***-POST GAME THOUGHTS-***

[gopherhoopsguy]

how about max shortell.. biggest lose to the program

Just makes me mad nelson does not throw the ball away..

 

[gopherhoopsguy]

Lots of us said this was a terrible matchup for the gophers and u all saw why.

 

[BHgrappler]

Most disappointing to me was the play of Haggeman in this game. For the guy that is supposed to be the face of the program, he got worked most of the game and appeared to be playing very unispired, as opposed to the dominating force that we need him to be.

 

[Governor Sibley]

(1) I said it was very bad that Shortell was leaving the program. I still think it was very bad.

(2) I don't see how our OL gets much better with age. O-lineman get better after a full year of starting. They don't get a ton better after year two. Typically anyway. Same with almost every other position these days.

(3) I think we have more room for growth on defense than on offense.

 

[RedPoo]

Has anyone (like the coaching staff) indicated that maybe Nelson wasn't actually 100%, in spite of what we were told before the game? All those unnecessary sacks he took, combined with the fact that we almost completely stayed away from the QB run, to me scream that he wasn't comfortable running, and probably shouldn't have been starting in the first place. (Not that he still couldn't have thrown the ball away on the sacks...there were some inexcusable mistakes there. But it looked to me like a guy who was used to taking off and trying to pick up a few yards when the pocket breaks down instead taking a step in that direction, freezing up, and getting brought down.)

 

[Maverick]

Has anyone (like the coaching staff) indicated that maybe Nelson wasn't actually 100%, in spite of what we were told before the game? All those unnecessary sacks he took, combined with the fact that we almost completely stayed away from the QB run, to me scream that he wasn't comfortable running, and probably shouldn't have been starting in the first place. (Not that he still couldn't have thrown the ball away on the sacks...there were some inexcusable mistakes there. But it looked to me like a guy who was used to taking off and trying to pick up a few yards when the pocket breaks down instead taking a step in that direction, freezing up, and getting brought down.)

This^^^^

 

[Sumtimegophs]

Well, I got fileted pretty good for saying this in another thread, but I think it is coaching. Kill and his staff did absolutely NOTHING to develop a passing attack in the first four games. That effort was pathetic and now the team is paying the price for that lack of coaching.

Granted, the Gophers did increase the number of passes completed in a game over their average by about 33%, but the passing attack is woefully inadequate which means teams can concentrate on stopping the run (30 yds on 27 carries? Give me a break) because there is no threat the Gophers will every beat a team with the pass.

This is all on Kill and his staff. I stand by what I said before about their abilities.

 

[Unregistered User]

Well, I got fileted pretty good for saying this in another thread, but I think it is coaching. Kill and his staff did absolutely NOTHING to develop a passing attack in the first four games. That effort was pathetic and now the team is paying the price for that lack of coaching.

Granted, the Gophers did increase the number of passes completed in a game over their average by about 33%, but the passing attack is woefully inadequate which means teams can concentrate on stopping the run (30 yds on 27 carries? Give me a break) because there is no threat the Gophers will every beat a team with the pass.

This is all on Kill and his staff. I stand by what I said before about their abilities.

Jesus H Christ - How many people feel the need to post the same crap in as many threads as possible in the hopes that they finally get acknowledgement?

 

[Indi1006]

This is both untrue and maybe the dumbest thing written in this thread....and that is saying something. You know nothing about offensive line play, development and performance and what goes into it.

The VAST majority of top performing O-lineman are 3rd, 4th & 5th year players. Kids come out of high school at 6-4 250 and by their 3rd year are 6-6 320 and by their 5th year are 6-7 320 and strong as an ox with much improved technique.

It is so rare for a O-lineman to come out of high school with the size, strength and technique to compete at the highest level in their first couple of years.

For further proof, feel free to look at the top 5 rushing teams from each of the last 10 years (50 teams - 250 lineman) and count how many starting offensive linemen on those teams weren't 3rd, 4th of 5th year players. Then look and see how many of those teams returned at least 4 starters from the previous year.

Time matters to big men in the trenches.

I think Campion is five years removed from HS had he not taken a year off and then went to Prep school he would be a RS senior. He's a grown a** man and whether he's listed as a RS sophomore is irrevelant. Epping RS junior so he's in his fourth year, Bak and Christiensen RS soph so in their third year. Leuer is the only "young" player. I honestly don't know how they can be classified as young unless folks get confused by Campion.

