Jump to content
SiouxSports.com Forum
shep

2018 Season

Recommended Posts

35 minutes ago, jdub27 said:

2016: 9-3
The offense averaged 26.9 ppg (removing the 5 D/ST TD's), 386 yards/game and 5.5 yards/play.
The defense gave up 22.0 ppg, 355 yards/game and 5.2 yards/play.

2017: 3-8
The offense averaged 23.0 ppg (removing the 4 D/ST TD's), 386 yards/game and 6.0 yards/play.
The defense gave up 34.6 ppg, 453 yards/game and 6.1 yards/play.

The offense scored 4 less points/game, had a better yards/play and averaged the same amount of yards/game yet the team won 6 fewer games. I know why the defensive numbers are what they are but to continue to blame the offense for the issues isn't the answer. With the style of football UND is built to play, anytime UND puts up 21 points or more, they should win and they lost 4 games hitting that benchmark last season. I'm not saying the offense can't be better but I don't think it is as far off from what it's supposed to be as some think nor is it even close to what the biggest issue has been.

How many they scored vs how many they should have with any semblance of high level play calling are different. 

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, jdub27 said:

In the first half against UC Davic, the offense put up 312 yards of offense, averaged 9.75 yards/play and scored 17 points with TOP being 16-14 in favor of UND with one 3 and out (two for the whole game). How in the hell is it the offense's fault the defense gave up 38 points and 421 yards in one half??

Remember a big chunk of that was on one play

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, jdub27 said:

The offense put up 312 yards of offense, averaged 9.75 yards/play and scored 17 points in the first half vs. UC Davis. TOP was 16-14 in favor of UND. They had one 3 and out (two for the whole game). How in the hell is it the offense's fault the defense gave up 38 points and 421 yards in one half??

That was a piss pour defensive game.  1st play of the game I think, we call a 3 deep coverage and our players can't cover a deep post....total horsecrap.  And all season, we never seem to double the stud on the other team that we all know is getting the ball when it counts.  

But more often, with the ebb and flow of games, I recall our offense being pretty poor until it didn't really matter in the game, then stats were padded later in the game.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, jdub27 said:

In the first half against UC Davic, the offense put up 312 yards of offense, averaged 9.75 yards/play and scored 17 points with TOP being 16-14 in favor of UND with one 3 and out (two for the whole game). How in the hell is it the offense's fault the defense gave up 38 points and 421 yards in one half??

I'm not blaming the offense at all on that one, our defense got shredded.  But it makes the point that we were in massive shootout type of games throughout the year because our defense was so poor.  When we are in shootout type of games and we average 23 points a game....yeah to me that is not impressive.    I actually remember our offense scoring some points and somewhat keeping us in it for a little while.  But as soon as we'd score, they'd make a big offensive play and score on us.  That was so ugly defensively for us, perhaps one of the worst in UND's history given that they weren't even a playoff team.   

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, geaux_sioux said:

How many they scored vs how many they should have with any semblance of high level play calling are different. 

This is my thought as well. UND has some serious offensive weapons on the offensive side of the ball, with just a tiny amount of creativity, UND's offensive would be a lot better. If a team is stacking the box, you can't fun it up the middle twice. My optimism on the offensive side comes from the fact like others have said, that coaching is a results driven profession. They will want to get this figured out. 

I've said it before and will continue to say it, but I'm very excited for the defense to return to form this year. It's going to be night and day difference.

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, gundy1124 said:

That was a piss pour defensive game.  1st play of the game I think, we call a 3 deep coverage and our players can't cover a deep post....total horsecrap.  And all season, we never seem to double the stud on the other team that we all know is getting the ball when it counts.  

But more often, with the ebb and flow of games, I recall our offense being pretty poor until it didn't really matter in the game, then stats were padded later in the game.

Exactly. Is it too much to ask to adjust our defensive game plan more than we do to actually try and make a team play left handed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, jdub27 said:

2016: 9-3
The offense averaged 26.9 ppg (removing the 5 D/ST TD's), 386 yards/game and 5.5 yards/play.
The defense gave up 22.0 ppg, 355 yards/game and 5.2 yards/play.

2017: 3-8
The offense averaged 23.0 ppg (removing the 4 D/ST TD's), 386 yards/game and 6.0 yards/play.
The defense gave up 34.6 ppg, 453 yards/game and 6.1 yards/play.

The offense scored 4 less points/game, had a better yards/play and averaged the same amount of yards/game yet the team won 6 fewer games. I know why the defensive numbers are what they are but to continue to blame the offense for the issues isn't the answer. With the style of football UND is built to play, anytime UND puts up 21 points or more, they should win and they lost 4 games hitting that benchmark last season. I'm not saying the offense can't be better but I don't think it is as far off from what it's supposed to be as some think nor is it even close to what the biggest issue has been.

There were also tons of people who wanted Rudolph fired after the 2016 season, when UND went 9-3 and made the playoffs.  People don't want him gone simply because UND lost a lot of games last year.  So he isn't a scapegoat.  That 2016 team was 105 out of 122 teams in FCS in 3rd down conversion %.  Looks to me like Rudolph got LUCKY to have a guy like Santiago that can break a huge run every once in a while, and in turn boost the yards/play stats.  The offense has ZERO consistency.   

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Studsrud was by all accounts a great locker room guy, but I have to believe the on-field results will improve with either Zimmerman or Ketteringham out there. Zim looked great in limited action last year (and was willing to look downfield despite Rudy).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion, the very first time we pound Santiago up the middle for the famous 2nd and 9, 3rd and 7 sequence someone should immediately go up to the coaches box and tell Rudolph to take a permanent hike.  I could not be more disappointed in Bubba for putting Sioux football second to his buddy system.  

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Sioux94 said:

Facts don't count things like going 3 and out 3-4 series in a row to start a few games, then when we are down by 20 points we get a 100 junk yards in the second half because teams are playing prevent with their cushy lead. Hell didn't UC Davis have almost like 40 points on us by halftime?  Nor does it account for having our 3rd string QB being way better than the 2nd string and the 2nd string being so inept in the first half against MT that he has now changed positions.  I remember seeing our yards per carry once last year, and it was a good average.  Well I'd like to see our average YPC in the 1st half compared to the 2nd half of games.  I haven't been as hard as some others on Rudy over the past couple of years, but we need to see something more this year.  Scoring 21 points a game will likely lose you a lot of games in the Big Sky, sorry.  Rudy has had his moments, we just need to see more.  And more of finding ways to get the best out of the players we have, not base plays on the players we wish we had (OL). 

Did you even watch that game against UC Davis??

That embarrassment of a game was clearly on the defense, particularly the horrible UND defensive backfield. UND needs to do way better than that (oh, and by the way, our head coach is supposed to be a defensive backs guy ...).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, UND-FB-FAN said:

Did you even watch that game against UC Davis??

That embarrassment of a game was clearly on the defense, particularly the horrible UND defensive backfield. UND needs to do way better than that (oh, and by the way, our head coach is supposed to be a defensive backs guy ...).

Did you see who was playing DB?  If Harris, Hunt, Reyes and Holm are playing, like planned, those things don't happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, UND1983 said:

Did you see who was playing DB?  If Harris, Hunt, Reyes and Holm are playing, like planned, those things don't happen.

Can't continue to always rely on that excuse. Yes, the injuries hurt, but it shouldnt be excusable for the defense to then give up 35 points per game. 

Like @gundy1124 mentioned, the gameplan didn't help the young guys. The opponent's best offensive players weren't appropriately emphasized and the scheme was not changed either. UND continued to max pressure leaving their young, vulnerable secondary even more vulnerable. 

Lastly, you need to recruit players with ability. Those back-up players that UND had to play last year were horrible. Why is UND only getting DII caliber players? It's happening again this year; many players' other offers are from UMD, Mankato, etc. with no mention of MVFC or Big Sky offers. That's concerning. Last year's young guys were just not good enough; poor recruiting.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, UND-FB-FAN said:

Can't continue to always rely on that excuse. Yes, the injuries hurt, but it shouldnt be excusable for the defense to then give up 35 points per game. 

Like @gundy1124 mentioned, the gameplan didn't help the young guys. The opponent's best offensive players weren't appropriately emphasized and the scheme was not changed either. UND continued to max pressure leaving their young, vulnerable secondary even more vulnerable. 

Lastly, you need to recruit players with ability. Those back-up players that UND had to play last year were horrible. Why is UND only getting DII caliber players? It's happening again this year; many players' other offers are from UMD, Mankato, etc. with no mention of MVFC or Big Sky offers. That's concerning. Last year's young guys were just not good enough; poor recruiting.

It is an excuse, but it's also a fact. The way this team was trending in previous years and the roster they had in fall ball was considered better than the previous year. They way they started the year against Utah and Missouri State, they were a legitimate Top 10 team and then we all know what happened from there. The injuries were catastrophic to certain positional groups and it snowballed from there.

I will agree with you partially on the overall depth of the team with certain positional groups. Let's look at the ILB position, where were the juniors and seniors last year? Losing O'Brien early was huge, but they went into fall camp with Rodgers (SO), Larson (true Freshman), Hunt (RS Freshman) and Rastas (RS Freshman). As great of a player as Larson will be, should you rely on a True Freshman as your #2 option? Everyone knew that was one of the positions of concern and after two games we instantly don't have the 3 best players, leaving Rastas as a starter much too early. On the other hand, at the FCS level (Non-NDSU), what is the expectation for depth? I know we all want every position to be 6 deep, but is that realistic? Even for great FCS programs, would many positional groups excel with both "starters" gone for the year and your down to that teams #4 / #5 option to start (when Hunt was injured as well)? 

Same can be said for the secondary last year, you have two All-Americans that played a total of 3 games. Would you consider Blubaugh (great recruit, offers from Wyo and UNC) or Canady (PWO Wisconsin) as bad players? Blubaugh had a tough time yes (understatement), but he was a true freshman. They are both going to be great players, they were forced into action much too early. 

As bad as last year was, what gives me a lot of optimism going forward is you had a lot of young guys get very valuable minutes. That will help this team this year and moving forward. It can be tough to remember how this team was trending before game 3 last year, but overall there has been a lot more good than bad over the past 3 years. This year is very important for the program and the coaching staff though. They need to bounce back and I truly believe they will. I have no doubt that defensively, they will bounce back and pick up where they left off in '15 and '16. It's hard to emphasis enough how much that will change the overall trajectory of the team. The ILB goes from what was possibly one of the worst in the FCS to a strong unit again. The CB will have talent and depth, the safety position will be better. Offensively, they have weapons, still concerned about play calling, but they will be adequate (will more upside than downside).

I'm very excited for the 2018 football campaign. 

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, AJS said:

It is an excuse, but it's also a fact. The way this team was trending in previous years and the roster they had in fall ball was considered better than the previous year. They way they started the year against Utah and Missouri State, they were a legitimate Top 10 team and then we all know what happened from there. The injuries were catastrophic to certain positional groups and it snowballed from there.

I will agree with you partially on the overall depth of the team with certain positional groups. Let's look at the ILB position, where were the juniors and seniors last year? Losing O'Brien early was huge, but they went into fall camp with Rodgers (SO), Larson (true Freshman), Hunt (RS Freshman) and Rastas (RS Freshman). As great of a player as Larson will be, should you rely on a True Freshman as your #2 option? Everyone knew that was one of the positions of concern and after two games we instantly don't have the 3 best players, leaving Rastas as a starter much too early. On the other hand, at the FCS level (Non-NDSU), what is the expectation for depth? I know we all want every position to be 6 deep, but is that realistic? Even for great FCS programs, would many positional groups excel with both "starters" gone for the year and your down to that teams #4 / #5 option to start (when Hunt was injured as well)? 

Same can be said for the secondary last year, you have two All-Americans that played a total of 3 games. Would you consider Blubaugh (great recruit, offers from Wyo and UNC) or Canady (PWO Wisconsin) as bad players? Blubaugh had a tough time yes (understatement), but he was a true freshman. They are both going to be great players, they were forced into action much too early. 

As bad as last year was, what gives me a lot of optimism going forward is you had a lot of young guys get very valuable minutes. That will help this team this year and moving forward. It can be tough to remember how this team was trending before game 3 last year, but overall there has been a lot more good than bad over the past 3 years. This year is very important for the program and the coaching staff though. They need to bounce back and I truly believe they will. I have no doubt that defensively, they will bounce back and pick up where they left off in '15 and '16. It's hard to emphasis enough how much that will change the overall trajectory of the team. The ILB goes from what was possibly one of the worst in the FCS to a strong unit again. The CB will have talent and depth, the safety position will be better. Offensively, they have weapons, still concerned about play calling, but they will be adequate (will more upside than downside).

I'm very excited for the 2018 football campaign. 

The '17 UND team that played Utah to start the season didn't look like a top 10 FCS team to me. They had moments, but that's about it. 37-16 is not a good score considering Utah went 7-6. Defense gave up big passing plays then too and the offense left way too many points out on the field: had to settle for three too many field goals.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, AJS said:

It is an excuse, but it's also a fact. The way this team was trending in previous years and the roster they had in fall ball was considered better than the previous year. They way they started the year against Utah and Missouri State, they were a legitimate Top 10 team and then we all know what happened from there. The injuries were catastrophic to certain positional groups and it snowballed from there.

I will agree with you partially on the overall depth of the team with certain positional groups. Let's look at the ILB position, where were the juniors and seniors last year? Losing O'Brien early was huge, but they went into fall camp with Rodgers (SO), Larson (true Freshman), Hunt (RS Freshman) and Rastas (RS Freshman). As great of a player as Larson will be, should you rely on a True Freshman as your #2 option? Everyone knew that was one of the positions of concern and after two games we instantly don't have the 3 best players, leaving Rastas as a starter much too early. On the other hand, at the FCS level (Non-NDSU), what is the expectation for depth? I know we all want every position to be 6 deep, but is that realistic? Even for great FCS programs, would many positional groups excel with both "starters" gone for the year and your down to that teams #4 / #5 option to start (when Hunt was injured as well)? 

Same can be said for the secondary last year, you have two All-Americans that played a total of 3 games. Would you consider Blubaugh (great recruit, offers from Wyo and UNC) or Canady (PWO Wisconsin) as bad players? Blubaugh had a tough time yes (understatement), but he was a true freshman. They are both going to be great players, they were forced into action much too early. 

As bad as last year was, what gives me a lot of optimism going forward is you had a lot of young guys get very valuable minutes. That will help this team this year and moving forward. It can be tough to remember how this team was trending before game 3 last year, but overall there has been a lot more good than bad over the past 3 years. This year is very important for the program and the coaching staff though. They need to bounce back and I truly believe they will. I have no doubt that defensively, they will bounce back and pick up where they left off in '15 and '16. It's hard to emphasis enough how much that will change the overall trajectory of the team. The ILB goes from what was possibly one of the worst in the FCS to a strong unit again. The CB will have talent and depth, the safety position will be better. Offensively, they have weapons, still concerned about play calling, but they will be adequate (will more upside than downside).

I'm very excited for the 2018 football campaign. 

As to Blubaugh, he has A LOT to prove this year. He was brutal last year, no other way to put it.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎7‎/‎13‎/‎2018 at 3:40 PM, jdub27 said:

In the first half against UC Davic, the offense put up 312 yards of offense, averaged 9.75 yards/play and scored 17 points with TOP being 16-14 in favor of UND with one 3 and out (two for the whole game). How in the hell is it the offense's fault the defense gave up 38 points and 421 yards in one half??

Offense scored too fast thereby not allowing the D time to rest????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who all is traveling to some road games? Moved out west to WY but this years schedule is not as favorable as I wished. Will definitely be going to Greeley maybe we will see some of you there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Sioux>Bison said:

Who all is traveling to some road games? Moved out west to WY but this years schedule is not as favorable as I wished. Will definitely be going to Greeley maybe we will see some of you there.

Thinking about driving to the Sam Houston St. game, as it’s only 2-3 hours from my daughter in Cypress (Houston suburb).  Otherwise, plan on hitting the Mississippi Valley and Montana home games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Sioux>Bison said:

Who all is traveling to some road games? Moved out west to WY but this years schedule is not as favorable as I wished. Will definitely be going to Greeley maybe we will see some of you there.

Greeley for sure on 9/29. Set up a big tailgate and do it right. Possibly Sam Houston but that is a big maybe at this point. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to the NAU game for sure.  Been waiting for 4 years for this game, with the odd scheduling this is the first game with Bubba as the coach with us playing at NAU.  That is the bad part for me about us leaving to Big Sky, would have had an easy road trip almost every other year to go to.  Still think moving to the MVFC will be better for the program overall though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/14/2018 at 7:48 AM, UND-FB-FAN said:

Did you even watch that game against UC Davis??

That embarrassment of a game was clearly on the defense, particularly the horrible UND defensive backfield. UND needs to do way better than that (oh, and by the way, our head coach is supposed to be a defensive backs guy ...).

You completely missed my point. I agree the defense was the problem that game and all year. My point is that our offensive averages look better than they probably really were because we always seem to be in shootout type of games because our defense was horrible.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×