Limegrover and Kill

[Spoofin]

Doing enough to win? What about when we don't win? Even Coach Kill went out of his way to praise Limegrover this past game. That indicates that even Kill thought he was extraordinary this past game. Of course they know more than me, or any of us, but maybe they're stubborn, maybe they get nervous during that situation when they have to figure out what play to call. People make excuses for Limegrover... oh he's waiting until B1G games to open up the offense. Oh, it's not his fault we get balls batted down on 3rd and long after running up the middle on first and second down.

I know we don't have great QBs, but there are plays you can call, safe plays, that will help mix it up so the defense just doesn't key on the run game. And obviously Limegrover has those plays on his list, he just never calls them, and just makes it harder for our QBs who are not great passers to start with. Why start off our young QBs with those plays to help make them comfortable and give them confidence early? If all their passing attempts are on 3rd and long, how good will their chances of succeeding be?

If you people can't recognize the issues with the Offense, then you don't know football. This past game was called great, and I am sure you all noticed the difference between the "normal" Limegrover game as opposed to the extraordinary game this past weekend. Again, not asking for a 30 passes a game, just asking for some mixing up of play calling. Sweep some, screen some, reverse some, anything but run run incomplete.

So is the working theory that Limey forgets how to mix up play calling, sweep some, screen some, reverse some, etc. or that he forgets that he can? Maybe he has post concussion issues?

 

[cncmin]

Doing enough to win? What about when we don't win? Even Coach Kill went out of his way to praise Limegrover this past game. That indicates that even Kill thought he was extraordinary this past game. Of course they know more than me, or any of us, but maybe they're stubborn, maybe they get nervous during that situation when they have to figure out what play to call. People make excuses for Limegrover... oh he's waiting until B1G games to open up the offense. Oh, it's not his fault we get balls batted down on 3rd and long after running up the middle on first and second down.

I know we don't have great QBs, but there are plays you can call, safe plays, that will help mix it up so the defense just doesn't key on the run game. And obviously Limegrover has those plays on his list, he just never calls them, and just makes it harder for our QBs who are not great passers to start with. Why start off our young QBs with those plays to help make them comfortable and give them confidence early? If all their passing attempts are on 3rd and long, how good will their chances of succeeding be?

If you people can't recognize the issues with the Offense, then you don't know football. This past game was called great, and I am sure you all noticed the difference between the "normal" Limegrover game as opposed to the extraordinary game this past weekend. Again, not asking for a 30 passes a game, just asking for some mixing up of play calling. Sweep some, screen some, reverse some, anything but run run incomplete.

This. Limegrover has called several excellent games in the past two seasons. But he's also called as many or more stinkers. I'm sure Limegrover knows a lot more than me about running a D-1 collegiate offense; however, that doesn't mean he is immune to various faults, or that I cannot see faults in his global and situational schemes.

I wonder how many of you using the excuse but but but the coaches they know so much more about football than you and I are critics of the President even though he knows a lot more about being a President than you, or critics of scientists (e.g., climatologists) even though you know nothing about their field of study. So don't be so pretentious and arrogant here. The coaches, no matter how good they are (and I think they are very good) have their individual and programmatic faults, and maybe they never listen to their critics, but sometimes, even if rarely, they should. To imply they (or anyone in the world) are perfect is ridiculous.

 

[cncmin]

So is the working theory that Limey forgets how to mix up play calling, sweep some, screen some, reverse some, etc. or that he forgets that he can? Maybe he has post concussion issues?

This sounds like a sarcastic post. It shouldn't be (except for the final question).

 

[Spoofin]

This sounds like a sarcastic post. It shouldn't be (except for the final question).

Yes, forgot the /s mark. Truth is that Limey makes some questionable play calls, but folks don't always seem to factor in the talent we do or don't have at a position in their criticism. The same folks who say ML7 is the worst QB in 40-years seem to want to see the red-raid O. I think this staff does a good job of developing game plans that give us the best chance of winning. I think that is even proven. Along the way they make some mistakes, but those are focused on too much as they are the vast minority, IMO.

I also don't think the issue is questioning the coaches that gets some folks (including me) on here worked up. Certainly we have that right on a message board. It is the "worst in 40-years", "Limey doesn't know anything", "they can't see what I see", "a still photo proves this", "one game proves that", "worst recruiting class ever", etc. mentality that is oh so exhausting.

 

[oleboy41]

The thing with coaches is that sometimes they spend so much time on their craft that they out think themselves. Sometimes they focus so much on their own team that they overrate their talent. That said it is easy as a fan to forget that these guys aren't dum dums. Some of Kill's comments this week about their thoughts on the passing game re-iterated that. In hindsight its easy to see the SJSU game as one in which they were really trying to simply shorten the game, minimize risk and injury and play to the strengths of their RS frosh qb and offense. Makes sense. But in the moment its easy for we fans to miss things like that

 

[RolGnav]

Why in the hell aren't you on someone's coaching staff???

Why the hell aren't you God?

 

[RolGnav]

So is the working theory that Limey forgets how to mix up play calling, sweep some, screen some, reverse some, etc. or that he forgets that he can? Maybe he has post concussion issues?

Or maybe he is just stubborn, or just isn't that great of an offensive mind? Maybe he's not cut out to be an Offensive Coordinator? Some times, some people just aren't cut out to be doing what they're doing.

 

[cncmin]

Yes, forgot the /s mark. Truth is that Limey makes some questionable play calls, but folks don't always seem to factor in the talent we do or don't have at a position in their criticism. The same folks who say ML7 is the worst QB in 40-years seem to want to see the red-raid O. I think this staff does a good job of developing game plans that give us the best chance of winning. I think that is even proven. Along the way they make some mistakes, but those are focused on too much as they are the vast minority, IMO.

I also don't think the issue is questioning the coaches that gets some folks (including me) on here worked up. Certainly we have that right on a message board. It is the "worst in 40-years", "Limey doesn't know anything", "they can't see what I see", "a still photo proves this", "one game proves that", "worst recruiting class ever", etc. mentality that is oh so exhausting.

Good post, even if I don't fully agree. I think it has more to do with falling into patterns, which is a physiological response of the brain in order to save energy. I consider it to be like one's Youtube adventures. You don't jump around so much as fall into a chain of thoughts that build on each other. What comes to mind is what's right in front of you, not nearly as often the thing in the back of your mind.
http://braingames.nationalgeographic.com/episode/19/

What I'm trying to say is that I really do think that Limey - just like everyone else in the world - sometimes forgets about all of his options and instead falls into patterns. It seems he has to force himself harder than most D-1 OC's to mix things up, but when he does he displays genius.

 

[RolGnav]

Hehehe! We have no shortage of experts on GH.

The funniest thing is that everyone outside of some of you deranged fans can see we have issues on offense. Why in the hell are espn, big ten network, etc doubting us because of our offense? It's just me right? Even the "experts" outside of Gopher fans, know our offense is pretty much a joke. At least until Limegrover realizes he needs to mix things up. Wake up.

 

[RolGnav]

And for those of you who are saying.... "oh but we don't have the talent." True but mixing things up doesn't mean we need Tom Brady. Again, call the safe high percentage plays like screens, sweeps, etc. It will help keep the defenses off balance, and give the QBs some confidence.

 

[Dr.Don]

Why the hell aren't you God?

His name is already taken on GH?

 

[die hard gopher]

The funniest thing is that everyone outside of some of you deranged fans can see we have issues on offense. Why in the hell are espn, big ten network, etc doubting us because of our offense? It's just me right? Even the "experts" outside of Gopher fans, know our offense is pretty much a joke. At least until Limegrover realizes he needs to mix things up. Wake up.

When Limegrover actually does need to mix thing up he does. And when he doesn't need to he doesn't. Simple as that. Also we weren't going to move the ball on TCU any way you slice it.

 

[maxwellsmart]

Good point. My only critique of the game-coaching was the series at the end of the first half. Yeah, we came away with 3 points, but it seemed like the coaches were happy to just get the FG. Some of the clock management was a little hinky, too. Another tick or two on the clock and we could have taken a shot into the end zone. Still, if that's the worst thing you can say about our play calling in a win I'll take it.

