Playing to win

[rooker]

4th and 1.

You can't play scared and expect to win against a better team. This was vintage Roger Thomas and the reason there were no football championships for UND in the 90's. This definitely was the turning point of the game.

Conservative football does not equal championships - unless you get lucky on a busted play in the last minute like UND did against GVSU.

Hopefully there is a lesson to be learned from this but I'm sure we will see the same old crap as usual.

I would like to congratulate the football players on a great season and another great run.

[LennonIsTheMan]

4th and 1.

You can't play scared and expect to win against a better team.  This was vintage Roger Thomas and the reason there were no football championships for UND in the 90's.  This definitely was the turning point of the game.

Conservative football does not equal championships - unless you get lucky on a busted play in the last minute like UND did against GVSU.

Hopefully there is a lesson to be learned from this but I'm sure we will see the same old crap as usual.

I would like to congratulate the football players on a great season and another great run.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You are a moron. You have to punt the football there. Halfmann's punt was an unexpected beauty into the wind, it landed at the 1 and bounced into the end zone. If Donovan Alexander finds the ball in the air, he could have caught it at the 1. That is the way Dale Lennon has done it the whole time he has been here. He did it that way in 2001 and 2003, both seasons in which we went to Alabama. Must be nice to be able to sit there and "arm-chair" it huh? Your posting name is fitting.

[PhillySioux]

[Let'sGoHawks!]

The tired cliche': "hindsight is 20-20" applies here.

[The Sicatoka]

And if Roland would have been stuffed on 4th and 1 the outcry would be, "Why didn't they punt and trust the defense like they did all season?"

[rooker]

I'm definitely an "armchair quarterback" - who isn't!

In all the Bison championship years, how many times did they punt after crossing the 50 yd line (I hate referencing them but I will give credit where credit is due). Do you know why? Because they knew they were going to shove it down your throat and make the first down. It's confidense in your players to produce.

Pitt State has the best offense in the country. UND definitely knew they were going to have to score more than 21 pts to beat them. You can't wait for the opposing team to make a mistake to keep you in the game. Its a lot easier to play when you are ahead then when you are behind.

just a few thoughts from an "armchair moron". Try being a little more creative on the name calling; you may dent my ego yet.

[bigmrg74]

I'll have to agree here guys. I've been screaming at GVSU all year for settling for Field Goals when they could have Manned up and gotten that extra yard or so they would have needed. And I'm not just talking about when we played UND. We had about 3 FG's that we should have gone for it instead against lowly Wayne State U. (Detroit). Not going for it in the past when you know you can get it can come back to bite you later on when the distance of a yard determinds if you get to play next week or not. Weither its a 4 and 1 on the 20 or on the 50, you're down by a score or two and the clock is almost out, you gotta go for it.

[U2Bad1]

I'll have to agree here guys.  I've been screaming at GVSU all year for settling for Field Goals when they could have Manned up and gotten that extra yard or so they would have needed.  And I'm not just talking about when we played UND.  We had about 3 FG's that we should have gone for it instead against lowly Wayne State U. (Detroit).  Not going for it in the past when you know you can get it can come back to bite you later on when the distance of a yard determinds if you get to play next week or not.  Weither its a 4 and 1 on the 20 or on the 50, you're down by a score or two and the clock is almost out, you gotta go for it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree completely. The way Pitt St. was moving the ball I don't think it mattered if they started at the 10, 20, or 40 (which would have been the case if UND failed on 4th and 1). It is very rare that a punt that lands on the 1 yard line gets downed, they usually roll intothe endzone. This was the real turning point (not the penalty on the field goal) in the game as the UND offense was not the same after that play.

[UND-1]

Can someone refresh my rapidly aging memory about the game situation at the time we decided to punt---quarter, score, etc.

I cannot remember it, honestly.

[UND92,96]

Can someone refresh my rapidly aging memory about the game situation at the time we decided to punt---quarter, score, etc.

I cannot remember it, honestly.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This was UND's second possession of the third quarter. UND drove all the way down the field on its first possession of the second half, but settled for a field goal. Pitt St. then went 3-and-out on its first possession of the second half. On its second possession of the half, UND was driving and had a lot of momentum. There was about 5 and half minutes left in the 3rd quarter when UND punted on 4-and-1 from the Pitt St. 41 yard line. The score was 14-13 at that time.

[LennonIsTheMan]

I'll have to agree here guys.  I've been screaming at GVSU all year for settling for Field Goals when they could have Manned up and gotten that extra yard or so they would have needed.  And I'm not just talking about when we played UND.  We had about 3 FG's that we should have gone for it instead against lowly Wayne State U. (Detroit).  Not going for it in the past when you know you can get it can come back to bite you later on when the distance of a yard determinds if you get to play next week or not.  Weither its a 4 and 1 on the 20 or on the 50, you're down by a score or two and the clock is almost out, you gotta go for it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ok, bigmrg, you of all people should be thinking the opposite. Against UND, you had at least 2 chances to kick the FG and instead went for it on 4th down, not getting either of them. Let's say you only make one of them. 19-18 makes it a FG to win instead of going for a TD being down by 4. If you make them both, then its 21-19 in your favor, but then who knows what UND does after that.

The sicatoka is exactly right, everybody would have been up in arms if UND had went for it and not gotten it. Gotta punt the ball. That's coach Lennon's style. I don't see why everyone is so surprised that he didnt go for it. Rooker, you are just wrong, that's all. Don't worry, I won't hold it against you.

[UND92,96]

The sicatoka is exactly right, everybody would have been up in arms if UND had went for it and not gotten it.

[Cratter]

I was shouting at my tv hoping he'd go for it. Pitt St defense not the best, their offense one of the best. Everyone knew the Sioux would have to put a lot of points on the board to win. Why not throw a deep ball in that situation and if they pick it off so be it, instead we got a twenty yard punt.

It would have been different if it was within field goal range, then I'd take the points. It would also be different if the Sioux were in their own territory.

[LennonIsTheMan]

The interesting thing is that once in awhile, Lennon throws caution to the wind and does something totally against his conservative nature. The primary example was going for 2 and the win at SDSU in 2003. I believe he's also on record as saying he would have done the same thing in the 2003 title game had UND managed to put one in the endzone at the end of the game. I wouldn't have gone for it in this situation against a team like Grand Valley who everybody knew had an outstanding defense, but against Pitt St., I felt that the UND o-line had a distinct advantage over their d-line.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I guess we agree to disagree then.

[BigGame]

I don't think it is a bad call either way. If we pin Pitt at the 1 yard line and stuff um, everybody thinks it's a great call. I really don't think it was wrong to punt, and I would have been fine with it if he made the choice to go for it.

[The Sicatoka]

Why not throw a deep ball in that situation and if they pick it off so be it, ...

That's one I hadn't considered. Their middle was open. Hang it up late down the middle and see what happens.

[Northcountry]

This is not a criticism because I believe that from the top down the Sioux have one hell of a great coaching staff - Buuuuut I was hoping that very early we would attempt to stretch the field and take a shot or two deep, especially when we could do it on our terms, not out of necessity. Again, not a criticism because I am not at practice every day, don't do the film study, don't know the relative speed of receiver/dbacks, and have no input on game plans. It is great to be a fan and be able to speculate on woulda, coulda, shoulda - helps get a guy through the Winter until Spring ball when we can start anticipating.

[all4Sioux]

The interesting thing is that once in awhile, Lennon throws caution to the wind and does something totally against his conservative nature. The primary example was going for 2 and the win at SDSU in 2003. I believe he's also on record as saying he would have done the same thing in the 2003 title game had UND managed to put one in the endzone at the end of the game. I wouldn't have gone for it in this situation against a team like Grand Valley who everybody knew had an outstanding defense, but against Pitt St., I felt that the UND o-line had a distinct advantage over their d-line.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[bigmrg74]

[iramurphy]

The interesting thing is that once in awhile, Lennon throws caution to the wind and does something totally against his conservative nature. The primary example was going for 2 and the win at SDSU in 2003. I believe he's also on record as saying he would have done the same thing in the 2003 title game had UND managed to put one in the endzone at the end of the game. I wouldn't have gone for it in this situation against a team like Grand Valley who everybody knew had an outstanding defense, but against Pitt St., I felt that the UND o-line had a distinct advantage over their d-line.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You are exactly right. I usually agree with Lennon and would not trade him for any other head coach. But....This was the time to go for it and try to take control, on the road, offense moving the ball but needing pts, blockers doing a great job, they had not stopped a straight ahead run for no gain. If you were at the game you saw and felt the difference after the punt. I know there are "fans" that would complain if we didn't get the first down, I don't think they were there. Show our offense, especially the line and Rbs in this case, the same confidence we show the defense. Don't try to tell me they don't deserve it.

Maybe someone brought this up and I missed it. In the third quarter we had the ball 2nd and 4 around the Pit 25 yard line with the clock running. We were going into the wind, I think we could have let the clock run out and gotten the wind for the next two plays and the punt, if needed. We passed incomplete twice and then had to punt with .9 sec left in the quarter. Why run even one play into the wind when you don't have to?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[/quote

I thought I was finished for the year and probably should be but I am at work waiting for others so here it goes.

Couple of thoughts. Turning point may have been in the first half when we were up 7-0 and stopped them on third down. They flagged our dback for phantom headshot (or whatever) and they get the first down and then go in to score. (I am not bitching about the call as much as I think it was a turning point). If they punt there I think it is a very different game. I have not been a Belmore fan but he was OK. Fumble on 25 hurt and missing the wide open TD pass then settling for a field goal hurt but other than that he was OK.

Dale's call wasn't wrong because it is what he usually does and he seems to know what he is doing. I do agree with the Rook though in that I think we need to have an offensive philosophy that we believe no one can stop us for a yard when we need one and we run it right up the old "poop shoot" for a first down. Our linemen are big and talented enough. Wistoff is a hell of a fullback. Someone should have called timeout and told Dale they wanted to go for it. Players used to say give me the ball or run it up my butt and we will open a hole and then make it happen. If I am the Off. Coordinator I would make that my mission to convince Dale and the rest of the staff that we can do that then put the kids in a position to make it happen.

UND92, 96 did a nice summary of who is coming back. I hope they start the three QB's even this spring and let the best kid work his way to the top. I still think Manke is the guy who will win. I also hope they bite the bullet and offer the Mertens kid a full ride. It may be too late though. He is the real deal according to former UND and present area high school coaches. The Gophers should also be on him.

Lastly, if you have good kids in your communities make sure you send their names and info to Dale and for that matter the coaches in other sports.. They likely know about them but you never know. Offer to take the coaches out to lunch when they are on the recruiting trails or have them over for a homecooked meal if they get stuck overnight in your town. I think you would have fun and many of the coaches enjoy meeting Sioux fans. Merry Chritmas.

[BigGame]

That's one I hadn't considered. Their middle was open. Hang it up late down the middle and see what happens.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The main problem with that is a smart DB will just knock the ball down instead of going for the pick.

[The Sicatoka]

... a smart DB ...

We're talking about their secondary.

[PCM]

Lennon once said on the Fighting Sioux Coaches' show that one of the advantages of playing conservatively is that nobody expects it when you try something different. This was in response to a question about the fake field goal against North Alabama in the playoffs last year that went for a TD.

Rather than going for it on fourth down against Pitt State, perhaps it would have been a good time for a fake punt.

[U2Bad1]

Lennon once said on the Fighting Sioux Coaches' show that one of the advantages of playing conservatively is that nobody expects it when you try something different. This was in response to a question about the fake field goal against North Alabama in the playoffs last year that went for a TD.

Rather than going for it on fourth down against Pitt State, perhaps it would have been a good time for a fake punt.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Like the Vikings "fake punt" last Sunday?

[PCM]

Like the Vikings "fake punt" last Sunday?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I didn't see it. And I wasn't trying to second-guess Lennon because at the time the Sioux punted, I don't remember thinking that they should have gone for it. Only in retrospect does going for it on fourth down look like a smart move.

My primary intention was to point out that when the Sioux have run fakes, they've generally been successful because of Lennon's normally conservative style. If I were in the coach's shoes, I probably would have considered a fake punt before I lined up to run a play.