UND @ SDSU (Beat the bunnies)

[siouxfan512]

6 hours ago, UND-FB-FAN said:

This is the disappointment. At this point in the program with Bubba in charge, we should be hearing UND’s name every Sunday FCS Playoff Selection Show, but we’re still racking up losing seasons, letdowns and blatant playoff misses. Beyond frustrating. 
 

The mindset of this team/program and overall leadership of it has tons of room to improve. 

The hard part for me is if you move on from bubba, how many players do you lose and how long does it take for that new coach to get their system going? Could be another 3-4 years, who knows?

[UND1983]

They aren't moving on cause he has two years left. There also isn't an FCS school in the country that would buyout two years of a contract unless they went like 0-11 and there are only a couple that could even afford that.  

All the bitching and calling for heads is just frustration and not grounded in any reality.  When Rudolph and Knauf got axed that was actually possible to pull off.

[SIOUXFAN97]

16 minutes ago, UND1983 said:

Right like I said. 

haha...your being dumb....snap.kneel.to.snap.kneel.to...snap.kneel..game over....season over.day.by.day.by.day.decade.by.decade.by.decade.

[Siouxperman8]

43 minutes ago, The Sicatoka said:

That was well done.
On what should have been the winning drive the error was admitted and acknowledged. 

I don't think it is automatic that we should have called timeout after the sack.  To me it's similar to when a team scores to take the lead late in a basketball game.  Some coaches want to take the ball and go and not let the defense strategize.   Other coaches want the timeout to get their offense set even though it lets the defense do the same.  Like someone else pointed out - the big pass rusher from SDSU was out taking a breather.  That is an advantage 

In this case we didn't execute the play and turned the ball over.  If we make the thow and catch it's a great decision.  I agree with others that part of what Bubba was doing in his postgame interview was to protect the players from criticism.  And in hindsight, we threw an inteception on the play so any other option could have turned out better - or not.   Do people really think that not calling a timeout would have made the throw more accurate or the WR to run his route differently?  I find that hard to believe myself.

[UND1983]

Don't understand it myself. Not calling a timeout there isn't even a "decision".  Its completely optional and if Tommy doesn't lead Richter too far or throws to Otis it never even comes up on this site because it was so optional. But Tommy throws a INT so now its Bubba's fault for not calling a timeout.  This board is full of winners.  

[The Sicatoka]

The 360 guys tweeted that Otis was open in the flat. We’ll never know if stopping and taking a collective breath would’ve helped the QB relax and go through the progressions instead of throwing to a receiver with four bunnies around him. 

[UND1983]

4 minutes ago, The Sicatoka said:

The 360 guys tweeted that Otis was open in the flat. We’ll never know if stopping and taking a collective breath would’ve helped the QB relax and go through the progressions instead of throwing to a receiver with four bunnies around him. 

Of course it would help him collect himself but a team only gets 3 per half and just had used one.  Can't call a timeout every time a QB needs to collect himself.

Also, it was 2nd and 18.  Not 4th down.  

[The Sicatoka]

Only silver lining? I don’t believe the committee would’ve put UND in over 6-5 UNI. They beat SDSU, SIU, and SacSt. 
 

A win and a no bid would hurt worse. 

[Oxbow6]

3 things to celebrate heading into Thanksgiving...

1. Tommy sucks

2. Cost of a gallon of gas is up 60%+ from a year ago

3. No UND punts from inside the opponents 40 for 9 months

 

[Midwestern Hawk]

2 hours ago, UND1983 said:

Don't understand it myself. Not calling a timeout there isn't even a "decision".  Its completely optional and if Tommy doesn't lead Richter too far or throws to Otis it never even comes up on this site because it was so optional. But Tommy throws a INT so now its Bubba's fault for not calling a timeout.  This board is full of winners.  

The sack play wasted almost half of the remaining time.  the situation went from 1st and 10 with plenty of time to 2nd and 18 and a rush.  There is no question a timeout should have been used after the sack.   Even if the pass is completed we are down to around 42 seconds left with 12 yards to go and a likely third and short.

[iramurphy]

2 minutes ago, Midwestern Hawk said:

The sack play wasted almost half of the remaining time.  the situation went from 1st and 10 with plenty of time to 2nd and 18 and a rush.  There is no question a timeout should have been used after the sack.  

Then why didn’t Schuster call it????

[Midwestern Hawk]

7 minutes ago, iramurphy said:

Then why didn’t Schuster call it????

You may have the inside scoop on what the protocol is on the team, but I doubt very much it is standard for Tommy to call a TO in that situation.  I don't remember Tommy calling a TO on his own all year.

[iramurphy]

4 minutes ago, Midwestern Hawk said:

You may have the inside scoop on what the protocol is on the team in that situation, but I doubt very much it is standard for Tommy to call a TO in that situation.  I don't remember Tommy calling a TO on his own all year.