Actually, in an interview Kill said they were just trying to keep the ball and run out the clock when suddenly they realized a field goal was possible. The fact is, this staff has a way of game planning that doesn't fit with a lot of fans' wishes. I think we should get used to it. And on the plus side, at least for me, is their ability to take a lead into the second half and convert it to a win.

 

[bleedsmaroonandgold]

Actually, in an interview Kill said they were just trying to keep the ball and run out the clock when suddenly they realized a field goal was possible. The fact is, this staff has a way of game planning that doesn't fit with a lot of fans' wishes. I think we should get used to it. And on the plus side, at least for me, is their ability to take a lead into the second half and convert it to a win.

I ordinarily am against running out the clock when you have the ball late in the half, but we were so backed up in that situation that I thought it was a good call. Obviously, once Cobb busted us out of the shadow of our own endzone, I was pleased we moved forward to try to score. At the end, I wish we would have taken one shot at the endzone. I thought 6 seconds would have been enough time to roll Leidner out of the pocket, look to see if someone is open, and throw it away to stop the clock if nothing was there. Not going to complain too much though, the coaches got the win calling it the way they wanted.

 

[60's Guy]

In agreement

This. Limegrover has called several excellent games in the past two seasons. But he's also called as many or more stinkers. I'm sure Limegrover knows a lot more than me about running a D-1 collegiate offense; however, that doesn't mean he is immune to various faults, or that I cannot see faults in his global and situational schemes.

I wonder how many of you using the excuse but but but the coaches they know so much more about football than you and I are critics of the President even though he knows a lot more about being a President than you, or critics of scientists (e.g., climatologists) even though you know nothing about their field of study. So don't be so pretentious and arrogant here. The coaches, no matter how good they are (and I think they are very good) have their individual and programmatic faults, and maybe they never listen to their critics, but sometimes, even if rarely, they should. To imply they (or anyone in the world) are perfect is ridiculous.

+1

 

[Indi1006]

Dpdolled.

Oh, no I'm sure he'll have a hard time sleeping tonight.

Limegrover was good Saturday. He's been good in the past from time-to-time. Overall, I don't think he's an intuitive play caller and he's laid more eggs here than he's had gems in big games. I hope he's able to back this past Saturday up and keeps things moving in the right direction.

 

[cncmin]

When Limegrover actually does need to mix thing up he does. And when he doesn't need to he doesn't. Simple as that. Also we weren't going to move the ball on TCU any way you slice it.

Are you suggesting that the coaching staff intentionally, much of the time, tries not to move the ball and to not score? I'd like to see the probabilistic benefits that show a team that scores less points has an increased chance to win a football game.

 

[60's Guy]

Doing enough to win? What about when we don't win? Even Coach Kill went out of his way to praise Limegrover this past game. That indicates that even Kill thought he was extraordinary this past game. Of course they know more than me, or any of us, but maybe they're stubborn, maybe they get nervous during that situation when they have to figure out what play to call. People make excuses for Limegrover... oh he's waiting until B1G games to open up the offense. Oh, it's not his fault we get balls batted down on 3rd and long after running up the middle on first and second down.

I know we don't have great QBs, but there are plays you can call, safe plays, that will help mix it up so the defense just doesn't key on the run game. And obviously Limegrover has those plays on his list, he just never calls them, and just makes it harder for our QBs who are not great passers to start with. Why start off our young QBs with those plays to help make them comfortable and give them confidence early? If all their passing attempts are on 3rd and long, how good will their chances of succeeding be?

If you people can't recognize the issues with the Offense, then you don't know football. This past game was called great, and I am sure you all noticed the difference between the "normal" Limegrover game as opposed to the extraordinary game this past weekend. Again, not asking for a 30 passes a game, just asking for some mixing up of play calling. Sweep some, screen some, reverse some, anything but run run incomplete.

Why would anyone belittle or disagree with these comments? We have good coaches. Limegrover is absolutely smarter than me!!! He graduated from the University of Chicago. I wouldn't consider going there and couldn't get in. That does not mean Limegrover is immune to suggestion, speculation and criticism. He's not perfect, nobody is.
He does make mistakes. The idea to me of a message board is to discuss the strategy that might have been more effective on a given game day or an overall organizational plan for items more long term. That's the fun for me, analyzing the decisions they made. I like our coaches. When it goes right I'm happy. We don't have to necessarily win for me to believe they coach better some days than others and they have publicly reached the same conclusion themselves. I am not so naive as to think my suggestions helped them reach that conclusion. But sometimes the plan was flawed, the approach was wrong and ya hindsight is 20/20. A huge advantage I'm totally aware of in the big picture.

 

[GophersInIowa]

The funniest thing is that everyone outside of some of you deranged fans can see we have issues on offense.

I'm not sure there are many people who don't think we have issues on offense. There's just a difference in opinion as to why our offense has had issues. Some people think it has more to do with the play calling and game plan, others think it has more to do with the players we have.

Even the "experts" outside of Gopher fans, know our offense is pretty much a joke. At least until Limegrover realizes he needs to mix things up. Wake up.

I've heard many of these experts talk about how much our passing game is not good. But I've also heard many be very impressed with our running game. I don't think that means they think the offense as a whole is a joke. Obviously there is a lot of room for improvement though.

The reason I usually give the coaches the benefit of the doubt most of the time is because they break down film and see what has/hasn't worked against teams previously. I certainty have done my share of yelling at the playing calling and decisions being made throughout the game however.

 

[dpodoll68]

And for those of you who are saying.... "oh but we don't have the talent." True but mixing things up doesn't mean we need Tom Brady. Again, call the safe high percentage plays like screens, sweeps, etc. It will help keep the defenses off balance, and give the QBs some confidence.

Implicit in "safe high percentage plays" is that they are easy to defend. Since you're the resident football expert, I'm sure you're already aware of that.

 

[cncmin]

Implicit in "safe high percentage plays" is that they are easy to defend. Since you're the resident football expert, I'm sure you're already aware of that.

By this flawed logic, running a single, predictable "safe" dive running play over and over should yield the same results as a wide mix of "safe" running and passing plays.

 

[60's Guy]

Implicit in "safe high percentage plays" is that they are easy to defend. Since you're the resident football expert, I'm sure you're already aware of that.

It's a little more complicated than that. Any play is easy to defend if you are not very good at executing it or do not have the personnel for the design of the play. Every defense has strengths and weaknesses from a design standpoint and personnel standpoint. It takes the right play versus the particular defense the opponent is in when you call the play...and then you must execute. Combine those two things along with capable offense personnel and the simple play will not be easy to defend.

You also call plays to set up other plays. You may sacrifice positive returns on a play to lull a defense into forgetting overall responsibilities or encouraging them to cheat to smother a certain play you run only to
set them up for your "homerun".

You might call plays to start your quarterbacks confidence to begin the day. Example Teddy on Sunday...we all could of completed the first couple throws behind the line of scrimmage. He went on from there to have a very nice day. Mitch's day at Michigan included a similar philosophy. So simple plays have many purposes.

Wide receiver screens, bubble screens, screens to the back over a blitz, and jet sweeps may be simple to defend but if you watch scoring highlights these plays are in a very high percentage of long gainers and scores. Right call versus the opponents defense and execution...no longer simple to defend.

 

[Indi1006]

Implicit in "safe high percentage plays" is that they are easy to defend. Since you're the resident football expert, I'm sure you're already aware of that.

75 percent or more of the people you think are your friends actually think you are a d!ck and talk about you behind your back.

 

[RolGnav]

Implicit in "safe high percentage plays" is that they are easy to defend. Since you're the resident football expert, I'm sure you're already aware of that.

Obviously you don't even get the point. Or maybe pretending not to get it. All I have to say is there are many out there that share my perspective. So I guess there are many resident football experts here besides me.

 

[RolGnav]

It's a little more complicated than that. Any play is easy to defend if you are not very good at executing it or do not have the personnel for the design of the play. Every defense has strengths and weaknesses from a design standpoint and personnel standpoint. It takes the right play versus the particular defense the opponent is in when you call the play...and then you must execute. Combine those two things along with capable offense personnel and the simple play will not be easy to defend.

You also call plays to set up other plays. You may sacrifice positive returns on a play to lull a defense into forgetting overall responsibilities or encouraging them to cheat to smother a certain play you run only to
set them up for your "homerun".

You might call plays to start your quarterbacks confidence to begin the day. Example Teddy on Sunday...we all could of completed the first couple throws behind the line of scrimmage. He went on from there to have a very nice day. Mitch's day at Michigan included a similar philosophy. So simple plays have many purposes.

Wide receiver screens, bubble screens, screens to the back over a blitz, and jet sweeps may be simple to defend but if you watch scoring highlights these plays are in a very high percentage of long gainers and scores. Right call versus the opponents defense and execution...no longer simple to defend.

+1

All I am saying is Limegrover just needs to mix it up more. I'm fine with 15 pass attempts per game. Just don't run up the middle 40 times a game.

 

[dpodoll68]

75 percent or more of the people you think are your friends actually think you are a d!ck and talk about you behind your back.

The good thing for me is that I stopped caring what people say about me behind my back when I was about 12 years old, like most others with a maturity level higher than the average 6th grader. Don't worry little buddy, you'll get there one day.

 

[short ornery norwegian]

The Gopher Hole Guide to Football:

If the team does something,and it works, then the Coach did a good job.
If the team does something, and it doesn't work, then the coach did a bad job.

I may be stupid, but the last time I checked, there are two teams out on the field. Some people on here seem to think that the other team has no impact on the outcome of the play - if it works, it was good play calling. If it doesn't work, it was bad play calling. We must not even contemplate the notion that the other team made a good play.

 

[killme]

I wonder how many of you using the excuse but but but the coaches they know so much more about football than you and I are critics of the President even though he knows a lot more about being a President than you, or critics of scientists (e.g., climatologists) even though you know nothing about their field of study. So don't be so pretentious and arrogant here. The coaches, no matter how good they are (and I think they are very good) have their individual and programmatic faults, and maybe they never listen to their critics, but sometimes, even if rarely, they should. To imply they (or anyone in the world) are perfect is ridiculous.

Football coaches make more than the president. It could be because the job is harder, but not because it's more important. As an American, I have the right to criticize or support the decisions of either leader. Not because I'm "arrogant" or "pretentious." I agree they have faults, like all humans, and base those observations on what I think about their decisions. I don't know if they listen to their critics, but hope, if they do, they don't listen to the ill-informed ones.

 

[Mulligan]

Yes, forgot the /s mark. Truth is that Limey makes some questionable play calls, but folks don't always seem to factor in the talent we do or don't have at a position in their criticism. The same folks who say ML7 is the worst QB in 40-years seem to want to see the red-raid O. I think this staff does a good job of developing game plans that give us the best chance of winning. I think that is even proven. Along the way they make some mistakes, but those are focused on too much as they are the vast minority, IMO.

I also don't think the issue is questioning the coaches that gets some folks (including me) on here worked up. Certainly we have that right on a message board. It is the "worst in 40-years", "Limey doesn't know anything", "they can't see what I see", "a still photo proves this", "one game proves that", "worst recruiting class ever", etc. mentality that is oh so exhausting.

+1 "Exhausting" is a great word for the folks coming out of the woodwork after a loss all worked up because they refuse to or aren't capable of looking at the circumstances. You also might have included the suggestions/demands to replace the OC or at least make him just an offensive line coach on your list. Simple concept but maybe Limegrover is running exactly the type of game plan Kill wants him to? Stick to the basics to reduce mistakes. Once the basics are clicking, then think about flashier stuff. Obviously over-simplifying it, but you can't watch him for four years and not see that's one of Kill's main tenets. Be critical of it--disagree with it--hell, bitch about it--but quit acting like you know more about it.

 

[Indi1006]

The good thing for me is that I stopped caring what people say about me behind my back when I was about 12 years old, like most others with a maturity level higher than the average 6th grader. Don't worry little buddy, you'll get there one day.

"Little Buddy", that's funny. I think we've already established you have some combination of mommy, band camp, shoved in a locker and/or my wife and kids can't stand me syndrome that compels you to work so hard to try and be the "smartest" guy on GopherHole. You have a bit of a following on here kind of like Anthony Michael Hall's character in Sixteen Candles has at his high school, so I guess you have that going for you. Overall, I'd feel sorry for you if you weren't such a condescening pain in the arse.