mksioux Posted November 19, 2007 Share Posted November 19, 2007 Uh, I recall a 20-2 game and WSU with the ball close to making it a 20-9 game at half.<shrugs> Chappel still should not have played after his injury in the first half. There was no way Winona was winning that game. The bottom line is that UND did not need Chappel to beat Winona State, so there was no reason to risk aggrevating his injury...and quite possibly the season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiouxMeNow Posted November 19, 2007 Share Posted November 19, 2007 <shrugs> Chappel still should not have played after his injury in the first half. There was no way Winona was winning that game. The bottom line is that UND did not need Chappel to beat Winona State, so there was no reason to risk aggrevating his injury...and quite possibly the season. Is this the start of the official FIRE LENNON thread? What's done is done...second guessing doesn't do anyone any good at this point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mksioux Posted November 19, 2007 Share Posted November 19, 2007 Is this the start of the official FIRE LENNON thread? What's done is done...second guessing doesn't do anyone any good at this point. You're right. No fan should ever second guess coaches on message boards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sioux27 Posted November 19, 2007 Share Posted November 19, 2007 You're right. No fan should ever second guess coaches on message boards. I am glad that I didn't have to say it and that you did. Finally, I think you get it. IN DALE WE TRUST! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
airmail Posted November 19, 2007 Share Posted November 19, 2007 Massive post count instant credibility aside, I agree with Sicatoka. The game wasn't "in hand" at half time. I'll concede that we probably could have and would have won had Chapel been pulled, but Winona or not... this is the playoffs. Strange things can and do happen, and you don't leave room for another team's lucky break to end your season. It's easy for us to say that he did the wrong thing by leaving him in, now that we know the outcome. A coach in the middle of the game with the season on the line doesn't have that luxury. I agree with SiouxMD also. This might be a time where we see an unsung hero step up big. You can't replace a Ryan Chapel, but all hope is not lost. We have a good coach who will come up with a game plan that will give us a chance to win. That isn't a question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted November 19, 2007 Share Posted November 19, 2007 I saw both Chappell and Murray leave the field. Chappell didn't look good at all. Murray was favoring pretty heavily even after the ice (at the end of the game). And Brady has had a broken hand(?) keeping him out. And being down to just Sorbo is a problem that hasn't been brought up. So are we looking at a 1-2 punch of Battle and Dungy at the RB position this week? Or are we going to "Jedi mind trick" Nicholas to "be the Dressler" and have Weston give us one more glimpse of that star back that used to be at Bismarck High? Now to the truly outlandish ..... Too bad the "playoff rule" we pondered in hockey doesn't apply here: If you beat a team in the playoffs you get to add one guy from their roster to yours for the rest of the playoff run: Alex Wiese. Then again, Tyler Roehl could pick this week to finally wise up, transfer, and get some playoff time. :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted November 19, 2007 Share Posted November 19, 2007 Massive post count instant credibility aside, ... It's not the size, it's what you do with it. ... I agree with Sicatoka. That's where you blew all credibility. The game wasn't "in hand" at half time. As Lennon said on the Sunday night show, Winona came back 21 points on us, in The Al, in 2003. It tooks some serious heroics to pull that one out of the fire. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted November 19, 2007 Share Posted November 19, 2007 That's where you blew all credibility. I agree with Sicatoka, too. Chappell was obviously banged up in the USD game. It could be argued that he shouldn't have played at all against Winona IF you assume the game was in the bag. This time of year, it's never safe to make such assumptions, even with a 20-2 halftime lead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teamsioux Posted November 19, 2007 Share Posted November 19, 2007 Does anyone know if it is possible for Brady to play this weekend or is he done for the year? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UND92,96 Posted November 19, 2007 Share Posted November 19, 2007 I saw both Chappell and Murray leave the field. Chappell didn't look good at all. Murray was favoring pretty heavily even after the ice (at the end of the game). And Brady has had a broken hand(?) keeping him out. And being down to just Sorbo is a problem that hasn't been brought up. So are we looking at a 1-2 punch of Battle and Dungy at the RB position this week? Or are we going to "Jedi mind trick" Nicholas to "be the Dressler" and have Weston give us one more glimpse of that star back that used to be at Bismarck High? If Murray can't go, I think we'll see Dressler motioning in and out of the backfield even more than usual. Honestly, until the emergence of Chappell last year, I felt he was the best running back in the program for a couple of years. Not that he's going to get 20 carries or anything, but at least the threat of a big run will be there every time he lines up in the backfield. Also, let's keep in mind that last year UND had very little success running the ball against Grand Valley even with a healthy Chappell. To beat them, I think you have to do it through the air for the most part. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oxbow6 Posted November 19, 2007 Share Posted November 19, 2007 I agree with Sicatoka, too. Chappell was obviously banged up in the USD game. It could be argued that he shouldn't have played at all against Winona IF you assume the game was in the bag. This time of year, it's never safe to make such assumptions, even with a 20-2 halftime lead. Obviously the coaching staff felt Chappel was well enough to play against WSU even though he was alittle banged up after the USD game. To say it was "never safe to make such assumptions" about the outcome of the WSU game is questionable at best (like Chappel will be come Sat.). If you know he is somewhat banged up going into the WSU game and if you know he is more dinged up before halftime and if you know Murray is not going to return in the second half due to a serious injury and if you have any faith in your defense, Chappel doesn't play in the 2nd half. You can make the case, as some have done about UNO a couple of years coming back, that at 20-2 the game wasn't a lock, but in all sporting events scenerios play out that dictate decisions. As a sports fan and nothing more than that, my opinion is that they could have won the game playing Battle the 2nd half without risking Chappel for GVSU. At least half of my opinion was right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiouxMD Posted November 19, 2007 Share Posted November 19, 2007 Did anyone watch the "Fighting Sioux Football Show" last night? Any update on the injury situation? I would watch it online but streaming video is blocked at work...I need a new job. Anyone? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UND92,96 Posted November 19, 2007 Share Posted November 19, 2007 Did anyone watch the "Fighting Sioux Football Show" last night? Any update on the injury situation? I would watch it online but streaming video is blocked at work...I need a new job. Anyone? Lennon pretty much said it was too early to make any judgments on the severity of the injuries. Just like in 2003 when Lueck's status never was disclosed prior to the national championship game, I wouldn't expect to hear anything definitive this time around, either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimdahl Posted November 19, 2007 Share Posted November 19, 2007 Haven't seen this linked yet in this thread: Chappell status will remain mystery Bakken's view is: Maybe he will, maybe he won't. But one thing is for certain: We will receive no information about it even if Chappell is running 40 yards in 4.1 seconds or if his leg is amputated. It will be a CIA-like security around Sioux football this week. They don't want Grand Valley to know his status because it will greatly effect the Lakers' game-planning. UND will lose much of its balance without their record-setting tailback. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted November 19, 2007 Share Posted November 19, 2007 Obviously the coaching staff felt Chappel was well enough to play against WSU even though he was alittle banged up after the USD game. Obviously. But if keeping Chappell healthy for GVSU was of utmost importance, why not sit him and play Murray against WSU? Why risk additional injury to Chappell at all? Perhaps Lennon was concerned about the message such a move would have sent to the team. I could see sitting Chappell for the second half if Murray was healthy or if Brady was available. But that wasn't the case. With the game still on the line, you need your best players to go out an make plays. And the game had not been decided at that point. Yes, UND's defense was playing well, but if you listened to what Lennon said leading up to the WSU game, he was very concerned about the Warriors' offense. Knowing that all it would take was a couple of big plays to get WSU back into the game and knowing that UND's defense has been giving up big plays routinely, my guess is that Lennon felt the Sioux needed to keep putting points on the board. As a sports fan and nothing more than that, my opinion is that they could have won the game playing Battle the 2nd half without risking Chappel for GVSU. At least half of my opinion was right. But you see, using 20/20 hindsight I can say that Lennon was wrong to have played Chappel at all because the Sioux defense played great and all UND needed to win the game was one field goal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted November 19, 2007 Share Posted November 19, 2007 With the game still on the line, you need your best players to go out an make plays. And thus explaineth why #18 had the ball going to the pylon to make it 27-2. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiouxMD Posted November 19, 2007 Share Posted November 19, 2007 And thus explaineth why #18 had the ball going to the pylon to make it 27-2. He's fast. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sioux27 Posted November 19, 2007 Share Posted November 19, 2007 Any word on Chappell yet? There is a claim by "one of our own" on D2football.com that he knows something about his status. Considering the source I have my doubts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UND92,96 Posted November 19, 2007 Share Posted November 19, 2007 I alluded to this earlier, and acknowledging that it's unlikely, does anybody think any consideration at all is being given to lifting the red-shirt off Catlin Solum? Under normal circumstances, I'd say definitely no. However, this is not a normal situation with no playoff possibilities until 2012--after the current batch of red-shirts will presumably be done. It makes for a somewhat interesting decision (if you were convinced that neither Chappell nor Murray will be ready to play by Saturday). He's not Chappell, but he is very good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
riders06 Posted November 19, 2007 Share Posted November 19, 2007 I alluded to this earlier, and acknowledging that it's unlikely, does anybody think any consideration at all is being given to lifting the red-shirt off Catlin Solum? Under normal circumstances, I'd say definitely no. However, this is not a normal situation with no playoff possibilities until 2012--after the current batch of red-shirts will presumably be done. It makes for a somewhat interesting decision (if you were convinced that neither Chappell nor Murray will be ready to play by Saturday). He's not Chappell, but he is very good. I saw Catlin Solum at the game on Saturday with a brace on his leg. I don't think he would be able to play even without a red shirt already. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UND92,96 Posted November 19, 2007 Share Posted November 19, 2007 I saw Catlin Solum at the game on Saturday with a brace on his leg. I don't think he would be able to play even without a red shirt already. So much for that bright idea. If he's injured, it must have just happened this week as he was the offensive scout player of the week. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigGame Posted November 19, 2007 Share Posted November 19, 2007 If Murray can't go, I think we'll see Dressler motioning in and out of the backfield even more than usual. Honestly, until the emergence of Chappell last year, I felt he was the best running back in the program for a couple of years. Not that he's going to get 20 carries or anything, but at least the threat of a big run will be there every time he lines up in the backfield. Also, let's keep in mind that last year UND had very little success running the ball against Grand Valley even with a healthy Chappell. To beat them, I think you have to do it through the air for the most part. GV graduated some good player from last years front seven, but I think the secondary remained largely intact. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UND92,96 Posted November 19, 2007 Share Posted November 19, 2007 GV graduated some good player from last years front seven, but I think the secondary remained largely intact. I just looked at their season stats, and somewhat surprisingly, they're giving up 157 yards rushing per game, compared to just 132 yards passing. Of course, it's probably tough to know how much those numbers really mean given the relatively weak competition they've played this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oxbow6 Posted November 19, 2007 Share Posted November 19, 2007 I just looked at their season stats, and somewhat surprisingly, they're giving up 157 yards rushing per game, compared to just 132 yards passing. Of course, it's probably tough to know how much those numbers really mean given the relatively weak competition they've played this year. Then we should be set to run it down their throat with Battle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigGame Posted November 19, 2007 Share Posted November 19, 2007 Then we should be set to run it down their throat with Battle I think a lot the QB draws and option are in order. Let Freund carry the load. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.