Fleck again takes the blame but cites major problem with missed tackles

BleedGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 11, 2008
Messages
61,740
Reaction score
17,649
Points
113
Per Joe:

"Winning comes down to winning football games. I know it sounds like a simple statement and really the statement probably doesn't make sense, but it does. We didn't win the turnover battle, we were minus two and you can't be minus categories and beating Iowa. Anybody who's in the minus category, you have like a 3% chance to actually beat Iowa. Tackling, we missed a ton of tackles in the second half," Fleck said Monday morning on KFAN-FM 100.3.

"We were hesitant in the second half for some reason," Fleck continued. "We lost the exlposive play battle and it was unfortunate because I thought we had a really good first half. Made some adjustments, they made some adjustments."


Go Gophers!!
 




True, the level of tackling brought me back to Mason's defenses of finger tackles..
 



We made adjustments?

Could’ve fooled me!
We stopped using passing game that was working in the 2nd qtr.

We stopped blocking the Iowa defensive line

We introduced the Olé tackling approach.

Clearly we made adjustments. Like his use (abuse) of the word Elite, I just don't think Peej knows what an adjustment is.
 






I know I've said this before, but this is part of why Fleck bugs me.

He comes out after a loss and says "It's all on me. It's my responsibility."

and then follows it up with "we missed a lot of tackles." how are missed tackles all on him? wouldn't that reflect on the DC or the position coaches?

he accepts responsibility on one hand, and with the other hand seems to suggest that others are also responsible.

to me, it seems like he's sending a mixed message.
 

Per Joe:

"Winning comes down to winning football games. I know it sounds like a simple statement and really the statement probably doesn't make sense, but it does. We didn't win the turnover battle, we were minus two and you can't be minus categories and beating Iowa. Anybody who's in the minus category, you have like a 3% chance to actually beat Iowa. Tackling, we missed a ton of tackles in the second half," Fleck said Monday morning on KFAN-FM 100.3.

"We were hesitant in the second half for some reason," Fleck continued. "We lost the exlposive play battle and it was unfortunate because I thought we had a really good first half. Made some adjustments, they made some adjustments."


Go Gophers!!

He seriously cited turnovers as a reason for losing the game? The first turnover led to the first score, then the Gophers came back and led 14-7 at the half. The second turnover wasn't until 8:00 left in the 4th when already down by 17. Turnovers had no effect on the outcome.
 

They made better adjustments
Did they? I'm seriously asking as I haven't watched the film or anything. Did Iowa do anything drastically different schematically in the 2nd half or was it more they just showed up and we didn't?
 



Did they? I'm seriously asking as I haven't watched the film or anything. Did Iowa do anything drastically different schematically in the 2nd half or was it more they just showed up and we didn't?
They ran mostly stretch plays in the first half and they run some counter plays that got us all discombobulated in the second. However, one of the runs was just up the middle with it being somewhat inconceivable how the guy popped out and went yard. I would say they made some moderate changes.
 

I know I've said this before, but this is part of why Fleck bugs me.

He comes out after a loss and says "It's all on me. It's my responsibility."

and then follows it up with "we missed a lot of tackles." how are missed tackles all on him? wouldn't that reflect on the DC or the position coaches?

he accepts responsibility on one hand, and with the other hand seems to suggest that others are also responsible.

to me, it seems like he's sending a mixed message.
You and Reusse have been on this for years. He's clearly trying to avoid throwing his players under the bus. You don't have to like it (neither do I), but you'll have to get used it.

I will note one exception that bugs me: He occasionally says it's on him but still finds a way to throw the players under the bus. For example, in the past he has said something like, "If we tell them to do this 100 times and they don't do it, that means we should've told them 101 times. That's on me." What he's saying there is, "Shit, I told them 100 times and they STILL didn't do it."
 

If y’all think you can do better well I have a lake home in Southern Illinois and can just quit and go there.
 

They ran mostly stretch plays in the first half and they run some counter plays that got us all discombobulated in the second. However, one of the runs was just up the middle with it being somewhat inconceivable how the guy popped out and went yard. I would say they made some moderate changes.
Safety came up like he was gonna hit the guy then just stopped in his tracks. GAVE #2 time to reverse away and get the angle. By that time there wasn't anyone in position to make a play. We seem like we had a couple defenders run into each other on that play. We stopped being the aggressor and playing team defense and let them execute everything after that.
 

he accepts responsibility on one hand, and with the other hand seems to suggest that others are also responsible.

to me, it seems like he's sending a mixed message.
But in reality that isn't a mixed message, it is the truth of the matter. Fleck is responsible, the other coaches are responsible AND the players are responsible.

Coaches are screwed no matter what they say after a loss. If they say it is all on them they get ripped, if the blame others they are making excuses and trying to pass the buck.....no matter what a coach says after a loss there are fans that are going to take issue with it.

As to the missed tackles, it is definitely a massive issue for this team. They missed a ridiculous amount of tackles against North Carolina and in the second half against Iowa the tackling was atrocious. No clue how you fix it in season but the coaches better figure something out because you can't have plays that should be stopped for little to no gain turn into massive gains after the players fail to complete the tackle.
 

I understand feeling the need to take responsibility.

I understand not wanting to be like "Our DC screwed up" or "X player did poorly".

But it is dissonant to take responsibility, and then point out a (valid) thing that contributed to our poor performance without giving at least some explanation as to how you (as the head coach) are going to improve that. Hell, even following it up with something like "Me and X coach are going to sit down and review the game footage to identify what we can change during practice to improve this" would be better. Especially since you can then follow it up later with "We made a tweak in how we run an existing drill" or "We added a new drill to address this" to show you've taken action to improve things.
 

He seriously cited turnovers as a reason for losing the game? The first turnover led to the first score, then the Gophers came back and led 14-7 at the half. The second turnover wasn't until 8:00 left in the 4th when already down by 17. Turnovers had no effect on the outcome.

Turnovers absolutely had a big impact. The first turnover led to a 7-14 point difference (Iowa scoring 7 and taking away Minnesota's chance to score) and the second turnover had 0-7 point difference (Gophs at minimum have a field goal attempt). The absence of those two turnovers completely changes the game.
 

Turnovers absolutely had a big impact. The first turnover led to a 7-14 point difference (Iowa scoring 7 and taking away Minnesota's chance to score) and the second turnover had 0-7 point difference (Gophs at minimum have a field goal attempt). The absence of those two turnovers completely changes the game.
It also means the defense didn't cause any turnovers either. Two forced turnovers could have changed the outcome significantly too.

He's right, if you lose the turnover battle to Iowa, your chances of winning are very low.
 

Turnovers absolutely had a big impact. The first turnover led to a 7-14 point difference (Iowa scoring 7 and taking away Minnesota's chance to score) and the second turnover had 0-7 point difference (Gophs at minimum have a field goal attempt). The absence of those two turnovers completely changes the game.
Yeah....anyone who watches football knows turnovers play a massive role in the outcome of most games. Not sure why anyone would even attempt to pretend like they don't.
 

It also means the defense didn't cause any turnovers either. Two forced turnovers could have changed the outcome significantly too.

He's right, if you lose the turnover battle to Iowa, your chances of winning are very low.
Not just Iowa....when there isn't a massive talent difference between the teams the turnover margin tends to be a key factor in the outcome of the game.

Don't have any numbers to back it up but feel very confident saying that in games with similar opponents the team that loses the turnover battle rarely wins the game.
 

The team that can’t run the ball, nor stop the run, loses the game. Also it’s inevitable a qb without a running game is forced to throw and will likely have more picks. How many o line guys did we lose from last year? I never suspected we wouldn’t be able to run vs a decent team!
 

But in reality that isn't a mixed message, it is the truth of the matter. Fleck is responsible, the other coaches are responsible AND the players are responsible.

Coaches are screwed no matter what they say after a loss. If they say it is all on them they get ripped, if the blame others they are making excuses and trying to pass the buck.....no matter what a coach says after a loss there are fans that are going to take issue with it.

As to the missed tackles, it is definitely a massive issue for this team. They missed a ridiculous amount of tackles against North Carolina and in the second half against Iowa the tackling was atrocious. No clue how you fix it in season but the coaches better figure something out because you can't have plays that should be stopped for little to no gain turn into massive gains after the players fail to complete the tackle.
The inconsistency comes when he identifies specific deficiencies in others (even though he avoids mentioning them by name) but never any similar deficiencies with his own work (aside for the platitude "it's all on me."). Sure, the missed tackles were a problem in the loss. But, what were the problems with our game plan or adjustments? Or does he think they were perfect?

You are right about them getting ripped no matter what after a loss. At the end of the day, a coach's future will be (and should be) dictated by whether they win or lose, not what they say in the press conference. I can nitpick his comments, but what bugs me is we just dropped to 2-2 (and 1-6 against Iowa). If we were 4-0 and PJ had just won Floyd for the 6th time in 7 tries, he could get up there and read supermarket coupons into the microphone and I'd be happy.
 

Our LB corps has lacked talent and tackling for a few years now. We had a few studs during the Kill era and then Thomas Barber and Braelon Oliver weren't the biggest or fastest, but you knew they were going to crack and lay the wood, reminded me of old-school 90's LB's.

Baranowski and Lindenberg are almost always making the wrong read, filling the wrong gap, or missing a tackle and laying on the ground as the back scampers away. Williams is OK but has also made a lot of bad reads.

I remember when we had a steady stream of LB's transferring over the last few years, this forum and other fans were assuring me that our LB room would be fine. Well, it's not. Iowa's LB's made ours look like DII guys.

Don't even get me started on the secondary. Kerry Brown is legit but he's an undersized safety and young, we can't throw it all at him.

The fact is, our back 7 is...rough. I don't know how you fix it.
 

The inconsistency comes when he identifies specific deficiencies in others (even though he avoids mentioning them by name) but never any similar deficiencies with his own work (aside for the platitude "it's all on me."). Sure, the missed tackles were a problem in the loss. But, what were the problems with our game plan or adjustments? Or does he think they were perfect?

You are right about them getting ripped no matter what after a loss. At the end of the day, a coach's future will be (and should be) dictated by whether they win or lose, not what they say in the press conference. I can nitpick his comments, but what bugs me is we just dropped to 2-2 (and 1-6 against Iowa). If we were 4-0 and PJ had just won Floyd for the 6th time in 7 tries, he could get up there and read supermarket coupons into the microphone and I'd be happy.
To your first part, to me this comes back to not really knowing what fans expect a coach to say after a loss. In a post game press conference they aren't going to be able to do a deep dive into what went wrong and frankly they shouldn't have to. As disappointed as the fans are with the result I guarantee the players and coaches are taking it 100 times harder because they are the ones who are truly invested in what happens on gameday. Fans think/act like they are but it isn't even close.
 

Our LB corps has lacked talent and tackling for a few years now. We had a few studs during the Kill era and then Thomas Barber and Braelon Oliver weren't the biggest or fastest, but you knew they were going to crack and lay the wood, reminded me of old-school 90's LB's.

Baranowski and Lindenberg are almost always making the wrong read, filling the wrong gap, or missing a tackle and laying on the ground as the back scampers away. Williams is OK but has also made a lot of bad reads.

I remember when we had a steady stream of LB's transferring over the last few years, this forum and other fans were assuring me that our LB room would be fine. Well, it's not. Iowa's LB's made ours look like DII guys.

Don't even get me started on the secondary. Kerry Brown is legit but he's an undersized safety and young, we can't throw it all at him.

The fact is, our back 7 is...rough. I don't know how you fix it.
The secondary has actually been really good so far IMO. Not that they've had to face top passing offenses or anything. The front 7 was much more concerning against Iowa.
 

Our LB corps has lacked talent and tackling for a few years now. We had a few studs during the Kill era and then Thomas Barber and Braelon Oliver weren't the biggest or fastest, but you knew they were going to crack and lay the wood, reminded me of old-school 90's LB's.

Baranowski and Lindenberg are almost always making the wrong read, filling the wrong gap, or missing a tackle and laying on the ground as the back scampers away. Williams is OK but has also made a lot of bad reads.

I remember when we had a steady stream of LB's transferring over the last few years, this forum and other fans were assuring me that our LB room would be fine. Well, it's not. Iowa's LB's made ours look like DII guys.

Don't even get me started on the secondary. Kerry Brown is legit but he's an undersized safety and young, we can't throw it all at him.

The fact is, our back 7 is...rough. I don't know how you fix it.
I think when healthy the secondary is solid. We definitely missed Walley and Gousby against Iowa. Having game ready depth is tough to come by in the portal era.

LB position is a mess though and would have really benefited from a Jack Gibson like transfer to help bolster that unit. We have been hit hard there with guys transferring out and while guys like Lindenberg and Mav have some ability, Lindenberg still seems to be dealing with injuries and Mav is young. Somehow they have to get better play out of that LB group but tough to say if the answers are on the roster right now.....hopefully they are.
 

Could care less what Fleck says after a game. The performance on the field tells the story. Poor tackling and turnovers are indicative of poor coaching. Period. I don’t pretend to be a coaching expert even I stayed in a Holiday Inn Express last night. Iowa is not an elite team especially after losing to Iowa State. They seem to be better coached than the gophers. They established an identity with their run game and rode it to victory. The Gophers identity? Other than when clubbing FCS baby seals, the Gophs don’t have one. Michigan is going to run, run and run again. They don’t have a qb that pass and won’t need one. Michigan by 2-3 tds. Que the Fleck speech on how it falls on him. The only thing falling on him is the millions falling from the Minnesota money tree
 




Top Bottom