defense should be able to hold a hobbled Matty Mauk, in a run-dominated offense, to almost nothing. That should be the case if he were healthy. He's not a good QB. I'd equate it to Wisconsin getting super pumped, and flaunting their secondary, after they held Leidner to under 100 yards this year.

Touting that as a victory, especially considering that their offense still scored 33 points and put up nearly 450 yards, is a stretch. They only threw the ball 19 times, but ran something like 65 plays. They didn't have to throw the ball, otherwise I'm sure the numbers would've looked differently.

Not saying the secondary didn't play a good game, or aren't a top tier unit. But, I'm not calling that game a moral victory for anyone of the Gophers defense. I'm guessing we'll see how good Murray and BBC really are against TCU to open 2015, when they throw the ball 50 times with a capable QB. They gave up something like 225 to Tommy Armstrong in less than 20 attempts, and 215 to Stave in under 20 attempts. They've definitely looked pahretty burnable at times against legitimate passing threats.
 

Michigan will be tough immediately - like Notre Dame the first year Holtz was there, but Holtz still went only 5-6 (third year, 12-0). Don't be surprised if the Blue win eight.
 

TheBulldog said:
Yes, that secondary. The one that played Matty Mauk, a notoriously bad/inconsistent passer, on one good leg.

They should have held them to almost nothing through the air. Any halfway decent power 5 defense should be able to hold a hobbled Matty Mauk, in a run-dominated offense, to almost nothing. That should be the case if he were healthy. He's not a good QB. I'd equate it to Wisconsin getting super pumped, and flaunting their secondary, after they held Leidner to under 100 yards this year.

Touting that as a victory, especially considering that their offense still scored 33 points and put up nearly 450 yards, is a stretch. They only threw the ball 19 times, but ran something like 65 plays. They didn't have to throw the ball, otherwise I'm sure the numbers would've looked differently.

Not saying the secondary didn't play a good game, or aren't a top tier unit. But, I'm not calling that game a moral victory for anyone of the Gophers defense. I'm guessing we'll see how good Murray and BBC really are against TCU to open 2015, when they throw the ball 50 times with a capable QB. They gave up something like 225 to Tommy Armstrong in less than 20 attempts, and 215 to Stave in under 20 attempts. They've definitely looked pahretty burnable at times against legitimate passing threats.
Click to expand...

You need to look at the post he was responding to. Dean essentially said the secondary didn't play very well against Missouri which is ridiculous. Die hard's post was not incorrect in any way.
 

TheBulldog said:
Yes, that secondary. The one that played Matty Mauk, a notoriously bad/inconsistent passer, on one good leg.

They should have held them to almost nothing through the air. Any halfway decent power 5 defense should be able to hold a hobbled Matty Mauk, in a run-dominated offense, to almost nothing. That should be the case if he were healthy. He's not a good QB. I'd equate it to Wisconsin getting super pumped, and flaunting their secondary, after they held Leidner to under 100 yards this year.

Touting that as a victory, especially considering that their offense still scored 33 points and put up nearly 450 yards, is a stretch. They only threw the ball 19 times, but ran something like 65 plays. They didn't have to throw the ball, otherwise I'm sure the numbers would've looked differently.

Not saying the secondary didn't play a good game, or aren't a top tier unit. But, I'm not calling that game a moral victory for anyone of the Gophers defense. I'm guessing we'll see how good Murray and BBC really are against TCU to open 2015, when they throw the ball 50 times with a capable QB. They gave up something like 225 to Tommy Armstrong in less than 20 attempts, and 215 to Stave in under 20 attempts. They've definitely looked pahretty burnable at times against legitimate passing threats.
Click to expand...

Our defense was 15th in the country in yards per attempt allowed. That's really, really good. When you consider we routinely had to have safety help in the box to stop the run, and that our pass rush wasn't very good, that makes our secondary outstanding. I'm not sure what else you expected from them.
 

Dean S said:
Considering that Jay is the 220th best college football recruiter and our top recruiter, I'll give Tom a little leniency on this one.
Click to expand...

If somebody could get 4 and 5 stars to come to the BarBQ, it seems Jerry would close the deal and be a top ranked recruiter. He's got a pretty high rate of success there.
 

TheBulldog said:
Yes, that secondary. The one that played Matty Mauk, a notoriously bad/inconsistent passer, on one good leg.

They should have held them to almost nothing through the air. Any halfway decent power 5 defense should be able to hold a hobbled Matty Mauk, in a run-dominated offense, to almost nothing. That should be the case if he were healthy. He's not a good QB. I'd equate it to Wisconsin getting super pumped, and flaunting their secondary, after they held Leidner to under 100 yards this year.

Touting that as a victory, especially considering that their offense still scored 33 points and put up nearly 450 yards, is a stretch. They only threw the ball 19 times, but ran something like 65 plays. They didn't have to throw the ball, otherwise I'm sure the numbers would've looked differently.

Not saying the secondary didn't play a good game, or aren't a top tier unit. But, I'm not calling that game a moral victory for anyone of the Gophers defense. I'm guessing we'll see how good Murray and BBC really are against TCU to open 2015, when they throw the ball 50 times with a capable QB. They gave up something like 225 to Tommy Armstrong in less than 20 attempts, and 215 to Stave in under 20 attempts. They've definitely looked pahretty burnable at times against legitimate passing threats.
Click to expand...

Do you mean the Matty Mauck who threw for 272 yards the game before against Alabama? 1 leg? so I guess Mitch had enxcuse all year because he played on 1 leg. I believe he had a torn tenden. What Mauck tear? TCU? lol i can tell you this the WR that lined up on the boundary(short side of the field) Kolby Listenbee was 2-25 against the gophers. If I remember the game correctly they went at and beat Myrick for a bunch but the kid was a soph playing in 1 of his first games. Thanks for the post very entertaining. PURE COMEDY
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom