Kill on expectations of next year, QB situation and more

[BleedGopher]

per Bloggin Scoggins:

I asked Kill if there’s a chance that redshirt freshman Jacques Perra could challenge Leidner for the job next season.

Kill: “You know what, come back and ask me – a lot of people forget about [Chris] Streveler too – but come back and ask me that question before we start spring. I need to see the offseason. But it will be hard because I think Mitch is going to take that next stride.

“I understand, it’s like people talk about me making decisions. I get that. But I would just tell you that I’ll know a lot more about everything in the spring. But I anticipate that Mitch -- certainly in the bowl game on a big stage, I thought he did a good job. I know what he can do. He’s just got to continue to work.”

http://www.startribune.com/sports/blogs/287535471.html

Go Gophers!!

 

[die hard gopher]

Another very good interview.

 

[TCF=UnitedWeStand]

It's great to have a columnist in the Twin Cities who is both knowledgeable and passionate about college football. I think Scoggins is very good, very fair.

 

[MNVCGUY]

The thing I really like about these recent interviews is that he is not trying to downplay or run from the increased expectations that are going to follow the success they have had the past few years. Early on his goal was to keep expectations low by constantly talking about how young the team was, now he clearly understands fans are going to expect more from the team and he seems to embrace that challenge which is good to see. He is really talking up the young kids on offense so the pressure will be on them to come through next season.

 

[Ogee Ogilthorpe]

I really wish Streveler would have gotten a few more snaps this year. Heading into another season with a relatively unproven backup QB but at least he did play SOME.

Whether it's the starting gig or the #2 spot, the QB situation should be interesting in the spring. Looking forward to seeing who takes the biggest step forward from the fall.

 

[oleboy41]

Like the confidence in Moose. Also thinking these WRs in general better step up. The frosh because he's been hyping them and everyone else because they haven't been getting hyped.

 

[Iceland12]

"We talked about a number of topics. I was critical of Kill’s conservative approach in the final minute before halftime in a 33-17 loss to Missouri so our conversation started with his decision-making in that situation.Kill wasn’t angry or testy, but he elaborated on why he elected to run out the clock rather than attempt to try and get points with his team trailing 10-7.

“I’ve been doing it for 31 years and I’ve been on two sides of that,” he said. “We’ve done something like that [try and score] and the ball went the other way and it cost us the game. On the other side of it, we’ve done it and been successful. …

“In my opinion, there are times to roll the dice. We had control. We had the ball 19 minutes to their 11 [in time of posseion]. They were not dominating us. I felt like we could get right back out and score and be smart.”

Kill said he wasn’t worried about Mitch Leidner throwing as interception as much as he was Leidner getting sacked and possibly fumbling the ball deep in their territory. Leidner lost one fumble on a sack in the first quarter. He lost another fumble in the second half.

Kill said he had a lot of respect for Missouri’s defensive ends, Shane Ray and Markus Golden. In studying the Tigers on film and talking to coaches who have faced them or scouted them, the coaching staff was concerned about taking shots down the field because it would force Leidner to hang onto the ball.

“We did some things protection-wise to help us,” Kill said. “You don’t want to hold onto the ball against those guys. Well, in the situation that we were in, you’re going to have to hold onto the ball because they knew you were going to throw it. …

“When you’re in that two-minute deal, you’ve got to go down the field even with the timeouts we had. It was more about them and us being in control the game. Even though we were down, I felt as a head coach, I felt good. I felt we controlled the game in the first half. …

“If we wouldn’t have turned it over on a sack [earlier] … in a coach’s mind, that plays into it because [what] if that happens again. If we do that and the ball gets knocked out, people are going to go, ‘What are you doing?’ It’s my opinion. It doesn’t have to be yours.”

 

[dpodoll68]

He's attempting to make the line of questioning disappear by responding with concerns that aren't legitimate. We didn't need to drop back and throw down the field. We needed to gain about 30 yards of field position in around a minute and with 3 full timeouts. We could've run about 4 or 5 plays in that span of time, so 8-10 yard routes would've been just fine. There's no justifiable reason to not go for at least a field goal. He pulled the same nonsense in the Wisconsin game and handed the momentum to the opposition both times by doing so.

 

[bleedsmaroonandgold]

He's attempting to make the line of questioning disappear by responding with concerns that aren't legitimate. We didn't need to drop back and throw down the field. We needed to gain about 30 yards of field position in around a minute and with 3 full timeouts. We could've run about 4 or 5 plays in that span of time, so 8-10 yard routes would've been just fine. There's no justifiable reason to not go for at least a field goal. He pulled the same nonsense in the Wisconsin game and handed the momentum to the opposition both times by doing so.

Wish I would have seen this about 5 minutes earlier, I just posted almost the exact same thing in another thread.

 

[RolGnav]

He's attempting to make the line of questioning disappear by responding with concerns that aren't legitimate. We didn't need to drop back and throw down the field. We needed to gain about 30 yards of field position in around a minute and with 3 full timeouts. We could've run about 4 or 5 plays in that span of time, so 8-10 yard routes would've been just fine. There's no justifiable reason to not go for at least a field goal. He pulled the same nonsense in the Wisconsin game and handed the momentum to the opposition both times by doing so.

+1

 

[jaymil]

He's attempting to make the line of questioning disappear by responding with concerns that aren't legitimate. We didn't need to drop back and throw down the field. We needed to gain about 30 yards of field position in around a minute and with 3 full timeouts. We could've run about 4 or 5 plays in that span of time, so 8-10 yard routes would've been just fine. There's no justifiable reason to not go for at least a field goal. He pulled the same nonsense in the Wisconsin game and handed the momentum to the opposition both times by doing so.

8-10 yard routes is basically throwing down field for this offense. I understand his reasoning for not wanting to throw the ball in that situation when the defense expects it. My frustration with it was not even trying to do anything. We could've taken a timeout after Maxx's first down and at least TRIED something by running the ball or throwing an easy screen pass to see if we gain some yards and go from there. Instead they did nothing. Being conservative is fine but not to that degree.

 

[WHB Brewer]

He's attempting to make the line of questioning disappear by responding with concerns that aren't legitimate. We didn't need to drop back and throw down the field. We needed to gain about 30 yards of field position in around a minute and with 3 full timeouts. We could've run about 4 or 5 plays in that span of time, so 8-10 yard routes would've been just fine. There's no justifiable reason to not go for at least a field goal. He pulled the same nonsense in the Wisconsin game and handed the momentum to the opposition both times by doing so.

It's not quite that simple and your math is a little bit off. The Gophers were at the 25yd line (KO/touchback) with 1:04 to start the drive in question. They would need 40yds to get to the 35yd line for a shot at a 52yd FG (not easy to assume our guy makes the FG). Assuming we can run 5 plays in the minute means we have to AVERAGE 8yds/play. so the "8-10yd routes" would have be repeated 5 times without error. when have we (or any team) been able to do that? If there is any play stuffed or incomplete, only makes each play more distance. Also overlooked, who is the receiver running the 8-10yd route? Plus, when was the last time you saw a quick-hit slant route? We don't have guys who can get off the ball and catch these routes. our passing game is predicated on play-action or slower developing drag routes over the middle or to the sideline.

I would conclude that Kill's concerns over a sack/fumble were quite legitimate. If you watched the NFL yesterday, it happened to the Lions TWICE in the final drive.

 

[WHB Brewer]

8-10 yard routes is basically throwing down field for this offense. I understand his reasoning for not wanting to throw the ball in that situation when the defense expects it. My frustration with it was not even trying to do anything. We could've taken a timeout after Maxx's first down and at least TRIED something by running the ball or throwing an easy screen pass to see if we gain some yards and go from there. Instead they did nothing. Being conservative is fine but not to that degree.

The complainers about the end of the first half make it seem like we did the Denny Green kneel-down.

1. The first play called was a draw, hoping to surprise them. Not a completely unreasonable call. it got stuffed. Missouri called timeout. 0:54 remaining
2. second play is Nice completion to Maxx who breaks some tackes and gets the 1st down.
3. 3rd play they try a "short route" to Fruechte, completed for 5yds.

They had run 3 plays (half of DPO's allotment) and gained a total of 16yds. They gave it a shot, realized they needed 30+ more to get a chance at a FG.

 

[GophersInIowa]

It's not quite that simple and your math is a little bit off. The Gophers were at the 25yd line (KO/touchback) with 1:04 to start the drive in question. They would need 40yds to get to the 35yd line for a shot at a 52yd FG (not easy to assume our guy makes the FG). Assuming we can run 5 plays in the minute means we have to AVERAGE 8yds/play. so the "8-10yd routes" would have be repeated 5 times without error. when have we (or any team) been able to do that? If there is any play stuffed or incomplete, only makes each play more distance. Also overlooked, who is the receiver running the 8-10yd route? Plus, when was the last time you saw a quick-hit slant route? We don't have guys who can get off the ball and catch these routes. our passing game is predicated on play-action or slower developing drag routes over the middle or to the sideline.

I would conclude that Kill's concerns over a sack/fumble were quite legitimate. If you watched the NFL yesterday, it happened to the Lions TWICE in the final drive.

We ran the ball for a very little gain, Missouri took a timeout and had two more. Therefore, we knew we couldn't just run out the clock. On 2nd down we completed a pass to the 36 yard line for a first down with about 50 seconds left and 3 timeouts. That is the point where people became upset. 30 yards gets you to the 34 yards line, within FG range.

50 seconds with 3 timeouts is a ton of time in college. You get a few first downs, maybe get out of bounds one or twice and you could easily run 7 or 8 plays or even more if you do it right.

All most people were asking was to take a shot. If we pass on the next play and get sacked, then maybe let it run out. But if we gain another 10 yards, then we have a shot.

 

[die hard gopher]

It's not quite that simple and your math is a little bit off. The Gophers were at the 25yd line (KO/touchback) with 1:04 to start the drive in question. They would need 40yds to get to the 35yd line for a shot at a 52yd FG (not easy to assume our guy makes the FG). Assuming we can run 5 plays in the minute means we have to AVERAGE 8yds/play. so the "8-10yd routes" would have be repeated 5 times without error. when have we (or any team) been able to do that? If there is any play stuffed or incomplete, only makes each play more distance. Also overlooked, who is the receiver running the 8-10yd route? Plus, when was the last time you saw a quick-hit slant route? We don't have guys who can get off the ball and catch these routes. our passing game is predicated on play-action or slower developing drag routes over the middle or to the sideline.

I would conclude that Kill's concerns over a sack/fumble were quite legitimate. If you watched the NFL yesterday, it happened to the Lions TWICE in the final drive.

One of the best posts I've seen regarding this topic.

 

[GophersInIowa]

The complainers about the end of the first half make it seem like we did the Denny Green kneel-down.

1. The first play called was a draw, hoping to surprise them. Not a completely unreasonable call. it got stuffed. Missouri called timeout. 0:54 remaining
2. second play is Nice completion to Maxx who breaks some tackes and gets the 1st down.
3. 3rd play they try a "short route" to Fruechte, completed for 5yds.

They had run 3 plays (half of DPO's allotment) and gained a total of 16yds. They gave it a shot, realized they needed 30+ more to get a chance at a FG.

This is not giving it a shot. After the second play, they didn't take a timeout and didn't hurry up at all, yet ran that pass play with 15 seconds left. It made no sense. If you're not going to try, then why even pass?

 

[The Goofy Gopher]

He's attempting to make the line of questioning disappear by responding with concerns that aren't legitimate. We didn't need to drop back and throw down the field. We needed to gain about 30 yards of field position in around a minute and with 3 full timeouts. We could've run about 4 or 5 plays in that span of time, so 8-10 yard routes would've been just fine. There's no justifiable reason to not go for at least a field goal. He pulled the same nonsense in the Wisconsin game and handed the momentum to the opposition both times by doing so.

Agreed. IMO, regardless of what he says, his actions show he doesn't trust our passing offense not to screw up in that situation, and so they played the conservative route. Hopefully next year he starts trusting the passing offense a lot more, but that's probably why he wants Mitch to take that "Connor Cook" step.

 

[60's Guy]

The complainers about the end of the first half make it seem like we did the Denny Green kneel-down.

1. The first play called was a draw, hoping to surprise them. Not a completely unreasonable call. it got stuffed. Missouri called timeout. 0:54 remaining
2. second play is Nice completion to Maxx who breaks some tackes and gets the 1st down.
3. 3rd play they try a "short route" to Fruechte, completed for 5yds.

They had run 3 plays (half of DPO's allotment) and gained a total of 16yds. They gave it a shot, realized they needed 30+ more to get a chance at a FG.

The two pass plays do equal an 8 yard average. The ball is on our 40. We need 20 yards to attempt a field goal.
Santoso makes 70 yarders in practice..that'd be 67 yards. 30 yards gets a 57 yard attempt. etc Spread them out, throw the bubble screen to Maye and one missed tackle is a touchdown. If you are playing "smart", why in the world is the third play a pass??? I get the sacks fear...but, One, two throw is not going be sacked.

Agree with DPO

 

[WHB Brewer]

We ran the ball for a very little gain, Missouri took a timeout and had two more. Therefore, we knew we couldn't just run out the clock. On 2nd down we completed a pass to the 36 yard line for a first down with about 50 seconds left and 3 timeouts. That is the point where people became upset. 30 yards gets you to the 34 yards line, within FG range.

50 seconds with 3 timeouts is a ton of time in college. You get a few first downs, maybe get out of bounds one or twice and you could easily run 7 or 8 plays or even more if you do it right.

All most people were asking was to take a shot. If we pass on the next play and get sacked, then maybe let it run out. But if we gain another 10 yards, then we have a shot.

This is precisely what Kill was worried about. If you saw the end the Lions game yesterday, their QB had sack fumble happen TWICE in the final drive.

 

[WHB Brewer]

The two pass plays do equal an 8 yard average. The ball is on our 40. We need 10 yards to attempt a field goal.
Santoso makes 70 yarders in practice..that'd be 67 yards. 20 yards gets a 57 yard attempt. etc Spread them out, throw the bubble screen to Maye and one missed tackle is a touchdown. If you are playing "smart", why in the world is the third play a pass??? I get the sacks fear...but, One, two throw is not going be sacked.

Agree with DPO

Let's be reasonable. Santoso made exactly ONE FG longer than 48yds this season. He made one from 52yds. Just because someone has 70yd range in practice, does not translate to making one in the game.

For the record, the Longest FG ever made in college is 67yds, in 1977.

 

[beavergopher]

8-10 yard routes is basically throwing down field for this offense. I understand his reasoning for not wanting to throw the ball in that situation when the defense expects it. My frustration with it was not even trying to do anything. We could've taken a timeout after Maxx's first down and at least TRIED something by running the ball or throwing an easy screen pass to see if we gain some yards and go from there. Instead they did nothing. Being conservative is fine but not to that degree.

Agree 100%. He coached a timid game and Pinkel didn't. Guess who won?

 

[WilliamsArenaGuy]

This is not giving it a shot. After the second play, they didn't take a timeout and didn't hurry up at all, yet ran that pass play with 15 seconds left. It made no sense. If you're not going to try, then why even pass?

Exactly. This is what the defenders keep ignoring. You can defend the stance to not go for it if you want, but then take a knee. The way we ran that has no defense, and you could see it in the players' eyes. Even handing off isn't safe. Anyone remember the Wisconsin game?

The situation was a mess, and they got what they deserved when Pinkel ran the onside kick.

 

[Firejumper]

If he was afraid of a sack and a fumble, then don't throw it. If you are so certain that they are certain you're going to pass, then run three draw plays. Maybe you can bust one. You have 3 timeouts.

 

[Great Plains Gopher]

He's attempting to make the line of questioning disappear by responding with concerns that aren't legitimate. We didn't need to drop back and throw down the field. We needed to gain about 30 yards of field position in around a minute and with 3 full timeouts. We could've run about 4 or 5 plays in that span of time, so 8-10 yard routes would've been just fine. There's no justifiable reason to not go for at least a field goal. He pulled the same nonsense in the Wisconsin game and handed the momentum to the opposition both times by doing so.

Ditto; you are right on.

 

[mnsports1]

Exactly. This is what the defenders keep ignoring. You can defend the stance to not go for it if you want, but then take a knee. The way we ran that has no defense, and you could see it in the players' eyes. Even handing off isn't safe. Anyone remember the Wisconsin game?

The situation was a mess, and they got what they deserved when Pinkel ran the onside kick.

This is the part I don't get either. Makes me wonder if he is covering for someone of there was some miscommunication at the end. I am all for his logic...I trust our passing offense less than jerry, so why that last pass to 14?

 

[RolGnav]

From Coach's comments, you have to wonder why they threw it all day when he was so scared of Missouri's defensive line? Why did he treat that last minute of the first half, like it was anything more special than the rest of the game? Doesn't make sense to me. Maybe Coach Kill was just too cocky in thinking they still controlled the game. Anyways, I'm over it.... When's Spring ?

 

[Governor Sibley]

If we pass on any play we might get sacked.

 

[short ornery norwegian]

I can see both sides of the argument. On a gut level, I would have liked to see the Gophs try a little harder for points at the end of the 1st half.

But, I think (hope) we can agree that if Leidner drops back, gets hit, fumbles and MO gets the ball in Gopher Territory with about a minute left in the half, we're having a different debate. Yes, there might be people saying "I'm glad Kill had the guts to try and score points in the 1st half," but I'm 100% sure there would also be people criticizing the decision. Again, as I have said multiple times, it's easy to second-guess a decision that didn't work out. If the Cobb throw-back to Leidner goes for a TD, people would be on this board proclaiming it the greatest play-call of all time.

 

[Mulligan]

Let's be reasonable. Santoso made exactly ONE FG longer than 48yds this season. He made one from 52yds. Just because someone has 70yd range in practice, does not translate to making one in the game.

For the record, the Longest FG ever made in college is 67yds, in 1977.

Were also going against the wind. But I wish they would have taken a shot even though that Golden scared the hell out of me every time Mitch went back to pass. One of the best players the Gophers faced all year IMO.

 

[bleedsmaroonandgold]

I can see both sides of the argument. On a gut level, I would have liked to see the Gophs try a little harder for points at the end of the 1st half.

But, I think (hope) we can agree that if Leidner drops back, gets hit, fumbles and MO gets the ball in Gopher Territory with about a minute left in the half, we're having a different debate. Yes, there might be people saying "I'm glad Kill had the guts to try and score points in the 1st half," but I'm 100% sure there would also be people criticizing the decision. Again, as I have said multiple times, it's easy to second-guess a decision that didn't work out. If the Cobb throw-back to Leidner goes for a TD, people would be on this board proclaiming it the greatest play-call of all time.

With the amount of timeouts and time had, in the hypothetical you described, I would be mad at our offensive line for not protecting Leidner, and mad at Leidner for not securing the football, but not mad at the decision to go for it.