 

[RedPoo]

Well, I got fileted pretty good for saying this in another thread, but I think it is coaching. Kill and his staff did absolutely NOTHING to develop a passing attack in the first four games. That effort was pathetic and now the team is paying the price for that lack of coaching.

Are you serious with this?
The ability of the coaching staff aside, the reason we don't pass much in games is because, as you just saw yesterday, even when the opponent is committed to stopping the run WE'RE NOT VERY GOOD AT IT. Do you really think throwing the ball all over (while compromising the game plan our first four wins we're built on) would have turned us into a good passing team? Do you think throwing ten more passes a game against New Mexico State and UNLV would have gotten our offense some kind of difference-making insight or skill that they didn't get from literally hundreds (if not thousands) of reps against our own defense?

 

[thailleagle]

Has anyone (like the coaching staff) indicated that maybe Nelson wasn't actually 100%, in spite of what we were told before the game? All those unnecessary sacks he took, combined with the fact that we almost completely stayed away from the QB run, to me scream that he wasn't comfortable running, and probably shouldn't have been starting in the first place. (Not that he still couldn't have thrown the ball away on the sacks...there were some inexcusable mistakes there. But it looked to me like a guy who was used to taking off and trying to pick up a few yards when the pocket breaks down instead taking a step in that direction, freezing up, and getting brought down.)

So you're agreeing that the coaching staff is to blame for starting a possibly fragile Nelson & benching your QB that had momentum & the hot hand? I would *HOPE* our coaching staff is a little smarter then that...

 

[thailleagle]

Do you really think throwing the ball all over (while compromising the game plan our first four wins we're built on) would have turned us into a good passing team? Do you think throwing ten more passes a game against New Mexico State and UNLV would have gotten our offense some kind of difference-making insight or skill that they didn't get from literally hundreds (if not thousands) of reps against our own defense?

You're either joking or trolling... I can't tell right now...

 

[cncmin]

We didn't match up well against Iowa on paper so I don't know why anyone would be surprised we lost. Our Offense has looked unimpressive all season against smaller teams so I really wasn't shocked that we couldn't "bully" a team of equal or bigger size. The Passing Game isn't as bad as I thought it would be... more accuracy on a few of those throws & our stats would've been a lot better but having ZERO ground game today really hurt.

A lot of experts said we wouldn't make a Bowl Game this year but would be an improved football team & I think that's all we can really hope for the rest of the Season after today's display...

I still think we'll sneak in a win against someone we're not supposed to beat...

There were a select few of us who dared mention the exact problems that ended up grossly exploited by an average Iowa team on Saturday. Sadly, those of us who didn't express extreme joy in the manner in which the Gophers attained their preseason victories were called names and criticized heavily on this very board after each preseason win, mainly for expressing doubt that they looked like a quality B1G team in the preseason wins. I really did think the Gophers had a chance in this game, but only because I thought Iowa stunk. They don't.

I don't see how the Gophers can win a B1G game this season, unless the offense improves in all categories. The OL is porous and doesn't create any holes (I was hoping the OL would be a strength coming into this season, what happened to it??). The WRs do not create gaps and don't adjust well to the thrown ball, other than Maxx Williams, who is greatly under-utilized. The running backs haven't done much, but the OL isn't creating holes, so that's not surprising. Nelson looks scared back there and not very confident. I'm glad he found a "go-to" WR in Engle, but...

The defense continues to have a problem getting off the field on 3rd (or 4th) down. When the Gopher defense can stop someone on 3rd and long instead of giving up the 15-yard pass right down the middle of the field, the Gophers will at least be a competitive team in B1G games. The DL needs to get a push at some point.

At what point do the Minnesota Golden Gophers decide to actually ATTACK an opponent instead of letting the opponent dictate every part of the game? I thought I saw some attacking in Brewster's second season. Then the wheel fell off, and I haven't seen that attitude since. Be Aggressive, Golden Gophers!

 

[cncmin]

Are you serious with this?
The ability of the coaching staff aside, the reason we don't pass much in games is because, as you just saw yesterday, even when the opponent is committed to stopping the run WE'RE NOT VERY GOOD AT IT. Do you really think throwing the ball all over (while compromising the game plan our first four wins we're built on) would have turned us into a good passing team? Do you think throwing ten more passes a game against New Mexico State and UNLV would have gotten our offense some kind of difference-making insight or skill that they didn't get from literally hundreds (if not thousands) of reps against our own defense?

