Irish
-
Posts
2,879 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
29
Posts posted by Irish
-
-
An open letter to all the disgruntled Sioux Women
-
The tight Sioux play calling is driving me nuts - we get the ball with about 3 minutes to go and start running the ball until we have to pass - then we are intercepted - they get the ball and go for it - they move it down for a FG. What's wrong with this picture?
-
Why are we running the ball?
-
Home town speculation aside - it does look like we were outrecruited this year - especially by the Gophers. I hope our freshman class works out, but I am worried going into the season. I had hoped we would do better.
-
It's now Wednesday - does anyone have a clue as to the parking arrangements for the Potato Bowl?
How much parking is available on the south side? Is there going to be a tailgating area as before? Where is the reserved section this year? Are there going to be shuttle busses? If so where do they leave from? What times do they run? Will there be an altered traffic flow? Come on Athletic Department - we need to know in order to make plans. I can't believe that no one from UND seems to be concerned about this.
-
Is the Alerus going to be charging for parking? I heard it was going to be $5.00 to park there. What's the latest?
However they do it, parking promises to be a fiasco. If they make room for tailgating (which they really need to do), there will be almost no parking around the Alerus. I've yet to hear the plan. However, I'm not very excited about taking a shuttle bus to the football game, and less excited to pay for parking. If parking is too much of a problem, this will affect the crowds all year. Come on athletic department, get your act together.
-
I am curious - for those of you living in GF or anywhere in ND, what are people saying about the potential move. Pro, con, non-issue???
It is somewhat of a non-issue right now - except for a few excited supporters of Division I. Most people I know are against the move - many things need to be better explained including finances, conference affiliation, title 9 implications etc. There is not a groundswell of support that will include increased financial support. Most people can't understand why we are in the red now - with increased football attendance from the move indoors, increased hockey attendance, the increase in ticket prices etc. No one I knows understands the relationship between the Englestead and the athletic budget. The general feeling is that we should have a comfortable financial cushion.
Most people I know including myself see football as the only sport that would benefit from a move up. That is because there is a IAA level for football only. We would sacrifice all other sports. I would much rather have the Sioux Women's basketball team in contention for a national title that go the way of the Bison Women's program for example. Many people see this recommendation as something that was done in the backroom behind closed doors and that the wishes of the general public will be disregarded. Remember, polls show that there is a majority against the move. I wonder if this is a done deal and if the committee is there only to give the appearance of outside input. I feel that a move to Division I is a huge mistake, and one that probably will be made regardless of public opinion.
-
Speaking of renewing hockey tickets - has anyone heard any more about any reseating plans? Before I shell out the kind of cash it takes for decent season tickets, I'd like to know where I'm sitting. What's going on with the plans to move the students?
-
I find these result unbelievable. If this is followed through with it might as well be a death sentence for every other sport on campus other than hockey. It's unfathomable that a majority of the "stakeholders" in UND have decided that we are to become a second rate university in ND. I'm speechless.
Quite to the contrary - the only sport that would benefit would be football. Ask the once proud Bison Womens Basketball, volleyball, or softball teams. What do you think would happen to both Sioux basketball teams, track, baseball, volleyball, soccer? The move up to DI for these teams is a killer. This is just from a comptition aspect. How do you think we would fund the move - apparently we are broke now even with attendence at record levels for hockey, football, and women's basketball. The move up would be a train wreck for most programs.
-
I see us as an extremely talented team next year - different from last year, but just as talented. What will make or break us is offensive philosophy and play selection. Strangely enough, we seem to be in some ways worse off with a dominating and opportunistic defense - in close games we rely on the defense to make the plays and tighten up on offense. Coach Lennon has consistantly assembled teams that are more talented than ever - what holds us back is offensive philosophy. It seems that when we play weaker teams our offense plays like worldbeaters - we keep them off balance, take chances, and move the ball down field. It's only in tight situations that we get predictable. Watch tape of last years Omaha game and look at our offense. It's enough to make you pull our your hair. Hopefully, we'll see the need for balance next year. I'm looking foreword to watching our young talent - I wonder who will have breakout seasons.
-
Huh?
You know - going into the regional as the top seed or one of the favorites and coming up short.
-
Curious - no one is talking about the elephant in the living room - it seems that this is happening every season.
-
You are assuming that all the other teams are fully funded which is not the case. Not everyone has a Ralph either, which should make the startup easiser. I think that we lose some very good seniors and the will have a green goaltender which could be a challenge. I was looking at it from a standpoint of wins the past four years.
2002-3- 10wins
2003-4- 16wins
2004-5- 9wins
2005-6- 7wins
I know that we started the WCHA in 2004-5, but there is no reason to regress while we are getting more funding and further along. We now lose 8 seniors, nine if you count Maggie who was cut only a few days before Senior Day.
I know that there are some good young players but I don't see us going the other direction anytime soon.
Sorry if this has been posted elsewhere, but what happened to Maggie? This cut at this time of the year seems bizzare at the least. What is going on in Women's Hockey? I would appreciate it if someone could enlighten me - this has gotten very little press.
For the dollars that this program is costing we should see much better results.
-
As a fan of the women's hockey program, I am one of the first to agree that this season has been rather disappointing. Especially considering that the team only graduated 2 seniors last year.
But as people have already pointed out this is only the fourth season of the program and only it's 2nd in the WCHA. And yes, Shantel's first recruiting class is seniors this year. But you also have to consider that in that first year, Shantel only had 3 schollies to spread around that entire team. It's not like this senior class was recruited in with full scholarship rides. This season the team is still only up to 12 scholarships, I believe. If you look at the top producers for the team this year it is basically 2 sophomores and the rest freshmen.
The thing that excites me the most about this team is the fact that this is the program that has the most potential to be our next program to win a National Championship.
The next program to win a National Championship? How? In our lifetime? We'd settle for a winning season. I'm not against women's athletics, but the cost/benefit ratio of Women's Hockey is ridiculous. The expense of this program is a millstone around the neck of the athletic department. It is forcing us to cut into proven programs - this is no way to operate. This has to be far and away the biggest money loser we have -with little potential of making up any of it's costs. It will be a drag on athletic finances forever.
-
Count me as one who didn't get to the St. Cloud game - I had a late start because of work and then heard it was sold out. This is crazy. I beleive many fans were turned away or discouraged from trying to go. What a pathetic way to build team support. Does anyone from the athletic dept. or the Englestead even care. On the other hand, playing in the big Ralph isn't the final solution either. We lose a considerable home court advantage in there because of the empty space. The poor planning that went into the Betty seems to have put us in a corner. When I heard the capacity during the construction phase, I couldn't believe it. Everyone I talked to felt that it was too small. I believe that it was rushed without much planning for the world jrs.
Speaking of the World Juniors - has any of the supposed benefits materialized. The Ralph seemed to get a monopoly on the food and drink sales for the tournament, shutting out local businesses. What hapened to the profits? Now, a year later, have we seen the massive business boost we were promised - has it "showcased" Grand Forks in such a way that many new recruits are comming here just because of the exposure? I think we were sold a bill of goods on that one. It was a nice tournament, but not worth the fallout - especially now that we are stuck with the Betty.
Another issue that has been mentioned on this topic is the effect of the Ralph on the Athletic Dept. budget - If this is topic for a new thread I apologise - but i would love to hear an explaination from someone who knows the facts (which I don't) as to how we could be broke. The football attendance since the move to the Alarus is about double - plus playoff games - Hockey capacity is about double also. Add to that increased ticket prices and the push to force people into the Fighting Sioux club in order to get tickets. Then add the increase in consessions - How can we be broke? Is women's hockey that expensive - Things just don't add up in my head - can anyone explain it to me? Is the Ralph not the great deal we thought? What is the relationship between the Ralph and the Athletic Dept. financially - who gets what revinue? Where did the money to build the Betty come from? who controls the profits - I would really like to hear from someone who knows.
-
The issue of playcalling came up on the coaches' show last night, and Dale Lennon made a point of distinguishing between a conservative offense, and one that simply failed to put many points on the board. His feeling was that UND wasn't being conservative against UNO--they just made too many mistakes.
As for the short leash comments, my feeling is that Belmore should be pulled if he has another bad turnover. He simply can't fumble anymore. And if he gets intercepted, it needs to be on a long pass attempt or the result of a receiver bobbling the ball. I've always felt that as between Belmore and Manke, Belmore has more of the "measurables," i.e. size, speed and perhaps arm strength. Manke would seem to have all the intangibles going for him, and he had a far superior high school career. I certainly don't claim to know better than Mussman or Lennon who should be playing, but I honestly feel that Manke is a winner and deserves a legitimate shot to play before his career is over.
I would respectfully disagree with Coach Lennon. I'm not trying to be overly critical - He's done a great job with the program. I wonder what others who were at the game think of the play selection - This is one area that drives me nuts - it seems that the tighter the game, the more conservative we get. Anyone else have an opinion?
-
Manke must be wondering just what has to happen in order to get a shot. I don't agree with the "short leash" comments however. One of our major problems is the offensive philosophy. When we are dominating a team, the offense is unpredictable, resourseful, and mixes plays well. However, when things are tight so is our play selection. I believe that we lost the Omaha game for the most part because of extremely conservative and predictable play selection. We play not to lose in close games. How many times in the second half did we begin an offensive series with a 2 yard run. We set ourselves up for failure and prefer to rely on our punting and defense. Our offense seems to be more interested in figuring where we can pin them back to if we punt than moving the ball or scoring. We have squandered marvelous field position with poor play selection. This game matters - open things up please.
-
This game goes down as one of the worst defeats in UND FB history. It ranks up there with the Sioux loss to the AC in 1972, The Sioux loss to the AC in 1973 and the Sioux loss to Alabama in 1975. All games where UND had more talent and let the game slip away. It may have cost UND the National title in 1972, it cost the conference title in 1973 and it knocked the #1 team in the country out of the playoffs in 1975. This one could cost us the homefield advantage for a number of playoff games this year and if we lose next week could knock us out of the playoffs. We had more talent, but I hate to say it but 'ol Pat B outsmarted us again.
This is the reason I said Manke should be getting reps at QB during the season in the first half. If anyone has bothered to look he has completed over 70% of his passes and has no turnovers. He has thrown 3 TDs with no int. usually leading our two's against the other teams ones or twos. He has not turned the ball over. Had he been getting reps during the season in the first half the coaching staff should have had enough confidence to put him in when Belmore is struggling. Let him lead the team and let Belmore start the next game if you insist. The way things are now, it doesn't matter how much Belmore struggles he isn't coming out. We had the same issue last year but at least this year Belmore played well until recently. I am not saying bench Belmore permanantly. If there was a big difference between the two QB's I could understand not putting Manke in. When they are that close you owe it to your defense to put Manke in and get them out of the game safely. I talked to some Redshirt FB players at the hockey game after the game and they said a lot of players think Manke is the better of the two QB's. (So do a number of former coaches and people close to the program). Even if you insist on staying with Belmore, you have to let him do more than run Beatty stretch left on first and second down and either the bubble or short slant on third down.
Belmore did not lose this game, the coaching staff did and the team did. The poor clock management was worse than a poor high school team. Whether you have Manke or Belmore in you can't put the shackles on your offense the way they did yesterday. I still think Belmore is one of the most improved kids on the team but he has struggled the last two games. He needs to cover the ball up in a crowd because he has fumbled to much all year. Any other player playing that poorly would be pulled. Pull him, let Manke do his thing, then get Belmore fired up to play again if you think is can't be replaced but don't let the team lose the damn game!
It is pretty bad when you need to keep your defense on the field to keep the ball away from your own offense so they don't turn it over. I am wondering if Mussman is intimidated by the idea of Manke at QB. Manke's Dad is as good of offensive FB mind as anyone UND has on their staff! Manke is a coaches kid who has won with a lot less talent although at the HS level. There are a lot of D1 kids whose teams lost to DL because of Manke. If nothing else he would have managed the clock a hell of a lot better and he knows enough to cover the ball with both hands when you are running is a crowd. All he does is win!
The defense played their hearts out but the staff needs to put the kids in a better position to win than they did yesterday.
I agree with almost all of the above. I've been waiting to post in hopes that time would ease the irritation I feel. In addition to Belmore's free fall, the thing that irritated me most is the offensive play selection particuliarly in the second half. How many series in a row did we try a run for a short gain on first down only to face second and 8. Then we went to one of the standard plays that we have used for the past 10 years which were anticipated and well defended. The tighter the game is, the worse our play selection gets. Our offensive philosophy sometimes seems to be trying to figure where we can pin them down if we punt. Our offensive coordinator was outcoached by Pat Burns for Christ's sake.
UND vs Augie - Game Thread
in Football
Posted
What a great coaching job by coach Manassau. It seems that in every successful season, there is one game that is tougher than it should be that you need to pull out. Hopefully this is the only one for this season. My main concern is the pattern of the past few years where we play like gangbusters the first few games - hitting on all cylinders - Great offensive balance, opportunistic defense - the whole package. Then, about midway through the season we start to bog down. We usually win most of these games on talent (a credit to our recruiting program). During this streak the offense becomes conservative and predictable and the defense tends to give up long passing plays at key times (looking at our talent both in the secondary and on the line I'm always shocked when this happens). When we hit the tough games at the end of the schedule we aren't playing nearly as well as early in the season. Not since our championship season have I felt that we were a better team at the end of the season than the beginning. Anyone else see this pattern? If we can play like we did at Northern Iowa, we could very well go all the way. If we play like we have the past few weeks, we could have several losses comming into the post season. How do we recapture the magic?