Jump to content
SiouxSports.com Forum

Recommended Posts

Posted
2 hours ago, jdub27 said:

Good tradeoff it is accurate. USD/SDSU at home in the same year (first year of conference play) and NDSU rotating the other year.

Agreed, as good as it gets.

 

Posted
5 hours ago, Siouxperfan7 said:

Confirmed:

UND-NDSU football rivalry will resume with meetings in Fargo

http://www.grandforksherald.com/sports/football/4494605-und-ndsu-football-rivalry-will-resume-meetings-fargo

And it sounds like they will protect all the Dakota schools rivalries and the Dakota schools will play the other 3 every year.

About time some logic is used in scheduling, good work.  Imagine traveling to Youngstown.....and not playing in Brookings for example.

Posted
8 minutes ago, gundy1124 said:

Much improved Miss Valley St...........maybe not, lost 71-0 to Jack. St.

Well, at least Jacksonville State was able to see video or what they do prior to playing. 

Posted
7 hours ago, gundy1124 said:

Much improved Miss Valley St...........maybe not, lost 71-0 to Jack. St.

There was always a chance, I guess, that MVSU could just be improved. I agree with you though, they look like the same ol' MVSU.

I'm concerned the philosophy and mindset of UND football right now doesn't allow for much aggression and/or big leads. Couldn't get separation against MVSU in the 2nd half (when UND was clearly more talented) and couldn't capitalize on opportunities calling for aggression against Washington (particularly 4th & 1 opportunity with punt decision, lack of red zone efficiency, etc.). UND had a legitimate opportunity to be in the game 17-14 in the 3rd QTR yesterday; from there anything can happen. Oh well, it didn't go that way.  

Posted
1 hour ago, UND-FB-FAN said:

There was always a chance, I guess, that MVSU could just be improved. I agree with you though, they look like the same ol' MVSU.

I'm concerned the philosophy and mindset of UND football right now doesn't allow for much aggression and/or big leads. Couldn't get separation against MVSU in the 2nd half (when UND was clearly more talented) and couldn't capitalize on opportunities calling for aggression against Washington (particularly 4th & 1 opportunity with punt decision, lack of red zone efficiency, etc.). UND had a legitimate opportunity to be in the game 17-14 in the 3rd QTR yesterday; from there anything can happen. Oh well, it didn't go that way.  

Right.

We showed a lot of class in not curb stomping MVSU, or we are not capable of that.

Then against UW, we just knew we had to play it close to the vest and not show Sam H. what we have, or we are not cold blooded killers.

Both games didn't send the right message to me anyway.

Sam H. probably thinks our QB can't throw the ball more than 10 feet watching the UW game!!  (Unless out of bounds)

Week #3, put up or shut up.

  • Upvote 3
Posted
2 hours ago, gundy1124 said:

Right.

We showed a lot of class in not curb stomping MVSU, or we are not capable of that.

Then against UW, we just knew we had to play it close to the vest and not show Sam H. what we have, or we are not cold blooded killers.

Both games didn't send the right message to me anyway.

Sam H. probably thinks our QB can't throw the ball more than 10 feet watching the UW game!!  (Unless out of bounds)

Week #3, put up or shut up.

 I completely agree. Just like week 3 last season, I think this week will set the general direction for the remainder of the season.

We all know how week 3 went last season (@South Dakota) ... season pretty much followed suit after that. 

  • Upvote 1
Posted
2 hours ago, UND-FB-FAN said:

 I completely agree. Just like week 3 last season, I think this week will set the general direction for the remainder of the season.

We all know how week 3 went last season (@South Dakota) ... season pretty much followed suit after that. 

exactly...after the sodak game we knew we were gonna hae a long season...SHSU will tell us bunches on saturday and i can't wait to find out

  • Upvote 4
Posted

If you had Guilford holding Davidson under 684 yards of rushing offense ... you lost!  :0

 

Worse? If you're Davidson, you ran for 685 ... and still gave up more total offense yards than that (698) to your opponent. 

Posted
21 minutes ago, The Sicatoka said:

If you had Guilford holding Davidson under 684 yards of rushing offense ... you lost!  :0

 

Worse? If you're Davidson, you ran for 685 ... and still gave up more total offense yards than that (698) to your opponent. 

D1 Davidson gave up 698 total yards and 61 points to a D3 team!!!  I guess they can be happy with their performance.  But I doubt the defensive coordinator for Davidson was expecting numbers even remotely close to that!

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...