Gophers Crush Maryland: Post-Game Reaction Thread

Donate To GopherHole
DCinOK said:
What bugs me about defending the closing out of the 1st half so meekly is this oft-used phrase "The Gophers get the ball first to start the 2nd half." So what. NOT relevant. Each possession is a jealous mistress and should be treated with fear, reverance, and affection. Use it for all its worth.
Click to expand...
In football, halftime adjustments can completely change the game. So if a team has the momentum at the end of the first half, they should always try to score.
 


A couple arguments I feel pretty strongly about.

1. "Halftime adjustments" are the second greatest most overrated talking point fans could possibly talk about.

It's a argument fans use whenever they want and their is no proof that a team did employ them well or not. For as many times as teams have good halftime adjustments, how often is the other team adjusting a drive later? Is there a tangible way of measuring the success of "halftime adjustments"?

If you go by points, Fleck made great "halftime adjustments" in this game, but didn't do as well against Nebraska. Was his halftime adjustments bad against Nebraska, or did Scott Frost just have better "halftime adjustments" that trumped the "halftime adjustments" we made. Or does the opposing team never make halftime adjustments?

What if neither team made any adjustments and one team just executed better by blocking and tackling better? Is that good coaching or is only halftime adjustments worthy of being a data point for good coaching?

2. Arguments about time management / time out usage. This is the most overrated talking point.
Just because random fan uses his timeouts in Madden correctly every time and takes 3 shots to the end zone before the end of every half does not mean you now have better game / time management than the typical college football coach.

Also, the odds of any of it being of consequence is a low percentage, and in that equation, it's often forgotten that if you do take shots and don't convert, the other team gets the ball and another possession. So the negative impact is hardly ever mentioned.

That's all.

Thanks for reading.
 




There is so much to like about this team: good d that runs to the ball, strong and sometimes dominating o line, running game with depth and skill, and well coached with a team that doesn't commit a lot of penalties. But to achieve a Big Ten West title we need a little more. Consistency with the special teams: especially making field goals, and a trust in the qb and the passing game. PJ needs believe that his veteran qb who has 23 career wins will make the right decision. Fleck has said he will always be aggressive but as Jerry Kill said, "I hear what you say but I trust what you do." His decision making with the pass offense tells us something different. I love what is going on with this program and just want them to go for it and let the chips fall where they may.
 

Face The Facts said:
A couple arguments I feel pretty strongly about.

1. "Halftime adjustments" are the second greatest most overrated talking point fans could possibly talk about.

It's a argument fans use whenever they want and their is no proof that a team did employ them well or not. For as many times as teams have good halftime adjustments, how often is the other team adjusting a drive later? Is there a tangible way of measuring the success of "halftime adjustments"?

If you go by points, Fleck made great "halftime adjustments" in this game, but didn't do as well against Nebraska. Was his halftime adjustments bad against Nebraska, or did Scott Frost just have better "halftime adjustments" that trumped the "halftime adjustments" we made. Or does the opposing team never make halftime adjustments?

What if neither team made any adjustments and one team just executed better by blocking and tackling better? Is that good coaching or is only halftime adjustments worthy of being a data point for good coaching?

2. Arguments about time management / time out usage. This is the most overrated talking point.
Just because random fan uses his timeouts in Madden correctly every time and takes 3 shots to the end zone before the end of every half does not mean you now have better game / time management than the typical college football coach.

Also, the odds of any of it being of consequence is a low percentage, and in that equation, it's often forgotten that if you do take shots and don't convert, the other team gets the ball and another possession. So the negative impact is hardly ever mentioned.

That's all.

Thanks for reading.
Click to expand...

I think most Gopher fans realize that there is some risk involved. I'm not 100% sure if there is more risk of an INT or a missed FG in that situation (I'd bet it would be pretty close), but we all do understand that there is a risk vs. reward analysis. We just think PJ improperly calculated the risks compared to the reward in this scenario.

PJ is a fantastic coach. I don't have any issues with how he uses his timeouts (I actually really like it. I think getting the right play at he right time is often way more important than stopping the clock for a future hypothetical drive), but he butchered the 2 minute drill on Saturday. Really good coaches make mistakes. I'm sure if I were in his shoes, I'd make countless more than he makes. That doesn't mean we're too big of rubes to be able to spot when mistakes are made.

It was a weird two minute drill, so I do cut him some slack on what happened, but his reasoning did bother me. I loathe the analysis that "well, we're getting the ball in the second half so I wanted to be up 10". Huh? It takes the FG for granted (can't do that in college). Why would getting the ball in the second half make being up by 10 more enticing than being up 14? Going into halftime, the correct mindset is that you want as many points as you can get.

Yeah, it would have been nice to be up 20-10 going into halftime, but being up 24-10 would have been nicer.
 

And many of the same fans ripping him for "playing it safe" would have been ripping him if Morgan gets sacked taking them out of FG range or if there is a turnover. The game thread would have been filled with "you have the lead and the ball what are you thinking?!?!?" along with "our run game is crushing why risk a throw?". It is as predictable as certain fans denigrating whoever we beat as obviously not that good.

That is not a defense of just accepting a long FG (I would have tried to get a lot closer just for the kickers sake) but we have all been around here long enough to know how this plays out in every scenario and unless points are scored people would be whining about the decisions made because ultimately most fans make their judgement based on outcome not on percentages. That is why their hot takes change week to week.

I don't agree with PJ's decision for the most part but mostly because I think he made it at the wrong time. I think he is right that any points before halftime is killer because Maryland had done next to nothing and had no answer for the running attack. (their DC didn't even change things up it always looked like base D no matter the formation) The issue isn't playing it safe, it is that they weren't safe yet. He showed too much faith in the kicker which I am sure makes him feel great but putting him in a better position closer in would have made him feel better IMHO. I think part of it though is that I don't much trust our passing game right now and methinks in parts of PJs mind he doesn't either. Morgan, while being a great leader of the team makes some rather questionable decisions under duress unless it is crossing patterns. (we also don't give him enough outlets...cause when we do it works like a charm like MBS dump off) PJ being risk averse anyways is going to lean on his conservative nature even harder if that is the case.

I wonder, if we have a QB who was more mobile and perhaps a stronger overall thrower in the future if PJ might just let it rip a bit more. Likely not, but who knows.
 

Dave H said:
And many of the same fans ripping him for "playing it safe" would have been ripping him if Morgan gets sacked taking them out of FG range or if there is a turnover. The game thread would have been filled with "you have the lead and the ball what are you thinking?!?!?" along with "our run game is crushing why risk a throw?". It is as predictable as certain fans denigrating whoever we beat as obviously not that good.

That is not a defense of just accepting a long FG (I would have tried to get a lot closer just for the kickers sake) but we have all been around here long enough to know how this plays out in every scenario and unless points are scored people would be whining about the decisions made because ultimately most fans make their judgement based on outcome not on percentages. That is why their hot takes change week to week.

I don't agree with PJ's decision for the most part but mostly because I think he made it at the wrong time. I think he is right that any points before halftime is killer because Maryland had done next to nothing and had no answer for the running attack. (their DC didn't even change things up it always looked like base D no matter the formation) The issue isn't playing it safe, it is that they weren't safe yet. He showed too much faith in the kicker which I am sure makes him feel great but putting him in a better position closer in would have made him feel better IMHO. I think part of it though is that I don't much trust our passing game right now and methinks in parts of PJs mind he doesn't either. Morgan, while being a great leader of the team makes some rather questionable decisions under duress unless it is crossing patterns. (we also don't give him enough outlets...cause when we do it works like a charm like MBS dump off)
Click to expand...
If Tanner had been sacked on second down, I would have ripped the o-line or Morgan (depending on whose fault the sack was). I would not have said "why did you run a play on second down instead of burning clock and kicking a field goal."
 



I didn't say you would have wanted them to burn clock, but plenty would have said why pass when you can run it down their throats? (and then if they did and it was stuff they would have hated that as well)

note: I am speaking in general, not saying you specifically.
 

I really liked how they spread out the carries and then went a little bit more with the hot hand in Thomas. I know I'm not the only one but I hated how they gave so many carries to Mo or Trey. There's no reason any one of them should get 30+ carries.
 

Dave H said:
And many of the same fans ripping him for "playing it safe" would have been ripping him if Morgan gets sacked taking them out of FG range or if there is a turnover. The game thread would have been filled with "you have the lead and the ball what are you thinking?!?!?" along with "our run game is crushing why risk a throw?". It is as predictable as certain fans denigrating whoever we beat as obviously not that good.

That is not a defense of just accepting a long FG (I would have tried to get a lot closer just for the kickers sake) but we have all been around here long enough to know how this plays out in every scenario and unless points are scored people would be whining about the decisions made because ultimately most fans make their judgement based on outcome not on percentages. That is why their hot takes change week to week.

I don't agree with PJ's decision for the most part but mostly because I think he made it at the wrong time. I think he is right that any points before halftime is killer because Maryland had done next to nothing and had no answer for the running attack. (their DC didn't even change things up it always looked like base D no matter the formation) The issue isn't playing it safe, it is that they weren't safe yet. He showed too much faith in the kicker which I am sure makes him feel great but putting him in a better position closer in would have made him feel better IMHO. I think part of it though is that I don't much trust our passing game right now and methinks in parts of PJs mind he doesn't either. Morgan, while being a great leader of the team makes some rather questionable decisions under duress unless it is crossing patterns. (we also don't give him enough outlets...cause when we do it works like a charm like MBS dump off) PJ being risk averse anyways is going to lean on his conservative nature even harder if that is the case.

I wonder, if we have a QB who was more mobile and perhaps a stronger overall thrower in the future if PJ might just let it rip a bit more. Likely not, but who knows.
Click to expand...
Well said. I wasn't so much against the field goal attempt, but would rather see the coaches give the offense the opportunity to finish the drive they started by having them take a few cracks inside the red zone. They did all that work to get down there, why not reward the team with a couple of opportunities to score a TD? If we were just going to run it with the intention of kicking the field goal, then why not bring in Kramer at that point to give you another option at running and to burden the defense with another ball carrier to account for? With the way the line was blocking and our backs were running, having to account for Kramer could have been all that was needed to break one through for a score. Tanner almost never runs, so the defense could key in on the running back for their reads without having to worry about him doing anything with the ball.
 

Face The Facts said:
A couple arguments I feel pretty strongly about.

1. "Halftime adjustments" are the second greatest most overrated talking point fans could possibly talk about.

It's a argument fans use whenever they want and their is no proof that a team did employ them well or not. For as many times as teams have good halftime adjustments, how often is the other team adjusting a drive later? Is there a tangible way of measuring the success of "halftime adjustments"?

If you go by points, Fleck made great "halftime adjustments" in this game, but didn't do as well against Nebraska. Was his halftime adjustments bad against Nebraska, or did Scott Frost just have better "halftime adjustments" that trumped the "halftime adjustments" we made. Or does the opposing team never make halftime adjustments?

What if neither team made any adjustments and one team just executed better by blocking and tackling better? Is that good coaching or is only halftime adjustments worthy of being a data point for good coaching?

2. Arguments about time management / time out usage. This is the most overrated talking point.
Just because random fan uses his timeouts in Madden correctly every time and takes 3 shots to the end zone before the end of every half does not mean you now have better game / time management than the typical college football coach.

Also, the odds of any of it being of consequence is a low percentage, and in that equation, it's often forgotten that if you do take shots and don't convert, the other team gets the ball and another possession. So the negative impact is hardly ever mentioned.

That's all.

Thanks for reading.
Click to expand...
I would like to see them come out the second half with a handful of scripted plays and go hurry up. Our offense is so methodical, I want to see them change up their speed and just go sometimes. Even if its not what you want to do it has value in throwing off the defense.
 



Another really encouraging performance on Saturday. The passing game really baffles me. I really wish they would throw a little more often even with the lead. I feel like game reps are important and it would be great to get Wright (one of our biggest upsided players IMHO) a couple catches to try and build his confidence, I feel they'll need him to make a big play or two at a key moment if they're going to finish the season like we hope they will. Also it would have been nice to see whoever the backup QB is get a few snaps at the end there running the "regular" offense. The opportunities to get backup QB's in to conference games are few and far between and we had one on Saturday.

Loved the rotation of the backs and it was encouraging that they all found success. I worry about fumbles with so many different guys handling the ball in the backfield, but that hasn't been an issue..knock on wood. It might have been the bye week or it may have been the change in rotation with Dunlap gone, but the OL seems to be run blocking at a higher level and doing a better job in pass protection as well.

Can't say enough about Rossi's defense. The 4th and 1 stop that went a long way to ending the game was sort of a drop by the Maryland pass catcher, but the scheme was so sound. QB rolls out with the run option...Gophers have it covered, first read is WR/TE running short from left to right...have that covered, QB has to go to second read (and 3rd option on the play) and throws it a bit behind him while facing pressure. That's about as good as you can cover a 4th and short pass play.

My concerns going forward are with the special teams and whether this team can respond in a game where they start down say 10-0 instead of playing with the lead.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom