Wilbur Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 So here is my question as a fan who has never seen Mollberg play. Is he ready to step in as a true Freshman, or does he need to redshirt a year to learn the offense so we don't have a freshman out there with absolutely no clue? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iramurphy Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 The game certainly wasn't lost by the "play calling". In fact the play calling showed good preparation against a team that is excellent against the run and expected us to run. The plays called were good and put our kids in a position to be successful, we just didn't execute. Even the call on first and goal on the one yd line was an easy pitch and catch if we execute. Kids just didn't execute. I think opening it up early forced them to respect what we should have been able to do passing and and they weren't able to stack the box against the run. O-line did a good job. I don't think we were sacked and QB's had time. Defense did well except for the two TD passes to wide open receivers. Keys to game were the poor QB play especially in the first half, Cal Poly's 2 TD's to wide open receivers, personal foul by CB that took them from 2nd and 11 around midfield to 1st and 10 inside our territory. ( Kids need to play disciplined) and dropped pass by Hardin that may have been a TD. Good game plan, kids played hard, just didn't execute. We are getting very close to where we need to be. Need to keep getting better bigger and faster each year. I was very disappointed in crowd. 9900 for homecoming against a very good team for conference lead is not acceptable. Student crowd was better but also not great. Many students left a halftime again. Crowd wasn't a factor like it can be in the Alerus. Cal Poly had only one false start due to crowd noise. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gfhockey Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 I think that if something is working and has been wokring for you all season, why stray away from it unless it doesnt work we started passingright away. i think bradley was lik1-9 why not run untill they show us they can stop miller/sutton btw did germanevenplay more then5 times yesterday waste of a redshirt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bincitysioux Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 I agree that the players need to execute, and they did not yesterday. But I still didn't like the game plan or play calling in the first half. Coming into this game UND, on average runs the ball 62% of the time, and have done so with great success to this point. Yesterday, they threw the ball 17 times in the 32 plays that Bradley was in for. On average so far, he throws the ball 22 times in an entire game. The run game was effective during that time as well gaining 4.5 yards per carry. Yes, players need to execute, I just think it was a questionable decision to go away from the players that HAVE executed throughout the season (O-line and running backs) and rely mostly on receivers that have at times had trouble hanging onto the ball and a QB that thus far has been asked to nothing but hand off and not turn the ball over.......................... I think given the current personnel on the roster, this team is far better suited to use the run to set up the pass rather than vice versa................. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iramurphy Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 I agree that the players need to execute, and they did not yesterday. But I still didn't like the game plan or play calling in the first half. Coming into this game UND, on average runs the ball 62% of the time, and have done so with great success to this point. Yesterday, they threw the ball 17 times in the 32 plays that Bradley was in for. On average so far, he throws the ball 22 times in an entire game. The run game was effective during that time as well gaining 4.5 yards per carry. Yes, players need to execute, I just think it was a questionable decision to go away from the players that HAVE executed throughout the season (O-line and running backs) and rely mostly on receivers that have at times had trouble hanging onto the ball and a QB that thus far has been asked to nothing but hand off and not turn the ball over.......................... I think given the current personnel on the roster, this team is far better suited to use the run to set up the pass rather than vice versa................. You certainly have a good points but I still like the fact that we opened things up and created some opportunities for success. I think the plan was we would run the ball but its tough to pass up gains of 15 to 30 yds per play when they were that open. The coaches have been criticized time and again for not opening things up. The plays called were good and if Bradley plays like he had so for this year, they work. Bradley had avoided getting us in trouble before today. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
star2city Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 I was very disappointed in crowd. 9900 for homecoming against a very good team for conference lead is not acceptable. Student crowd was better but also not great. Many students left a halftime again. Crowd wasn't a factor like it can be in the Alerus. Cal Poly had only one false start due to crowd noise. Every game next year IMHO will easily exceed this year's games attendance. UND hosts Cal Poly again next year (likely in the Potato Bowl), and would bet the attendance will be well over 11,000. Homecoming vs NAU and game vs Montana will be near sell outs. Even the opener against South Dakota Mines will draw, because of so much anticipation over the end of transition and entry into the Big Sky. UND is not like other transitioning schools, where all they had was football homecoming as the game to come "home" to. As a team, we just need a QB and more depth. At this point, just wish Landry was still eligible. We'd be 6-1 with a long ball throwing threat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sioux_FF Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 I agree that the players need to execute, and they did not yesterday. But I still didn't like the game plan or play calling in the first half. Coming into this game UND, on average runs the ball 62% of the time, and have done so with great success to this point. Yesterday, they threw the ball 17 times in the 32 plays that Bradley was in for. On average so far, he throws the ball 22 times in an entire game. The run game was effective during that time as well gaining 4.5 yards per carry. Yes, players need to execute, I just think it was a questionable decision to go away from the players that HAVE executed throughout the season (O-line and running backs) and rely mostly on receivers that have at times had trouble hanging onto the ball and a QB that thus far has been asked to nothing but hand off and not turn the ball over.......................... I think given the current personnel on the roster, this team is far better suited to use the run to set up the pass rather than vice versa................. But, that's what the coaching aspect of the game is about. To put the players in a position to make plays. The game plan and play calling was sound. Bradley was put in situations to make plays because it was known the defense was committed to the run. He just didn't make the plays. You don't just blindly run the ball because you've done it a certain percentage of times in the past. You adapt. You put the game in the hands of the playmakers and hope they step up and make the plays. We saw flashes, but in the end Cal Poly playmakers made a few more plays. I think if we would have went 3 and out on the first couple of series by forcing the run people on here would have been complaining about the lack of imagination. At some point this season they had to see if Joey B. is going to be the man or not down the road. Probably still more questions than answers on that one after Saurday. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilbur Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 Every game next year IMHO will easily exceed this year's games attendance. UND hosts Cal Poly again next year (likely in the Potato Bowl), and would bet the attendance will be well over 11,000. Homecoming vs NAU and game vs Montana will be near sell outs. Even the opener against South Dakota Mines will draw, because of so much anticipation over the end of transition and entry into the Big Sky. UND is not like other transitioning schools, where all they had was football homecoming as the game to come "home" to. As a team, we just need a QB and more depth. At this point, just wish Landry was still eligible. We'd be 6-1 with a long ball throwing threat. 6-1 with Landry? Glad you put the smiley there..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bincitysioux Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 You don't just blindly run the ball because you've done it a certain percentage of times in the past. You adapt. You put the game in the hands of the playmakers and hope they step up and make the plays. Point taken, but my argument is that the coaching staff took the game out of the hands of the proven playmakers. My opinion is that yesterday's game plan would have been a better one against an FBS team or an NAIA team, not in a vital conference home game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
green_sioux Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 Point taken, but my argument is that the coaching staff took the game out of the hands of the proven playmakers. My opinion is that yesterday's game plan would have been a better one against an FBS team or an NAIA team, not in a vital conference home game. Easy to say from the cheap seats. How much film did you study the last 2 weeks? How many hours did you spend at practice? What are your football credentials? Enlighten us. Frankly it's a little sad you're so full of yourself. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bincitysioux Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 Easy to say from the cheap seats. How much film did you study the last 2 weeks? How many hours did you spend at practice? What are your football credentials? Enlighten us. Frankly it's a little sad you're so full of yourself. Whoa.............down boy. Just offering my opinion......................could have sworn that's what this forum was for. Didn't know because you and I disagree that makes me "so full of myself". What does that make you? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
green_sioux Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 Whoa.............down boy. Just offering my opinion......................could have sworn that's what this forum was for. Didn't know because you and I disagree that makes me "so full of myself". What does that make you? You can have an opinion, but to use a bincity term, "because this is real football, not playstation........", I think all of us would be interested in hearing about your real football credentials. That's all I asked.. Is it more than video games? You weren't just offering your opinions. You were telling us all how bincity knew more than the staff that is there day in and day out. (Of course, after the fact) That's more than "offering your opinion". You explalined to us of how you knew better than the Sioux staff. Explain to me what this forum is for? is it for experts to explain, after the fact how intelligent they are in comparison to the folks that do this for a living. Certainly you're more than welcome to give your opinion, but when you claim so somehow magically have some special understanding how you know more than a large Sioux football staff that put in a ton of hours preparing for a game, it's beyond silly. It's sad. So, tell us all about your extensive football experience. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 Easy to say from the cheap seats. How much film did you study the last 2 weeks? How many hours did you spend at practice? What are your football credentials? Enlighten us. Frankly it's a little sad you're so full of yourself. Considering Muss' record as head coach of this program, I don't think you are in any position to attack someone's critique of the gameplan. Film study, hours at practice, and football creditials have failed Muss thus far. And yes, I did use the word "fail" there. If this program leaves the Great West without at least sharing a conference title...that's failure in my book. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 19 wins 20 losses Not something that looks great on a coaching resume. But I'm sure he has great football credentials, has spent many hours at practice, and has poured over hours of film, so don't anyone out there disagree with his gameplan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.