Fleck has become worse than Kill

Allshade

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
457
Reaction score
330
Points
63
I get Mn is going to be worse
I think Iowa will be better
Why do you think wisconsin will be better? I disagree with that one.

They’re kind a wild car, but if they aren’t successful in the portal they’ll be worse. If they’re unsuccessful in the portal (and lose key guys) they’ll be much worse.

You’re pretty negative
Purdue will be worse
Illinois will be worse
If northwestern loses hull they might be the worst big ten team in 20 years
Michigan state is a wild card
Honestly haven’t watched UNC since the app state game

I could see us winning 5
I could see us winning 10
You think 5 is optimistic? If you think 5 is optimistic and it’ll actually be worse I assume you want to move on from the coach? If I expected 4-8 or 5-7 I would want to move on from the coach
You wouldn't give Fleck a few losing seasons?
 


Some guy

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 1, 2014
Messages
17,474
Reaction score
7,720
Points
113
When we struggle to make a bowl game next year? Yes, I'll definitely be ready.

Wisconsin is going to be better because they fired their coach.
I think wisconsin is going to be the same because they’re going to hire internal

I think you’re delusional to think that people who believe wisconsin will be closer to a 6-6 team next year than a 10-2 team are lying to themselves
 

Some guy

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 1, 2014
Messages
17,474
Reaction score
7,720
Points
113
You wouldn't give Fleck a few losing seasons?
I wouldn’t give a coach any seasons if I didn’t think they can get it done long term

If your goal is to win a conference title and you don’t believe they can contend for a conference title in the future you should fire them right now. If you keep someone who you don’t think can get it done you’re SOFT
 

Allshade

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
457
Reaction score
330
Points
63
This was our year because IA and WI are both the worst they've been in a long time, and we have an old roster filled with talented players. It makes me sick that Iowa is going to win the West, again, and they weren't even mediocre this year, let alone good. I would argue that this is Iowa's worst team in at least 10 years, and Wisconsin's worst team in at least 14 years if not longer. And despite those both happening simultaneously, along with us concurrently having one of our better teams in decades, we STILL couldn't win the division. It's hard to think anything other than - if it didn't happen this year, when is it EVER going to happen?

I wish I shared your optimism for 2023, but I truly don't see how we're even competitive in the conference next year. We're effectively trading Rutgers for Michigan, and PSU for OSU. (The latter doesn't really matter, since we were boatraced by PSU and it will be even worse at Columbus next year.) We are also going to get destroyed at Chapel Hill. If we had the 2023 schedule this year, we're sitting at 5-6 hoping to win in Madison to squeeze into a bowl game. And you think we're going to compete for the Big Ten West next year, against a much tougher schedule, with a worse roster? I think you're crazy, but maybe that's just me. I see maybe 3 Big Ten wins next year, and even that might be generous.
We can barely complete a forward pass, yet you think this was one of our best teams in decades. I don't get it.
 


GopherBulldog

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 5, 2015
Messages
1,191
Reaction score
127
Points
63
There aren't any, just like there weren't any this year. And yet we're probably going to go 2-4 against the West this year.

Do you deny that we're going to have a less talented roster next year? And do you deny that Wisconsin and Iowa are almost certainly going to be better next year? I think anyone who denies any of those three is lying to themselves. And when we go 1-2 against the East next year (at best), that means we're going to need to go 5-1 or 6-0 against the West to win it. In reality, I think we go 2-1 in the nonconference, 1-2 against the East, and 2-4 against the West. That's 5-7, and honestly that's even optimistic against what we'll likely do.
I don’t think it’s a given we will be worse. I don’t think it’s a given that Iowa or Wisky will be better. I believe we will be right in the mix in November. As much as it drives me crazy that we can’t close it out when we statistically dominate Iowa, lose to Wisky on Gameday in our house and shit the bed against Purdue, the fact that we have been in the mix so frequently is historically very positive. I expect the same in 2023. But you seem to be the Nostradamus of college football.
 

Allshade

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
457
Reaction score
330
Points
63
I wouldn’t give a coach any seasons if I didn’t think they can get it done long term

If your goal is to win a conference title and you don’t believe they can contend for a conference title in the future you should fire them right now. If you keep someone who you don’t think can get it done you’re SOFT
We've been selling the UofM to recruits for 50 years and have been unable to get the talent we need to, as you say, get it done. Go ahead, fire Fleck. Start over. Then we'll really see how angry you can get.
 

Some guy

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 1, 2014
Messages
17,474
Reaction score
7,720
Points
113
We've been selling the UofM to recruits for 50 years and have been unable to get the talent we need to, as you say, get it done. Go ahead, fire Fleck. Start over. Then we'll really see how angry you can get.
I don’t want to fire him.

I do think all the people who are willing to say he is bad and unable to get it done. That the team will be lucky to win 5 next year….
But they’re unwilling to say fire him now.
They are Absolutely soft snowflake bitches.

If you think he sucks, take pride and your opinion and say it now.
 

Allshade

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
457
Reaction score
330
Points
63
I wouldn’t give a coach any seasons if I didn’t think they can get it done long term

If your goal is to win a conference title and you don’t believe they can contend for a conference title in the future you should fire them right now. If you keep someone who you don’t think can get it done you’re SOFT
We've been selling the UofM to recruits for 50 years and have been unable to get the talent we need to, as you say, get it done. Go ahead, fire Fleck. Start over. Then we'll really see how angry you can get.
 



dpodoll68

Elite Poster
Joined
Nov 24, 2008
Messages
19,085
Reaction score
467
Points
83
We can barely complete a forward pass, yet you think this was one of our best teams in decades. I don't get it.
We absolutely CAN complete a forward pass, it's just that our head coach gets a hard-on from passing 15 times a game.

And this is unquestionably one of our better teams in decades. That simply can't be argued. In the last 45 years, the only teams arguably better are 1999, 2003, 2014, 2016, 2019, and 2021. So at worst, this is the 7th-best team in the last 45 years. It's a team that should've gone 10-2 at worst and is going to go 7-5.
 

Some guy

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 1, 2014
Messages
17,474
Reaction score
7,720
Points
113
We absolutely CAN complete a forward pass, it's just that our head coach gets a hard-on from passing 15 times a game.

And this is unquestionably one of our better teams in decades. That simply can't be argued. In the last 45 years, the only teams arguably better are 1999, 2003, 2014, 2016, 2019, and 2021. So at worst, this is the 7th-best team in the last 45 years. It's a team that should've gone 10-2 at worst and is going to go 7-5.
do not agree with this analysis.
85, 86, 89, 90, 02, 05, 18 also all arguably as good as this team
 

dpodoll68

Elite Poster
Joined
Nov 24, 2008
Messages
19,085
Reaction score
467
Points
83
I don’t want to fire him.

I do think all the people who are willing to say he is bad and unable to get it done. That the team will be lucky to win 5 next year….
But they’re unwilling to say fire him now.
They are Absolutely soft snowflake bitches.

If you think he sucks, take pride and your opinion and say it now.
I'm not saying he can't, I'm saying he won't. It doesn't have to be this way. He is choosing to do this. He wants to run the ball 80% of the time against Big Ten teams, and the results are predictable. It's perfectly normal and even advisable to be very conservative when taking over a major conference job that's been poor-to-middling, and then you open it up when you get more and more players that are used to your system. Somehow, bafflingly, he gets more conservative year-over-year, and seemingly game-to-game, the longer he stays here. If he changes things up next year and moves into the 1960s (as opposed to the 1930s where our offensive strategy is now), I reserve the right to be wrong about how next year, and ultimately his tenure at Minnesota, will go. I don't think he will change, and consequently I don't think I will be wrong.
 




Allshade

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
457
Reaction score
330
Points
63
I don’t want to fire him.

I do think all the people who are willing to say he is bad and unable to get it done. That the team will be lucky to win 5 next year….
But they’re unwilling to say fire him now.
They are Absolutely soft snowflake bitches.

If you think he sucks, take pride and your opinion and say it now.

We absolutely CAN complete a forward pass, it's just that our head coach gets a hard-on from passing 15 times a game.

And this is unquestionably one of our better teams in decades. That simply can't be argued. In the last 45 years, the only teams arguably better are 1999, 2003, 2014, 2016, 2019, and 2021. So at worst, this is the 7th-best team in the last 45 years. It's a team that should've gone 10-2 at worst and is going to go 7-5.
What needed to be different to go 10-2?
 

Some guy

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 1, 2014
Messages
17,474
Reaction score
7,720
Points
113
I'm not saying he can't, I'm saying he won't. It doesn't have to be this way. He is choosing to do this. He wants to run the ball 80% of the time against Big Ten teams, and the results are predictable. It's perfectly normal and even advisable to be very conservative when taking over a major conference job that's been poor-to-middling, and then you open it up when you get more and more players that are used to your system. Somehow, bafflingly, he gets more conservative year-over-year, and seemingly game-to-game, the longer he stays here. If he changes things up next year and moves into the 1960s (as opposed to the 1930s where our offensive strategy is now), I reserve the right to be wrong about how next year, and ultimately his tenure at Minnesota, will go. I don't think he will change, and consequently I don't think I will be wrong.
So you don’t think he has it in him to get it done. So why are you so soft to not just say youd fire him?
If you don’t think he will get it done what’s the point in keeping him? You think he is going to change? He isn’t going to change. Our offense in 2017 is the same as it is now, and schematically it never has change even through a different OC
 

Some guy

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 1, 2014
Messages
17,474
Reaction score
7,720
Points
113
I’d argue this team post autman bell injury isn’t a top 10 roster of the past 45 years
We don’t have a wideout with talent on the roster. We play a freshman QB with a career 47% completion percentage and a 1/4 TD/INT

This is the worst fleck offense since 2017.
 

dpodoll68

Elite Poster
Joined
Nov 24, 2008
Messages
19,085
Reaction score
467
Points
83
What needed to be different to go 10-2?
1. Run/pass balance somewhere closer to 60/40 instead of 80/20
2. Knowing when to go for it on 4th-and-short
3. Knowing how to use your fucking timeouts
4. Diversity of play calling - call a screen, run outside the tackles, jet sweep, etc., etc. as opposed to some variation of inside zone 45-50 times a game and 12-15 mostly low-percentage passes

...for starters.
 

Some guy

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 1, 2014
Messages
17,474
Reaction score
7,720
Points
113
1. Run/pass balance somewhere closer to 60/40 instead of 80/20
2. Knowing when to go for it on 4th-and-short
3. Knowing how to use your fucking timeouts
4. Diversity of play calling - call a screen, run outside the tackles, jet sweep, etc., etc. as opposed to some variation of inside zone 45-50 times a game and 12-15 mostly low-percentage passes

...for starters.
Jet sweep:
Lol
 

dpodoll68

Elite Poster
Joined
Nov 24, 2008
Messages
19,085
Reaction score
467
Points
83
I’d argue this team post autman bell injury isn’t a top 10 roster of the past 45 years
We don’t have a wideout with talent on the roster. We play a freshman QB with a career 47% completion percentage and a 1/4 TD/INT
We have a top-10 defense in the country, perhaps the best RB this school has ever had, perhaps the best C in the country, one of the better TEs in the country according to PFF. We could stand to upgrade at 3 of the 5 OL positions, and our WRs are bad. Morgan (our actual starter for most of the season, not the freshman) could've played much better, but it's somewhat understandable when he's asked to throw 12-15 times per game and is unable to establish any kind of rhythm.

Again, as mentioned earlier, we were favored in 10 of 12 games this year - and even in this upcoming game, one of the two we're not favored in, we're essentially a coinflip giving them homefield advantage. When was the last time we could say that? Ever?
 

Some guy

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 1, 2014
Messages
17,474
Reaction score
7,720
Points
113
We have a top-10 defense in the country, perhaps the best RB this school has ever had, perhaps the best C in the country, one of the better TEs in the country according to PFF. We could stand to upgrade at 3 of the 5 OL positions, and our WRs are bad. Morgan (our actual starter for most of the season, not the freshman) could've played much better, but it's somewhat understandable when he's asked to throw 12-15 times per game and is unable to establish any kind of rhythm.

Again, as mentioned earlier, we were favored in 10 of 12 games this year - and even in this upcoming game, one of the two we're not favored in, we're essentially a coinflip giving them homefield advantage. When was the last time we could say that? Ever?
No idea, but we aren’t a very good team.

Playing bad teams so we are favored doesn’t make this a good team.
When is the last time zero teams in the west were ranked this weekend? I’ll give you a hint…it’s the first time in the history of the west.
 

dpodoll68

Elite Poster
Joined
Nov 24, 2008
Messages
19,085
Reaction score
467
Points
83
No idea, but we aren’t a very good team.
Every advanced metric that has us in the top 30 or better would disagree.
Playing bad teams so we are favored doesn’t make this a good team.
When is the last time zero teams in the west were ranked this weekend? I’ll give you a hint…it’s the first time in the history of the west.
AND WE STILL CAN'T WIN THE DIVISION!!

You're making my argument for me.
 

Some guy

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 1, 2014
Messages
17,474
Reaction score
7,720
Points
113
You are correct that the west was there for the taking. Nobody is very good. But the problem is neither are the gophers. The reason that we have a top 11 defense?
We played one too 20 scoring offense and gave up 45
We didn’t play another top 60 offense.

68 Purdue
75 wisconsin
85 Michigan state
93 Illinois
103 Nebraska
117 New Mexico State
119 Rutgers
123 Iowa
127 Colorado
128 northwestern


That crappy Wisconsin offense we play this week? That’s the third best offense we will have played to date.
 

Some guy

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 1, 2014
Messages
17,474
Reaction score
7,720
Points
113
Every advanced metric that has us in the top 30 or better would disagree.

AND WE STILL CAN'T WIN THE DIVISION!!

You're making my argument for me.
No I am not.
You are arguing that we are a good team that didn’t win a division there for the taking

I am arguing we are very much a mediocre team and part of what makes the division mediocre
If we were good we would’ve won the division. We can’t score. We have a good, not great defense and played against 10 shitty offenses. The one good offense we played dropped 45
 

Some guy

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 1, 2014
Messages
17,474
Reaction score
7,720
Points
113
Respectfully, saying we "should" be competitive next year isn't an argument. Take an unbiased look at the data. We're going to go 8-4 or 7-5 (probably the latter) against a schedule in which we were favored in 10 games. We will end the season favored in 7 of 9 Big Ten games, and will win either 4 or 5. Next year we're going to be favored in maybe 6 games (3 or 4 in the Big Ten), and we're going to be competitive in the West? With the same success rate next year, we're going to go 3-9 or 4-8.
Just have the courage to say you want to fire the coach. Why are you so soft?
 

dpodoll68

Elite Poster
Joined
Nov 24, 2008
Messages
19,085
Reaction score
467
Points
83
No I am not.
You are arguing that we are a good team that didn’t win a division there for the taking

I am arguing we are very much a mediocre team and part of what makes the division mediocre
If we were good we would’ve won the division. We can’t score. We have a good, not great defense and played against 10 shitty offenses. The one good offense we played dropped 45
Explain SP+ ranking us 17th and Sagarin ranking us 29th, even at 7-4. I'm assuming they just don't know what they're talking about and/or their models are bad.

We are good, and we can't score because our head coach insists on playing offense like it's 1930.
 


Some guy

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 1, 2014
Messages
17,474
Reaction score
7,720
Points
113
Explain SP+ ranking us 17th and Sagarin ranking us 29th, even at 7-4. I'm assuming they just don't know what they're talking about and/or their models are bad.

We are good, and we can't score because our head coach insists on playing offense like it's 1930.
Do you understand how efficiency models work? We are ranked really high because we have 7 blowout wins and 3 close losses.
SP+ doesn’t care about wins and losses only about Effiency.

Football cares about wins and losses as do I.
If we had beaten Purdue and Iowa by 3 each but lost by 40 to Illinois we would be ranked lower not higher.
 

Some guy

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 1, 2014
Messages
17,474
Reaction score
7,720
Points
113
I guess I'm just not as manly as you are. I bow to your superior penis.
Any man who says the solution is to “run more jet sweep” has lost the right to be taken seriously as a commentator. You’re really really dumb
 
Last edited:

Live in the now

Active member
Joined
Dec 5, 2021
Messages
416
Reaction score
207
Points
43
So are you ready to move on?
Wisconsin clearly thinks they’ll be worse, which is why they fired their coach

Pretty odd take to say that Wisconsin will be better next year and anyone who thinks differently is lying to themselves with your reasoning being a reversion to a 30 year mean?
You think Ron Dayne means wisconsin will be better next year? Because that literally is what you just argued
I think the badgers will be better. Allen another year older and also dike. They had 8 new starters on defense. And 2 of the 3 games they lost were in the last play of the game. It’s just Mertz and I really believe that. He is just killing them, but they will probably start him again for some reason. I usually like and agree with your posts but I think the gophers are losing a ton and will struggle. Look how they have leaned in mo and also what happened in games he couldn’t play in. That’s a massive loss.
 

Some guy

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 1, 2014
Messages
17,474
Reaction score
7,720
Points
113
I think the badgers will be better. Allen another year older and also dike. They had 8 new starters on defense. And 2 of the 3 games they lost were in the last play of the game. It’s just Mertz and I really believe that. He is just killing them, but they will probably start him again for some reason. I usually like and agree with your posts but I think the gophers are losing a ton and will struggle. Look how they have leaned in mo and also what happened in games he couldn’t play in. That’s a massive loss.
Allen may not be back.
Mertz is like a top 4 QB in the conference statistically.

I’m not a Mertz guy, but it isn’t mertz.
If we had Mertz we would be 10-1
 




Top Bottom