Doogie says "five wins maximum" for Gophs in 2010

[howeda7]

You're mistake is expecting the homer's here to understand the term 'reality'. You are, of course, absolutely correct. One blown play against SDSU, and we lose and the season looks pretty crummy. On these boards, though, that's forgotten in all the talk of 'how close' the PSU and OSU games ACTUALLY were if you were simply to close one eye, squint hard, cover your ears and say, "LA LA LA" really loud.

Agreed. Sorry, but those of you saying the OSU, PSU or Iowa games were 'close' are kidding yourselves. We were never in real contention to win at any point in the 4th quarter of any of those games. To me, if you have virtually no chance of winning at the start of the 4th quarter, the game wasn't close. The Cal game was close. So was Illinois. But as others point out, so was Syracuse, Air Force, MSU and SDSU. In reality, the Gophers won more then half thier close games. If anything they had GOOD luck last year.

In constrast, see this year's Gopher basketball team for an example of a team that lost way, way more then it's share of close games.

 

[GopherFan75]

I'm not a Doogie hater but it's nice that grunkiejr used actual reasoning to say why Cooper should be a LB rather than Doogie just making assumptions. Whoever it was that pointed out that Doogie has probably never actually played football, I agree.

Again, not trying to rip on Doogie but it's just better when people use reasoning to make their points rather than throwing blind predictions out there.
________
Full Melt Hash

 

[grunkiejr]

Will be the first to admit that Fisch grew on me last March, but after finding out about the tweak in Weber's throwing style and the hand-signals, I slowly backed off ... also, when did I ever say that he would be the next coach?
Thanks for the Cooper info. Still unsure of his ability to be productive for 60+ snaps per game at WLB.

I still don't know why everybody claims Weber's problems were with a change in his throwing motion. Adjusting a throwing motion isn't uncommon (just look Tim Tebow between their bowl game and his pro day). Weber's problems with short throws last year were 1) not consistently getting his feet right 2) in his mind. Very simply, it is a confidence thing and when you doubt yourself you overthink your mechanics which causes a thrower to overthink what should be a natural motion.

Now a longer anecdote if anybody wants to read it:
Sadly I completely understand what I think Weber is going through. I was a pitcher in HS and despite pitching all my life I ran in to problems with my accuracy while playing catch in the gym for spring training of my junior year. To make a long story short I was claustrophobic in the small area and feared hitting people so I started trying to be too perfect and ended up holding the ball too long. About 95% of my throws landed 10+ feet in front of my target. It got to the point that my coach had me throwing in an auxillary gym to work on my mechanics. The strange thing is when I got up on a mound and threw hard my control was the same as it ever was and I could nip a corner on command. The difference was that when I threw hard from the mound the motion and release point came natural to me and I couldn't overthink about the mechanics.

The phenomena is similar to when a pitcher lobs a soft throw over the 1st baseman's head after a hit back to the mound. Sometimes you just need to throw hard to not think about it.

Well if you think back to Weber's problems last year it wasn't on balls that he threw downfield 10+ yards. It was all on short passes where he had to take something off it and IYAM he clearly over thought it. IMO if the adjustment in his throwing motion had a negative effect on Weber it wasn't the motion itself but rather making him think about his mechanics which ended up causing him overthink things and lose confidence. It also didn't start last year...Weber had quite a few throws like that in the Michigan and Iowa games in 2008 which indicates it may not have been working on the throwing motion that caused his problems in the first place.

 

[maxwellsmart]

Said it before and saying it again. It's not the throwing motion and it's not new plays (which BTW aren't new after being run several dozen times). Weber needs to feel like he has a green light to run, and actually do so occasionally, in order to obtain a comfort level and play without analyzing every move. Too much thinking going on. Just my opinion but I'm sticking to it.

 

[Section2]

Agreed. Sorry, but those of you saying the OSU, PSU or Iowa games were 'close' are kidding yourselves. We were never in real contention to win at any point in the 4th quarter of any of those games. To me, if you have virtually no chance of winning at the start of the 4th quarter, the game wasn't close. The Cal game was close. So was Illinois. But as others point out, so was Syracuse, Air Force, MSU and SDSU. In reality, the Gophers won more then half thier close games. If anything they had GOOD luck last year.

In constrast, see this year's Gopher basketball team for an example of a team that lost way, way more then it's share of close games.

The Iowa game was close. We had first and goal at the 2 in the 4th quarter. We score and we're down 5 with plenty of time left and some momentum. The OSU game wasn't close after the first half. The PSU game wasn't really close, they dominated both sides of the ball. Iowa didn't dominate us. Other close games in the L column were Iowa St and Wisconsin that you are forgetting to mention. So IMO, we lost more close games than we won 5-4.

 

[tikited]

Said it before and saying it again. It's not the throwing motion and it's not new plays (which BTW aren't new after being run several dozen times). Weber needs to feel like he has a green light to run, and actually do so occasionally, in order to obtain a comfort level and play without analyzing every move. Too much thinking going on. Just my opinion but I'm sticking to it.

I agree. Last year was a mess in so many different areas, but Weber not having the green-light to run was a major mistake. He seems to be a player that needs "flow" to make it work. Running for 5-10 yards and then throwing down field on the next play gives the "flow" he needs imo. A good running qb can make even a terrible O-line look decent now and then.

 

[Doogie]

I'm not a Doogie hater but it's nice that grunkiejr used actual reasoning to say why Cooper should be a LB rather than Doogie just making assumptions. Whoever it was that pointed out that Doogie has probably never actually played football, I agree.

Again, not trying to rip on Doogie but it's just better when people use reasoning to make their points rather than throwing blind predictions out there.

Rarely do I throw out a blind prediction without at least one person I wholeheartedly trust verifying or first volunteering the thought ... and no, I did not play football beyond Pop Warner, but what does that have to do with anything?

 

[monk10]

Weber's problems with short throws last year were 1) not consistently getting his feet right 2) in his mind.

This was the biggest I consistently saw. I didn't get to review film to confirm as much as I would like, but it would stick out to me the most.

 

[GopherFan75]

Rarely do I throw out a blind prediction without at least one person I wholeheartedly trust verifying or first volunteering the thought ... and no, I did not play football beyond Pop Warner, but what does that have to do with anything?

There is nothing wrong with that but it does sometimes make a difference when it comes to understanding the game, as grunkiejr showed.
________
Bmw e9 history

 

[oleboy41]

Rarely do I throw out a blind prediction without at least one person I wholeheartedly trust verifying or first volunteering the thought ... and no, I did not play football beyond Pop Warner, but what does that have to do with anything?

it has to do with understanding the nuances of the game. Its true that some people know football very well without having ever played or coached but many who have never done either don't always get some of the more subtle things. Most people understand things like pursuit angles but not everyone gets how things should work. For instance in the Cooper LB thread some people don't get that WI killed us on the edge last year because our DEs did a poor job not because they didn't make the tackle but because they didn't force the play inside or bounce it out and because our MLBs were unable to scrape through the muck and make the play in the gap. Instead they see an LB getting blocked and assumed he's too small when in fact he simply took on the wrong shoulder of the blocker. Football is a sport that looks like its fairly simple to decipher what is going on but often that's not the case. Another example is how 2 years ago so many people were saying that Lee Campbell was doing a good job at MLB when the reality was that his false steps and hesitation were opening up a ton of holes in the middle of the D. I said going into last year that the D could be much better because I thought that Campbell would be more comfortable at LB and with his instincts thus cutting down those technique mistakes that killed us at times in 08. He did that and the D was much improved up the middle. Sometimes you read the things that media people write and have to shake your head. In reading many of your posts you seem to rely more on 'sources you trust' to give you info than any actual football knowledge or ability to accurately assess the talents or capabilities of players or this team.

 

[streetfighter]

it has to do with understanding the nuances of the game. Its true that some people know football very well without having ever played or coached but many who have never done either don't always get some of the more subtle things. Most people understand things like pursuit angles but not everyone gets how things should work. For instance in the Cooper LB thread some people don't get that WI killed us on the edge last year because our DEs did a poor job not because they didn't make the tackle but because they didn't force the play inside or bounce it out and because our MLBs were unable to scrape through the muck and make the play in the gap. Instead they see an LB getting blocked and assumed he's too small when in fact he simply took on the wrong shoulder of the blocker. Football is a sport that looks like its fairly simple to decipher what is going on but often that's not the case. Another example is how 2 years ago so many people were saying that Lee Campbell was doing a good job at MLB when the reality was that his false steps and hesitation were opening up a ton of holes in the middle of the D. I said going into last year that the D could be much better because I thought that Campbell would be more comfortable at LB and with his instincts thus cutting down those technique mistakes that killed us at times in 08. He did that and the D was much improved up the middle. Sometimes you read the things that media people write and have to shake your head. In reading many of your posts you seem to rely more on 'sources you trust' to give you info than any actual football knowledge or ability to accurately assess the talents or capabilities of players or this team.

I don't think any of these "nuances" are things that couldn't be picked up by even a casual observer of the game by talking and engagin with people that are football knowledgable. I would guess that Doogie has access to some good football minds and (even if he knew nothing else about the sport) they would rub off on him.

I'll echo Doogie's sentiment and say that him not playing beyond Pop-Warner ball doesn't matter. I would guess that a huge number of beat writers never played beyond HS ball (if they played HS at all). Just because he brings his opinions to an open forum doesn't mean that he is any less knowledgable than other beat writers or any of us for that matter.

 

[oleboy41]

I don't think any of these "nuances" are things that couldn't be picked up by even a casual observer of the game by talking and engagin with people that are football knowledgable. I would guess that Doogie has access to some good football minds and (even if he knew nothing else about the sport) they would rub off on him.

I'll echo Doogie's sentiment and say that him not playing beyond Pop-Warner ball doesn't matter. I would guess that a huge number of beat writers never played beyond HS ball (if they played HS at all). Just because he brings his opinions to an open forum doesn't mean that he is any less knowledgable than other beat writers or any of us for that matter.

Thats why a number of beat writers seem to have no clue what they're talking about. Souhan wrote a column blasting a highly ranked Xavier team. Youngblood often comes across as no more knowledgeable than the average fan. Same for Myron Metcalf. Doogie is a fan and I'm not a Doogie hater like some, I just haven't seen anything to make me value his opinion as I don't feel he has any more football acumen than the average fan. I can't stand Reusse but he knows the game pretty well. Bill Simmons didn't play or coach basketball but the dude knows his NBA. I just think its clear who in the media truly knows a sport inside and out and who is just a fan with a great job. No knock on those guys but since they can't bring to light interesting nuances the average fan doesn't already know, they rely on 'reliable sources' to stir the pot or they take extreme stances. Otherwise its just a guy with average knowledge of the game saying 'well if they gell they could be pretty good but if not they could struggle' and who would be discussing that article on GH?

 

[Costa Rican Gopher]

"Rarely do I throw out a blind prediction without at least one person I wholeheartedly trust verifying or first volunteering the thought"

100% believe he rarely makes a precdiction w/out someone else first volunteering the thought for you. His cut 'n' paste jobs from the posting forums speak to this.

 

[Goldteam]

What games were YOU watching?

CAL: Tie game until an untimely penalty on third and long with 7 minutes left in the 4th quarter.
WISKY: 3 point loss
IOWA: Very tight game and several chances inside the Iowa redzone that we simply didn't capitalize on.
OSU: In Columbus, and completely in the game at half-time. (I'll give you the bad 3rd quarter)
PSU: In the game the entire way. Same situation as Iowa, absolutely no offense, but within a big play of turning the momentum.

By the way, covering the spread doesn't mean squat. The spread is not a prediction on how close a game should be but rather a reflection of the betters tendancies.

cal was close

wisconsin pounded us........they dominated us so bad in the second half that i could have cried......sherels or someone picked up a fumble to run it back for a td but we were never really in the game

iowa, psu, and osu........it felt to me like we could have played 100 quarters against each starting defense and never score

 

[Section 100]

about Maturi's decison to hire an unproven, no name guy will be over.

Four years, a lot of talk and nothing else.

Book it, it will all start over soon.

They probably will lose to either MTSU or N. Ill. They willl lose to Iowa and Wisconsin. They will lose to PSU and OSU. They will lose at MSU and most likely at Purdue. They will lose to S. Cal. They may lose at Ill and NU may win here.

OK, they may actually win two games, but the program is acually on the upswing, as both Maturdi and Brewster will be gone.

Wins: USD,

Losses : PSU, USC, Wisc. Iowa , OSU

toss ups/ leaning wrong way - the rest


4 -8 at best

You are NOT an idiot. This is a 3-5 win team. I also think Brewster should get one more year.

If this O-line doesn't improve, bank on less than five wins. And don't forget about a QB, any sort of player that resembles a RB, and a defense.

 

[maxwellsmart]

You are NOT an idiot. This is a 3-5 win team. I also think Brewster should get one more year.

If this O-line doesn't improve, bank on less than five wins. And don't forget about a QB, any sort of player that resembles a RB, and a defense.

"This is a 3-5 win team."

Not until the season has been played out. That's the way it works, right?

 

[Doogie]

"Rarely do I throw out a blind prediction without at least one person I wholeheartedly trust verifying or first volunteering the thought"

100% believe he rarely makes a precdiction w/out someone else first volunteering the thought for you. His cut 'n' paste jobs from the posting forums speak to this.

Costa Rican Gopher: The only time I have ever cut 'n' paste was for a Strib blog to point out some absurd takes, and absolutely attributed ... Journalism 101: You never do something like that without proper attribution ... when else have I done what you claim?

 

[WilliamsArenaGuy]

Costa Rican Gopher: The only time I have ever cut 'n' paste was for a Strib blog to point out some absurd takes, and absolutely attributed ... Journalism 101: You never do something like that without proper attribution ... when else have I done what you claim?

It was a metaphor genius. You never offer your own insight into anything. It's all already offered or speculated by someone else, then you write your blog on the same topic.

Hence, it has a cut and paste quality.

Start doing something unique and quit sounding like every sinlge other member of the media in this town.

 

[jovs]

You are NOT an idiot. This is a 3-5 win team. I also think Brewster should get one more year.

If this O-line doesn't improve, bank on less than five wins. And don't forget about a QB, any sort of player that resembles a RB, and a defense.

I would agree, at this point it is hard to see how they will win anymore than that, but, you never know what might happen with an offense that moves the ball some. They accomplished what they did last year with an offense that did nothing in 1/2 of the games. Change that a little and anything could happen.

 

[streetfighter]

It was a metaphor genius. You never offer your own insight into anything. It's all already offered or speculated by someone else, then you write your blog on the same topic.

Hence, it has a cut and paste quality.

Start doing something unique and quit sounding like every sinlge other member of the media in this town.

You made the claim, now build your case. Considering Doogie works in journalism, this is a pretty serious charge and I think you ought to back this up with some evidence.

 

[Doogie]

Thats why a number of beat writers seem to have no clue what they're talking about. Souhan wrote a column blasting a highly ranked Xavier team. Youngblood often comes across as no more knowledgeable than the average fan. Same for Myron Metcalf. Doogie is a fan and I'm not a Doogie hater like some, I just haven't seen anything to make me value his opinion as I don't feel he has any more football acumen than the average fan. I can't stand Reusse but he knows the game pretty well. Bill Simmons didn't play or coach basketball but the dude knows his NBA. I just think its clear who in the media truly knows a sport inside and out and who is just a fan with a great job. No knock on those guys but since they can't bring to light interesting nuances the average fan doesn't already know, they rely on 'reliable sources' to stir the pot or they take extreme stances. Otherwise its just a guy with average knowledge of the game saying 'well if they gell they could be pretty good but if not they could struggle' and who would be discussing that article on GH?

Hard to please everyone ... will agree that especially when it comes to the Gophers, most media folks don't pay attention ... Saturday is an off day for many, so they may catch some of the game on TV, but that's it ... Practice access is limited, like it is at most schools, so it's hard to gain any knowledge in that area, and with press conference transcripts available on the Big Ten's website, or others, most fans can find out the same information that most reporters can ... and with fans, most are not jaded. Most of my media friends have no interest in carrying on a conversation with me about the Gophers ... in other words, I talk to my buddies who follow the team closely. Just because I have a media pass doesn't mean I am any different than anyone on here. I post on here because I am passionate about the program. I have never claimed to know all the nuts-and-bolts. I have opinions like everyone else, sometimes informed takes, and enjoy the back-and-forth that takes place on here.

 

[Ole]

You made the claim, now build your case. Considering Doogie works in journalism, this is a pretty serious charge and I think you ought to back this up with some evidence.

He did clarify.
What he's saying is that Doogie's Blog gives no original insight or thought beyond the typical TC media member. It's not unique in any respect, and often discussion topics and the such are taken from message board material. I really wish there was a mainstream media voice for Gopher football discussion, but unfortunately there's not. The Fringe Bowl team Blog is about as close as it comes.

My question is will credit be given by all these doomsayers if the team actually wins more than the negative nancy crowd in this thread are predicting. Dare I call out oakstreet because he's got a rep of intense Brewster hatred, but if Brewster wins 6 this year does he get credit for exceeding your expectations of 4 max victories, or will you ignore your prediction and gripe about some other facet of his coaching regime?

We have a tough schedule folks, we have a very young team also, this combination probably will play out in an unexpected way with the team playing up and down to the competition.
I could easily see a victory against a ranked opponent and a loss against a nonconference foe(god save us if it's SD). Perspective is going to be key, and I don't think it's unreasonable to get excited and be positive about some of our young, highly touted players, while still being disappointed should the losses pile up. For me it's 5 years for Brewster come hell or high water, maybe a season of unbelievable off the field trouble(no, the recent drinking arrests of the past year don't count, I'm talking rape/assault/theft, MSU type stuff) would change that, but a coach deserves to get to his first recruiting classes' senior year.

 

[Maximus]

It's all already offered or speculated by someone else, then you write your blog on the same topic.

Such as?

 

[howeda7]

The Iowa game was close. We had first and goal at the 2 in the 4th quarter. We score and we're down 5 with plenty of time left and some momentum. The OSU game wasn't close after the first half. The PSU game wasn't really close, they dominated both sides of the ball. Iowa didn't dominate us. Other close games in the L column were Iowa St and Wisconsin that you are forgetting to mention. So IMO, we lost more close games than we won 5-4.

The Iowa game was never as close as it seemed. It was 12-0, but if they felt like it, it could have been 30-0. From the moment they got up more then 1 score, they went into prevent mode with thier back-up QB in the game. They knew the only way we would score is if they turned it over or did something stupid. So they took the air out of the ball on offense. If we'd actually managed to score a point, they'd likely have reinflated the ball on offense and scored some more. Penn State did the same thing to a lesser degree.

This is why I think many here over-rated our defense. Yes, it had its moments and was solid overall. But when your offense is as utterly wretched as ours was last year, teams aren't going to go all out against you and risk making mistakes. With all of the starters lost, this year's defense is unknown, but I pray it comes together or it could get ugly.

I forgot about the Iowa State game (does the Insight Bowl count as a real game?) I didn't forget about Wisconsin. That game to me doesn't fit any category. It would have been a blow-out save the fluke TD in the 4th quarter. Even if you cout those, they won close games against Syracuse, Air Force, MSU and SDSU and lost close games to Cal, Wisconsin, Illinois and Iowa State. That's 4-4 in tight games. Hardly the 3-8 or so that the basketball team was this year.

 

[PapaHawk21]

The Iowa game was never as close as it seemed. It was 12-0, but if they felt like it, it could have been 30-0. From the moment they got up more then 1 score, they went into prevent mode with thier back-up QB in the game. They knew the only way we would score is if they turned it over or did something stupid. So they took the air out of the ball on offense. If we'd actually managed to score a point, they'd likely have reinflated the ball on offense and scored some more. Penn State did the same thing to a lesser degree.

This is why I think many here over-rated our defense. Yes, it had its moments and was solid overall. But when your offense is as utterly wretched as ours was last year, teams aren't going to go all out against you and risk making mistakes. With all of the starters lost, this year's defense is unknown, but I pray it comes together or it could get ugly.

Good points. Minnesota's defense played quite well in this game, much better than I had anticipated. Granted, the numbers do not reflect the true quality of the Iowa offense. Our best RB Adam Robinson had 72 yards on 12 carries going into the 2nd quarter before he left the game with an injury. Ricky Stanzi was injured and Jame Vandenberg was making his 2nd career start. Iowa dominated Georgia Tech statistically in the Orange Bowl (final score 24-14) when the team had a healthy Ricky Stanzi and Adam Robinson. Iowa had 403 yards of offense to Georgia Tech's 155. I try to stay away from transitivity when making an argument but if Iowa was healthy the margin of victory would have most likely been much higher than 12.

Penn State dominated Minnesota statistically and won by 20, so I am unsure as to the logic in saying this game was "close."

There is no argument to say the Ohio State game was close.

The Wisconsin game was the only one that could be considered close. If Wisky doesn't hand Minnesota that fumble in the 4th quarter the game probably would have ended in a two touchdown defeat for Minnesota.

 

[oleboy41]

Good points. Minnesota's defense played quite well in this game, much better than I had anticipated. Granted, the numbers do not reflect the true quality of the Iowa offense. Our best RB Adam Robinson had 72 yards on 12 carries going into the 2nd quarter before he left the game with an injury. Ricky Stanzi was injured and Jame Vandenberg was making his 2nd career start. Iowa dominated Georgia Tech statistically in the Orange Bowl (final score 24-14) when the team had a healthy Ricky Stanzi and Adam Robinson. Iowa had 403 yards of offense to Georgia Tech's 155. I try to stay away from transitivity when making an argument but if Iowa was healthy the margin of victory would have most likely been much higher than 12.

Penn State dominated Minnesota statistically and won by 20, so I am unsure as to the logic in saying this game was "close."

There is no argument to say the Ohio State game was close.

The Wisconsin game was the only one that could be considered close. If Wisky doesn't hand Minnesota that fumble in the 4th quarter the game probably would have ended in a two touchdown defeat for Minnesota.

Those games were 'close' because the team had plenty of opportunities to take leads or tie the games. MN was always one play away from being right there. On the flip side we were one play away from being out of it. The sentiment was that the offense was so horrible that even an average offense would have been enough to beat Iowa, Wisky, and maybe PSU. I disagree completely about Iowa taking the air out of the ball and being fully capable of scoring at will against us. Our D dominated Iowa despite being on the field the whole game. The offense was comically inept that game

 

[oleboy41]

Hard to please everyone ... will agree that especially when it comes to the Gophers, most media folks don't pay attention ... Saturday is an off day for many, so they may catch some of the game on TV, but that's it ... Practice access is limited, like it is at most schools, so it's hard to gain any knowledge in that area, and with press conference transcripts available on the Big Ten's website, or others, most fans can find out the same information that most reporters can ... and with fans, most are not jaded. Most of my media friends have no interest in carrying on a conversation with me about the Gophers ... in other words, I talk to my buddies who follow the team closely. Just because I have a media pass doesn't mean I am any different than anyone on here. I post on here because I am passionate about the program. I have never claimed to know all the nuts-and-bolts. I have opinions like everyone else, sometimes informed takes, and enjoy the back-and-forth that takes place on here.

You have some good points there and I understand that it can be difficult with limited access. Still I think that having a media pass and writing in the local paper and being on the radio absolutely does mean you're held to a higher standard than your average internet fan. There's no reason that MV, who has a day job and absolutely no access to the team, should put out stuff that is 5 times more interesting, in depth and insightful than you or your fellow media members. Why not a position by position break down throughout the spring? Why not do some individual player profiles outside of the 3-4 guys the paper always talks about? Why not some thoughtful, in depth analysis of the team that doesn't include shots at the staff or players? Why not compare the talent on this team to that of years past or even to other B10 teams this year? How about talk to former players or people with access to practices and get their thoughts (nothing the coaches wouldn't want to get out but just general thoughts). I think there's a ton of stuff that could be done other than making controversial season predictions.

 

[lakesgopher]

writing a story on why this team could be successful isnt as much fun as writing a story on why they wont be...or something. i guess im a fan of the u of mn and alum, i would love to come on here and read a story on why this team CAN have success rather than why they can only win 5 games. pretty lame, grow a pair doogie...you claim to be a fan but everything you write has something negative. be objective for once rather than always going to the negative end of things.

 

[Unregistered User]

writing a story on why this team could be successful isnt as much fun as writing a story on why they wont be

This has nothing to do with Doogie. Agree or disagree with him, he is entitled to his opinions, but I disagree with the above quote. It has more to do with that fact that it is easier. It takes little to no imagination to constantly hack on people. Look around you, listen to the radio. The "fastest" one-liners at bars are usually some type of put-down at someone else's expense. Burrito has his tag line of "listen in and hear me savage people" or something like that. How many papers have a daily "rant". Jime Rome is talentless and his entire show is based on this. For the love of Dog, even Golf Magazine or Golf Digest has a "daily flogging". It's ridiculous.

 

[maxwellsmart]

The Iowa game was never as close as it seemed. It was 12-0, but if they felt like it, it could have been 30-0. From the moment they got up more then 1 score, they went into prevent mode with thier back-up QB in the game. They knew the only way we would score is if they turned it over or did something stupid. So they took the air out of the ball on offense. If we'd actually managed to score a point, they'd likely have reinflated the ball on offense and scored some more. Penn State did the same thing to a lesser degree.

This is why I think many here over-rated our defense. Yes, it had its moments and was solid overall. But when your offense is as utterly wretched as ours was last year, teams aren't going to go all out against you and risk making mistakes. With all of the starters lost, this year's defense is unknown, but I pray it comes together or it could get ugly.

I forgot about the Iowa State game (does the Insight Bowl count as a real game?) I didn't forget about Wisconsin. That game to me doesn't fit any category. It would have been a blow-out save the fluke TD in the 4th quarter. Even if you cout those, they won close games against Syracuse, Air Force, MSU and SDSU and lost close games to Cal, Wisconsin, Illinois and Iowa State. That's 4-4 in tight games. Hardly the 3-8 or so that the basketball team was this year.

Your theory about the Iowa game would make Ferentz into one of the more foolish coaches around. They could build a 30-point lead but chose to keep it at 12? Huh?