UND - Idaho Game Day Thread

[Sioux94]

8 minutes ago, gundy1124 said:

That page fell out of the notebook.  It's fun watching teams when they have success off a play one week, then the next week a team scouts it......but the offensive coordinator is a step ahead and runs the "next" phase of the playbook using the previous play as a decoy.  Rarely have I seen that at UND, like power ball odds type rare.

No doubt, I'm not even sure if they tried faking the sweep to McKinney against Idaho.   And yeah coming up with a new play off the fake sweep to McKinney would be what you'd like to see to take advantage of teams starting to focus on it. 

[BarnWinterSportsEngelstad]

34 minutes ago, gundy1124 said:

That page fell out of the notebook.  It's fun watching teams when they have success off a play one week, then the next week a team scouts it......but the offensive coordinator is a step ahead and runs the "next" phase of the playbook using the previous play as a decoy.  Rarely have I seen that at UND, like power ball odds type rare.

Yes, - - -  this is our weakest facet of the team. And, it's on the coaches.

 

Using your observation.

We do have successful plays.

Opposing team scouts them.

Our coaches should go to the next phase of the playbook. using that play as a decoy.

Teams do this very well against us. Us, not so much - we need to step up here.

This is part of the difference between us and our opponents going into the second half. They make adjustments and we rarely do - we come up short.

This goes back a few years. The talent seems to be here, we play with teams for most parts of the game.

 

 

[Goon]

31 minutes ago, Sioux94 said:

No doubt, I'm not even sure if they tried faking the sweep to McKinney against Idaho.   And yeah coming up with a new play off the fake sweep to McKinney would be what you'd like to see to take advantage of teams starting to focus on it. 

Normally that play works, but against Weber State they were so fast, and they sniffed it out. 

[Feff]

There was a nice wrinkle put in with the jet sweep this last week at Idaho. Ran the sweep, came back with a reverse, Stanley then had the passing option which had Maag wide open downfield for what should have been an easy touchdown but which was underthrown by at least 5 yards. 

[UND-FB-FAN]

16 minutes ago, Feff said:

There was a nice wrinkle put in with the jet sweep this last week at Idaho. Ran the sweep, came back with a reverse, Stanley then had the passing option which had Maag wide open downfield for what should have been an easy touchdown but which was underthrown by at least 5 yards. 

Good point. If Wanzek hadn’t been injured, he likely would’ve been the one throwing it instead. At least that’s a strong possibility. 

[Hawks_Win_Again]

1 hour ago, UND-FB-FAN said:

Good point. If Wanzek hadn’t been injured, he likely would’ve been the one throwing it instead. At least that’s a strong possibility. 

Great call at a perfect time.. .... but.... how about use the WR that is a former QB?........ #13.    TD  game over.     Frustrating.       Go Hawks.

 

[Sioux94]

18 hours ago, Hawks_Win_Again said:

Great call at a perfect time.. .... but.... how about use the WR that is a former QB?........ #13.    TD  game over.     Frustrating.       Go Hawks.

 

I agree that one was a really good call, and Wanzek likely would have been the one throwing it if he wasn't out and probably completed it.  It was super frustrating to miss on that play.  However I think we hit Maag on a long pass one or two plays later and got down to about the same spot, if I remember correctly.  When I think of all of the the "what could have" in this game, I thought about this play missing....but since I think we hit Maag deep it didn't have a big impact.  Again, if I recall correctly. 

[Hawks_Win_Again]

12 minutes ago, Sioux94 said:

I agree that one was a really good call, and Wanzek likely would have been the one throwing it if he wasn't out and probably completed it.  It was super frustrating to miss on that play.  However I think we hit Maag on a long pass one or two plays later and got down to about the same spot, if I remember correctly.  When I think of all of the the "what could have" in this game, I thought about this play missing....but since I think we hit Maag deep it didn't have a big impact.  Again, if I recall correctly. 

You do recall correctly....by game over I was actually inferring to it more of a sure thing, than a situational game ender.      As mentioned often on this board..it's the little things that might seem unnoticed with our team. .....personnel usage.... fixable details..... that can add up in a close game. We were good enough to win all 3 of our close losses, and "details" make a difference...  (along with a break or 2 from the "zebras"). ....or not.......

Let's win these last two.  Go HAWKS !!