zonadub Posted October 28, 2013 Share Posted October 28, 2013 Deneui had Hansen's blind side (lefty) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdub27 Posted October 28, 2013 Share Posted October 28, 2013 Deneui had Hansen's blind side (lefty) Fair point though I don't think they rotated when Hendrickson was in and in my post I was more referring to who would be protecting the blind side of Molbert/Bartels. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geaux_sioux Posted October 28, 2013 Author Share Posted October 28, 2013 No matter how you slice it Lynch was a stud and is obviously not easy to replace. Next year we'll have to replace Denui who had been pretty bad this year and Kleason who was a great guard and is an average tackle at best. Mcgurran wasn't nearly the athlete Walker is but he was bigger and more consistent and you also can't discount how experienced he was. The lone bright spot on the line this year had been Anderson. Luckily we have him for two more years. Hopefully Adams can get some reps before the season is over so he can lock down the other guard spot next year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homer Posted October 28, 2013 Share Posted October 28, 2013 Our O-line needs to stop being trained like WRs and RBs and start training like OL. Beef these guys up so they can pound on people throughout a game so it doesn't look like they are playing on roller skates getting pushed backwards. Agility is great but if you can't move anyone around it does you no good. I've heard all year how agile our center is and the flexibility this gives us by being able to pull him, hasn't done much good. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bidago Posted October 28, 2013 Share Posted October 28, 2013 The defense played their asses off today and deserve a lot of credit. The offense was just awful. We lost to a team who used 3 QBs..... I am not a big fan of using multiple qb's. I was one of the people who wanted muss to start molberg, at the time, I think he earned it. I also agree that the protection has been sub-par. Bartels had a bad streak and rightfully got replaced. but is he so bad now that he cant give us a second look while the starter throws 2 iht's/td over the last 5 games? what happened to the "epic battle" that played out during spring/fall camp? Freund is on record stating that all 3 rfr were capable at playing at a high level. we HAD the best receiving core it FCS? a quick thinking, mobile quarterback is everyone's dream. some kids are quick thinking, some are mobile, some are both or neither. Molberg is obviously quicker than Bartles, but what has it gotten us. he scrambles to throw more int's we would be better of with sacks. I would like to see muss shake it up at the qb position the next few games. I don't know what he promised molberg when recruiting him, but it might cost him his job. if bartels goes is and cant get it done, put the other guy in. if he doesn't work, put molberg back in. in a goofy way, it worked for psu. muss doesn't shake it up enough. he has done the same at other positions, i.e. rb, lb, ol etc. if you keep doing what you've always done, you will get what you've always got! when he starts molberg next game, my grediction is 2 int's 1td. if we are satisfied with that, then so be it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdub27 Posted October 28, 2013 Share Posted October 28, 2013 I am not a big fan of using multiple qb's. I was one of the people who wanted muss to start molberg, at the time, I think he earned it. I also agree that the protection has been sub-par. Bartels had a bad streak and rightfully got replaced. but is he so bad now that he cant give us a second look while the starter throws 2 iht's/td over the last 5 games? what happened to the "epic battle" that played out during spring/fall camp? Freund is on record stating that all 3 rfr were capable at playing at a high level. we HAD the best receiving core it FCS? a quick thinking, mobile quarterback is everyone's dream. some kids are quick thinking, some are mobile, some are both or neither. Molberg is obviously quicker than Bartles, but what has it gotten us. he scrambles to throw more int's we would be better of with sacks. I would like to see muss shake it up at the qb position the next few games. I don't know what he promised molberg when recruiting him, but it might cost him his job. if bartels goes is and cant get it done, put the other guy in. if he doesn't work, put molberg back in. in a goofy way, it worked for psu. muss doesn't shake it up enough. he has done the same at other positions, i.e. rb, lb, ol etc. if you keep doing what you've always done, you will get what you've always got! when he starts molberg next game, my grediction is 2 int's 1td. if we are satisfied with that, then so be it. I would guess nothing on the bolded part since Bartels was named the starter after the Valpo game and Molberg only came in because Bartels was getting knocked around. On the switching QB's part, Mussman got absoutely blasted on this board last year for doing that exact thing (albeit with two much more game-ready QB's). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bidago Posted October 28, 2013 Share Posted October 28, 2013 I would guess nothing on the bolded part since Bartels was named the starter after the Valpo game and Molberg only came in because Bartels was getting knocked around. On the switching QB's part, Mussman got absoutely blasted on this board last year for doing that exact thing (albeit with two much more game-ready QB's). he got blasted because many fans thought Hendrickson was doing a great job, because he was. choosing between two successful qb's is a completely different scenario than signing up ahead of time for 2 int's and 1 td Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdub27 Posted October 28, 2013 Share Posted October 28, 2013 he got blasted because many fans thought Hendrickson was doing a great job, because he was. choosing between two successful qb's is a completely different scenario than signing up ahead of time for 2 int's and 1 td And if 2 successful QB's can't get into a rhythm rotating, I don't see a happy ending with two inexperienced QB's rotating. I will say I'm surprised that Bartels hasn't got another shot in some of the past few games though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bidago Posted October 28, 2013 Share Posted October 28, 2013 you are missing the point I am trying to make. I don't think that he should rotate the two. try something new. I am not a huge Batles fan by any stretch of the imagination. put the other kid in, I don't care. I am quite confident that molbergs numbers will be 2 int's 1 td after the next game. the only rhythm we have now is we throw 2 int's/game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geaux_sioux Posted October 28, 2013 Author Share Posted October 28, 2013 Start Jake Hanson. Why not? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UND-FB-FAN Posted October 28, 2013 Share Posted October 28, 2013 Start Jake Hanson. Why not? Games will go from ugly to ugliest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geaux_sioux Posted October 28, 2013 Author Share Posted October 28, 2013 Games will go from ugly to ugliest. Pull Palendechs shirt? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sioux95 Posted October 28, 2013 Share Posted October 28, 2013 I would also like to see Bartles play some, but PSU wasn't the game to do this. We needed Molberg mobility. The last half of the sac state game would have been better place to try Bartles. If we are in a similar situation in any of our next few games I wouldn't at all mind seeing Hanson or Bartels play. If for o other reason than to see them get some experience for the day they will need to fill in due to injury. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UND-FB-FAN Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 Why do you say that? He was good enough to walk on. If you think Mollberg's play has been poor, you don't want to see our walk-on quarterback play. He doesn't have DI talent. I think he is merely on the roster for North Dakota representation - which is respectable. Nevertheless, his measurables aren't even close to those of Mollberg and Bartels; too short, too slow, and not a strong enough arm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hawkster Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 I agree fully that Mollberg's day has come and gone. It's time to see what Bartles can do Start him against NAU and UNC One very hard game and one that we have a chance to win, this should show how he copes. Mollberg just doesn't seem to live up to the hype that surrounded him when we picked him up. If nothing else, maybe if Mollberg is forced to watch from the sidelines, he might learn something. He sure hasn't up to this point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darell1976 Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 I agree fully that Mollberg's day has come and gone. It's time to see what Bartles can do Start him against NAU and UNC One very hard game and one that we have a chance to win, this should show how he copes. Mollberg just doesn't seem to live up to the hype that surrounded him when we picked him up. If nothing else, maybe if Mollberg is forced to watch from the sidelines, he might learn something. He sure hasn't up to this point. I agree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 I agree fully that Mollberg's day has come and gone. It's time to see what Bartles can do Start him against NAU and UNC One very hard game and one that we have a chance to win, this should show how he copes. Mollberg just doesn't seem to live up to the hype that surrounded him when we picked him up. If nothing else, maybe if Mollberg is forced to watch from the sidelines, he might learn something. He sure hasn't up to this point. You may be right. His mistakes are related to bad decision making and fundamentals more than ability. Working and learning in practice would certainly be less of a liability for this team than what those mistakes have been costing his team on the field. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homer Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 I agree fully that Mollberg's day has come and gone. It's time to see what Bartles can do Start him against NAU and UNC One very hard game and one that we have a chance to win, this should show how he copes. Mollberg just doesn't seem to live up to the hype that surrounded him when we picked him up. If nothing else, maybe if Mollberg is forced to watch from the sidelines, he might learn something. He sure hasn't up to this point. Unless our Oline play improves, I don't think any other qb will do any better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdub27 Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 I agree fully that Mollberg's day has come and gone. It's time to see what Bartles can do Start him against NAU and UNC One very hard game and one that we have a chance to win, this should show how he copes. Mollberg just doesn't seem to live up to the hype that surrounded him when we picked him up. If nothing else, maybe if Mollberg is forced to watch from the sidelines, he might learn something. He sure hasn't up to this point. That is a lot to put on a rFR QB with a line and running game that have been below average at best along with the coaches seemingly trying to protect him by not allowing him to run the ball. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geaux_sioux Posted October 29, 2013 Author Share Posted October 29, 2013 If you think Mollberg's play has been poor, you don't want to see our walk-on quarterback play. He doesn't have DI talent. I think he is merely on the roster for North Dakota representation - which is respectable. Nevertheless, his measurables aren't even close to those of Mollberg and Bartels; too short, too slow, and not a strong enough arm. He's faster than Joe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UND-FB-FAN Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 He's faster than Joe. I question that. I watched both play high school ball, and trust me, Detroit Lakes faces 100x better competition than Grafton does in North Dakota Class AA football. If you support Hanson as a DI starter, then you obviously don't realize the talent differential between Mollberg/Bartels and Hanson. There's been numerous times where Mussman has even hinted at this (e.g. spring ball). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geaux_sioux Posted October 29, 2013 Author Share Posted October 29, 2013 I question that. I watched both play high school ball, and trust me, Detroit Lakes faces 100x better competition than Grafton does in North Dakota Class AA football. If you support Hanson as a DI starter, then you obviously don't realize the talent differential between Mollberg/Bartels and Hanson. There's been numerous times where Mussman has even hinted at this (e.g. spring ball). How did you read so deep into one sentence? I said Jake is faster because he is. Where the hell did I say he was better or even a D1 talent? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bidago Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 was there an epic battle between molberg and bartels in spring/fall camp? there must have been as Bartels started the first few games. were the coaching staff's assessments so far off? Molberg is the obvious choice when you look at his stature and athletic ability and in the long run, he is probably still the strongest candidate. all things being equal, what is between the ears is the more important part of qb's make up. not one of the teams that have defeated us this year have had a 6'3" 235 lb qb. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UND-FB-FAN Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 How did you read so deep into one sentence? I said Jake is faster because he is. Where the hell did I say he was better or even a D1 talent? Read my first sentence; I question that he's faster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geaux_sioux Posted October 29, 2013 Author Share Posted October 29, 2013 Read my first sentence; I question that he's faster. Yea based on the level of competition they played against which has nothing to do with how fast they can run. You need to read the rest of your post where you go on to say that if I support him as a d1 starter blah blah blah. Really? Do you think there's any way I would support him as a d1 starter? 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.