Doogie Tweet: Gophers Might Not Have All Their Regulars UPDATED: Croft won't play Sat

Donate To GopherHole
dpodoll68 said:
There is a big difference between going to the ground and falling on the ball and trying to scoop it up bent over at the waist. Offensive players at every level of competition are coached to fall on the ball. It's elementary. If you can't acknowledge these basic facts, it's pointless to engage you on it.
Click to expand...

I'm well aware. My contention is it's not as simple as you describe. It's fair to disagree.
 

I knew there was a reason I ignore listed pumpass elitist a long time ago. Thank you guys for a 21 page reminder.
 

Counseling. Therapy. So many people here need help. Holy **** this place is bi-polar.
 

joshvanklomp said:
but there is a specific rule about what to do in Croft's situation and he didn't follow it.
Click to expand...

Maybe PJ should have a rule against throwing bad INTs too?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

WanderingGopher said:
Yeah I pretty much agree with this. It was awkward because the ball was rolling between his legs, not really in a position to "just fall on it." And Rhoda later had an unforced fumble that could've been just as bad, but luckily for him it went out of bounds.

All the focus on Croft's fumble obscures the real issue, which is that Croft already had been losing the trust of Fleck. If this competition purely was about QB play, Croft would've been starting. That's obvious to anyone who's been watching.
Click to expand...

What about Croft's play the first two games indicate he should be the starter?
 


Spoofin said:
Maybe PJ should have a rule against throwing bad INTs too?


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


No rule needed for that.
That's part of the culture.
The culture is to not turn over the ball.
If you don't embrace that, then you're not on board.
 

What we have here is a psychotic dysfunctional family.
 


The hysteria over this....If Rhoda throws another INT is he going to get the hook for Green or Morgan? I doubt it.

Just so I'm clear, since Rhoda is instructed to throw he's off the hook for interceptions? Even if he throws into triple coverage for a pick six? Are there degrees of severity? Tipped pass would be minor. Interception on a deep route same as a punt. Red zone turnover: well, yeah that's not good but it least he didn't fumble it . Red zone INT for a pick six? Does that garner a hook?

The Culture is second to nothing. I will await Fleck's iron will on this. We're going to be playing TJ or Morse at QB by week 10.
 




WanderingGopher said:
Yeah I pretty much agree with this. It was awkward because the ball was rolling between his legs, not really in a position to "just fall on it." And Rhoda later had an unforced fumble that could've been just as bad, but luckily for him it went out of bounds.

All the focus on Croft's fumble obscures the real issue, which is that Croft already had been losing the trust of Fleck. If this competition purely was about QB play, Croft would've been starting. That's obvious to anyone who's been watching.
Click to expand...

Oh really? Based on what?
 

Johnnyboy18 said:
What about Croft's play the first two games indicate he should be the starter?
Click to expand...

Well, in game two vs. OSU, he was in for 3 series and they scored on 2 of them.
The team has a higher yards per carry average when he is in the game.
He completed 7 of 12 for 63 yards in game one. Not great numbers, but not horrible either.
He made a mistake in not falling on that fumble. Rhoda took advantage and the Gophers rolled OSU.
Nothing in what Croft did indicated he couldn't become the starter. Nothing that Rhoda did indicated that he couldn't be the starter either.
Had Croft had equal reps vs OSU through the first half and game, or had Croft gotten to start the game instead of Rhoda vs. OSU, maybe things would be different as to who has had the better of it the first two games. Now it is Rhoda's and that will be good for the team going forward as they can play to Rhoda's strengths more.
Croft being away from the team for an undetermined amount of time is too bad for him, because he needs the reps to continue his development as I saw enough out of him the first two games to think he can be a really good starting QB for us, if not needed this year, then next year.
 

GFBfan said:
Well, in game two vs. OSU, he was in for 3 series and they scored on 2 of them.
The team has a higher yards per carry average when he is in the game.
He completed 7 of 12 for 63 yards in game one. Not great numbers, but not horrible either.
He made a mistake in not falling on that fumble. Rhoda took advantage and the Gophers rolled OSU.
Nothing in what Croft did indicated he couldn't become the starter. Nothing that Rhoda did indicated that he couldn't be the starter either.
Had Croft had equal reps vs OSU through the first half and game, or had Croft gotten to start the game instead of Rhoda vs. OSU, maybe things would be different as to who has had the better of it the first two games. Now it is Rhoda's and that will be good for the team going forward as they can play to Rhoda's strengths more.
Croft being away from the team for an undetermined amount of time is too bad for him, because he needs the reps to continue his development as I saw enough out of him the first two games to think he can be a really good starting QB for us, if not needed this year, then next year.
Click to expand...

Good points. Next year is a serious issue.
 




First of all all, how pumped is Doogie that this thread is 21 pages long?

Secondly, I feel like the current argument occurring is very confusing. Croft was NOT sent away from the team for a fumble (that would be insane). He was benched for about a quarter and a half for a fumble...happens all the time. I don't even see where the controversy is.
 

GFBfan said:
Well, in game two vs. OSU, he was in for 3 series and they scored on 2 of them.
The team has a higher yards per carry average when he is in the game.
He completed 7 of 12 for 63 yards in game one. Not great numbers, but not horrible either.
He made a mistake in not falling on that fumble. Rhoda took advantage and the Gophers rolled OSU.
Nothing in what Croft did indicated he couldn't become the starter. Nothing that Rhoda did indicated that he couldn't be the starter either.
Had Croft had equal reps vs OSU through the first half and game, or had Croft gotten to start the game instead of Rhoda vs. OSU, maybe things would be different as to who has had the better of it the first two games. Now it is Rhoda's and that will be good for the team going forward as they can play to Rhoda's strengths more.
Croft being away from the team for an undetermined amount of time is too bad for him, because he needs the reps to continue his development as I saw enough out of him the first two games to think he can be a really good starting QB for us, if not needed this year, then next year.
Click to expand...

What you failed to mention is Fleck's expectation that his QB be the absolute leader of the team. Prior to the OSU game it seems neither Rhoda or Croft had done nearly enough to show Fleck the leadership qualities he was looking for in his QB. After the game he seemed to be impressed with Rhoda's sideline demeanor and communication with the team as much or more than his passing and decision making on the field. Aside from any other issues my guess is that Croft was not as far along as Rhoda in those areas.

P.J. Fleck was impressed with Gophers quarterback Conor Rhoda

Gophers football coach P.J. Fleck has been prodding and clamoring for either quarterback Conor Rhoda or Demry Croft to exert ownership of the team since spring practices began in March.

While the Gophers relied heavily on the run in their 48-14 win over Oregon State on Saturday night — 58 rushes to eight passes — one quarterback took the reins in Reser Stadium.

“(Saturday) was the first time I watched Conor Rhoda control a football team,” Fleck said.

A major focus in Week 2 was drumming up the players’ enthusiasm after showing a more subdued sideline in the 17-7 win over Buffalo in the season opener.

“The one thing about our culture: We ignore nothing,” Fleck said. “Everything is coached, and nothing is ever slid by, like, ‘It’s OK’ — because that will just fester.”

To correct the lack of a sideline vibe, Fleck dedicated a 10-minute portion of practice last week to how players need to enjoy themselves and celebrate big plays with their teammates.

LEADING WITH ENERGY

The intangibles of leadership and energy is an area where Rhoda led Saturday. When the extra-point or field-goal unit came off the field, Rhoda and Fleck were the first to greet them. Before the Gophers’ next defensive series, Rhoda would stick his head into Minnesota’s defensive huddle for a quick bit of encouragement.

“I told (Fleck) I was able to feel it when I was out there,” Rhoda said.

Fleck’s encompassing approach took into account Rhoda’s game management. The Gophers held a 38:16 to 21:44 advantage in time of possession, including 21:02 to 8:58 separation in the second half.

“(Rhoda) was going to his offensive line and communicating really well, running the game efficiently,” Fleck said. “At the end, draining the clock, milking the clock properly, keeping everybody calm.”

‘SHOW YOU LOVE GAME’

To start the rah-rah segment of practice last week, Fleck called linebacker Thomas Barber and safety Jacob Huff onto the field. They simulated a forced fumble and recovery, and then threw themselves a party with teammates.

“It’s kind of weird that you have to teach to celebrate, but there are some things that you don’t realize that need to be happening to get the team going,” said Barber, a sophomore who had three tackles and a forced fumble Saturday.

Senior linebacker Jon Celestin, who had a team-high 10 tackles, said it was the first time in his career he’s been coached on how to cheer. “Coach was right,” he added. “Last week, the sideline, we were energetic but we weren’t like we should have been.”

Fleck doesn’t view the celebration segment as micromanaging but rather an attempt to uncork why players play.

“You got to show you love the game,” Fleck said. “When you have a bunch of young people out there, sometimes they forget why they are playing. They forget the fun part of it. They are so locked into my assignment, ‘Oh my gosh, oh my gosh,’ but it’s still a game, and you’ve got to bring that out in them.”

After the victory, the Gophers’ locker room was cordoned off by an curtain with an Oregon State logo. The players’ shouts and singing of the Rouser could be heard well down the exterior hallway.

Read more at: http://www.twincities.com/2017/09/1...k-was-impressed-with-quarterback-conor-rhoda/
 

He always says this isn't a results-driven culture. The fact that Rhoda and Croft both had turnovers means nothing. It's about how they got them. Rhoda ran the fade play they called, just missed on the throw. Croft didn't do what everyone's been taught.
 

joshvanklomp said:
He always says this isn't a results-driven culture. The fact that Rhoda and Croft both had turnovers means nothing. It's about how they got them. Rhoda ran the fade play they called, just missed on the throw. Croft didn't do what everyone's been taught.
Click to expand...

