UND92,96

The difference, to me, is that UNO is not a true passing team. I still consider them a running team that is able to complete passes because most teams cheat to stop the run. NDSU didn't have to cheat, although UNO did get some rushing yards. Krause has good numbers, but he is by far their best receiver and I suspect that there was a good deal of doubling of him. At least, that's what I would do as a defensive coordinator. Essler is a nice player at free safety, but until I see Babich, or Walter if he's in there, consistently cover somebody one-on-one with my own eyes, I am a skeptic. The Sioux don't rely on any one receiver, which makes doubling more difficult, and I suspect that there will be plenty of one-on-one opportunities. Whether those opportunites are won by the offense or defense remains to be seen, but I do think that an offense with a number of tall and capable receivers will be able to win its share of those battles.

I'm sure you're probably correct, and really it's the same with the UND defense. Running against the Sioux is generally pretty futile, but some teams have been able to get yards through the air. I guess the difference is that UND has also given up points via the air, at least in the first halves of the past two games. I still would try to exploit NDSU's corners, though. I'll be the first to admit if I'm wrong, but I'm not convinced that Babich and company are any better than average at best.

It's no secret that UND has not run the ball very successfully this year, and that NDSU has done a very good job of stopping the run. It's also clear that UND can throw the ball quite well, and that NDSU has been thrown upon by some teams with success. Therefore, I would look for the Sioux to run the ball just enough to keep the defense honest. If the Sioux are going to score enough points to win, it will be via the pass. I would throw at NDSU corner Bobby Babich at every opportunity. He's not tall, and he's not particularly fast by NCC corner standards. A Babich-on-Lueck matchup, in particular, would appear to be a big advantage for UND. I imagine NDSU will really try to get after the quarterback, so believe it or not a traditional screen pass (NOT a bubble screen) may be effective in slowing down the pass rush. Another interesting question will be whether NDSU tries to throw more often than they have been. Again, it's no secret that UND has been thrown upon, but that the Sioux have done a nice job of stopping the run with the exception of the first half against SCSU. Thus far, NDSU has been primarily a running team. I don't believe the Bison will be able to make a living running the ball against the Sioux (although obviously that remains to be seen), so the play of Tony Stauss will be a key. He is apparently throwing mostly 0-to-5 yard passes, so his completion percentage is good, but his yardage and touchdowns are not. I haven't seen him play aside from the second half against Montana, so I don't know how much he has been asked to throw downfield, but I would expect that he may have to on Saturday. Although many, and perhaps most impartial observers would probably consider NDSU a favorite in this game, I do like UND's chances. This will be NDSU's first true road test since the second game of the year, UND does seem to match up pretty well with what NDSU likes to do offensively, and the Sioux offense can possibly exploit what is arguably a Bison weakness by throwing the ball. I expect a low-scoring game that will probably be decided by a field goal either way.

This has been a strange series over the past dozen-or-so years. At home, UND has won by an average of 27 points since 1990 and is 6-0. However, at Brookings, UND is just 4-3 since 1990, and each of the losses occurred in years where the Sioux were considered a heavy favorite, i.e. the NCC title and playoff semi-final year of 1993, the Callahan/Tibesar, et al. senior year of 1996, and the NCC title year of 1999. If the Sioux can play defense as they did against Augie and in the second half against St. Cloud, and don't turn the ball over, I like our chances. If the defense struggles and/or there is more than one turnover, then a win is probably unlikely. This is UND's toughest road NCC game, so a win would be huge.

The decision has been made: Wilson is starting against SDSU.

I believe The Sicatoka's comment was tongue-in-cheek and not directed at anyone in particular. I think this topic has officially been beaten to death, but for the record UND's non-conference opponents have a combined record of 8-7 thus far--hardly a disgrace. Even UMC managed to hammer Southwest State last week so it's not even as though UND played the worst team in the NSIC. The problem with proclaiming anyone's schedule as strong or weak before or early in a season is that we have no way of really knowing until probably near the end of the year which opponents were truly good and which were not. As it stands right now, it appears that UND played one pretty good team (Mesa is ranked second in its region for now), one average team (Newberry is 2-2), and one poor team. All in all, probably not as bad is most thought prior to the season. And clearly, all signs point to a stronger schedule in the near future.

Here's the real poll: Midwest 1. Pittsburg State (5-0) 2. Emporia State (5-0) 3. Nebraska-Omaha (5-1) 4. North Dakota State (4-1) 5. North Dakota (4-1) 6. Winona State (5-1) 7. Central Missouri State (5-0) 8. St. Cloud State (4-2) 9. Concordia-St. Paul (4-1) 10. Northern State (4-1) I'm very surprised by how low Central Missouri is ranked, and shocked by Winona being ahead of Concordia-SP (and Central Mo). Either my strength of schedule calculations were way off, or Winona's ranking makes absolutely no sense at all. But at least UND is ranked higher than I anticipated.

I agree with basically everything you said, but I do believe that Bowenkamp is currently a 5th year junior, so after this year he will have already had essentially a full career in the program. True, he will have the opportunity to come back for a 6th year if he so chooses, but I imagine that may depend in large part on whether he is on schedule to graduate this spring or not. Unless he again earns the starting job this season and does well, I agree that most likely the staff will be looking to whomever emerges among Groeschl, Manke and Bellmore as the starter next season. I am a firm believer that in this day and age, a quarterback needs to be mobile, and unfortunately Bowenkamp does not fit into that mold although he does supposedly have good straight-ahead speed. I'm not sure on Bellmore as I haven't seen him play except for briefly in the spring game, but both Groeschl and Manke run very well.

Your points are all well-taken, but what sticks out to me is that in the first 6 quarters of the NCC season, all at home, Bowenkamp has directed the offense to exactly zero touchdowns. While I wouldn't put all the blame on the quarterback, certainly he must bear a good deal of the responsibility. Whether Wilson will be consistent or not is a complete unknown, but it certainly appears that he has earned the right to show what he can do as a starter on a trial basis. I look at this situation far differently than if we had a proven starter, i.e. Kelby Klosterman. I wouldn't be anywhere near as quick to bench him. But Bowenkamp has been very inconsistent during his career as a starter, and I would have to think that his confidence must be shaken at this point. If he can't produce at home, particularly against a relatively mediocre defense like Augie's, I wouldn't expect much more from him on the road against a better SDSU team. Let's see if Wilson's hot-hand can continue.

While I do understand HOW strength of schedule is calculated (I think), I'm a little confused as to exactly how it's used. Is it the primary criteria, or just one of several? The NCAA handbook listed on the NCAA website is the 2002 edition, so if the criteria have changed, I'm not sure how. In any event, I attempted to calculate the current s.o.s. index for each of the probable ranked teams. Keep in mind that ONLY games against dII opponents count when calculating s.o.s. index, so NDSU's number is based ONLY on games against Tusculum, SDSU and MSU-Mankato. 1. NDSU (6.66) 2. Emporia St. (6.4) 3. (tie) Central Missouri St. (6.25) Concordia-SP (6.25) 5. Pitt St. (6.2) 6. UNO (6.16) 7. (tie) UND (6.0) SCSU (6.0) Winona St. (6.0) 10. Northern St. (5.75) My earlier predictions didn't take into account these numbers. As most people would probably agree, relying purely on s.o.s. can cause some pretty absurd results, i.e. Concordia-SP tied for third and Pitt St. in fifth. FWIW, I don't see how Winona could be ranked ahead of Concordia since they have the same record, Concordia's s.o.s. is higher, and whether it's "officially" a primary criteria or not, I have to think that head-to-head results will still mean something.

The only poll that means anything is supposed to come out tomorrow for the first time this year. My GUESS is that the poll will look something like this: 1. Pitt St. 2. Central Mo. 3. UNO 4. NDSU 5. Emporia St. 6. UND 7. St. Cloud 8. Concordia-SP 9. Winona St. 10. Northern St. Winona St.'s loss yesterday really threw a wrench into things. They likely would have been ranked third or fourth. Now, who knows? They really can't be ranked ahead of Concordia, who beat them yesterday, since they both have one loss. Concordia lost to USD, which is probably one of the weaker teams in the NCC, so they can't really be ranked very high, either. St. Cloud has two losses, but both were on the road against quality opponents. It should be interesting...

I also have been baffled as to why there are not more passes thrown to the tight ends. For that matter, an occasional 5 to 10 yard pass to Wisthoff may be a good idea, as well. Yesterday's catch by Kussler was the first TE reception since UMC. If it's zone coverage, the tight end should always be able to find a soft spot. If it's man coverage, I would think Mielke's speed (although perhaps not the other tight ends) should be good enough to be able to beat a linebacker trying to cover him.

IMO, starting Wilson next week is the obvious decision. Bowenkamp doesn't seem to make very good decisions, and he does not have much of any ability to elude the pass rush or scramble for yards. Wilson is not exactly a sprinter, but he did show relatively quick feet yesterday, and was able to elude the rush several times and at least get back to the line of scrimmage. Plus, he just seems more fiery and possibly more of a leader than is Bowenkamp.

Wow, am I glad I didn't leave at halftime! I have to admit that at halftime, I was thinking to myself that it was like the end of the Behrns era/early Thomas era all over again. It was an equally terrible performance by the offense and defense. But it was truly an incredible turnaround in the second half. I told a friend of mine at halftime that all we needed was Frank Reich to come in at qb--referring to the famous comeback by the Bills against the Oilers in that playoff game in the early 90's. It turns out that Wilson played the Reich role perfectly! I have to eat crow with regard to Wilson because prior to this game, I didn't see the logic of having a seldom-used 6th year senior as the backup quarterback instead of an up-and-coming freshman. Obviously, I was wrong. Wilson can play. Great job, guys! Now if we could only get rid of the bubble screens/0 yard passes to the wide-outs and running backs, I would be really happy! BTW, kudos to Randy Hedberg and staff for an incredible turnaround in the fortunes of the SCSU football program. A few years back, that was a struggling program. Now, they are clearly one of the best in the league and really seem to be a classy group. Best of luck to them the rest of the year.

The Sioux get a verbal commitment for the 2004-05 season: link

IMO, two things lost this game for the Sioux last year. One, the uncharacteristic inability to stop the run. A then-unknown freshman named Matt Birkel ran for an unheard-of 180 yards against UND. That can't happen again, needless to say. The other thing that hurt the Sioux was the fact that we could not run the ball at all against what had traditionally been a very porous SCSU run defense. 19 rushes for 15 yards isn't going to get it done against anybody. Heckendorf is a great qb, but I would much rather be beaten via the pass than the run. I have to wonder if maybe too much emphasis was put on slowing down the passing attack last year, which the Sioux did a pretty good job of, but that emphasis resulted in the running game doing far better than what they normally would have against a UND defense. SCSU has a very balanced offense, so I think the Sioux need to play their base defense and just count on the fact that our defensive scheme and talent is good enough to limit SCSU to 20-24 points without putting any special emphasis on stopping Heckendorf. Even having given up 430 yards last year, the Huskies only managed 20 points. Offensively, UND needs to utilize its big receivers, particularly Lueck. He generally has a large advantage over the db's who will try to cover him with 6'3" to 6'4" height, excellent speed, and a 36"-plus vertical. It would be foolish not to utilize him more in the passing game. Hopefully, the Sioux can figure out a way to run the ball consistently, as well. Obviously, Roland's numbers ended up being very good against Augie, but I don't think they can wait until the 4th quarter to run effectively against St. Cloud and expect to win. And finally, I agree that Jeff Glas has to be able to make some field goals if given the opportunity. Thus far, he's 0 for 4 on the year beyond 24 yards.

I'm not qualified to come up with any all-inclusive definition of a "common person." I just think that most people who will be at the game probably fall into whatever that definition is. I'm sure there are some people who aren't going because of the ticket prices. There are many others who don't go because they can watch it on TV. And you know what? All that means is that somebody else will go. I would feel bad if there were empty seats and people who really want to go but can't afford it. But when the seats are full, then I don't see that this is all that big of an issue. In the unlikely event that it doesn't sell out, then I guess the price was too high. If it does sell-out, then I guess the demand supported the price. As for what the Herald has to say about it, who cares. Neither Dennis nor Jacobs knows anything about sports, anyway. If it's not about the Sioux name, it's generally outside of their scope of interest. This is apparently an issue where you're on one side of the fence or the other. You're obviously not going to change your mind, and nor am I, so we may as well agree to disagree.

Thanks, I figured it was probably just an oversight. The other thing that sticks out to me is the weight, or lack thereof, of Franklin. I didn't realize he was quite that thin.

I have a tendency to agree that the playcalling has been rather poor the past two seasons. What is more perplexing is that Mussman did guide UND to being the top-scoring offense in the NCC during his first two years--2000 and 2001. And just so there's no misunderstanding, that was in NCC games only (not including games against UMC and the like). Plus, he did have a lot of success as Mankato St.'s offensive coordinator prior to coming to UND. So I guess my point is that it's not as though Mussman is incapable of calling good games. He just hasn't seem to have been doing it much during the past 15 games or so. I don't claim to be some sort of offensive genious, but at least he should ditch the stupid bubble screen, and start using some misdirection in the running game instead of just trying to bowl straight ahead between the tackles all the time. There should be at least one end-around or reverse to Travis Lueck every game. He's the best weapon we have right now and he's barely seeing the ball other than as a punt returner. And start using the tight ends once in awhile. The offense is somewhat handicapped by the fact that unlike Klosterman, Bowenkamp is not at all elusive or effective as runner. But that shouldn't mean that the offense can't be somewhat creative.

The new mens basketball roster has been posted: link No Doyle or Gutter, though. Does anybody know whether they're enrolled at UND?

Kudos to the defense. The "d" has been getting better and better since the first half of the Mesa game. Of course, they had to play very well due to the complete futility of the offense for 3 1/2 quarters. Ugh. Finally, the Sioux offense got something going in the last two drives when Augie's defense apparently succumbed to fatigue since I don't think the offense was doing anything differently. The fatigue must have resulted from all that running on and off the field before and after UND's offense went three-and-out umpteen times in a row. Seriously, I'm wondering whether this is a case of poor play-calling, poor execution (penalties in particular), personnel not being utilized properly, or some other reason? I really don't think Augie's defense should have been able to shut out the Sioux offense for 3 1/2 quarters. Any thoughts?

I'm going to limit my comments to football only, but I really haven't seen any indication that more than a very few people are there just to schmooze. At least not the people who sit around me in Section 204. The way I see it, while the "atmosphere" may be better at an outdoor facility, it's a proven fact that the majority of people are quite literally "fair weather fans." At least with the Alerus, people do come out in bigger numbers. Sure, not all of them are necessarily hard-core fans, but so be it. At least they're there. If somebody has a solution to get big crowds to the games, made up exclusively of "real" fans, without cutting ticket prices so much that all the burden will fall on the alums and/or season ticket holders to pick up the revenue slack, then by all means tell the athletic department about it.