Feff

That's definitely the big question for me going into the season. Last year you knew exactly who UND would try to get the ball to late in the clock or whenever they needed a score. It's not necessarily a matter of having someone skilled enough to be able to score in those situations, as much as it is having someone with the desire and courage to step up and create in those situations. If we find someone to give the team that, I think this team could do some very good things.

My problem with this, look across the field at the season ticket holders and there are plenty of empty seats there as well. It doesn't look as glaring because they are spread out, but the fact of the matter is that season ticket holders either don't buy or don't show up either. Move the students, you'd probably get even fewer to show up and then still probably still not sell out those sections.

Just saw this come across on Jayson Hajdu's Twitter in response to the Windsor article: "Entering '11-12, UND & Windsor had each produced 15 NHLers since '04. UND holds edge in GP (2648-1199), PTS (1345-384), YRS in NHL (53-36)." "If raw data isn't your thing, "They develop pro hockey players in North Dakota." -- Pierre McGuire, NHL analyst and former NHL coach." ""There's no better place to go in college hockey in terms of a pro factory, a pro mindset, a pro mentality." -- TSN analyst Bob McKenzie" "Facilities? "It's everything people have said about it, it's one of the most beautiful buildings we have in North America." -- Wayne Gretzky" Pretty damn convincing rebuttal if you ask me.

Coaches trying to get too cutesy/tricky coming out of the bye week you think?

Got back from the game and some of my thoughts: 1) Our defense played pretty well for the most part. We played well against the run (which was CP's strength) but once again our pass defense bugaboo reared its ugly head. Too many times receivers just running by our corners or no defender within 5-10 yards. Both their touchdowns came on blown coverages and without those we still had a shot at winning. Then again, they just missed out on several more big plays that could have seen us lose by quite a bit more. 2) This game was an example of what happens when a team shuts down our running game. Miller still ran well, but there was just too much inconsistency with our running game to rely on it exclusively like we have in past games this season. 3) I didn't like the coaches trying to force Sutton back into things too early. It was clear to see that he was a step slower than earlier in the season and aside from one run, he really didn't get much done. The running game has been working with Miller and Garman, yet I think Garman was put in for just one play today. 4) Unless there can be some major improvement by Bradley over the last part of the season or in the off-season, the coaches have whiffed on this pickup. Today was just terrible to see, both for his decision making (both interceptions were just ugly) as well as his actual throws (many of which were way off target). Goska showed quite a bit of senior grit by coming in and almost salvaging the game, but he also showed the reason why he isn't the starter to begin with. 5) Dropped balls. How many times this season have we had dropped balls, especially at crucial times in the game. Notably in today's game, Hardin's drop on that final drive was a real killer. Catch that, we keep the momentum, we are deep in their territory and we've got a legitimate shot at winning. With all that said, we were still in the game late in the 4th with a chance to win. They scored on two big plays, we settled for field goals. 1st and goal within the 1, we need to score a touchdown there. That's inexcusable. But it is what it is. A tough fought game, but still a loss.

I'm genuinely excited for this game, finally a decent team coming in and challenging us at home. Hopefully the crowd should be good and we get to see a great game. I haven't missed a UND football game in years, and I talked my wife out of going to a cousin's house warming just so I could go to this game! (To be honest, she wasn't keen on going to the house warming either)

I agree that the Alerus is a good facility for where we are at right now. Renovate and expand Memorial 15-20 years down the road after we've built the program to a point where it can actually fill a larger stadium. But I remember 2001 on our way to the national championship. The Alerus sold out, people packed in and roaring. Pitt St. and UC Davis never saw what was coming to them when they stepped into that building. The noise was deafening, you couldn't even hear the person right next to you, and we only got louder with every false start that was called on them. THAT is a football atmosphere! THAT is what the Alerus is capable of providing for our team. Don't forget how big of a factor that played in the early 2000's duo to the product that's been on the field through this transition.

As a current student at UND, I think I should point out one fact that is currently the reason for the low student turn-out: it isn't a big social event, hockey is. Sitting in the student section for the hockey games, sure you hear people that are into it and that genuinely understand what is going on in the game, but you also hear and see those people that don't have a clue and wouldn't know a goalie from a center. They go to the games because that is the thing to do and the culture of their chosen university. It is expected that people show up to hockey, and then when other people start yelling or cheering, they in turn start to yell and cheer without even knowing why. UND football is not the same social event as hockey is, for whatever reason. Despite the efforts that UND has gone to to attract fans to the various sports (and this is for more than just football, other sports are majorly lacking in student fan support), the fact of the matter is that most students are only attracted to hockey because that's the attitude of Grand Forks. On a more positive note though, while sitting in the student section for hockey this weekend, I heard some good chatter about the football team, comments like "Oh hey, the football team is ranked? I didn't know that" or "I heard the football team is supposed to be good this year, maybe I'll go check it out." Just a couple things I heard and hopefully we can actually get a good crowd for homecoming, and if we win that game, I think you will see students continue to return to the remaining games.

They aren't as good as Fresno but can UND get motivated for them like Fresno? I really don't have a good feeling going into this game as SUU has looked terrific this year and has one of the best QB's in FCS this year, which does not match up well with the weakness in our defensive backfield.

Some of my takes from the game: Our line is built to run block and it's what they prefer and are good at. They do not like to pass block and they are not very good at it. There should have been no reason Bradley should have been feeling any pressure unless they were blitzing 6 or 7 and then he should have found easy completions in man coverage. This did not happen really. Bradley did not throw a good looking deep ball all day. They were either underthrown, let hang up, or forced a great catch by a wide open receiver (McGill). Defense looked great early on in the game. Corners are still suspect and still give up yardage. Against the BHSU receivers, they should not have had problems but were often several yards away when the catch was made. Closed nicely and made solid tackles, but should be able to break on that ball when it's in the air and make more plays on the ball as its getting to the receiver rather than after they have already caught it. Safeties are solid and made some nice looking plays. Would liked to have seen the 1's keep their intensity throughout their playing time in the second half but you could see them with visibly less motivation. Benjamin got pushed around quite a bit in the second half and that's hard to believe given how he dominated against Fresno just the other week. All in all it was a win, but I come away not all that impressed. We already knew we could run the ball, we proved that against Fresno. I wanted to see what could be done in the passing game and am still not convinced on what we have at this point in the season. Also I kept wondering throughout the game if Mussman told the OC to simply go vanilla or what. How many times did we run out of singleback, two tight end, two receiver sets?

I think we have talent, I just don't think the coaches are putting them in a position to win (except special teams). I don't buy the fact that we are losing simply because recruiting is hard to do in a transition. All you have to do is look at the team down in Vermillion to see that is blatantly false. Their recruiting has been just as difficult as ours, but somehow they have the ability to beat a BCS conference football team (even if it was just Minnesota), and now they've beaten one of the top teams in the FCS just a weak after that team proved it was capable of going toe to toe with a Pac 12 team. So I don't buy the crap that we don't have the talent or are unable to recruit the talent due to lack of conference or being in the transition. Mussman has been given so many breaks over and over throughout this transition. When does it become apparent that he's not the coach for this team?

Yes they serve beer at UND volleyball. And you can't go wrong with the pretty girls in tight shorts!

It actually seemed that when we did some of the best was when we blitzed, too many times with a 3/4 man rush the Drake QB had plenty of time to look around. We blitzed, got pressure and forced him to either run for minimal or no gain, or else force a tougher throw then he wanted. Our offense was just totally vanilla and lackluster for the most part. Sutton ran hard and the line gave him some good holes to go through. Miller looked good as well. Right now we are a run-first team but we all expected that early in the season and the hope is that Bradley develops and gets a better feel for the pocket. Several times he moved out of the pocket and put unwarranted pressure on himself. Yes he didn't make any bonehead turnovers or try to force the ball anywhere, but some of the sacks were on him and not the offensive line. I think he shows promise, but it's still going to take some time to develop him. Hopefully we see more in the Idaho game and they get pumped for it. Hopefully Mussman opens up the playbook some and gets creative.

Any word on who the starting QB will be going into the year?

I think I'm out of the loop a bit, what Big Sky fiasco?

I enjoyed the game and thought they did a good job on the atmosphere. Jerelle Davis was quite entertaining with his sideline interviews and I think that was a nice touch. Also having it an actual game format certainly made it more entertaining than the controlled scrimmages of years prior. As for what happened on the field: The QB situation I am feeling better about and we at least have some young options. Pretty sure that Goska is out of the starting situation, of the three quarterbacks he's the one that did the least and his interception was plain out an overthrow that Hardin had no shot at. Hendrickson still has the tendency to throw too high on short to intermediate routes and that's definitely something he needs to work on. I thought I saw some improvement in him from last year though, much more patient and actually looking downfield. Bradley did a decent job for the most part, but it was easy to see he was not comfortable under center. That will come with practice though, as he almost never did it last year from what I could tell. He has a quick release and generally made good decisions. Not sure if it's due to a low release, but the two passes blocked at the line make me a little uneasy. WR's: Nothing really stood out as all that impressive to me. They were solid, but far too many drops. On Bradley's interception, Heimler has to go up for the ball. That was a 50/50 ball that Heimler didn't even make an attempt on. Hardin is still the stud of the group and we need someone to step up to take the double pressure off of him and make teams reconsider shifting coverage over his way. RB's: Sutton looked steady as always, Miller definitely showed some improvement, especially between the tackles, I think he needs to work on his vision a little more. Magstadt was a pleasant surprise and should be considered for short yardage next season. He definitely seemed to like initiating contact and had nice leg drive to keep moving forward. Bickel didn't really show me anything but did make a nice catch downfield. O-line: Looked very steady for the most part, I thought they opened some great run lanes during the game and gave time to the QB's for the most part, especially going against a talented d-line. Lots of young talent there and looks bright for the future. Defense: I'm going to lump them all together here because I thought they played pretty well. You can see there is a bit of aggressiveness in the defense and the athleticism of the OLB's was fun to watch. Hendrickson is still a tackling machine and looks to have some support in the middle. The d-backs played very well for the most part, limiting most everything downfield. The two interceptions were exceptional positional coverage and then making a play on the ball, which is good to see. Brenneman should be a stud for us next year, he is just incredibly quick off the edge. I think the team is showing improvement and we got out of the spring without too many injuries (obviously Butler's injury is a setback). Can't ask for too much more. I am thinking we'll need to rely on our running game next season, and that might be the cause of going more under center. However getting steady play out of whoever wins the quarterback competition come this fall will be the ultimate decider for what our team can do. We'll have the defense in place to keep us in games, and the running game to take some pressure off whoever the QB is, but we will need plays out of the passing game and I'm not entirely sold on if we'll have that come fall.

I'm sure you've already read it but some are being held out of this game for academic reasons. Boys better smarten up and get to classes.

I think on a national level, UND vs. Notre Dame would draw a greater interest, just due to Notre Dame's name.

I expect this to probably change. Those two ended the season as 1/2 and so are likely there by default. As spring practice goes along, I'd expect things to shift around.

Getting people excited for the Spring game will help bring a sense of excitement for the following season, try to get people more invested into the team. I'm glad they are changing the format of the game, I've gone the last several years but it gets dull to watch at times. This should be much more entertaining and I think it gives a good "gametime" feel to it for the players. I really want to see the QB's and see if there's been any improvement since last year.

Last night was really fun to watch, I was only able to see the first half but the score could have been even more lopsided. We were getting a lot of open looks from beyond the arc that were just rattling out. As for Schuler, I've gotta think something is up. He hasn't been playing as well the last couple of games, and has been short on most every shot I've seen him take. Might not even be an injury but a confidence thing, although that would be weird at this point in the year considering how well he's played.

At this point we don't know what we have going into next season at quarterback. Some of our questions will be answered after spring ball, but we've got two redshirt freshmen that sound like they had some promise coming in, plus a young JUCO transfer that has collegiate level experience and a live arm. I'm interested to see what they can do before I say we don't have a real QB. Remember Landry was drafted as a D2 guy and was playing against primarily D1 competition, our problem was we had no competent depth behind him last year when he went down. I think we improve on offense (even without Murray) if we can establish more than 1 receiver as a threat. Last year it was Hardin and that was about it, teams would rotate their coverage to stop him and no one really stepped up to take the pressure off. Where Landry was more successful than either of his backups was checking down to other receivers, but then there would be drops or there was no real advantage gained by those receivers, either by not getting separation, or like I said, dropping the ball.

The men need to learn how to close out games like this. This usually means being able to make your free throws and running an efficient offense. Too many times it looked like they became disjointed and just forced up a shot after running some clock. They need to stay in the offense and try to set up something better than chucking up a shot.

Ouch... Not a good sequence. Gotta know your timeouts, and I don't like that foul all the way down the court.