I think some effort in game-time passing development would have been quite beneficial, yes; instead of running the QB 40% of the play calls. By the way, where were those QB runs this game? It's the only part of the offense that actually works, and it disappeared entirely.

 

[RedPoo]

I think some effort in game-time passing development would have been quite beneficial, yes; instead of running the QB 40% of the play calls. By the way, where were those QB runs this game? It's the only part of the offense that actually works, and it disappeared entirely.

I think both yourself and thailleagle are dramatically overestimating the potential benefit of what would be maybe 40 passing reps against very bad defenses. Especially when weighed against the fact that the first and second goals in any game are to win that game (and the third is to get out of it healthy), and none of our previous games were out of reach until at least the second half. Given the game plan we had against those teams, the importance of getting those wins, and the obvious weaknesses in our passing game, throwing the ball a bunch would have definitely hurt our chances of winning, while delivering marginal benefits at best in future games. And I'm sure all four of our previous opponents were hoping we'd pass more, too.

I agree about the lack of the QB rush this game...that's why I was questioning Nelson's health earlier in the thread. I see no reason why we shouldn't have been running with the QB more, especially given how poorly our RBs and passing offense were doing at moving the ball.

 

[RedPoo]

So you're agreeing that the coaching staff is to blame for starting a possibly fragile Nelson & benching your QB that had momentum & the hot hand? I would *HOPE* our coaching staff is a little smarter then that...

I'm not assigning blame anywhere, I am actually openly wondering if Nelson may have been more hurt than he and the team led us to believe, and if anyone else saw any evidence to support or refute that idea. That is all.

 

[salaunese]

There's nothing "average" about Iowa's OL or defensive front 7...it's the lack of true difference makers at key positions that are keeping the Hawks down right now..

It was more about how the two teams matched up against each other.

Iowa's two OT's will both play in the NFL

 

[thailleagle]

I think both yourself and thailleagle are dramatically overestimating the potential benefit of what would be maybe 40 passing reps against very bad defenses. Especially when weighed against the fact that the first and second goals in any game are to win that game (and the third is to get out of it healthy), and none of our previous games were out of reach until at least the second half. Given the game plan we had against those teams, the importance of getting those wins, and the obvious weaknesses in our passing game, throwing the ball a bunch would have definitely hurt our chances of winning, while delivering marginal benefits at best in future games. And I'm sure all four of our previous opponents were hoping we'd pass more, too.

I agree about the lack of the QB rush this game...that's why I was questioning Nelson's health earlier in the thread. I see no reason why we shouldn't have been running with the QB more, especially given how poorly our RBs and passing offense were doing at moving the ball.

I'm just saying... if you're going to decided to start passing at least pass with a QB who was 100% & I agree with you that Nelson may have still been hurt to some degree...

 

[cncmin]

I think both yourself and thailleagle are dramatically overestimating the potential benefit of what would be maybe 40 passing reps against very bad defenses. Especially when weighed against the fact that the first and second goals in any game are to win that game (and the third is to get out of it healthy), and none of our previous games were out of reach until at least the second half. Given the game plan we had against those teams, the importance of getting those wins, and the obvious weaknesses in our passing game, throwing the ball a bunch would have definitely hurt our chances of winning, while delivering marginal benefits at best in future games. And I'm sure all four of our previous opponents were hoping we'd pass more, too.

I agree about the lack of the QB rush this game...that's why I was questioning Nelson's health earlier in the thread. I see no reason why we shouldn't have been running with the QB more, especially given how poorly our RBs and passing offense were doing at moving the ball.

It's my opinion that one of the reasons some of those early games were close WAS extremely conservative playcalling. In every game except, possibly, the SJSU game, I felt that our coaching staff was firmly outcoached in terms of playcalling by the opposing coaching staff, especially the UNLV game. I was told not to worry, the coaching staff was just being conservative because they "didn't want to show the playbook" against bad teams; which is always the excuse a fanbase uses to justify an ugly-coached victory.

I'm not sure why Nelson played the whole game, especially when the team wasn't really moving the ball. I believe Nelson is the starter, but sometimes when things aren't working you have to go with the other guy. Leidner proved his mettle as a backup. Kill continues to show conservative stubbornness. I'm not convinced that stubbornness is ever a way to improve anything.

 

[Great Plains Gopher]

Back from Mpls. What a disaster!

Took a day of rehab before hitting the road, with a good excuse to watch the Vikings in London. Can't remember (40+ years) a worst first half offense than Saturday's. What made the coaches think they could run against Iowa? Why did they waste four games without developing a passing game? Why didn't Leidner get in at some point? He sparked the team in the last two games before Iowa. As so many have been saying, you can't win in the B10 without passing - and Nelson looked unready for prime time (after 11 starts, he's under .500, with only one good passing game - Purdue last year). Maybe Leidner can't pass at the B10 level either, in which case why, in the third year of a program, don't we have a QB who can? Absolutely horrible game with a stupid game plan, no offensive imagination (especially early), a QB running like a scared rabbit, and a result that could easily have been much worse if Ferentz wasn't a conservative gentleman (didn't go for the jugular at the end, twice went for field goals with fourth and 2 and his team rolling). Could easily have been 43-7 or worse. The Gophers will lose every conference game unless they improve dramatically from this debacle - and Michigan, after a bye and smarting from criticism, will likely use homecoming to run up the score.

This embarrassment raises the specter of losing seasons this year and next.

 

[BreakTheGopherCurse]

Took a day of rehab before hitting the road, with a good excuse to watch the Vikings in London. Can't remember (40+ years) a worst first half offense than Saturday's. What made the coaches think they could run against Iowa? Why did they waste four games without developing a passing game? Why didn't Leidner get in at some point? He sparked the team in the last two games before Iowa. As so many have been saying, you can't win in the B10 without passing - and Nelson looked unready for prime time (after 11 starts, he's under .500, with only one good passing game - Purdue last year). Maybe Leidner can't pass at the B10 level either, in which case why, in the third year of a program, don't we have a QB who can? Absolutely horrible game with a stupid game plan, no offensive imagination (especially early), a QB running like a scared rabbit, and a result that could easily have been much worse if Ferentz wasn't a conservative gentleman (didn't go for the jugular at the end, twice went for field goals with fourth and 2 and his team rolling). Could easily have been 43-7 or worse. The Gophers will lose every conference game unless they improve dramatically from this debacle - and Michigan, after a bye and smarting from criticism, will likely use homecoming to run up the score.

This embarrassment raises the specter of losing seasons this year and next.

An excerpt from a recent strategy session for the Gophers vs. Iowa Game:

Limegrover: Jer', we're young, undersized, and relatively inexperienced up front;
Kill: I realize that Matt, what are you trying to tell me?
Limegrover: Well, we need an offensive strategy for Saturday. Their front 7 is big and strong.
Kill: What do you suggest Matt?
Limegrover: Play to our strengths.
Kill: I like that plan. So, what's it going to be?
Limegrover: Run off center, guard and tackle as much as we can.
Kill: I love it. "Gopher" it Matt!

 

[Great Plains Gopher]

An excerpt from a recent strategy session for the Gophers vs. Iowa Game:

Limegrover: Jer', we're young, undersized, and relatively inexperienced up front;
Kill: I realize that Matt, what are you trying to tell me?
Limegrover: Well, we need an offensive strategy for Saturday. Their front 7 is big and strong.
Kill: What do you suggest Matt?
Limegrover: Play to our strengths.
Kill: I like that plan. So, what's it going to be?
Limegrover: Run off center, guard and tackle as much as we can.
Kill: I love it. "Gopher" it Matt!

That was pretty much the first half. Did we get 19 yards rushing that half?

 

[LesBolstad]

That one was on the coaches; to come out like that against your rival? Pathetic at best. Contrary to the maroon colored glasses wearing Gopherholers, this team is in no better shape than the Brewster era. Hell, at least Brew had us 3-0 in b10 his third year and has us at least dreaming of roses.

 

[NateDawgUM]

That one was on the coaches; to come out like that against your rival? Pathetic at best. Contrary to the maroon colored glasses wearing Gopherholers, this team is in no better shape than the Brewster era. Hell, at least Brew had us 3-0 in b10 his third year and has us at least dreaming of roses.

Brewster was never 3-0 in the Big Ten. We were 3-1 in 2008, but you're conveniently forgetting that we got completely smoked by Ohio State in week 1 of the Big Ten season.

It was a disappointing game with a questionable game plan for sure, but the way you people are so quick to throw away an entire season based on one loss is laughable.

I don't know why I read this board anymore, and I definitely don't know why I feel compelled to respond.

 

[Iceland12]

Brewster was never 3-0 in the Big Ten. We were 3-1 in 2008, but you're conveniently forgetting that we got completely smoked by Ohio State in week 1 of the Big Ten season.

It was a disappointing game with a questionable game plan for sure, but the way you people are so quick to throw away an entire season based on one loss is laughable.

I don't know why I read this board anymore, and I definitely don't know why I feel compelled to respond.

Boy, glad you didn't read the rant about the A.D. selling 100 tickets to the game. That REALLY would have ticked you off!

 

[LesBolstad]

Brewster was never 3-0 in the Big Ten. We were 3-1 in 2008, but you're conveniently forgetting that we got completely smoked by Ohio State in week 1 of the Big Ten season.

Losing 34 -21 at the Shoe is completely smoked? Dude, Kill would get a 4 year extension if he started a B10 season 3-1 with a 13 pt. loss at OSU.

Show me the progress, don't tell me about it.

 

[RedPoo]

Show me the progress, don't tell me about it.

In 2011, Kill's Gophers went 1-3 in non-conference play, including a loss to New Mexico State. They finished with three wins.

In 2012, Kill's Gophers went 4-0 in non-conference play, including a triple-overtime win over a horrible UNLV team (that finished with two wins) and a five-point victory over Western Michigan, before losing to Iowa in their first conference game by 18 points (though it was never that close, as Iowa was up 24-0 at the half and coasted the rest of the way)

In 2013, Kill's Gophers went 4-0 in non-conference play, winning each game comfortably (by more than two touchdowns) including blowouts against both New Mexico State and UNLV. They lost to Iowa in their first conference game by 16 points (though they remained relatively close, being within 13 points in the 4th quarter with a drive stalling near mid-field and Iowa tacking on a late score after a desperation INT thrown by MN).


Progress doesn't get much more obvious than that.

 

[LesBolstad]

In 2011, Kill's Gophers went 1-3 in non-conference play, including a loss to New Mexico State. They finished with three wins.

In 2012, Kill's Gophers went 4-0 in non-conference play, including a triple-overtime win over a horrible UNLV team (that finished with two wins) and a five-point victory over Western Michigan, before losing to Iowa in their first conference game by 18 points (though it was never that close, as Iowa was up 24-0 at the half and coasted the rest of the way)

In 2013, Kill's Gophers went 4-0 in non-conference play, winning each game comfortably (by more than two touchdowns) including blowouts against both New Mexico State and UNLV. They lost to Iowa in their first conference game by 16 points (though they remained relatively close, being within 13 points in the 4th quarter with a drive stalling near mid-field and Iowa tacking on a late score after a desperation INT thrown by MN).


Progress doesn't get much more obvious than that.

What's obvious about it? Kill is 2, 2, and likely 2 or less in conference his first 3 years. Brew (yes, he was a huge mistake) was 0, 3, and 3 in his first 3. Seems pretty comparable to me. But hey, I'm just looking at the facts.

And you're saying this years home IA loss was an improvement over last years? Thanks for the laugh.

 

[RedPoo]

What's obvious about it? Kill is 2, 2, and likely 2 or less in conference his first 3 years. Brew (yes, he was a huge mistake) was 0, 3, and 3 in his first 3. Seems pretty comparable to me. But hey, I'm just looking at the facts.

And you're saying this years home IA loss was an improvement over last years? Thanks for the laugh.

Are you serious? I guess I have to proceed under the assumption that you are, but I don't get how you can hold that position.

Anyway, Kill started over from scratch. He was up front about the fact that they were tearing it down and starting over. As I outlined above, the team has steadily improved from his first year to now. Every step of the way over these first three (or rather, two+) years, the team has gotten better.

Under the proceeding 2+ years under Brewster, the team got progressively worse. 7 wins in 2008, 6 in 2009, and 1-6 before he got fired in 2010.

Seriously, the clarity of this comparison is almost unheard of. You almost couldn't ask for a better example of slow, steady improvement than what we've seen in Kill's first three years, especially when compared to the bottoming out we witnessed in Brewster's last three. There is a ton of space for disagreement in sports, but this specific instance is simply not one of them. It may turn out that Kill isn't ultimately successful, but all of the evidence right now points to improvement.

 

[Halsey Hall]

I watched Illinois smoke Miami and their offense was so improved over 2 years ago I couldn't believe it. We played 4 creampuffs in the non conference and didn't smoke any of them. We won, yes, but it was never a comfortable win. We gave up way too many yards and didn't pass well. It's possible we don't win another game.