Sorry, this makes no sense. The four factors: academically, athletically, socially, spiritually. Failing at any of them means they won't play. He doesn't care who they are, if they do not comply with The Culture they will not play. He has already stated if all 4 QBs fail, which presumedly include failing athletically, e.g. Throwing to the other team's players, fumbles, missing blocks, penalties, they will not play. He doesn't care about wins. Unless PJ told him to throw the ball to the other team your point doesn't make sense.

I'll be watching to see if the ball really is the program, or if Pinocchio John is full of hot air. PJ has painted himself into a corner. Player he champions: failing is growing. Player he disfavors: ride the pine until garbage time.
 

Pompous Elitist said:
Sorry, this makes no sense. The four factors: academically, athletically, socially, spiritually. Failing at any of them means they won't play. He doesn't care who they are, if they do not comply with The Culture they will not play. He has already stated if all 4 QBs fail, which presumedly include failing athletically, e.g. Throwing to the other team's players, fumbles, missing blocks, penalties, they will not play. He doesn't care about wins. Unless PJ told him to throw the ball to the other team your point doesn't make sense.

I'll be watching to see if the ball really is the program, or if Pinocchio John is full of hot air. PJ has painted himself into a corner. Player he champions: failing is growing. Player he disfavors: ride the pine until garbage time.
Click to expand...

“The results will be what the results are, very similar to how we rebuilt the culture at Western Michigan, it’s the same thing. We aren’t going to focus much about the results. We are going to focus on the process of getting the results down the road, but work on the little, internal parts, the fundamentals, the details that we can control, because that’s all we can control.”

You can control jumping on a live ball. You can't control a defensive back making a nice play on the ball.
 

joshvanklomp said:
“The results will be what the results are, very similar to how we rebuilt the culture at Western Michigan, it’s the same thing. We aren’t going to focus much about the results. We are going to focus on the process of getting the results down the road, but work on the little, internal parts, the fundamentals, the details that we can control, because that’s all we can control.”

You can control jumping on a live ball. You can't control a defensive back making a nice play on the ball.
Click to expand...

:rolleyes:

I listen to his press conferences. PJ needs to dial back the rhetoric about 20%. I was moved by his personal story on the show and his life philosophy but honestly, he sounds like he's making it up as he goes along. There's a risk of looking like a hypocrite.
 

A couple of things...

1. The BTN broadcast talked about Croft not playing today due to "personal reasons" several times. But in the 4th Q, one of the announcers said something about Croft leaving the program. Can anyone confirm that was just a misspeak?

2. While I'm in strong agreement with Rhoda being the starter and main QB, I would have liked to see Seth Green get more than trash time handoffs in the blowout, and a chance to do something with the ball. This is particularly an issue if Croft is going to miss anymore time than just today.
 

Pompous Elitist said:
:rolleyes:

I listen to his press conferences. PJ needs to dial back the rhetoric about 20%. I was moved by his personal story on the show and his life philosophy but honestly, he sounds like he's making it up as he goes along. There's a risk of looking like a hypocrite.
Click to expand...

I'm certain Fleck will note your concern and change his approach to life.
Thank you for your service.
 

cncmin said:
1. The BTN broadcast talked about Croft not playing today due to "personal reasons" several times. But in the 4th Q, one of the announcers said something about Croft leaving the program. Can anyone confirm that was just a misspeak?
Click to expand...

I believe it was a misspeak, probably coming from PJ saying he's "away from the team."
 

cncmin said:
A couple of things...

1. The BTN broadcast talked about Croft not playing today due to "personal reasons" several times. But in the 4th Q, one of the announcers said something about Croft leaving the program. Can anyone confirm that was just a misspeak?
Click to expand...
I also remember a graphic in the first quarter that showed Croft's picture and said something like "left team, personal reasons." I just dismissed it as some sort of typo, or a poor way to say that he's not with the team this week.
 

Why can't we just say "suspended" like every other team out there. This "not with team", "away from team" etc. is as hard for everyone to follow as when Coyle tried explaining Claeys' pay after the firing. Just call a spade a spade.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Spoofin said:
Why can't we just say "suspended" like every other team out there. This "not with team", "away from team" etc. is as hard for everyone to follow as when Coyle tried explaining Claeys' pay after the firing. Just call a spade a spade.


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

MC is probably the one behind the wording


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Spoofin said:
Why can't we just say "suspended" like every other team out there. This "not with team", "away from team" etc. is as hard for everyone to follow as when Coyle tried explaining Claeys' pay after the firing. Just call a spade a spade.
Click to expand...

Because maybe it's not a suspension
 




You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom