***MINNESOTA-INDIANA PRE-GAME THOUGHTS THREAD***

Donate To GopherHole
Line is Indiana -10 as of this morning. Wow.
 

Gopher07 said:
Line is Indiana -10 as of this morning. Wow.
Click to expand...

That line scares me, what does Vegas see that I don't? This will be a tough game but I think the Gophers can win. I agree with GopherinIowa, stick to the gameplan.
 

If we win the coin flip, do we defer or take the ball? It would be nice to get the ball first, and have a long TD drive, grinding out the clock, and put off seeing Indiana's offense as long as possible. On the other hand, if you give them the ball first and can stop them, that's even better.
 

Clark W. Griswold said:
That line scares me, what does Vegas see that I don't? This will be a tough game but I think the Gophers can win. I agree with GopherinIowa, stick to the gameplan.
Click to expand...

I believe it was explained upthread, but the line isn't so much a represenation of which team the bookmakers think will win and by how much as opposed to a mechanism of getting bets evenly distributed. For instance, if too many bets were coming on Indiana to cover at 9 points, the line goes up to 10 in order to encourage bets on Indiana to fail to cover.
 



RodentRampage said:
If we win the coin flip, do we defer or take the ball? It would be nice to get the ball first, and have a long TD drive, grinding out the clock, and put off seeing Indiana's offense as long as possible. On the other hand, if you give them the ball first and can stop them, that's even better.
Click to expand...

I usually prefer to defer to the 2nd half but not in this game. Like you said, get the ball first and use up a bunch of the clock.

As for the line, I'm really not that surprised to be honest. At first I figured it would be closer just because we just had a big win and Indiana had a bye, meaning we were more fresh in everyone's mind. But scoring a lot is more sexy to most fans, so they will tend to go that direction in a "could go either way type of game".
 

I think we match up well against IU. They're last in the BIG in rushing D. We gained over 270 on the ground against the Huskers and IU is considerably worse in that regard. If we rush 50+ times I think we EASILY gain 250+ on the ground controlling the clock and limiting turnovers.

This is the opposite of the Iowa game. Iowa was capable of taking away our run which gave us no chance. IU can not and will not stop our run.
 

beatles said:
I think we match up well against IU. They're last in the BIG in rushing D. We gained over 270 on the ground against the Huskers and IU is considerably worse in that regard. If we rush 50+ times I think we EASILY gain 250+ on the ground controlling the clock and limiting turnovers.

This is the opposite of the Iowa game. Iowa was capable of taking away our run which gave us no chance. IU can not and will not stop our run.
Click to expand...

Related to this as well, I think Indiana will be so focused on taking away the run (because they know their deficiencies and our strengths) that it will, at multiple times in the game, open up the play-action pass. Nelson (or Leidner) being able to hit a wide-open Goodger or Williams (similar to the Nebraska game) at key points could be the difference.
 

beatles said:
I think we match up well against IU. They're last in the BIG in rushing D. We gained over 270 on the ground against the Huskers and IU is considerably worse in that regard. If we rush 50+ times I think we EASILY gain 250+ on the ground controlling the clock and limiting turnovers.

This is the opposite of the Iowa game. Iowa was capable of taking away our run which gave us no chance. IU can not and will not stop our run.
Click to expand...

This is probably going to be the next big step for our team. We either need to (A) develop a run game which no one can stop, or (B) get some options that allow us to put up points when our run game gets stopped. I don't want teams with a strong run defense to be to Coach Kill what the zone defense was to Tubby Smith.
 



Indiana is viewing this game as the biggest of the year for them. They are in year 3 of the Wilson regime and haven't been bowling yet, and they view this as a must win game to show progress with their program. They'll be ready to play...

My prediction is that Leidner gets the start again. I remember reading after the NW game Nelson stating that it helped him to start the game on the sideline because it gave him the opportunity to see what the defense was doing ahead of time. There's no question his best two games have been the last two when Leidner has started, so I bet we see it again.
 

dpodoll68 said:
In 1987, we never even received votes, much less reached a #19 ranking.

http://www.collegepollarchive.com/football/ap/teams/summary.cfm?teamid=1#.Um_WUlMUkoM
Click to expand...

That database refers to the AP poll only. The writers didn't rank the Gophers, but we were in the "also receiving votes" category that College Poll Archive didn't show. Had the poll been a Top 25 instead of Top 20 at the time, the Gophers would have been #21.

http://news.google.com/newspapers?i...AJ&dq=top 20 college football&pg=1091,2747596

College Poll Archive doesn't show the coaches poll which was then conducted by UPI. They had the Gophers rated #19.

http://news.google.com/newspapers?i...AJ&dq=top 20 college football&pg=4981,1213576
 

The key will be to run the ball, finish drives, and not turn it over. Their offense needs to have the ball for as little time as possible, and we need to play with a lead. Given their run defense, this is very doable, but we can't fall behind. If they can manage that, just a few stops will be all they need.

Again, I'd like to echo the sentiment of "Where in the blue hell is this -10 line coming from?"
 

Sports_Realist said:
That database refers to the AP poll only. The writers didn't rank the Gophers, but we were in the "also receiving votes" category that College Poll Archive didn't show. Had the poll been a Top 25 instead of Top 20 at the time, the Gophers would have been #21.

http://news.google.com/newspapers?i...AJ&dq=top 20 college football&pg=1091,2747596

College Poll Archive doesn't show the coaches poll which was then conducted by UPI. They had the Gophers rated #19.

http://news.google.com/newspapers?i...AJ&dq=top 20 college football&pg=4981,1213576
Click to expand...

I'm sure dpo will correct me, but I believe Lohmiller missed a field goal which would've won that game in 1987. Played on a Friday night because of the Twins.

A great matchup of Darrell and Anthony Thompson.

http://www.gophersports.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/MN-IND-1987.html
 




A couple things on the line:

-If you look at the Sagarin ratings, we are about 8 point underdogs, after you factor in its a road game.
-I heard (for an unrelated game) yesterday that Vegas places heavy emphasis on Yards per Play. I wonder if that factored into the initial line.
-I think Indiana is rightfully favored in this game, though I also think we may match up well against them. If the teams played ten times, I'd expect to win somewhere between 4 and 5 games. I would not expect us to blow them out on many occasions, but I can see them running up the score on us.

That all said, I think the line is too high, and I may just have to go to AC and play against the spread... heck, maybe even a moneyline bet. What's the over under?
 

Maximus said:
I'm sure dpo will correct me, but I believe Lohmiller missed a field goal which would've won that game in 1987. Played on a Friday night because of the Twins.

A great matchup of Darrell and Anthony Thompson.

http://www.gophersports.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/MN-IND-1987.html
Click to expand...

The Gophers went to bowls in 1985 and 1986, so optimism abounded entering 1987 along with plenty of hype and enthusiasm entering this game with the team ranked and unbeaten. The loss, which got understandably overshadowed by the Twins, took the air out of the Gophers' sails. To close 1987 and throughout 1988, they went 3-12-2. Although the Gophers rebounded to 6-5 in 1989, Nebraska demolished us 48-0, Michigan beat us 49-15, and we had the infamous Ohio State collapse. The bowl bids got locked up much earlier back then so not even beating Iowa for Floyd could lift the Gophers into a bowl. All that enthusiasm from the 1985-87 period was gone. Not to pin it all on that Indiana loss in 1987, but the hype for that game certainly exceeded this week and the subsequent collapse showed how fast things can turn.
 

I disagree that it is imperative to have a lead. Sometimes a high powered offense gears down and loses urgency with a lead, as long as you don't get too far behind. We are plenty explosive vs that kind of defense. I'm not saying I wouldn't prefer to lead from the get go, but its not the only path to victory.
 

I have been reading so much about how Indiana's defense is atrocious. They really are very bad. Interesting how "rushing yards allowed" and "time of possession" are almost entirely correlated with their losses.

Rushing Yards Allowed:
Navy 444 (Indiana Loss)
Missouri 280 (L)
Michigan 248 (L)
Michigan State 238 (L)
Bowling Green 136 (W)
Indiana State 131 (W)
Penn State 70 (W)

Time of Possession Allowed:
Michigan 38:34 (L)
Michigan State 37:23 (L)
Missouri 36:45 (L)
Bowling Green 35:13 (W)
Navy 33:48 (L)
Indiana State 27:42 (W)
Penn State 24:49 (W)

Total Yards Allowed
Michigan 751 (L)
Missouri 623 (L)
Navy 515 (L)
Michigan State 473 (L)
Bowling Green 409 (W)
Indiana State 306 (W)
Penn State 410 (W)
 

One thing we cannot have happen is to have our receivers drop passes that hit them right between the numbers. Last week we had at least three drops where Nelson hit our receivers right on the numbers and they flat out dropped the ball to stall out drives. We can't have that happen against Indiana.
 

How does PSU only rush for 70 yards against these guys? Did IU play D or did PSU take a dump on the field? That number worries me because it is recent. I hope we get the D scUM faced where we can run for 400 yards and throw for 100 and hold the ball for 45 minutes.

BarnBoy said:
I have been reading so much about how Indiana's defense is atrocious. They really are very bad. Interesting how "rushing yards allowed" and "time of possession" are almost entirely correlated with their losses.

Rushing Yards Allowed:
Navy 444 (Indiana Loss)
Missouri 280 (L)
Michigan 248 (L)
Michigan State 238 (L)
Bowling Green 136 (W)
Indiana State 131 (W)
Penn State 70 (W)

Time of Possession Allowed:
Michigan 38:34 (L)
Michigan State 37:23 (L)
Missouri 36:45 (L)
Bowling Green 35:13 (W)
Navy 33:48 (L)
Indiana State 27:42 (W)
Penn State 24:49 (W)

Total Yards Allowed
Michigan 751 (L)
Missouri 623 (L)
Navy 515 (L)
Michigan State 473 (L)
Bowling Green 409 (W)
Indiana State 306 (W)
Penn State 410 (W)
Click to expand...
 

afurry91 said:
I heard once that the best way to defend the option was to hit the quarterback as hard as possible. Let the running back get the ball, but make sure the quarterback thinks twice about the late pitch.
Click to expand...

Doesn't work.
 

I am hoping this is the week that the play action passes to a wide open Fruechte yield in some scores rather than going off the tips of his fingers.

Indiana has had quite a bit of success on the ground this year as well. Definitely more balanced than SJSU as someone mentioned earlier.

I think our secondary has been playing better the past couple of weeks with Vereen, Murray, A. Johnson, and D Travis providing better coverage and tackling.

Will we see more DeVondre Campbell and Aaron Hill with 5 DB sets in this game?
 

GopherinPhilly said:
How does PSU only rush for 70 yards against these guys? Did IU play D or did PSU take a dump on the field? That number worries me because it is recent. I hope we get the D scUM faced where we can run for 400 yards and throw for 100 and hold the ball for 45 minutes.
Click to expand...

Their day wasn't great by any means, but it was hindered by -19 yards rushing from Hackenberg and a -31 yard "team rush" in the first quarter. Erase those and they had a 120 yard day ... obviously still low, but not as much of an outlier. Penn State also is not a terribly good rushing team (only went for 85 against Michigan, while we went for 136 despite the lopsided final score).
 

The line really confuses me!!!! The strength of the Gophs is running the ball; the weakness of IU is stopping anything especially the run (221 per game). A running team usually controls the clock which means, typically, less scoring. Thus, being a 9-10 point dog means they must read into IU being able to stop/control our running game, or our D not stopping them at all.

I'm not surprised they're favored, but favored by a large margin appears to be odd at this point!
 

The odds makers are looking at a typical Minnesota letdown. This is not the same team as other years. We are in good shape with injuries and we are a better team this year on defense.
 

Dean S said:
The odds makers are looking at a typical Minnesota letdown. This is not the same team as other years. We are in good shape with injuries and we are a better team this year on defense.
Click to expand...

Which always makes sense because these kids were playing for their Pop Warner and Middle School Teams the last time the Gophs had an opportunity like this to meltdown. In fact, I'm sure there's a handful of players that hadn't even started playing football yet the last time we had an opportunity like this.

In fact, I think the coaches of this team are on their second stop since that time, too.

Oh, how I wish Vegas was as close a drive as Wisky right now!!!!! (Hopefully, I'll be able to say the same Saturday evening!)
 

I think the large point spread is a good thing. It should help our guys stay focused.
 


Gophers should be able to run all over Indiana.
This game is important for both teams for many reasons, but one interesting comparison is how different coaching and recruiting philosophies clash here in each staff's third year. Historically, a good offense and no defense is not a recipe for success. It gets you noticed and interviewed. It's entertaining for the casual fan, but it's probably not a sustainable model in the long run.
 

nokomismod said:
I am hoping this is the week that the play action passes to a wide open Fruechte yield in some scores rather than going off the tips of his fingers.

With our strong running game and our WR's inability to get separation consistently, I would love to see a flea flicker coming out of the read option look mixed into the play calling! I wonder if they have that in their playbook? I'm calling that we see one this week or next.
Click to expand...
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom