Subs

[New-RTB-Fan]

I love this board. Really great comments, well thought out points by most everyone. One thing that might have contributed to not seeing more "subs" is that until CU, we had not really played a complete game. Maybe he wanted to see his "starters" finish a complete game. Maybe he thought they needed to prove to themselves they could. Now we have a new "best" and he can challenge them to change to it. I thought that was some of what was going on in Rossi's comments about the defense in today's media session. Rossi was not sitting pack and praising the performance of the defense at CU. He was critiquing every mistake and focusing on how we could improve and become better.

 

[60's Guy]

PJ has his way. Another reason for playing regulars all game long is game conditioning. If starters rest often, when you play an opponent that forces you to play/compete buzzer to buzzer…your guys are tired at crunch time because they are used to sitting.
Being on the field all game long is something else you can’t duplicate in practice. There are arguments on all sides.
He is consistent.

 

[RememberMurray]

QUOTE: "I know it's a quibble but it's the same behavior that led to Mo being overused etc."

I strongly disagree that Mo was "overused".

— Mo got hurt in the Ohio State game. It was the first game of the season. How can there be "overuse" in Game One of the season? Come on.

— We were fighting hard to win that very crucial, sold out game, against a highly-ranked opponent, and Mo is the Gophers' superstar, considered a Heisman candidate. You don't bench your best player in crunch time while in a dogfight against a Top Ten team. I certainly wouldn't, if I was the coach.

 

[MNSpaniel]

I question whether Fleck would make those rather direct comments. That is not coach speak .

Maybe not exact words but pretty much what he said. Kept using the phrase "Paranoid about losing." Also said that defense wasn't on the field that much and they didn't get that many reps in the game as they usually do. I thought he said defense was on the field for 40 plays.

 

[eker0016]

At the same time what's the benefit to putting ZA in there to hand the ball off a few times? Tanner's injury risk is pretty low in that scenario and I'm not sure that experience does much for ZA.

I would have loved seeing one of the future guys in there: Kramer/Clark/Athan to get them more used to taking snaps in a game. And I would be happy to let him throw a pass or two, even in that situation. I was actually hoping to see one of those guys instead of Zack.

 

[eker0016]

QUOTE: "I know it's a quibble but it's the same behavior that led to Mo being overused etc."

I strongly disagree that Mo was "overused".

— Mo got hurt in the Ohio State game. It was the first game of the season. How can there be "overuse" in Game One of the season? Come on.

— We were fighting hard to win that very crucial, sold out game, against a highly-ranked opponent, and Mo is the Gophers' superstar, considered a Heisman candidate. You don't bench your best player in crunch time while in a dogfight against a Top Ten team. I certainly wouldn't, if I was the coach.

You're free to disagree. There are two aspects I don't like about overusing a player: they get gassed and less effective later in the game, and they have an increased risk of injury. Mo got injured, and he was less effective later in the game. He had 30 carries that game before getting hurt in he 3rd quarter. His 2nd half carries before he got hurt: 5, 1, 19, 1, 2, 2, 8, 3, 3, 4, 1. I would have loved to see Potts get mixed in a little bit more so Mo was more fresh later in the game.

 

[RememberMurray]

You're free to disagree. There are two aspects I don't like about overusing a player: they get gassed and less effective later in the game, and they have an increased risk of injury. Mo got injured, and he was less effective later in the game. He had 30 carries that game before getting hurt in he 3rd quarter. His 2nd half carries before he got hurt: 5, 1, 19, 1, 2, 2, 8, 3, 3, 4, 1. I would have loved to see Potts get mixed in a little bit more so Mo was more fresh later in the game.

That stat line you posted of Mo's carry-by-carry before his injury actually weakens your own argument, in my opinion. By my count (and assuming your numbers are accurate) that gives Mo 49 yards in those last 11 carries — almost 4.5 yards a pop. All that shows is that the offensive game plan had continued to be extremely effective. Grind the clock, shorten the game. Keep Ohio State's explosive offense off the field, and give the Gopher defense time to rest and regroup.

The reason Mo had 30 carries in the third quarter was because he had gained 163 freakin' yards and scored 2 TDs on those 30 carries! Of course you keep feeding him the rock. The only people who would have loved to see him on the bench were all standing on the Ohio State sideline.

With Mo in the game, don't you think the odds of any play action pass being effective were increased exponentially? I certainly do.

If I'm a coach, I'm not pulling Adrian Peterson or Barry Sanders or Bo Jackson or Derrick Henry in crunch time, and I'm not sitting Mo down with the game on the line against the Ohio State.

He's a young, strong man, and he had only had 30 carries for the season to that point. Saying he had been "overused", and that the alleged "overuse" caused the injury, is simply absurd.

 

[Some guy]

I think people overestimate the value of experience in a blowout game. A guy playing 2 series at the end of a game well out of reach, playing next to backups, likely against other backups, in a pressure less situation isn't going to make much of a difference in terms of their future performance. It's better than nothing, sure, but them playing against our 1's in practice is probably more helpful. The only real benefit to me is reducing the possibility of injuries to starters.
Also we play like 8-10 DL, 4-5 LBs and 5-7 DBs just in regular action on. The only places where we don't play a lot of guys right now is QB and TE. So if a starter gets hurt his backup has probably been playing a lot anyway.

That’s for sure true that people over value garbage time.
I think injury risk to some guys is a valid concern though

 

[RememberMurray]

That’s for sure true that people over value garbage time.
I think injury risk to some guys is a valid concern though

It's football. You can get hurt on the very first play of the game.

 

[Some guy]

It's football. You can get hurt on the very first play of the game.

Pretty sure that’s exactly the point

If you can get hurt on any play…..
Playing fewer plays leads to lower injury risk….

Am I missing something

 

[RememberMurray]

Pretty sure that’s exactly the point

If you can get hurt on any play…..
Playing fewer plays leads to lower injury risk….

Am I missing something

Yes.

What's your star running back's 'pitch count', at home, in front of a sellout crowd, against #4 ranked Ohio State in the first freakin' game of the season — a tight game, in the third quarter, in which he's running really, really well, and keeping your team in the game?

Since he got hurt on his 30th carry, I assume your amazing gift of clairvoyance would have told you to sit him after carry #29.

Or, would you have pulled him from the game earlier — perhaps right before one of his amazing runs?

Here's a thought: maybe he shouldn't have played at all. Then we'd be guaranteed that he'd be healthy right now. Unless, of course, he got hurt in practice. Well, come to think of it, football practice can be quite risky. And don't get me started on weight training. Torn pectoral muscle doing bench presses, anyone? Hellll-oooo?

What if your "don't get hurt" philosophy cost Mo a shot at the Heisman Trophy, because he got beaten out for the award by a player with more carries?

I'm "pretty sure" that that would suck.

Here's how it works, now and forever: Great players play. Especially in big games.

 

[HoustonTXGopher]

My favorite game day sub was at the Big 10 Bar & Grill, corned beef with swiss substituted. Oh how I miss those.

BIG 10 Subs closing down always leaves in empty space in my heart every time I come up to visit. I always looked forward to that place.

 

[Some guy]

Yes.

What's your star running back's 'pitch count', at home, in front of a sellout crowd, against #4 ranked Ohio State in the first freakin' game of the season — a tight game, in the third quarter, in which he's running really, really well, and keeping your team in the game?

Since he got hurt on his 30th carry, I assume your amazing gift of clairvoyance would have told you to sit him after carry #29.

Or, would you have pulled him from the game earlier — perhaps right before one of his amazing runs?

Here's a thought: maybe he shouldn't have played at all. Then we'd be guaranteed that he'd be healthy right now. Unless, of course, he got hurt in practice. Well, come to think of it, football practice can be quite risky. And don't get me started on weight training. Torn pectoral muscle doing bench presses, anyone? Hellll-oooo?

What if your "don't get hurt" philosophy cost Mo a shot at the Heisman Trophy, because he got beaten out for the award by a player with more carries?

I'm "pretty sure" that that would suck.

Here's how it works, now and forever: Great players play. Especially in big games.

You are literally talking about an entirely different situation than I’m talking about

 

[hungan1]

Was driving in the car and listening to KFAN yesterday. Fleck was doing a show with a live audience. I didn't hear the whole conversation but the question was asked about subbing or lack of subbing. I didn't agree with his answer and don't agree with his practice of playing starters very late in that game that is going to be lopsided pro/con.

His answer was simple. Paraphrasing: I'm afraid if I sub that we will lose. He said he was paranoid of losing even very late in the game. He said his defensive coaches will tell him that they are going to put a sub in and I will tell them ...no you are not. I'm just paranoid of losing ... that's the reason for how we sub.

I just don't agree with that. #1. You could get an injury to a starter. #2. The subs don't get game day experience. Practice is not the same as playing in a real game.

A good example is Mo's injury. Why didn't they give him a breather rest against tOSU every so often if they were going to use him that much? This is worrisome especially late in the season when the race to the top tightens.

It is like running in a marathon. A short thirty-second slow-down or walking pace brings lots of cardiovascular benefits. You will probably finish with a better time.

We can not predict when a player gets hurt. But, we can rest him a little to re-energize.

 

[noamfromm]

Bring up only 20 isn’t that big. Up 20 in the early 4th quarter and you are 2-3 plays away from being in a dogfight.


fleck doesn’t put in subs much because his style doesn’t lead him to bring up 5 possessions much.

Even when he is up 5 possessions he still doesn't. Against Maryland we saw Jacob Clark throw what . . . one pass?

 

[GFBfan]

At the same time what's the benefit to putting ZA in there to hand the ball off a few times? Tanner's injury risk is pretty low in that scenario and I'm not sure that experience does much for ZA.

I don't think its about the experience factor. It's about giving someone playing time who is working as hard as the starter and not getting the reward of game action.
Yes the OL and DL have a rotation, but once a game is out of reach, that rotation should change to the next group on the depth chart.
If he claims it is the trailing teams responsibility to start the subbing process then his actions in the Iowa game last year would be a dick move.

 

[Ogee Ogilthorpe]

My favorite game day sub was at the Big 10 Bar & Grill, corned beef with swiss substituted. Oh how I miss those.

I was thinking this thread was going to be a Jimmy John's vs Capriotti's discussion.

 

[STPGopher]

Was driving in the car and listening to KFAN yesterday. Fleck was doing a show with a live audience. I didn't hear the whole conversation but the question was asked about subbing or lack of subbing. I didn't agree with his answer and don't agree with his practice of playing starters very late in that game that is going to be lopsided pro/con.

His answer was simple. Paraphrasing: I'm afraid if I sub that we will lose. He said he was paranoid of losing even very late in the game. He said his defensive coaches will tell him that they are going to put a sub in and I will tell them ...no you are not. I'm just paranoid of losing ... that's the reason for how we sub.

I just don't agree with that. #1. You could get an injury to a starter. #2. The subs don't get game day experience. Practice is not the same as playing in a real game.

Clearly a life long Gopher fan...

 

[Some guy]

Even when he is up 5 possessions he still doesn't. Against Maryland we saw Jacob Clark throw what . . . one pass?

Yeah. I don’t think throwing 3 passes really makes a difference in Jacob Clark’s career there. He gets better reps in practice than in garbage time

 

[noamfromm]

Yeah. I don’t think throwing 3 passes really makes a difference in Jacob Clark’s career there. He gets better reps in practice than in garbage time

That's not what I was talking about as we were up 5 scores the entire fourth and we only saw Clark in for a series

 

[RememberMurray]

A good example is Mo's injury. Why didn't they give him a breather rest against tOSU every so often if they were going to use him that much? This is worrisome especially late in the season when the race to the top tightens.

It is like running in a marathon. A short thirty-second slow-down or walking pace brings lots of cardiovascular benefits. You will probably finish with a better time.

We can not predict when a player gets hurt. But, we can rest him a little to re-energize.

Distance running and playing running back are pretty dissimilar, I would say.

Running backs get a breather between each play, and longer rests when the defense and special teams are on the field.

 

[noamfromm]

It's football. You can get hurt on the very first play of the game.

To put it in perspective Treyson Potts has started two games this season and has 70 rushing attempts -- which is third in the nation -- first is Air Force's running back at 75 attempts over 3 games. We are the outlier, so to make the "pitch count" argument seems disingenuous as everyone else seems to be able to limit the amount of carries/game.

 

[Some guy]

That's not what I was talking about as we were up 5 scores the entire fourth and we only saw Clark in for a series

Yeah. Garbage time reps doesn’t help anyone with anything. If you think it does you’re kidding yourself.
Clark should’ve been in to avoid injury risk to someone else. But it wouldn’t make Clark any different of a player today

 

[MplsGopher_fan]

At the same time what's the benefit to putting ZA in there to hand the ball off a few times? Tanner's injury risk is pretty low in that scenario and I'm not sure that experience does much for ZA.

I'd say getting the play call in, getting the offense lined up correctly, etc against a real opponent, on the road, is definitely a good experience.

 

[MplsGopher_fan]

Mo got injured, and he was less effective later in the game.

Tends to happen with injuries.

 

[RememberMurray]

To put it in perspective Treyson Potts has started two games this season and has 70 rushing attempts -- which is third in the nation -- first is Air Force's running back at 75 attempts over 3 games. We are the outlier, so to make the "pitch count" argument seems disingenuous as everyone else seems to be able to limit the amount of carries/game.

Good heavens, we don't want to be 'outliers'.

So exactly how many carries should Potts get, coach? What's the magic number? How much safer will he be, at your number?

 

[noamfromm]

Good heavens, we don't want to be 'outliers'.

So exactly how many carries should Potts get, coach? What's the magic number? How much safer will he be, at your number?

Do you respond in most conversations like an a** or just on the board? I merely pointed out that our rb's are carrying the ball many more times than others. I didn't say I was a coach with a magic number -- but who cares

 

[Six to Eight]

Good heavens, we don't want to be 'outliers'.

So exactly how many carries should Potts get, coach? What's the magic number? How much safer will he be, at your number?

By your logic, as many as it takes to win the game. He's a strong young man after all, so why not 50 carries?

Reasonable people can disagree on whether PJ's conservative tendencies are counterproductive at times, but please spare us the indignant lectures.

 

[RememberMurray]

By your logic, as many as it takes to win the game. He's a strong young man after all, so why not 50 carries?

Reasonable people can disagree on whether PJ's conservative tendencies are counterproductive at times, but please spare us the indignant lectures.

Regarding the bolded: By George, I think you've (finally) got it!