UND @ UNI 10/21/2023

[Hambone]

Seems we are a top 10 team at home, but complete dog crap on the road.    Would love to win out, but that means beating a solid USD team on the road.

[UND-FB-FAN]

3 minutes ago, Hambone said:

Seems we are a top 10 team at home, but complete dog crap on the road.    Would love to win out, but that means beating a solid USD team on the road.

Unfortunately not likely with how this program has been built (and led).

[fightingsioux4life]

16 minutes ago, HoopsFan03 said:

So then what is the biggest issue? We all know coaching is a big issue. But the players have to play. What is the most important position in football? The quarterback position. Has our QB play not been extremely shaky? Especially in big games? Like on the road?

I guess I'm just trying to figure out why Tommy keeps getting a pass, when he is playing the most important position on the field and goes MIA in any big game or big moment. Something just isn't adding up to me.

The biggest issues are mental. Getting over the NDSU hump was a huge accomplishment mentally. Now this program has to get over the hump on playing well on the road. And following up a big win with a solid performance the next weekend. Those problems are difficult to pin down and fix.

I am not opposed to giving Feeney a look at starting QB, but I don't know if that would fix the problems I outlined above.

[Mama Sue]

2 hours ago, geaux_sioux said:

Saban has a set of clangers though. There’s a reason he’s built championship squads at multiple schools. Still salty he left LSU.

Like my grandson says….MAN UP

Or the cardiologist I worked for…Grow a pair

[jdub27]

4 hours ago, gundy1124 said:

Fishing for a game the UND offense and Tommy were in a funk, down 10+ in the 2nd half, then caught fire and won based on Tommy's performance.  I just don't recall that scenario but as you mention, UND vrs YSU 2 years.  Otis broke a 43-yard run.

Last year NAU was just an effort by Bo, very fortunate in that one!!  I was at that game and don't think that fits.

Tommy's comeback record/scenarios are pretty shaky.

I mean, he's the one at the line, checking into plays/making the decisions on the RPO, handing it off or throwing to WR's.

Not what you were insinuating but does a QB without the experience he has make the right decision or even get that latitude? Not in most systems.

[geaux_sioux]

1 minute ago, jdub27 said:

I mean, he's the one at the line, checking into plays/making the decisions on the RPO, handing it off or throwing to WR's.

Not what you were insinuating but does a QB without the experience he has make the right decision or even get that latitude? Not in most systems.

The truth is we don’t know what we have in Feeney until he has the opportunity to sink or swim. Some guys are just gamers.

[CMSioux]

As we know the most popular player on a football team is the backup quarterback and the most knowledgeable coach is the one in the lazy boy on the Internet. 

[Kab]

1 minute ago, CMSioux said:

As we know the most popular player on a football team is the backup quarterback and the most knowledgeable coach is the one in the lazy boy on the Internet. 

When things aren’t going right make changes

we really know nothing about Feeney and won’t until he gets some serious game time,

[gundy1124]

1 hour ago, jdub27 said:

I mean, he's the one at the line, checking into plays/making the decisions on the RPO, handing it off or throwing to WR's.

Not what you were insinuating but does a QB without the experience he has make the right decision or even get that latitude? Not in most systems.

I think that's fair, checking into the right plays, reading RPOs, but......isn't that game management?  I am wanting more, and believe we need more, from Tommy or next QB up.  If the "more" hasn't come yet, will it??  Do we ride 7-4, 6-5 into next season and rinse, repeat??  What's the leash and trigger on the QB position at UND?  This is ultimately what folks(experts ) are asking.

[jdub27]

5 hours ago, geaux_sioux said:

The truth is we don’t know what we have in Feeney until he has the opportunity to sink or swim. Some guys are just gamers.

Agreed, we don't.

Also, going to assume the coaches have a more educated guess. It's literally their jobs on the line. They care more about wins and loses than the rest of us, particularly the ones that played here or have other ties. 

7-4 is the current minimum bar this season (barring an epic meltdown) with 8-3 in play if they can win of those games that had mostly eluded them looming in Vermilion. Knowing that, I have a hard time thinking a QB change is the right play. That being said, there should've a realistic chance to see some backup play from 2-3 qb's the next two weeks. Maybe something pops? 

[geaux_sioux]

54 minutes ago, jdub27 said:

Agreed, we don't.

Also, going to assume the coaches have a more educated guess. It's literally their jobs on the line. They care more about wins and loses than the rest of us, particularly the ones that played here or have other ties. 

7-4 is the current minimum bar this season (barring an epic meltdown) with 8-3 in play if they can win of those games that had mostly eluded them looming in Vermilion. Knowing that, I have a hard time thinking a QB change is the right play. That being said, there should've a realistic chance to see some backup play from 2-3 qb's the next two weeks. Maybe something pops? 

They do but sometimes it just doesn’t show in practice which makes it hard on the coaches. Hell, Tom Brady’s first college pass was a pick 6. Also with their jobs on the line I’d bet a lot of coaches are weighing the down sides with extra weight to be conservative. That makes their threshold for yanking a qb totally different than a fans regardless of how knowledgeable that fan is or not.

[Sioux94]

1 hour ago, jdub27 said:

Agreed, we don't.

Also, going to assume the coaches have a more educated guess. It's literally their jobs on the line. They care more about wins and loses than the rest of us, particularly the ones that played here or have other ties. 

7-4 is the current minimum bar this season (barring an epic meltdown) with 8-3 in play if they can win of those games that had mostly eluded them looming in Vermilion. Knowing that, I have a hard time thinking a QB change is the right play. That being said, there should've a realistic chance to see some backup play from 2-3 qb's the next two weeks. Maybe something pops? 

All I know is Feeney could have at a minimum put up the same amount of points as Schuster did in the second half.....ZERO. I can see still starting Schuster coming out of second half to see if could get something going, but we did nothing. Seems like to add a spark they could have put Feeney in at least for the 4th or something. Even if they did put in Feeney to start the 4th it wouldn't mean that he is the new starter going forward. Lost opportunity to see what Feeney could do in Live action in my opinion. 

[UND-FB-FAN]

11 hours ago, jdub27 said:

Agreed, we don't.

Also, going to assume the coaches have a more educated guess. It's literally their jobs on the line. They care more about wins and loses than the rest of us, particularly the ones that played here or have other ties. 

7-4 is the current minimum bar this season (barring an epic meltdown) with 8-3 in play if they can win of those games that had mostly eluded them looming in Vermilion. Knowing that, I have a hard time thinking a QB change is the right play. That being said, there should've a realistic chance to see some backup play from 2-3 qb's the next two weeks. Maybe something pops? 

Your assumptions aren’t necessarily correct, but we can all have our own opinions. Some on here are current or former coaches (albeit high school) or choose to not coach for several reasons but definitely have the ability to coach. Some on here really really care. It’s important to hear all sides and not just assume. That may in fact be the issue with this current staff - too closed-minded. 

Nevertheless, we’ve been at the “show me” stage for a while now with this program. I can’t understand how perennially bring 7-4 is okay with some, especially when you look at the FB budget, the continual opportunities blundered to be better than that, etc. The culture is currently damaged into accepting mediocrity (7-4 or 5-6 every season).  Beating NDSU once in the past six attempts was nice, but this team is so fragile-minded on the road, that it is clear the staff is not doing their job. A signifiant part of football is the mental aspect, and the players are not motivated or confident on the road. That falls on the staff (namely Bubba). He admitted it. Their jobs should be on the line, but I doubt Chaves has the vision to follow through. 

[jdub27]

9 hours ago, Sioux94 said:

All I know is Feeney could have at a minimum put up the same amount of points as Schuster did in the second half.....ZERO. I can see still starting Schuster coming out of second half to see if could get something going, but we did nothing. Seems like to add a spark they could have put Feeney in at least for the 4th or something. Even if they did put in Feeney to start the 4th it wouldn't mean that he is the new starter going forward. Lost opportunity to see what Feeney could do in Live action in my opinion. 

No disagreement from me. They should have put him in earlier than they did.

 

11 minutes ago, UND-FB-FAN said:

Nevertheless, we’ve been at the “show me” stage for a while now with this program. I can’t understand how perennially bring 7-4 is okay with some, especially when you look at the FB budget, the continual opportunities blundered to be better than that, etc. The culture is currently damaged into accepting mediocrity (7-4 or 5-6 every season).  Beating NDSU once in the past six attempts was nice, but this team is so fragile-minded on the road, that it is clear the staff is not doing their job. A signifiant part of football is the mental aspect, and the players are not motivated or confident on the road. That falls on the staff (namely Bubba). He admitted it. Their jobs should be on the line, but I doubt Chaves has the vision to follow through. 

You're arguing against comments no one has made. Find me the people who are perennially OK with 7-4 or 5-6 every season. They don't exist except in your made up arguments.

Also, 2 weeks ago one of your biggest issues with the staff was that they couldn't win a big game (i.e. NDSU). Now that they did it, it's just a blip on the radar. No one is pretending that is the end goal, but it was a big step for the program and checked one of the boxes on your list.

"Jobs on the line" is a relative term. If AD's had the knee jerk reaction of the average message board poster, they would be so far in debt from buyouts and have no one willing to apply for the job.

[UND-FB-FAN]

9 minutes ago, jdub27 said:

No disagreement from me. They should have put him in earlier than they did.

 

You're arguing against comments no one has made. Find me the people who are perennially OK with 7-4 or 5-6 every season. They don't exist except in your made up arguments.

Also, 2 weeks ago one of your biggest issues with the staff was that they couldn't win a big game (i.e. NDSU). Now that they did it, it's just a blip on the radar. No one is pretending that is the end goal, but it was a big step for the program and checked one of the boxes on your list.

"Jobs on the line" is a relative term. If AD's had the knee jerk reaction of the average message board poster, they would be so far in debt from buyouts and have no one willing to apply for the job.

I think the NDSU win followed by the absolute embarrassment at Northern Iowa will be a 2-game stretch brought up as a point of debate for months, if not years. UND beat NDSU (still only 1 time out of 6 attempts in DI era) but then followed it up with absolute sh*t.
 

Is that overall situation (2-game stretch) interpreted as net positive or net negative? 

The debate will live on. Given the overall body of underwhelming work, I interpret it as net bad (net negative). As such, given the past few years are being considered, making a necessary strategic staffing move wouldn’t be “knee jerk”, as suggested by your “made up argument”. Extending staff after a 5-6 season isn’t implicitly being okay with those records? Give me a break. 

[jdub27]

2 minutes ago, UND-FB-FAN said:

I think the NDSU win followed by the absolute embarrassment at Northern Iowa will be a 2-game stretch brought up as a point of debate for months, if not years. UND beat NDSU (still only 1 time out of 6 attempts in DI era) but then followed it up with absolute sh*t.
 

Is that overall situation (2-game stretch) interpreted as net positive or net negative? 

The debate will live on. Given the overall body of underwhelming work, I interpret it as net bad (net negative).

Sad that you are already lining up your talking points for the offseason.
The fact that you think that is something that needs to be debated for months, let alone years, is kind of mind-boggling.

[UND-FB-FAN]

2 minutes ago, jdub27 said:

Sad that you are already lining up your talking points for the offseason.
The fact that you think that is something that needs to be debated for months, let alone years, is kind of mind-boggling.

It isn’t mind-boggling. It’s being honest with the fact that necessary actions at UND are routinely deferred for months, sometimes years. 
And it’s not sad that I’m highlighting the truth, what is sad is the lack of consistency that this program demonstrates, and good performances always guaranteed to be followed by abysmal ones. 

[UND1983]

The City of Grand Forks and the fans were just happy to finally get that win over NDSU.  Losing to UNI doesn't diminish it at all to the general crowd, only the experts.  

[UND-FB-FAN]

3 minutes ago, UND1983 said:

The City of Grand Forks and the fans were just happy to finally get that win over NDSU.  Losing to UNI doesn't diminish it at all to the general crowd, only the experts.  

You’re not wrong. Will Bill Chaves be in support of the general crowd or the experts? Likely the general crowd, because it’s cheaper. 
 

In essence, the final four games of the season could be canceled. This season will already be considered a success, even if team went 4-7. 

[jdub27]

47 minutes ago, UND-FB-FAN said:

You’re not wrong. Will Bill Chaves be in support of the general crowd or the experts? Likely the general crowd, because it’s cheaper. 
 

In essence, the final four games of the season could be canceled. This season will already be considered a success, even if team went 4-7. 

Continuing to argue against things no one actually believes.....

[wheelsup]

10 hours ago, Sioux94 said:

All I know is Feeney could have at a minimum put up the same amount of points as Schuster did in the second half.....ZERO. I can see still starting Schuster coming out of second half to see if could get something going, but we did nothing. Seems like to add a spark they could have put Feeney in at least for the 4th or something. Even if they did put in Feeney to start the 4th it wouldn't mean that he is the new starter going forward. Lost opportunity to see what Feeney could do in Live action in my opinion. 

I know its an impossible question but this is where it would really interesting to understand Danny's mindset (By the way i continue to believe Danny is responsible for continuing to roll Tommy out there not Bubba). 

I totally understand the idea that we made some half time adjustments lets give Tommy the 1st series out of halftime to see if it worked.. but.. 3 and out.. UNI touchdown.. 3 and out.  These 6 plays for a total of -2 yd, included 2 sacks.. 1 short run basically a sack.. 1 incomplete pass, 1 short completion.  1 completion for 12 yds.  Obviously all of this is not 100% on Tommy (Line didnt have its best day)

Seems like there was plenty of data to say.. Hey Tommy.. not your day bud.. we are going give the lefty a chance and see if there is a team spark.  Instead 3 more series to Tommy and then dumping Feeney in when there are about 90 seconds remaining.  Granted in those 90 insignificant seconds the ball was snapped over his head and he threw two short passes when he needed 25 yds.