jdub27

I mean, you can think whatever you want since there is not way to prove or disprove it, but UND has had multiple drives in the last couple minutes of games to go ahead or ice the game over the last couple of years.

Playing maybe, but not starting and playing pretty much every down. Based on the pre-fall depth chart posted a few days ago, I don't think the redshirt freshman were planning on seeing a ton of snaps behind Stockwell and Bell other than some rotation. The silver lining is there are quite a few getting a taste now and are learning what it takes.

At the skill positions, yes for the most part outside of a game or two at WR and Keaton's leg. Line has been a revolving door until recently (in more ways than one). Losing Norberg was a pretty big blow plus Fiedler is the best blocking tight end on the roster, not having those two really dampens max protect schemes to help the inexperienced line, though Luke is back now. I'm not saying that things couldn't be better, I'm just wondering how much of it was limited by personnel and how much is coaching limitations. It's somewhere between the two, tough to tell exactly where. Regardless, it's been a disappointment to say the least.

I'll preface this with believing you need to play with the hand your dealt and make the best of it and I think both sides of the back have left things to be desired but: How much flexibility can you really have when you are dealing with that much inexperience? At that point, wouldn't doing the basics of the system be the most obvious solution? If you're only missing a few pieces, some adaption works but trying to teach young guys something that deviates from whatever it is they've learned in their short time could just cause even more problems. Just a thought.

Yep, but it's a fine, fine line. As you stated earlier, it's in the perception.

My point exactly, but he had that swagger we're all looking for now. And he probably should have celebrated since he didn't escort the guy into the end-zone. Tackles by the DB's were a big deal for a while there!

Ratelle lived in the weight room and he was far from a player that played with a lot of swagger. He went about his business and let his play do the talking for him. I get the general idea of wanting to see more swagger but I remember a lot on this board absolutely ripping the team Mussman's last year or two for having too much of it. I mostly agreed with that sentiment and while I like seeing emotion on a big play, no need to be hopping on and down after stopping a guy for a 1 yard gain or doing your job in general.

You're telling my our #6 and 7 MLB's and entire 2nd string secondary weren't ready to play every single down of a game at the FCS level? If only they would have had some All-Americans or experienced seniors in front of them to play the majority of the snaps and give them one more year to get acclimated.

Take a look at the depth charts of those teams. You aren't going to see more than a handful of True/Red shirt freshman on the 2-deeps. Having unrealistic expectations also can put a program into a tailspin because they are never met. Either I'm misunderstanding your expectations or they are completely out of whack. Programs at the FCS level don't bring in 10-12 kids who are ready to play at the top of the FCS level Day 1. If they were, they wouldn't be in the FCS. Kids like that are 3*+ kids, who go to bigger schools. FCS schools bring in lesser rated kids and take a couple years to turn them into 3*+ kids. Yes, there are going to be a handful that come in and contribute immediately. The majority of that is due to need with a handful sprinkled in that are just that good.

UND is going to bring in very few players who are ready to play day 1, maybe a couple a year and even that is an exception, not the rule. Most recruits at this level are "project" recruits and if things are going right shouldn't be seeing the field until 2-3 years anyway. This year is obviously an anomaly where the kids that were still developing, putting on weight and maybe gaining a few reps a game were instead forced to play the entire game.

I don't get offended, I think it just gets a little ridiculous, especially with how much of it is coming from outside the student section. I also don't really care how people judge, but I also don't like those things being looked at as a "representation" of UND, it deserves much better an unoriginal obscenity and inability to accept reality. No different than the school to the south getting some flack because they have a football cheer involving UND's old nickname and an obscenity that they still do every game.

So because a bigger group is doing it, that makes it better? Think about the fact that some of the largest crowd involvement during a game comes from the following: Fans chanting an explicit, which would probably be a little more passable if it was coming from just the student section, but it's not even close to being the case Chanting a nickname that was retired 5 years ago is not being let go Booing the nickname of the school There used to be (and still is) some pretty good ones that come out of the student section but it is nowhere near as creative as it used to be. I can think of a lot better crowd involvement cheers that I'd rather UND be known for. Except for the wave. The wave is the worst.

The UND 360 guys made a pretty good point that special teams are struggling more than normal this year because the guys who would normally be on them are instead having to play. The injuries have been a trickle down across every aspect of the game.

Or the defense could have made a stop on one of Richmond's last 4 drives instead of letting them score on 4 in a row. Blaming the loss on one aspect of the game is way off base, plenty of fault to go around.

I'm not referring to anything his players were doing, though for what it's worth, he had some players with the exact same problems UND has recently faced.

I don't disagree with your sentiment, but I'd prefer not getting someone who came with Bohl's off-field baggage at the time. Hell, he wasn't even NDSU's first choice, Terry Allen was.

The offense put up 24 points and didn't turn the ball over. Pretty big stretch to claim that loss was all on them. The team had a 17 point lead in the 3rd quarter.

They did manage to run off 9 straight including going 8-0 in conference last year with him calling plays....

Von Miller was a 4-star recruit and had offers from A&M, Oklahoma, Ole Miss and Florida. He has a little more natural ability than the guys UND (and other FCS schools) recruit and take a few years to develop.

Hush money for what? There's a lot of well placed sources that have very different versions of what/how/why things happened, I'd take everything with a grain of salt. And I'm not sure how anyone could know what Kennedy is looking for but I have a hard time buying he isn't looking for a leader. Going that route would go against pretty much every move he's made to date, especially considering with how highly he places successful athletics in his vision for UND.

The team that UND has been able to put on the field is a far cry from the team that was a consensus top 10 team, like over half of the two deep has changed. There is absolutely no debate about that and the comparison isn't a fair one. One of them had 2 All-American anchoring the secondary, the other has third stringers and true freshman playing almost every defensive snap. Not a real big surprise to see a dropoff when that is just a snapshot of the injury issues the team is dealing with.

Being a better team is not the same as having a better resume. Not sure what's so hard to understand about that.

Per Bubba, Studsrud will play tomorrow.

I'm curious who the hell would actually disagree with all that? Obviously it's easier said than done but there's no doubt we all hope to find someone up to the task.

Women's hockey cost over $2 million/year, can hire a lot of AD's for that money. And for how unhappy people apparently are with the outgoing guy, there shouldn't be much complaining to spend more to get someone who they think is better. Part of the reasons for the cuts were to free up money to reinvest in the remaining programs. It wouldn't be a surprise at all if the next guy gets more money.