Gameday: Fighting Hawks vs MVSU

[iramurphy]

53 minutes ago, UNDvince97-01 said:

Now if we can only get him to fix that 'windup' throwing motion.

Lol

[UNDvince97-01]

4 minutes ago, iramurphy said:

Lol

[The Sicatoka]

I have some relatives that are U-dubbers. 

After last night, how many points do I ask for. I'm thinking 56.5. 

[Dustin]

3 hours ago, UND1983 said:

https://undfootball360.com/news/the-aftermath-und-wins-35-7/

 

Pretty much the exact assessment that everyone on here was making.

[The Sicatoka]

Massey Ratings had this game called at 49-7. 

[geaux_sioux]

2 hours ago, UNDvince97-01 said:

Now if we can only get him to fix that 'windup' throwing motion.

I don’t like his mechanics. He succeeds in spite of them. He could get more out of his arm though.

[geaux_sioux]

42 minutes ago, The Sicatoka said:

Massey Ratings had this game called at 49-7. 

I wonder how much their gamesmanship helped them out. Kudos to their coach for being crafty and giving his guys a better chance at a win.

[The Sicatoka]

What was I most disappointed in? 

Time of possession.

Yes it was 33+ (to 26+) in favor of UND, but UND's run game should've put that closer to 36. Well, that and the UND Defense not getting off the field on the MVSU opening drive (see: full blitz on 3rd and 25 and giving up a 50 yard play) letting MVSU hold the ball most of the rest of the first. 

[The Sicatoka]

What did I like?

The way they opened the second half. 

At 21-7, I was worried MVSU would come out and score right after halftime and UND would clinch up. Instead it was ... Cugat! 

But then UND's offense stalled and I clinched up because a one score game was possible again.

But the defense went Cugat again, and this time UND scored, 28-7, and the game felt in hand. 

[UNDvince97-01]

4 hours ago, geaux_sioux said:

I don’t like his mechanics. He succeeds in spite of them. He could get more out of his arm though.

I like how he plays QB. 

With what we saw last night, albeit only one game, complaining about his throwing motion seems silly at this point.

Maybe discuss the kicker's kicking motion instead?

 

[FSSD]

I thought that Ott looked really good - really excited to see how the end develop this year.

[homer]

38 minutes ago, UNDvince97-01 said:

I like how he plays QB. 

With what we saw last night, albeit only one game, complaining about his throwing motion seems silly at this point.

Maybe discuss the kicker's kicking motion instead?

 

Lol.  

[Oxbow6]

11 hours ago, UNDvince97-01 said:

I like how he plays QB. 

With what we saw last night, albeit only one game, complaining about his throwing motion seems silly at this point.

Maybe discuss the kicker's kicking motion instead?

 

This....^^^

Top tier FCS teams get consistent way better than average QB play, can run the ball and can stop the run. This team has the potential to check all three of those boxes.

[Midwestern Hawk]

21 hours ago, OgieOgilthorpe said:

Offense: All 3 running backs did pretty decent for what they were given. Johnny didn't seem 100% but made some ridiculous cuts like we all know he can. Brady is a decent mix of power and agility and is an all around good RB at this level. He'll fix his fumbling issue because he's never really had that problem before and one of them (if not both) was a perfect helmet to the nose of the ball fluke. James was pretty underwhelming to me. It sure seemed like he lost his speed and agility with all those L.B.s he stacked on. I'm not sure he'll crush too many defenders this season...only because he'll never be running fast enough to do so. Without that speed or burst, he may not even be a good goal line RB...but definitely a good blocker. 

Oline looked good on pass protect but have some bugs to work out on the running scheme. Overall I was pleasantly surprised that they LOOK like an oline and seem to have the capabilities to do good things. 

How great is it to see a guy like Ketteringham with a UND jersey on? He looks, plays and acts like a legit D1 QB. Great pocket presence, great mobility, can throw on the run and has an accurate arm. His arm strength isn't top tier, but he has enough to get the job done. He made 2-3 VERY questionable throws that should've turned into at least 1 pick but I expect him to clean that up as the season unfolds. For the most part he made the right throws and wasn't scared to take a shot, and usually he error-ed on the correct side. He's already a stud, but shows obvious signs of even more potential. An even better feeling than having him on the team?...knowing Zim is there to back him up and 1-2 pretty capable guys behind them. 

WRs had a bad game but you can tell they posses the skill set, so I won't judge them on what I saw yesterday. Plenty of skill stacked up in that position group but I'd like to see some more of the speedsters in the slot with short quick routes. The mid ball was working so no need to change, but I think using Izzy and company on quick short curls and slants could do some damage with their ability to make guys miss. TEs looked solid and fit the body type of legit TEs. They caught the ball and made blocks all game long. They won't win any games for UND but they definitely won't be a weak spot. 

Defense: DBs were very poor, particularly CBs. I will give credit to that QB and those quick little receivers, but wow did Holm and Harris look like fools...over, and over and over and over. It looked like both of them were drunk and were wearing bowling shoes. Washington is going to be giggling in film, and their QB is going to be drooling. I'd start Blubaugh over either one of them as an eye opener next week, take your pick. He was a baller out there. Similar plays where Harris was straight legged and tripping over himself Blubaugh was cutting and jumping balls all over the place. Safeties weren't horrendous and didn't blow any coverage, but they were hesitant and always 1 second late to the ball. They need to get back to the basics and get their read off the tackles and trust it. Understandable of the first game to get back in the feel

Dline seemed much beefier than last year which was nice to see. They'll be no problem for Wash, but they'll at-least be respectable. LBs seemed to be MUCH beefier and stout. They held their own and tossed people around. Noah Larson is a scary dude. He was filling gaps like a juggernaut. The 2nd and maybe 3rd string guys filling in seemed to be very capable as well, so I was glad to see some depth there. As long as they don't end up on the 5th and 6th stringers like last year, I think the LBs will hold their own.

 

Special teams: The kicker now has a mental battle on his hands but he has the form and skill to overcome it. He'll nail a couple easy ones and snap out of it. The punter will be fine as well. He had a couple bad bounces but has decent air time and gets it off pretty quickly. Kickoff coverage actually looked okay to me other than 2 guys crossing lanes causing the long return. Shore that up and make sure idiots know how to take the guy to the ground rather than go for a highlight hit, then they'll be fine. 

 

Lots of good comments in this post.  Solid QB play, pound the ball, stuff the run and it will be a good year.  DB's looked much better in 2nd half after Schmidt started blitzing.  Specials need lots of work.  As of now kickoff depth/coverage and missed field goals will cost us a victory or two.

[Goon]

I'll leave this here. 

[Ozzie82]

5 hours ago, Goon said:

I'll leave this here. 

Where did you find this image?

[Goon]

3 minutes ago, Ozzie82 said:

Where did you find this image?

Took it with my camera. 

 

 

[Sioux>Bison]

The more football I watch the more I am giving our defense a pass for a poor first quarter. It’s tough to know what an offense is going to come out with to start the year. Are they going to run a similar offense or is the new coaching going to change it up completely. I have a feeling that this will not be a common theme going forward this year as we play team with more and more film. I can’t wait for Sammy.

[darell1976]

Any chance we can catch a break and have Washington overlook us and look forward to Utah. 16 points against a team like Auburn doesn't say how their offense will do against our defense.

[F'n Hawks]

49 minutes ago, darell1976 said:

Any chance we can catch a break and have Washington overlook us and look forward to Utah. 16 points against a team like Auburn doesn't say how their offense will do against our defense.

I don’t think so, they will be pissed about losing to Auburn. If they had won today I could maybe see them overlooking us but not now

[Sioux>Bison]

2 hours ago, darell1976 said:

Any chance we can catch a break and have Washington overlook us and look forward to Utah. 16 points against a team like Auburn doesn't say how their offense will do against our defense.

Absolutely not. Chances are they will take out there anger on us and try to run it up to 60-70 points

[sioux24/7]

19 hours ago, Goon said:

I'll leave this here. 

This made me remember how much I hate those stupid nascar numbers. 

[AJS]

Before I completely turn the page to week 2, my overall thoughts:

Offensively

The two biggest positives for me were Rudolph and Ketteringham. Some of the new packages are definitely a step in the right direction and Ketteringham has the arm to stretch the field and make all the passes. The total points scored of 35 itself wasn't impressive, but they played pretty methodical in the 2nd half, which I was fine with. You had a fumble and a couple missed field goals which ended up costing points, plus with how the defense shut MVSU down in the 2nd half, they didn't have to play fast and score as often as they could have. Looked more of a try to bleed the clock type deal. Was able to play the 2nd string later in the 4th as well. It's tough given the competition to really grade their performance, but I am optimistic that this unit has the potential (bigger playbook / QB play) to be an improved unit over what we've seen in recent years. Need to improve: Drops and although they played well, the offensive line needs to continue to improve, because they won't see a defense that poor the rest of the year.  B-

