UND @ SDSU (Beat the bunnies)

[geaux_sioux]

1 hour 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. 

Ah yes, the old insert extreme straw man argument into my mouth strategy.

[geaux_sioux]

54 minutes ago, iramurphy said:

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. 

Would Belquist have more opportunities to make plays if he were paired up with a Greg Hardin type?

[SiouxFan100]

1 minute ago, geaux_sioux said:

Would Belquist have more opportunities to make plays if he were paired up with a Greg Hardin type?

Yes

[SiouxFan100]

If calling the timeout is the issue - that is all on the coach -the coach to call it or prearranged to give permission to a player 

I hope to hell that our qbs are allowed and capable to audible 

[iramurphy]

10 minutes ago, SiouxFan100 said:

If calling the timeout is the issue - that is all on the coach -the coach to call it or prearranged to give permission to a player 

I hope to hell that our qbs are allowed and capable to audible 

It’s on the coach and the QB. If you as a QB need permission, I would either move you to another position or give you a clipboard to chart plays for the QB who will take charge and do what it takes to win. 

[Midwestern Hawk]

48 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.  

42 seconds is not much time with a third down and short.   If the pass is incomplete, it’s 3rd and 18 with 42 seconds left and we are at the 31.   It was absolutely horrible clock management.  Go back and watch the plays again . Total disarray after the sack.  

[iramurphy]

18 minutes ago, geaux_sioux said:

Would Belquist have more opportunities to make plays if he were paired up with a Greg Hardin type?

Not sure. I’m also not sure what is meant by a “burner”.  What kind of speed are you looking for?  

[Midwestern Hawk]

3 minutes ago, iramurphy said:

Not sure. I’m also not sure what is meant by a “burner”.  What kind of speed are you looking for?  

There is so much more to our lack of deep throwing game than just someone who is a “burner”.  Double moves, overloading a zone with high low, rub routes, lots of ways to create space.

not sure sdsu had anyone who would be considered a “burner”, yet they took several deeper shot including one throw where their qb threw the ball 55 yards in the air.

[shep]

12 minutes ago, Midwestern Hawk said:

There is so much more to our lack of deep throwing game than just someone who is a “burner”.  Double moves, overloading a zone with high low, rub routes, lots of ways to create space.

not sure sdsu had anyone who would be considered a “burner”, yet they took several deeper shot including one throw where their qb threw the ball 55 yards in the air.

Tom Brady can't hit a "burner" or non burner" when he's on his back. Tommy saved the OL from giving up sacks on numerous occasions. Until the OL is stiffer, the passing game suffers. If the OL gets better, Danny's play calling includes longer routes.

[Sioux94]

15 minutes ago, Midwestern Hawk said:

42 seconds is not much time with a third down and short.   If the pass is incomplete, it’s 3rd and 18 with 42 seconds left and we are at the 31.   It was absolutely horrible clock management.  Go back and watch the plays again . Total disarray after the sack.  

I just watched the play about 10 times. As another poster mentioned, and I hadn't caught it at the time, when Richter breaks to the inside....he slows up just a bit.  Would you say if he keeps running the route the way Tommy expects him...meaning continuing full speed to the inside......that the ball hits him in the hands?  

[Midwestern Hawk]

8 minutes ago, Sioux94 said:

I just watched the play about 10 times. As another poster mentioned, and I hadn't caught it at the time, when Richter breaks to the inside....he slows up just a bit.  Would you say if he keeps running the route the way Tommy expects him...meaning continuing full speed to the inside......that the ball hits him in the hands?  

Very well could have . It looks as though Richter is not expecting the ball, which again leads me back to taking a timeout.

During timeout discuss situation with everyone and what happens after completion short of first down, completion out of bounds, or incompletion and if it’s third and what next play is in each scenario.

[SiouxFan100]

Shoulda avoided the sack 

[iramurphy]

3 minutes ago, Midwestern Hawk said:

Very well could have . It looks as though Richter is not expecting the ball, which again leads me back to taking a timeout.

Receivers should always expect the ball off of their cut. Normally cut and accelerate off of your cut unless you are in the seam of the zone then you glide so you don’t run into coverage. I’m in NY so didn’t see the game nor play so I can’t disagree with others who saw the play. 

[Midwestern Hawk]

7 minutes ago, iramurphy said:

Receivers should always expect the ball off of their cut. Normally cut and accelerate off of your cut unless you are in the seam of the zone then you glide so you don’t run into coverage. I’m in NY so didn’t see the game nor play so I can’t disagree with others who saw the play. 

Totally agree, but I agree with Sioux 94, richter makes the cut and slows down like either he doesn’t expect the ball or there is miscommunication on the route between he and Tommy.  It’s near the end.  Not ESPN view.
https://youtu.be/ucjPYFzcTA8

[Sioux94]

4 minutes ago, Midwestern Hawk said:

Very well could have . It looks as though he is not expecting the ball, which again leads me back to taking a timeout.

It looks a little akward, like he's not expecting it because he slowed a bit, but he had his head turned back and was looking for the ball.....but then kinda akwardly reaches his arm out for it because he was breaking more straight across and slowed up a bit instead of breaking in and continuing to go full speed.  At the time of the game I had kind of blamed Tommy for a bad throw and leading him too far, but after watching I can see why he threw it where he did......Richter would have been there if he wouldn't have slowed up that little bit.  Not sure if Ricther was right or wrong on how he ran that route, but it sure looks like that is what happened, and I don't think it had much to do with a Timeout not being taken.  And yes there were 3 defenders in that area, and at the time watching Live I thought it was a risky throw.  But watching again there was a fairly wide open window there. 

After that sack, maybe 60-70% of coaches would have taken a timeout, and 30-40% wouldn't have.  So I don't think it's like a 95% that he should have taken a timeout after the sack.  After all of the blunders this year though it is easy in hindsight to say that now and blame it on the coaches.  But if Richter keeps running full speed that is a huge completion and we are sitting good.

 

[UND1983]

16 minutes ago, Midwestern Hawk said:

Very well could have . It looks as though Richter is not expecting the ball, which again leads me back to taking a timeout.

During timeout discuss situation with everyone and what happens after completion short of first down, completion out of bounds, or incompletion and if it’s third and what next play is in each scenario.

I just went and watched it again.  You are literally lying when you say UND was "hurrying" and not coordinated after the sack.  They even went so far as to huddle and Tommy looked over at the sideline for the play calmly for probably 10-15 secs.  UND took 34 secs to run that play, that is how HURRIED they were.  I mean seriously dude, give it up.  

If you want them to take a timeout fine.  But don't make up reasons for it.  

[Midwestern Hawk]

10 minutes ago, UND1983 said:

I just went and watched it again.  You are literally lying when you say UND was "hurrying" and not coordinated after the sack.  They even went so far as to huddle and Tommy looked over at the sideline for the play calmly for probably 10-15 secs.  UND took 34 secs to run that play, that is how HURRIED they were.  I mean seriously dude, give it up.  

If you want them to take a timeout fine.  But don't make up reasons for it.  

Your serious?  Do you know anything about clock management?  Some huddle some don’t,  it’s disorganized and obviously by richter route not everyone was on the same page.  With 1:30 we burned 39 seconds on one play . That’s as bad as it gets.

 

Refresh my memory how did it work out for us?  Yeah, that’s what I thought.  Maybe we can use the two timeouts next season.  

 

[geaux_sioux]

46 minutes ago, iramurphy said:

Not sure. I’m also not sure what is meant by a “burner”.  What kind of speed are you looking for?  

Literally Greg Hardin. Or Clive Georges more recently. We don’t have a single guy who the opponent is worried about blowing past guys. Having that type of guy makes everyone’s jobs so much easier on offense.

[UND1983]

2 minutes ago, Midwestern Hawk said:

Your serious?  Do you know anything about clock management?  Some huddle some don’t,  it’s disorganized and obviously by richter route not everyone was on the same page.  With 1:30 we burned 39 seconds on one play . That’s as bad as it gets.

Now you are changing the argument.  You said they were hurried and disorganized.  The film shows differently.  They purposely moved at that pace, which means you must know more than Danny and Bubba about how to handle end of game situations.  

[Midwestern Hawk]

1 hour ago, The Sicatoka said:

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

Now we are supposed to believe that they were worried about leaving sdsu too much time.  It’s was 2nd and 18 at the 31 with less than a minute to go.  Now I’ve heard everything.  Some in here will defend absolutely any moronic thing we do.

[SiouxFan100]

Complete the pass to richter and everyone is happy no matter how much time it took

Without the sack ???????

[Sioux94]

6 minutes ago, Midwestern Hawk said:

Your serious?  Do you know anything about clock management?  Some huddle some don’t,  it’s disorganized and obviously by richter route not everyone was on the same page.  With 1:30 we burned 39 seconds on one play . That’s as bad as it gets.

 

Refresh my memory how did it work out for us?  Yeah, that’s what I thought.  Maybe we can use the two timeouts next season.  

 

So let's assume two scenarios...

1. Richter runs route at full speed and catches that ball.  We take a Timeout after he gets tackled.  So then it's 3rd and 1 at about the 14 with the clock stopped with 46 seconds and one timeout remaining.  It's 3rd and one and you have just taken a timeout to think about what to call on a very important 3rd down. 

2.  We take a timeout after the sack.  There is 1:26 left on the clock with the clock stopped.  We run the same play and hit Richter in the same spot he gets tackled with 1:19 on the clock and the clock is running.  It's third down and we can't spike the ball, so everyone would be running up to the line.  The coach probably doesn't want to super hurry the play call in because it's 3rd and one and is a huge play so by the time they run it.......it probably takes 30 seconds off the clock by the time they snap it on that crucial 3rd down, which would mean there would have been about 50 seconds left.  Really not much different in my opinion on how much time and timeouts would have been left no matter which way they did it.  It could be argued the first scenario having a timeout to make sure you get the best 3rd and 1 play you have called correctly would be important. 

Now if you are telling me during the timeout, they would have told Richter....."hey....don't forget to keep running full speed when you break your route in"  Then they definitely messed up by not calling the timeout.  

I think it could be argued they should have taken a timeout after the sack, and I think it could be argued they didn't need to burn one there.  

 

[Sioux>Bison]

6 hours ago, SiouxFan100 said:

Do we need to get a sprinter from the track and field team? Hopefully we have at least one fast one 

Our punter! 

[Midwestern Hawk]

9 minutes ago, Sioux94 said:

So let's assume two scenarios...

1. Richter runs route at full speed and catches that ball.  We take a Timeout after he gets tackled.  So then it's 3rd and 1 at about the 14 with the clock stopped with 46 seconds and one timeout remaining.  It's 3rd and one and you have just taken a timeout to think about what to call on a very important 3rd down. 

2.  We take a timeout after the sack.  There is 1:26 left on the clock with the clock stopped.  We run the same play and hit Richter in the same spot he gets tackled with 1:19 on the clock and the clock is running.  It's third down and we can't spike the ball, so everyone would be running up to the line.  The coach probably doesn't want to super hurry the play call in because it's 3rd and one and is a huge play so by the time they run it.......it probably takes 30 seconds off the clock by the time they snap it on that crucial 3rd down, which would mean there would have been about 50 seconds left.  Really not much different in my opinion on how much time and timeouts would have been left no matter which way they did it.  It could be argued the first scenario having a timeout to make sure you get the best 3rd and 1 play you have called correctly would be important. 

Now if you are telling me during the timeout, they would have told Richter....."hey....don't forget to keep running full speed when you break your route in"  Then they definitely messed up by not calling the timeout.  

I think it could be argued they should have taken a timeout after the sack, and I think it could be argued they didn't need to burn one there.  

 

And if the pass is incomplete, it’s 3rd and 18 from the 31 with ~ 42 seconds left.  Still have two timeouts, but the clock gets to be a factor.

[Midwestern Hawk]

29 minutes ago, UND1983 said:

Now you are changing the argument.  You said they were hurried and disorganized.  The film shows differently.  They purposely moved at that pace, which means you must know more than Danny and Bubba about how to handle end of game situations.  

The same staff that choked against NDSU and failed to call TO when they didn’t take our bait on the punt, was calmly telling Tommy to take his time after the sack?  Really?