iramurphy

What most of you don't seem to understand is the concept of taking the opponents best player out of the game. We heard about what a great punter the Grizzles have. Our game plan was to keep him on the bench. Just like you want to keep Peyton Manning or Aaron Rodgers off the field. We were able to do that better than any team these guys will face this year!

It seem the GF Herald thinks we are playing Montana State. Do they have anyone in their sports dept. that knows anything about sports. I hope it was only the online story that screwed that up. Does todays papers lead story on the game really have Montana State in the headline?

Only if you are an AC grad and your check from the county hasn't come yet

As I posted last night, Mollberg will start.

I would expect Labatt to finally see extensive action with Goodman's injury and finally being healthy. Cory McKesson the RB from the San Diego area that we reviewed film on last spring is now on the roster. I am excited to see how he develops. Mollberg to be named starter.

We have the talent to beat good FCS teams. We can't have 10 penalities, Can't waste timeouts, Can't turn the ball over and we need our front 7 to be more than a speed bump. Our super receivers can't drop balls. If you can beat your opponent on one play, then you can beat him on the next, then the next and so on. Gotta dig deeper and out work and outhustle a more talented opponent. Could have won the SDSU game but didn't. Until we put together some consistent play from start to finish we are still a "work in progress". If we get better every game we can contend for a playoff spot.

Nice Avatar! LOL. Our QB has been pressured. Mollberg made plays, Bartels struggled. When given time they both can be very accurate. Our O-lines the last few years have protected the QB reasonably well but don't run block very well.

This schedule is what we will get year in and year out. There will be 3-4 Big Sky teams ranked. We need to be one of them.

Defense didn't relax. Long pass to Hardin had defender with him and TD to Hardin was also decent coverage. Receiver and QB made great throw and catch. Defensive pressure on QB still there, Mollberg did better job of avoiding it. I dont think any coach would go into prevent when opposition has ball down by 21 in mid third quarter. SDSU didn't.

I don't think you understand the pressure he was under. If he fails, he is likely relegated to the number 2 spot unless Bartels gets hurt. He had everything to lose and everything to gain. Don't forget he completed 6 of 7 last week and the incompletion was one where the receiver fell. He is 21 of 30 for over 300 yds and 2 tds. He led 3 scoring drives under lots of pressure. I don't thnk it was the 2 dropped passes, the reason Bartels started was cuz his completion record in practice was a little better and Muss thought he reacted to his mistakes better than Joe. If Bartels didn't miss a wide open Hardin, and cough the ball up and make a poor decision when he could have run or thrown to an open receiver on a third down or get sacked by not being mobile enough then we wouldn't be talking about this. Under game conditions with pressure so far I will take Mollberg. He earned a shot. IF you are going to let Bartels take the job from Mollberg with a little better performance in practice then to be fair Mollberg has earned the number one spot back with a better performance in the game.

What you saw Sat is what Mollberg brings to the table. He is a gunslinger who has a cannon of an arm. He threw the ball effortlessly to Hardin 60 yds in the air. He may have made a poor decision as he admitted on his last play but then he also may have made poor decisions to throw the long ball to Hardin or the TD to Hardin or the cross filed pass t Golladay as he was getting tackled. He moves better in the pocket and helps his O-linemen by moving within the pocket. Bartels doesn't do that as well. Mollberg's int wasn't a terrible throw like Bartles int was it was a gunslinger trying to make a play and win a game. Brett Farve and Terry Bradshaw were two guys who were similarly criticized early in their careers. He was the better QB and has earned a chance to start against Montana.

Coaches had a good game plan. Got beat physically up front. Wasted 2 TO's in second half not getting the plays in and I would have gone to no huddle sooner. Too many penalties. This thread needs to wait until end of season. We could have won this game. Kids were put in a position to win and that is what the coaches need to do. IF we improve each week then we don't need a change. Bringing back Dale and Bubba aren't the answer. Beating Montana is.

After watching last weeks game, I think Jacks will be able to run and unless we get some sort of pressure they will also throw. I know we didnt' show much last week, but we only sacked the Valpo kid once. Even playing base stuff our kids need to do better than that. Alsowe need to clean up the missed arm tackles. I think we should be able to throw on anyone. It will be interesting to see if we can run. If Bartels struggles and they don't go to Mollberg early, it will be a long season. If Miller struggles and they don't get anyone else in, it will be a long season. I liked what Sparks did last week and the only time we saw him last year. Granted they weren't good teams and it was second half but he still showed great quickenss and broke tackles. Shaugaby didn't get many carries other than goaline and we need to see more of him so we know what these other guys can do. I think we will need to score 40 or more to be in it but if we can play defense we can win this. One of our staring LBS went down. Labatt is supposed to play this game and I have been anxious t see him at this level. No excuses for crowd less than 12,000. Night game and great matchup.

Come on. He brings up a good point and he got a couple of good responses. Yours wasn't one of the good responses. These forums should not be for a small group of guys drinking the same kool-aid. I am not convinced we have been good enough defensively to predict a 50 point blow-out. Hopefully we are that much better. We certainly didn't do that to Drake. This game should give our team an opportunity to play against someone else and at least see some of our new guys in a game situation. We need to develop and get better each game. We should win this and we should see an improvement from last year. Point spread isn't as important.

If UND wants to establish the run, I am surprised they are starting Bartels. Mollberg gives them a run option to go along with his strong arm. Don't forget this competition was so close no one knew until just now who would start. That close competion was regarding the passing game and reading defenses, not the run game. Having said that I believe Bartels has earned the chance to start. If you don't give both guys playing time with the other starters in the first half, preferably the first quarter, you are not very smart. The competion between these two might last through next spring ball then the number two guy will likely leave. Neither of these guys are going to wait for an injury or be satisfied with mop up duty and they shouldn't. They are both too good to sit on someone's bench. Right now they both have a great attitude and want to win and will do whatever it takes to help the team so it is a moot point what happens until the end of the season as long as we are winning and scoring points. With the competition this close, if one falters the other needs to be in there. I prefer a "gamer" and sometimes you don't see all of that until game time. Might be both of them. We also need to do a better job of getting our RB's playing time. Miller, Garmin, Shaugaby, and Sparks need to play and not just short yardage.

Most incoming freshmen expect to be redshirted. Depends on the kid if they think they can play right away.

I would not pull the redshirt on a freshman receiver this year unless it is the only way to keep the kid here. We made that mistake pulling Golladay's redshirt last year. Miller's freshman year was wasted and he should have been redshirted. when we had no chance to make the playoffs that year. Carr may be good enough to play but we have 5 excellent receivers that collectively are probably the best we have ever had. They have earned playing time and we need to keep that year of eligibility for him. Bartels will start and he has had an excellent fall camp. I understand he has been more consistent and reading defenses better. Mollberg has a better upside and can make plays with his arm and his feet. Neither Bartels nor Mollberg will stay four years to be a backup and I don't blame either of them. They both need the opportyunity to play this year in games when they are with the starters and the game is on the line.If one out plays the other, then it is settled. Mollberg was the better QB in the spring game and the better athlete. Time will tell. I

Mollberg has a great arm and can make all of the throws. He is bigger, faster and more athletic. I believe Bartels is more the pro stye pocket passer of old, bright kid who is making good reads and has been a bit more consistent. Mollberg is more the athletic mutli dimensional QB we see emerging at the college and pro level the past few years. I am wondering if this is a reflection on the o-line and what we might expect in the run game or lack of run game. We have one of the most talented group of receivers that have seen at one time (if not the most talented). I would assume both of these guys will get ample playing time with the other starters. If not ,whomever isn't playing will be gone. I hope we don't see the same mistake we made when they left Reed Manke on the bench for a year and a half while Belmore struggled. Either way, we are fortunate to have at least 2 guys who can play and I believe both will work ttheir butts off to make us winners.

I believe Mussman will announce Bartels as starting QB. Must have played better this fall than last spring. I heard he has been more consistent in fall camp than Molberg. I don't believe either QB will stay in program if they are back-ups. If one emerges as clear starter, the other will likely leave at end of the year. Both are good enough to start. I think Molberg has the bigger upside. I don't believe either of these guys want to spend fours years as back-up. Hope our Freshmen QB's are good enough to play early.

Never suggested anyone can't discuss whatever they wish. Making a claim that "90% of N. Dak. kids would rather play football for " the AC right now is not based on fact but maybe your version of "penis envy". I deal with HS kids every week in nearby Mn. and this is not the case for our kids and I doubt for N. Dak. kids. There is nothing in my post hinting that the AC is no longer a rival nor a rival UND fans would have interest in. What they do with some kid who drinks too much and gets in fights, is irrelevant to our program. I believe the kid has some warning signs for an alcohol problem and I don't think ragging on the AC coaches about how they handle this makes a lick of difference for the " extremely ignorant" like me and many others. I don't find it helpful to keep comparing what I do or UND does with others. You may think that you are better than someone else or they are better than you based on their mistakes but that is a shallow way of going through life and I don't believe leads to success. If the AC falters the entertaining part is the fan reaction. I am more into building our program back up to where we dominate our sister school to the south, and become a national power at this level. There is nothing in my post that even hints UND and the AC have no connection. I just don't believe if they screw up we will win be a better team. I guess I am just not that bright.

Notre Dame is probably thinking the same thing. Let them changes theirs.

Who cares what they do with him? They do things differently at the AC. We need to take care of getting ready for the season. I won't feel any differently whether they suspend him or not. What he needs more than suspension is to realize he has had some alcohol related run -ins which can happen but if you have 2 or 3 then alcohol is interferring with your life and you may need to avoid it. If you can't get through life without alcohol then you have a problem. What difference does it make to us whether or not he plays? They aren't playing us.

Next to the railroad tracks, south of the Engineering building.

I heard he is gone. Anyone comfirm this???

Seems some folks lives revolve around comparing themselves to others, then thinking they must be better if they have some association with a team or person who has been successful. It is funny that there seem to be people who not only do that, but can't even use their own accomplishments as a basis for that comparison. The fact is, that the vast majority of UND students and Alumni are happy with our educational experience at UND and what we have been able to accomplish with that education. If we played a sport at UND while we were there, we had a great experience. What happens at the AC or Notre Dame or Stanford or Augustana etc. do not diminish our experience. There seem to be a lot of trolls who don't understand that the UND experience is a great experience for the vast majority of students and we would choose it again regardless of the accomplishments of our hockey teams, BB teams FB teams etc. There seem to be some UND fans who suffer from the same comparison issues but not many. UND FB will be a very successful FCS program and it will occur regardless of what happens with our old rivals. The opinion of those who have no knowledge, nor investment in the success of our programs is really irrelevant. It bothers the heck out of some folks that most of us don't seem to base our self evaluation and importance on our athletic teams. Doesn't mean we don't plan to win in all sports at all levels of competition it is just a different mind set for most of us.