I’m not down on Tommy but a QB at this level will change the play and call a needed timeout when needed. That fact is something that need to change if he’s going to get better. That’s what a winner will do. He is still learning. 

[UND-FB-FAN]

3 hours ago, geaux_sioux said:

Non of those guys you listed can straight up run by a guy. They are good route runners but not burners at all.

You’re right, we should only recruit high school athletes with the word “burner” in their Twitter bio. UND has some capable players, but can always get better players; that’s no secret. 

[The Sicatoka]

15 minutes ago, iramurphy said:

Then why didn’t Schuster call it????

You’ve asked if he’s allowed to audible. Is he allowed to call time out?

 If he’s not, why.

[Midwestern Hawk]

2 minutes ago, iramurphy said:

I’m not down on Tommy but a QB at this level will change the play and call a needed timeout when needed. That fact is something that need to change if he’s going to get better. That’s what a winner will do. He is still learning. 

I don't know this for a fact, but I have watched Tommy closely this season and I have NOT seen him change a play at the line nor call a timeout on the field.  If someone has a specific instance of either scenario, please let me know which game and I would love to see what I missed.  I can't think of an instance this season where UND called a TO from the field on O or D.

[UND-FB-FAN]

3 hours ago, siouxfan512 said:

The hard part for me is if you move on from bubba, how many players do you lose and how long does it take for that new coach to get their system going? Could be another 3-4 years, who knows?

Any coach that takes 3-4 years isn’t a good coach in this day and age of college football. With the right resources, you should be winning after a couple years.
 

Only counter argument to a coach not turning it around that fast would be lack of institutional support, i.e., need better facilities, equipment, etc.

[iramurphy]

2 minutes ago, UND-FB-FAN said:

You’re right, we should only recruit high school athletes with the word “burner” in their Twitter bio. UND has some capable players, but can always get better players; that’s no secret. 

That’s why we didn’t recruit Thielen. Could have had him for a dime. Most patterns including TDs of over 40 yds are not to wide open burner behind the secondary. What is needed? 4.5?  Do you know how close the 4.6 or even 4.7 kid is to the 4.5 kid in the first 40 yds. Our receivers have been able to find the seems candid get open. I’d prefer a 4.3 guy but if they can’t read a defense, find the seems in a zone, block and catch I will take the kids we have. Belquist has great quickness and I would bet can run a 4.6 if not better. The oline is a key piece that can easily compensate for that missing 4.4 forty guy. 

[iramurphy]

8 minutes ago, UND-FB-FAN said:

Any coach that takes 3-4 years isn’t a good coach in this day and age of college football. With the right resources, you should be winning after a couple years.
 

Only counter argument to a coach not turning it around that fast would be lack of institutional support, i.e., need better facilities, equipment, etc.

Any good coach will want at least 5 yrs. that’s how long it takes for you to have a team of your own recruits. By then you should have the program on the right track. Programs that are down will take longer than 2 years. 

[iramurphy]

13 minutes ago, Midwestern Hawk said:

I don't know this for a fact, but I have watched Tommy closely this season and I have NOT seen him change a play at the line nor call a timeout on the field.  If someone has a specific instance of either scenario, please let me know which game and I would love to see what I missed.  I can't think of an instance this season where UND called a TO from the field on O or D.

That’s my point. If I’m the QB I don’t ask permission. I make the final decisions on plays and I’ll call a timeout if we need it.  As a coach that is what I want from my QB. 

[UND1983]

50 minutes ago, Midwestern Hawk said:

The sack play wasted almost half of the remaining time.  the situation went from 1st and 10 with plenty of time to 2nd and 18 and a rush.  There is no question a timeout should have been used after the sack.   Even if the pass is completed we are down to around 42 seconds left with 12 yards to go and a likely third and short.

Lol...and TWO timeouts.  I am completely lost why you keep bringing that up.  42 secs left on the 12 yard line is literally TOO MUCH time left on the clock when a team has two timeouts. They could've scored the next play and left SDSU with 25+ secs.  

[The Sicatoka]

3 minutes ago, UND1983 said:

Lol...and TWO timeouts.  I am completely lost why you keep bringing that up.  42 secs left on the 12 yard line is literally TOO MUCH time left on the clock when a team has two timeouts. They could've scored the next play and left SDSU with 25+ secs.  

Give me the four point lead and I’ll risk it. 

[UND1983]

1 minute ago, The Sicatoka said:

Give me the four point lead and I’ll risk it. 

With 25 secs left or less, for sure.  Leave SDSU 40-50 secs?  No thanks, not after MSU

[Oxbow6]

6 minutes ago, UND1983 said:

With 25 secs left or less, for sure.  Leave SDSU 40-50 secs?  No thanks, not after MSU

Tommy's fault too?

[UND1983]

5 minutes ago, Oxbow6 said:

Tommy's fault too?

Why not!