Wow: Kirk Ciarrocca Takes OC Job at Rutgers

[Johnny Olson]

Sure but if you used the whole playclock on the 3 and out then you took close to 2 minutes off the clock. Then you force them to take the risks with the ball and trust in your very good defense to make them run a lot of plays or stop them.

Again....show me where our philosophy has caused us to lose a game we were winning.....

We came one defensive play in the end zone from losing 2019 to Penn ST.

 

[Word]

We came one defensive play in the end zone from losing 2019 to Penn ST.

But.....we won.

 

[Gopherchase]

You're comment wasn't applicable this year except in the Penn State White Out where MN got behind right away and was never going to come back with them "protecting" AK in his first start. The Gophs were within one score or tied in the 4th quarter in all of the three other losses. Shortening the game had no impact in those losses except for helping to keep the score low.

Didn’t work at either Illinois or Iowa never really felt we were going to win either game; that being more true with Illinois v Iowa. Sometimes I think the conservative stuff would be better termed chickenshit.

 

[PMWinSTP]

But.....we won.

Gophs have also lost games because of it. Illinois. Fleck's record when down by 10 or more. They have to demonstrate the ability to score quickly when needed.

 

[Pompous Elitist]

Gophs have also lost games because of it. Illinois. Fleck's record when down by 10 or more. They have to demonstrate the ability to score quickly when needed.

Fleck’s horrendous second half performance history when trailing should be given some weight here. It works, unless it doesn’t.

 

[Dakota2]

I think the bigger issue is fans don’t understand game flow at all.

The gophers only ran the ball 10 times in the second half.
The gopher only ran like 47 plays in the game. That’s why we didn’t throw very much.

Maybe because we made two first downs in the second half.

 

[Dave H]

There are also fans that will never be ok with the shorten the game strategy when you have a lead by not calling a bunch of passing plays and instead running to keep the clock rolling.

Those fans will always counter with....well if you stay aggressive (translation - pass) and get more first downs you can keep the clock moving that way and end up with more points....or something to that effect. Ignoring that everytime you throw and don't get completions, you stop the clock allowing the other team more time to mount a comeback.

This was big in the playing to win vs. playing not to lose thread.....I asked in there for examples of all the times the playing not to lose strategy (that is apparently a massive problem) cost us a victory and shockingly the posters doing the most complaining seemed very short on any actual examples.

How did that work out for Purdue earlier in the season?

Everything involves risk, it is all about how much risk you as a fan are willing to accept. If it is against Iowa and their ridiculous defense my answer "not much at all". If it is anyone else, probably more than we take. But I am also a fan not the guy whose job is on the line...

It seemed against WI and early against Cuse Fleck found it less risky to let AK take the game into his hands. I hope that is a sign of things to come.

 

[Dakota2]

This is interesting.

What is Fleck's "formula", something about turnovers, explosive plays, and I think one other thing, you win 70% of the time? Can't quite remember how it goes.

But was the explosive play bit more about limiting (the other team's) explosive plays, or about generating them yourself. Both of course seem crucial.


The explosive plays against Wisconsin this year won the game.

Those plays where they would do a stupid run fake, the Wisc defender would scream in there, and AK would still somehow chuck up a great ball while getting blasted. That one to Brockington was just beautiful. Such a huge play.

Early on Fleck included winning turnovers and winning explosive plays ON OFFENSE as parts of his formula for winning. Haven't heard that since 2020. Replaced by shortening the game and "the first stat I look at is TOP".

 

[PMWinSTP]

I think the bigger issue is fans don’t understand game flow at all.

The gophers only ran the ball 10 times in the second half.
The gopher only ran like 47 plays in the game. That’s why we didn’t throw very much.

 

[Dakota2]

Sure but if you used the whole playclock on the 3 and out then you took close to 2 minutes off the clock. Then you force them to take the risks with the ball and trust in your very good defense to make them run a lot of plays or stop them.

Again....show me where our philosophy has caused us to lose a game we were winning.....

Ok, you may be right. We were not winning when BG stacked the box the whole game but we continued to run and lost. We were not winning when Illinois dominated the LOS but we continued to run and lost. (After which Fleck said the game plan revolved around one receiver who got hurt early "so we were forced" to run the ball.

We didn't lose to Syracuse but I'm not counting on being consistently saved by a 70-yard pick six and a long kick return. Defense and STs won that game with only one notable play on offense in the second half when Jackson turned a 10-yard first down into a 25-yard TD by spinning away from three tacklers.

You may also recall in that game that we ran three times and turned it over to the defense late in first half then watched Cuse shred said defense for 80 yards and seven points in 90 seconds.

 

[Some guy]

Maybe because we made two first downs in the second half.

Yeah. Hard to throw it when you don’t have it

 

[Dave H]

We didn't lose to Syracuse but I'm not counting on being consistently saved by a 70-yard pick six and a long kick return. Defense and STs won that game with only one notable play on offense in the second half when Jackson turned a 10-yard first down into a 25-yard TD by spinning away from three tacklers.

Hey now...it works for IOAW I am not even sure they have an offense

(I agree with you)

 

[Dave H]

We came one defensive play in the end zone from losing 2019 to Penn ST.

So your contention is we won because we made more plays? Or we won because Penn State didn't make more plays? Thanks...

You can break down most games to a couple of plays that did or did not happen.

 

[MNVCGUY]

Ok, you may be right. We were not winning when BG stacked the box the whole game but we continued to run and lost. We were not winning when Illinois dominated the LOS but we continued to run and lost. (After which Fleck said the game plan revolved around one receiver who got hurt early "so we were forced" to run the ball.

We didn't lose to Syracuse but I'm not counting on being consistently saved by a 70-yard pick six and a long kick return. Defense and STs won that game with only one notable play on offense in the second half when Jackson turned a 10-yard first down into a 25-yard TD by spinning away from three tacklers.

You may also recall in that game that we ran three times and turned it over to the defense late in first half then watched Cuse shred said defense for 80 yards and seven points in 90 seconds.

There are two different things at play here. My issue is with people complaining about the way we have played when ahead. If Fleck's philosophy when playing with the lead is a problem then there should be plenty of examples of us losing games we had in hand because we took the air out of the ball and focused on killing the clock as opposed to staying aggressive.

Like most here I would love to see our offense open it up more and be able to rely more on the passing game the way we did in 2019 to a greater degree. I have a feeling we will see more of that in the future as we transition from a RB dominated offense to one that has its most talented player at QB. The focus on bringing in receivers in the portal also points to them looking to improve the passing game and hopefully make it more a part of the offense again.

 

[Panthadad2]

It's funny when a thread eventually devolves into people bitching about how a team wins.

 

[MNVCGUY]

It's funny when a thread eventually devolves into people bitching about how a team wins.

This has been an interesting trend, especially this year. Fleck has even addressed it in press conferences where he said something along the lines of you must be doing something right when people are complaining about how you are winning.

I guess we don't lose as much these days as we used to so those looking to complain have to shift some to complaining about how we win as opposed to complaining about how we didn't win

 

[Gophers_4life]

It's funny when a thread eventually devolves into people bitching about how a team wins.

And funner!

Better than arguing about why they lost!

 

[Gophers_4life]

The QB position was the reason for our lack of success until Tanner got hurt. He had hit his ceiling.

I'm afraid I agree, to a degree.

Tanner never fully regained his 2019 form. Reasons why have been hashed and speculated about on GH into mincemeat.

 

[Six to Eight]

And every time you run three times then punt the other guys have control of the clock. If they are trailing they will be throwing. The clock will stop on incompletes, out of bounds after completion, and briefly on first downs.

The only way to control and run out the clock is to make first downs. This means calling both runs and passes in most cases and not being crippled by a no matter what philosophy.

You're arguing against the #1 defender of everything status quo when it comes to Fleck.

 

[Dakota2]

So your contention is we won because we made more plays? Or we won because Penn State didn't make more plays? Thanks...

You can break down most games to a couple of plays that did or did not happen.

Think what he meant was we won because Howden made the play when he needed to, saving the win. We did not win because we ran out the clock.

 

[Dakota2]

There are two different things at play here. My issue is with people complaining about the way we have played when ahead. If Fleck's philosophy when playing with the lead is a problem then there should be plenty of examples of us losing games we had in hand because we took the air out of the ball and focused on killing the clock as opposed to staying aggressive.

Like most here I would love to see our offense open it up more and be able to rely more on the passing game the way we did in 2019 to a greater degree. I have a feeling we will see more of that in the future as we transition from a RB dominated offense to one that has its most talented player at QB. The focus on bringing in receivers in the portal also points to them looking to improve the passing game and hopefully make it more a part of the offense again.

Of course, no one argues you shouldn't run clock with a two-score lead in the last few minutes. What I believe is limiting the offense and team is a guiding hard rule that he will always prefer to deflate the ball from mid-second quarter onward.

 

[Dave H]

Think what he meant was we won because Howden made the play when he needed to, saving the win. We did not win because we ran out the clock.

Ah that would make sense if so I retract my snark

 

[Dakota2]

It's funny when a thread eventually devolves into people bitching about how a team wins.

Or discussing how to win more. True, 5-4 in the conference is winning. Getting more out of the talent should not be frowned upon.

 

[Dakota2]

This has been an interesting trend, especially this year. Fleck has even addressed it in press conferences where he said something along the lines of you must be doing something right when people are complaining about how you are winning.

I guess we don't lose as much these days as we used to so those looking to complain have to shift some to complaining about how we win as opposed to complaining about how we didn't win

Back on topic: would you agree our offensive philosophy would rank among the 10%, or even 5% most risk averse offenses in power 5 football?

If you agree -- or assign some other percentage -- then that means the overwhelming body of coaches see offense differently than Fleck. Since coaches are not stampeding to "shorten the game", that tells me they just don't want to handcuff their talent.

Mo is gone. We may or may not continue to have Olines that can play all game against stacked boxes. Common sense says adapt or regress.

 

[tjgopher]

Fleck loves Athan, that is a fact. I believe Fleck is ready to let his young gun go win games with his skills. If not, then that's disappointing.

 

[matt]

Some are saying Simon and Harbaugh are named Co/Co's and Simon still coaching WR's and Harbaugh move to QB coach.

I would be surprised at that. Harbaugh has been an FBS assistant for two years and this year was his first year as a P5 assistant. He would be a surprising hire as a G5 OC or Co-OC.

People say that Simon is way under qualified for the job, but he has two years as a P5 Co-OC and two stints as Acting OC. I think his résumé is a little on the light side but at least qualified for the job. Harbaugh, on the other hand, is a real stretch to have coordinator in his title unless PJ really thinks he’s the next big thing.

 

[Goldmember]

Someone please set a timer right now for 34 months and let’s revisit this topic.

KC will probably be an analyst at Delaware.

Move on.

 

[hello-world]

The QB position was the reason for our lack of success until Tanner got hurt. He had hit his ceiling.

The Gophers outscored their first four opponents 183 to 24.

CRAB got hurt in the third game, Mo got hurt in the fourth, Tanner got hurt in the fifth.

All time stupid take. If those three had stayed healthy than the Gophers had a shot at running the table.

Tanner completed 67% of his passes this year. It was the most accurate full-season peformance that the Gophers have had in my lifetime (and potentially ever), despite having a very weak receiver room after CRAB got hurt.

He also won a bowl game with that same lack of receivers and threw an absolute dime to Jackson for the first passing touchdown of the game.

Moreover, saying he hit his ceiling in 2022 when we saw what he did in the same offense in 2019 is ridiculous. We know what he looks like with good players around him.

He was not the limiting factor in the 2022 offense. The 2022 offense was the worst that we have seen since 2017, but it was not because of the quarterback.

He struggled with the deep ball this year, but he is the best QB the Gophers have ever had.

 

[Some guy]

The QB position was the reason for our lack of success until Tanner got hurt. He had hit his ceiling.

Excluding garbage time:
The team was
5-1 With Morgan playing
2-2 With AK playing
2-1 With both playing

Just for some context.


Including garbage time because it’s too hard to separate out for this:
Morgan 66% of passes complete
AK 54%

Morgan 9 touchdowns and 5 ints
AK 3 touchdowns and 4 ints

Morgan 5.6 yards per attempt
AK 5.2 yards per attempt


In losses:
Morgan 22/45 278 0 and 4
AK 18/43 279 1 and 4


I’m not saying Morgan is better.
I’m not saying AK isn’t good with high potential.
I’m not saying that AK shouldn’t have been starting at the end of the year.

I’m just saying I’m not sure your claim holds true at all
It’s actually pretty amazing how similar the QB’s played in losses.

 

[MNVCGUY]

Back on topic: would you agree our offensive philosophy would rank among the 10%, or even 5% most risk averse offenses in power 5 football?

If you agree -- or assign some other percentage -- then that means the overwhelming body of coaches see offense differently than Fleck. Since coaches are not stampeding to "shorten the game", that tells me they just don't want to handcuff their talent.

Mo is gone. We may or may not continue to have Olines that can play all game against stacked boxes. Common sense says adapt or regress.

Can't really answer the first part because there are so many teams out there that I have zero visibility in regards to what kind of offense they run. But I would agree that the past few years we have most likely trended towards being one of the more risk adverse offenses.

I also think we have done that in large part because the strength of the offense has been the RB and the strategy of controlling the clock has worked very well for us.

To your last line, I have already said I would like to see us open things up more and I think we will as the offense evolves from one that was built around the RB to one that is built around the QB. I expect to see more balance next year but I still think the overall framework of the offense will stay the same in terms of trying to control the clock as much as possible.

We are 29-10 over the last 3 full season. Our style of play might not be the most exciting out there but it is working for the most part.