Defensively

They secondary was flat out terrible in the first half, especially the CB position. They were coming in blind and made the adjustments in the second half, but still, Holm / Harris have enough talent where it was still inexcusable. The one thing to note is not only did they play better in the second half, basically shutting down MVSU, but out of any positional group, Holm / Harris would have had the most "rust". Again, it's tough to grade, but overall I'd give them a C. Need the secondary to play better, although I do believe the CB group overall is solid and will play much better as the year goes on. I like the front 7.

Special Teams

Definitely mental right now for the freshman kicker, he appears to have an ok leg, so I'll wait a couple more games to hit the panic button. Punting was in the same spot where it was his first college action. 

Overall, I'm happy that they played MVSU the first game. I'm not sure how they would have done against a quality opponent, but they were able to work out some kinks. Defensively, night and day difference between the 1st and 2nd half which is very encouraging. 

[gundy1124]

5 hours ago, AJS said:

Before I completely turn the page to week 2, my overall thoughts:

Offensively

The two biggest positives for me were Rudolph and Ketteringham. Some of the new packages are definitely a step in the right direction and Ketteringham has the arm to stretch the field and make all the passes. The total points scored of 35 itself wasn't impressive, but they played pretty methodical in the 2nd half, which I was fine with. You had a fumble and a couple missed field goals which ended up costing points, plus with how the defense shut MVSU down in the 2nd half, they didn't have to play fast and score as often as they could have. Looked more of a try to bleed the clock type deal. Was able to play the 2nd string later in the 4th as well. It's tough given the competition to really grade their performance, but I am optimistic that this unit has the potential (bigger playbook / QB play) to be an improved unit over what we've seen in recent years. Need to improve: Drops and although they played well, the offensive line needs to continue to improve, because they won't see a defense that poor the rest of the year.  B-

Defensively

They secondary was flat out terrible in the first half, especially the CB position. They were coming in blind and made the adjustments in the second half, but still, Holm / Harris have enough talent where it was still inexcusable. The one thing to note is not only did they play better in the second half, basically shutting down MVSU, but out of any positional group, Holm / Harris would have had the most "rust". Again, it's tough to grade, but overall I'd give them a C. Need the secondary to play better, although I do believe the CB group overall is solid and will play much better as the year goes on. I like the front 7.

Special Teams

Definitely mental right now for the freshman kicker, he appears to have an ok leg, so I'll wait a couple more games to hit the panic button. Punting was in the same spot where it was his first college action. 

Overall, I'm happy that they played MVSU the first game. I'm not sure how they would have done against a quality opponent, but they were able to work out some kinks. Defensively, night and day difference between the 1st and 2nd half which is very encouraging. 

A lot of good analysis from posters.

Some missing items-  Santiago will need patience in the screen game.  He had so much open space I think he almost went into shock and ran full speed into defenders.  He needs to tuck behind a big O-lineman down the field until a opportunity arises.

Harris- in a world of stats, nothing is better than pick 6's at corner.  I honestly don't know why NFL scouts are at our practices, cause Harris isn't that caliber.  He played like crap.  After Washington, we'll know if he can hang or not.

If our corners are manned up and back to the ball too much then we are totally screwed this year.  They might want to mix in man from a cover 3 type coverage, always keeping an eye on the QB.  They call them 50/50 balls but seems like they are more like 70/30, the bad way against our corners.

 

[UND-FB-FAN]

15 hours ago, gundy1124 said:

A lot of good analysis from posters.

Some missing items-  Santiago will need patience in the screen game.  He had so much open space I think he almost went into shock and ran full speed into defenders.  He needs to tuck behind a big O-lineman down the field until a opportunity arises.

Harris- in a world of stats, nothing is better than pick 6's at corner.  I honestly don't know why NFL scouts are at our practices, cause Harris isn't that caliber.  He played like crap.  After Washington, we'll know if he can hang or not.

If our corners are manned up and back to the ball too much then we are totally screwed this year.  They might want to mix in man from a cover 3 type coverage, always keeping an eye on the QB.  They call them 50/50 balls but seems like they are more like 70/30, the bad way against our corners.

 

As mentioned before, UND’s corners are just plain bad. Definitely an area that needs improvement in both recruiting and development.