Tonight's Defense - Big picture

Donate To GopherHole
Ogie Ogilthorpe

Ogie Ogilthorpe

Tattooed Millionaire
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
22,995
Reaction score
16,252
Points
113
First things first, I thought it was unfortunate for the Rodents' "new" inexperienced defense to open on the road against a team that runs the spread and runs it well. Tough to prepare for, without question, particularly with how they ran the no-huddle.

A few positives:

Gave up 3 points in the second half. Nice adjustments.

Think back the last 6-8 years, all the MAC and Sun Belt teams the Gophers have played who ran the spread. Even in the Mason years when the running game should have been able to control the clock, I'm not sure I EVER recall the Gophers giving up just 17 points to a team that ran the spread. I doubt MTSU is much less effective at running their offense than somebody like Northwestern, Bowling Green, Toledo, et al.

Negatives:

Way way too damn many missed tackles. Wow. How many times did MTSU run the ball up the middle, runner was met in the hole, and went on for a 8-10 yard gain... Ouch. The Rodents have some nice backs, but they don't really have one that can "make the first guy miss".


The defense will obviously be a work in progress all year. Granted, South Dakota may not be a powerhouse but I'm looking forward to seeing how the Gophers defense plays next week, provided SD runs a more traditional offense.
 


The offense was a bit of the same. Weber was a little better, but not enough to make me comfortable. The running game looked good, but it will be interesting to see what happens when we don't outweigh the opposite line by 50 pounds per player. The receivers looked bad. Dropped some balls...just didn't seem to be that explosive. The o-line still didn't pass block well.

The defense didn't look great. WAY too many missed tackles. The secondary looked particularly bad. The D-line wasn't really a factor because of how MTSU ran the offense.

I'm just sort of neutral on the game. Not overly excited about how the team played, although happy with a win. Also not ready to jump off a cliff because it was broken beyond repair. We'll see in 2 weeks what this team is made of.
 

Most encouraging

I'm most encouraged by a few things that the Gophers did well tonight that have been a SERIOUS problem in recent seasons;


Running the ball - That's a given, doesn't need to be repeated again

PENALTIES!!! - Offensively, one false start and one holding call on 66 running plays, 83 total offensive plays. Considering how this team struggled in this area last year, this was amazing, particularly on the road, in the first game of the season. The Brew Bashers love to point to the penalties as directly attributable to poor coaching. Improvement made.

3rd Down Conversions - Converted 50% on the night, 8 of the last 10 (not to mention 2-for-2 on 4th Down)

Defensive 3rd Down Conversions - On the flip side, MTSU obviously converted just 1-for-8. Great job.

No Turnovers - Again, 83 offensive plays and not a single turnover, on the road. Very solid.


Overall, just plain very very few mistakes offensively. Definitely something to build on.
 

There is no way the Gophers could emulate the MTSU offense with their plodding, smash mouth approach during practice. As a result, often the D was a step late and out of position to make the tackle. Without watching the game again, no one stood out for the D. However, I did see Kirksey cover the sideline a couple of times which was rather impressive and he showed excellent lateral pursuit. The DB's looked tentative and passive. Tinsley wasn't a force and invisible for the most part. The pass rush was slow. This is a young and inexperienced troop and young players often show improvement between game one and two. We will need it.
 


I think where we really struggled was in the Safety play. It was to be expected with Royston and Theret out. I'm not too worried about our defense. MTSU's offense (not just Dasher) is potent as hell. Once their quickly paced offense gets going, it is really hard to stop. People may look at how well our offense controlled the clock, but our D did a very good job of forcing numerous three-and-outs. Grinding out a long td drive and having a quick-strike td score the same amount of points, but over the course of an entire game it is always better to be able to control the line of scrimmage and the clock.... given that we don't turn the ball over.

We saw that last night. This is definitely a solid workable BigTen template. We might not always win (especially this year), but it is a formula the Gophers can recruit to and win with in the long run.
 

All things considered, I think we did alright. There are no preseason games in college football...we'll have to improve, but I also assume we will.
 

Big 10 Network Wrap UP

I agree with the guys on BTN...they said it was a "coaching win". They developed an identity for this team. They wanted to run the ball, and even when they got behind, they held true to their plan and controlled the line of scrimmage against a good team. Many thought we'd lose this game, and I was on the bubble myself, but this game proved a lot to me. Our commitment to the run, as well as our execution on offense has improved 100%. Our passing game, still needs work as Weber looked a little uncomfortable back in the pocket when any pressure started to come his way. he was high and a little behind on his passes all night, until the 4th qtr and then seemed to settle into a nice rhythm. Let's hope they keep improving. The D, except for the 2nd qtr, played as good as they had to, not Great but not horrible either, for a bunch of inexperienced guys...all in all, I'll take it.
 

Are there still posters here who think we have a better defense then last year? We had no pass rush all night and at least last years front seven could tackle the running back.

I agree with this years plan on running the ball. We need to keep the defense off the field as much as we can because they will have a hard time stoping quality teams. Last years defense was much better. I don't know why many posters here thought we'd have a much better defense this year. Replacing 11 starters is no small task, no matter how talented they are.
 



Defense

I have mixed feelings on our pass rush. I was frustrating at times that we weren't getting a push. Then again, they are a quick spread team which unloads the ball quickly. When MT was clicking in the 2nd, we looked very tired, and we could not substitute. What issues did the temp create? I think it was about 89 at kick-off. Our Tackles and ends definitely got tired, and they could not rotate like they would like against that hurry-up spread. I was a little disappointed that Edwards and Kirksey didn't seem able to to stuff the middle runs, and MT has a small line, so the LBs should have been able to get off blocks and make more tackles as well. Even though we knew what to expect, I do think their hurry-up spread and the heat played a factor.
 

Obviously there are a number of things that need to be cleaned up, but all in all I think this was a good building block type of game.
 

gold04 said:
Are there still posters here who think we have a better defense then last year? We had no pass rush all night and at least last years front seven could tackle the running back.

I agree with this years plan on running the ball. We need to keep the defense off the field as much as we can because they will have a hard time stoping quality teams. Last years defense was much better. I don't know why many posters here thought we'd have a much better defense this year. Replacing 11 starters is no small task, no matter how talented they are.
Click to expand...


Why don't you compare defenses after the first game last year.... Yards allowed, third down conversions allowed, etc.... I'd be curious to see that...
 

Easy to criticize the defense. With two safeties playing their first game, Garrin and Hageman new out the box, and the ever undersized Collado. We played poorly for about 10 minutes of the game. First it was triggered by a missed 40 yard field goal. I thought if that comes up again, just punt it. But no. We tried another 40 yarder. Those decisions should be reviewed this week. Having said that, Coach Brewster at those points showed confidence in Ellstad and the defense. He got burned.

But comming out for the second half, as others have noted. Adjustments. Something Gopher teams have failed to do. It was my biggest fault of the former coach. The defense was on track in the second half. They kept it close, and the running game took over, again.

One thing that probably is underappreciated, is following the fumble recovery by Jon Hoese, the offense ran out the clock. How many times have we done that with ease?


And for that poster who questioned whether in this day and age you can run the ball 55 times, the answer, yes. 67 times in fact.

And for those who compare this to Mason ball, its completely different. Under Mason we had runs of 80 yards, quick touchdowns and the defense was back on the field. We were so efficient running the ball we inadvertanly stressed the defense. This offense controls, the tempo, controls the clock, and limits the opponents offense time on the field. Its classic. You have seen it with Nebraska in the day.
 



gold04 said:
Are there still posters here who think we have a better defense then last year? We had no pass rush all night and at least last years front seven could tackle the running back.
Click to expand...

I was in that group and I concede defeat.

The poor tackling was horrendous and in my short 45 years of watching college football it has been my experience that this is very difficult to correct over the course of a season. This does not bode well.

The pass rush was the second most disappointing. The OL for MTS is about the size of UMN linebackers and there was no evidence of even an effective bull rush by anyone on any down. Very disappointing.
 

husker70 said:
One thing that probably is underappreciated, is following the fumble recovery by Jon Hoese, the offense ran out the clock. How many times have we done that with ease?


And for that poster who questioned whether in this day and age you can run the ball 55 times, the answer, yes. 67 times in fact.

And for those who compare this to Mason ball, its completely different. Under Mason we had runs of 80 yards, quick touchdowns and the defense was back on the field. We were so efficient running the ball we inadvertanly stressed the defense. This offense controls, the tempo, controls the clock, and limits the opponents offense time on the field. Its classic. You have seen it with Nebraska in the day.
Click to expand...

Agreed...I made this point too with my son and elsewhere. I can't even cout how many times we needed 3 more yards to ice the game...and got only 1 or 2. That was the way to win it....run it for a 1st down...when they KNEW we were going to run it.

Also...forget Nebraska....back in the day it was the Gophers do this TO Nebraska. MN has a winning record against the Huskers.

Looking forward to that game next year.

GM
 


With regards to the whole "OMG WE DIDNT GET ANY PASS RUSH ON MTSU."

You arent going to get a pass rush on them because their QB had a bunch of 3 and 5 step drops and you will rarely get a sack, unless an o lineman misses a block completely.
 

My thoughts on the D

First off, they got a huge boost from the O, a big change from all the bailouts the D made for the O last year. A good sign.

Pass rush was minimal until they dialed up some blitzing, However they seemed to be doing alot of zone drops from various Dlinemen and linebackers. I think the gameplan was to contain the QB and mix up coverages, keep everything in front of them and get off the field.
If so, they did their jobs.

Safety play was very green, Manuel and Lewis were a step slow, probably more due to a slow read on the play than their speed.

Linebackers did well, good to see Rallis continue to show up around the ball and play johnny on the spot for that deflection INT

3rd down stop by Edwards was huge and clutch. We needed a stop on that play.

I think we'll see a mixture of strategies on D all year, this one was tailor made to contain a speedy spread team, unfortunately they exposed our green safeties late in the 2nd quarter, but overall they were contained. They did nothing on O in the second half.

It will be interesting to see what the D brings to the table next week, when they'll have speed advantage over the O they face. I'm betting they'll play more traditional 4-3 and contain the run and let the young Dline sharpen their 4 man pass rush in 3rd and long situations.
 

Sumtimegophs said:
I was in that group and I concede defeat.

The poor tackling was horrendous and in my short 45 years of watching college football it has been my experience that this is very difficult to correct over the course of a season. This does not bode well.

The pass rush was the second most disappointing. The OL for MTS is about the size of UMN linebackers and there was no evidence of even an effective bull rush by anyone on any down. Very disappointing.
Click to expand...

First college game starting against a difficult offense for a lot of them. That team was better than our haughty for no good reason fans think. Let's wait and see how the defense develops before judging it as poor.

As noted, very significant that we regrouped at halftime and basically shut them down the second half. The defense got the ball every time the second half without allowing a point and people are minimizing it because our offense controlled the ball so well. It's almost like some people would feel better if the defense had stayed on the field longer.
 

I think the defense has a lot to prove in the coming weeks. I felt people were way too excited about this defense at the start of the season. Replacing 11 starters is not an easy thing. Last years defense was actually a really good defense by Minnesota standards. Only Masons 98? team had a better defense in recent memory.

I'm not giving up on them yet, but I didn't see anything last night to get us excited about the defense this year. Let's hope Cosgrove is a miracle worker. If he's not, then it still might be a long season.
 

For those already giving up on the defense...calm yourself.

Did they play well the whole game? NO.
Did they tackle well much of the night? NO.

But I look at the game and think that the problems they showed can be cleaned up and improved upon. Will they? I don't know. That's been our achilles heel under Brew. You can see the opportunities and talent but the improve that is needed doesn't always happen. But is this D quicker? YES. There were flashes of really good play in there. The key is to see if they can reduce the bad and increase the good. If they do I don't think this D will have any problems at least matching the performance of last year's team.
 

gold04 said:
I'm not giving up on them yet, but I didn't see anything last night to get us excited about the defense this year. Let's hope Cosgrove is a miracle worker. If he's not, then it still might be a long season.
Click to expand...

If you didn't see ANYTHING to like then you weren't paying attention IMO. Or more likely, you're letting your displeasure over tackling and some other elements of the game that they need to improve on blind you to the good moments they did have.
 

gold04 said:
I think the defense has a lot to prove in the coming weeks. I felt people were way too excited about this defense at the start of the season. Replacing 11 starters is not an easy thing. Last years defense was actually a really good defense by Minnesota standards. Only Masons 98? team had a better defense in recent memory.

I'm not giving up on them yet, but I didn't see anything last night to get us excited about the defense this year. Let's hope Cosgrove is a miracle worker. If he's not, then it still might be a long season.
Click to expand...

How about allowing only 1 of 8 on 3rd down conversions? It wasn't a good performance by the defense, but there certainly are some good things to take from the game.
 

GophersInIowa said:
How about allowing only 1 of 8 on 3rd down conversions? It wasn't a good performance by the defense, but there certainly are some good things to take from the game.
Click to expand...

This... absolutely, I suppose we could have held them to 0-8? This is a step in the right direction for a young defense, no?!
 

It was game 1 in many ways.

I think some of you need to lay off the hate juice! This was game #1 not only of the season but for the defense it was game #1 in many of these guys starting careers. Not to mention we were not playing against a typical patsy that cant play. MTSU is a good team if we were playing Towson or something it would be different but MTSU is a solid football team that would give most teams trouble. Lets remember how so many complain when we dont play enough good teams now we play a good team and win its not by enough. When you play better teams you are not going to walk all over them and look pretty.

Defense
Pass rush usually struggles against spread teams because the D-line has to read the play first. The design of the spread is to help slow down pass rushes by forcing the line to read run first. Someone else mentioned the quick 3 to 5 step drops that were used last night also limit a pass rush.

Tackling needs to improve for sure. That can't be argued.

All the new starters on the team have to settle down and get in a groove notice all the points MTSU scored in the first half after momentum changing missed field goals? Once the team settled down and relaxed some they didnt allow a TD in the second half. As the season goes along this will improve its called experience.

Offense
Reading all the takes on Weber I have to ask how many drops did the team have? I have read over and over again Weber didnt look good but the team had some drops. Well heck he was 10 of 17 passing for a 15 yards per catch average. If the team dropped even 2 passes that means of his 17 passes only 5 were maybe bad throws and figuring he didnt have an INT he didnt have any terrible errors. For a team running as much as we did that is great. Do we need some big plays? Of course but it is game #1 and we are trying to establish the running game now which should lead to more passing later on.

The line was good but also had some mistakes as well. That being said to run it as much as we did and have as few penalties as we did maybe the line has improved. They will also have to play better when they start seeing bigger players in the Big Ten but its a good starting point.

RB's- as a group it looks like they had a solid game. Had some good balance with Bennett getting the most carries but he also got enough rest from Eskridge and Kirkwood.

Game #1 is a win against a good solid team. It isnt supposed to be pretty on the road against a good team. The Gophers are young get as many wins as possible early that will build confidence and momentum the rest of the year. We need to take care of USD show improvement and then try for our first major upset of the year against USC.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom