Minnesota Football: Win over MTSU... What we thought we knew, What we found out
by JDMill on Sep 3, 2010 10:10 AM CDT
in Gopher Football
Email
PrintWelcome back to a world where you wake up the day after a Gopher game and feel slightly empty that it's past... but immediately get excited for next week.
This was a good win over what is considered to be a very solid MTSU Blue Raiders squad. This game had its ups and downs, but in the end it's hard to argue with the fact that the Gophers did what they planned to do and, outside of a glitch called the 2nd quarter that I'd prefer to forget ever happened, they pretty well dominated this football game.
After the jump we'll take a look at what we thought we knew coming into the MTSU tilt, and what we now know with the game having been played.
What we thought we knew:
We knew that the Gophers were talking about being committed to the run, but after having said the same thing last year, we weren't ready to believe it until we saw it.
What we found out:
We saw it. Boy, did we see it! 11 runs for 79 yards and a TD on the opening drive. I loved the "Hey, Blue Raiders, we're going to run... try to stop us" mentality of the play calling. Reminded me of the Michigan game at the Metrodome in 2006 when the Wolverines sent Mike Hart off-tackle left 6 of the first 8 plays of the game in what amounted to Michigan exerting its will on the Gophers.
We found out that the Gophers could control the line of scrimmage, run the ball in short yardage situations, and had a glimpse of the home-run capability of Bennett. Now look, I realize MTSU isn't USC or Ohio State and maybe isn't even on par with the Northwesterns & Michigan States of the Big Ten Conference. But you cannot argue with the production of the running game.
66 rushing attempts out of 84 total plays
281 rushing yards
4.2 yards/carry
Over 45 minutes time of possession
What we thought we knew:
We thought we had a pretty talented defense, but we were a little nervous about how that talent was going to come together.
What we found out:
I am still a little nervous about how that talent is going to come together. And when I say "I," I mean "we." As in "we are all a little nervous," as in, "if you aren't nervous then you weren't watching the same game that I did.
I was specifically highly disappointed in our lack of pass rush. We appeared to have almost no ability to get to Kilgore which made his life a lot easier. When Because Kilgore had time to throw he was able to find seems in our inexperienced secondary.
That defensive line might be an issue because when they weren't putting pressure on Kilgore, they were allowing the Blue Raiders to average 6.6 yards/carry. Without question some of that falls on the linebackers (good heavens, what was wrong with Tinsley... he forgot how to tackle for a night), but no matter how you slice it the holes that the MTSU RB's were running through were often massive.
What we thought we knew:
We thought Adam Weber would be more comfortable, and therefore more productive, in Jeff Horton's simplified offensive scheme.
What we found out:
We found out that we're going to need some more time to determine this. Weber looked shaky early in the game and seemed uncomfortable. But he began to settle down and while the running game was carrying the bulk of the load, the passing game added to the balance of the offense and didn't kill drives, something that we saw a lot of last year. I think that if we're judging Weber's performance based on how it fit within the larger game plan, we couldn't have asked for a better game from Weber.
GN and I got into a quick debate during the live game thread about Weber's accuracy. While I reserve the right to complain about specific throws because I continue to maintain that we should be able to expect better accuracy from a 4 year starter, I will admit that Weber had an efficient game and did a good job of complimenting the game plan that was clearly intended to be run heavy from the beginning.
What we thought we knew:
We thought Duane Bennett would be back at full speed and be a much more complete back after a difficult 2009 in which he was still slowed by 2008's knee injury.
What we found out:
Sweet sassy-molassy Duane Bennett is BACK!!! Remember how excited we were about this guy in '08 before his injury in the Bowling Green game? Take that amount of excitement and multiply it by 5. Bennett looks quick, fast, shifty, confident, sure footed, and, maybe best of all, violent. The young man just refused to go down all night long. He was fighting for every inch that he possibly could. Now that he has his full capacities Bennett appears to be ready to take over the "feature back" duties and run over, around, and through defenders on his way to doing so.
All things considered, outside of a 7 minute stretch at the end of the 2nd quarter, this was a very dominating performance by the Gophers and clearly there has been some improvement in the running game that we can be excited about.
88 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
JD
don’t be too disappointed in the pass rush. The guys were getting a good push. It is the nature of that spread that makes it difficult to apply pressure especially in the hands of a good QB. Kilgore (sp?) is a natural QB as opposed to Weber. He had very good footwork in the backfield and a great quick release. I think we will hear about that MTSU QB down the road—-he really impressed me. I’m not bashing Weber—-he brought home a win on the road and you gotta like it.
Okay, I will do it
If you don’t want to bash Weber, I will gladly do it. I cannot believe this kid is actually a four year starter. There was one play that seem to epitomize how much lack of progress he has made in four years. A blitzer came up the middle and, not trusting that Bennett will make the block, Weber panics and stumbles. Bennett did make a crushing block and Weber would have had plenty of time to look downfield and get the pass off. Instead he got himself sacked. That play just spelled freshman. How can you not know your own blocking scheme and how can you not have the guts to stand tall in the pocket even when pressure is coming? Kilgore’s footwork in moving around the pocket put Weber to shame. A lightly recruited JC transfer looked better than a guy who is suppose to be a four year starter in the Big Ten.
I just watched that play this morning before work
Bennett did hit the guy and Weber did stumble. But after that initial hit Bennettt’s guy was in Weber’s face and both ends collapsed the pocket. If his first read was open, he would have had time to throw it but if that guy was covered he didn’t have time for anything else.
If you are going to rail him for that play are you going to give him credit for the time a blitz came through untouched, AW spun away from it then hit Gray for a 20+ gain?
what you say here can, and will, be used against you The Daily Gopher
by GopherNation on Sep 3, 2010 11:16 AM CDT up reply actions
+10
"If we got to we're going to crawl in this locker room. And on our back is going to be an axe..."
+1
Maroon and Gold Headquarters: The Daily Gopher
by PJS on Sep 3, 2010 3:55 PM CDT up reply actions
that was a +1 for garrick
Maroon and Gold Headquarters: The Daily Gopher
by PJS on Sep 3, 2010 3:55 PM CDT up reply actions
I'm unsure of that particular play
…but there is no debating that Weber was pretty erratic all night long. He doesn’t look poised at all.
As far as positional outlooks go, both QB play and offensive line play are areas of weakness. I could see a scenario where Weber improves over the MTSU performance, but I’m not sure the offensive line’s pass protection is ever going to be more than sub-par.
Bennett was outstanding wasn't he?
the OL gave him some holes but he got a lot of important yards on his own.
what you say here can, and will, be used against you The Daily Gopher
GN
Bennett looked like the young Emmitt Smith I saw as a freshman. Wish he had another speed gear, but hey, he did look great. Kirkwood in my mind moves up to #2 RB.
His name is definitely Kirkland… just ask the rapping color analyst.
"We're talking about unchecked aggression here, Dude."
Off Tackle Empire
The Daily Gopher
does he shop at Costco?
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Sep 3, 2010 3:06 PM CDT up reply actions
Garrick
Weber has serious limitations as a QB—-no doubt about it. But the guy is our QB and brought home a win. He did not hurt the team with turnovers, did a good job of directing traffic, and finally has an OC that understands what he can and cannot do. I do hope Horton utilizes Gray in the “wildcat” down the road. Yes, it can be painful to watch AW sometimes, but I will trust Horton to play the guy that gives us the best chance at a win.
Pass Rush
Makes 0 sense to try and evaluate the pass rush against a team like MTSU. They’re built to get the ball out quickly. Even when we blitzed untouched we couldn’t get there in time. With a young D that’s hustling just to get lined up against a no huddle you can’t expect there to be much of a rush.
agreed
I was much more concerned with the secondary and overall tackling than I was the pass rush. getting our safeties back will be really nice.
what you say here can, and will, be used against you The Daily Gopher
by GopherNation on Sep 3, 2010 11:38 AM CDT up reply actions
I'll wait until we play a real team before I get too excited
I know MTSU is supposed to be pretty good and all, but I just can’t help but think that we should crush some team I didn’t know existed from a conference I barely knew had D-IA football. So I’ll wait until we play a team I’ve heard of before to make any judgements about how we are going to be this year
"Everybody in the building is standing except for people in a wheelchair." - Doug Woog
"Coach, if you need one yard, I'll get you three yards. If you need five yards, I'll get you three yards." - Leroy Hoard
by Where's My Burrito? on Sep 3, 2010 11:38 AM CDT reply actions
Ummmm...
A team isn’t good because you didn’t hear about them? I guess Michigan must be a national champion every season because everyone has heard about them.
There are things that can be critiqued or bemoaned about the Gophers play against MTSU. This is just wanting to be right so badly that you’re hanging your hat on a silly argument.
When's the last time the national champion was a team not from a major conference?
All I meant was that I don’t think beating MTSU makes us a good team because they probably are not a good team, but I don’t know because I have heard absolutely zilch about them.
"Everybody in the building is standing except for people in a wheelchair." - Doug Woog
"Coach, if you need one yard, I'll get you three yards. If you need five yards, I'll get you three yards." - Leroy Hoard
by Where's My Burrito? on Sep 3, 2010 12:21 PM CDT up reply actions
Wait...
So national championships are now the only way to judge if a conference has good teams? And MTSU is “probably” not a good team but you’re unsure because you admit you know nothing about them? You’re not strengthening your argument here.
I didn't say national championships were the only way to judge
it was just in response to your comment about Michigan winning because people have heard of them. Good teams generally get more press than bad teams so if I’ve never heard of a team before, it’s a good bet that they are not a significantly good team.
"Everybody in the building is standing except for people in a wheelchair." - Doug Woog
"Coach, if you need one yard, I'll get you three yards. If you need five yards, I'll get you three yards." - Leroy Hoard
by Where's My Burrito? on Sep 3, 2010 12:29 PM CDT up reply actions
Mmmm hmmmm
I’m sure their lack of national pub couldn’t have anything to do with the fact that they are a Sun Belt team and national writers don’t care about the Sun Belt.
Look, I’m not trying to claim that MTSU is a titan. But your argument is severely flawed. You not paying attention to college football beyond what SI and ESPN show you doesn’t strike me as a strong standard by which to gauge a team’s quality.
You're not paying attention to college football then
MTSU won the Sun Belt and went to a bowl game last year. They were #63 in the final Sagarin ratings last season, one spot ahead of Minnesota. They did lose their best player this game, which may knock them down a bit but I think they are probably still the Sun Belt favorite without him. And we played them on the road.
Let’s look at the other Big 10 teams played last night:
Indiana (home) vs Towson (last place in their division of the Colonial FCS conference last season, #196 Sagarin)
Ohio State (home) vs Marshall (big name but middle of the pack Conf-USA school, Sagarin #79)
And the other cupcake games this weekend:
Mich State (home) vs Western Michigan (MAC middle of the pack, #125 Sagarin rating)
Penn State (home) vs Youngstown State (Missouri Valley middle of the pack, #155 Sagarin)
Iowa (home) vs Eastern Illinois (Ohio Valley 2nd place, #163 Sagarin)
Bottom line… We gain more from our road win against a decent mid-major than these other Big 10 teams will in their home blowouts of Little Sisters of the Poor College (Ohio State not withstanding). Would I like to see more? Sure there is plenty of work yet to do, but I’m not going to bash them for being 1-0. I do want to see more of a margin of victory at home vs South Dakota, who is worse than SDSU and should be our one chance at a blowout. I’ll be more concerned if we can’t exert some dominance there.
by mraveling on Sep 3, 2010 12:39 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Amen!
Very well stated counselor…
If you add the 6 from missed field goals, 7 for the kneel down at the end of the game inside the 10 yard line, thise was a 20 point win on the road against a good team that plays the style of offense we’ve struggled against for years ala Northwestern.
I wish we had a kicker who could make a 40 yard+ field goal
"Everybody in the building is standing except for people in a wheelchair." - Doug Woog
"Coach, if you need one yard, I'll get you three yards. If you need five yards, I'll get you three yards." - Leroy Hoard
by Where's My Burrito? on Sep 3, 2010 11:39 AM CDT reply actions
also
I loved the play-calling.
The run game was a nice mix of inside and out. We had some really effective play-action passes. Even the two shuttle passes were right on the verge of being a 10+ yard play. The first Bennett ran into the blockers and could have bounced it out. The second Wills got in the way with a lot of daylight ahead of DB.
what you say here can, and will, be used against you The Daily Gopher
yeah
I hear actually running helps with selling the play action.
Hear that Jedd Fisch?
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Sep 3, 2010 3:09 PM CDT up reply actions
GN
agree. Horton made a good first impression on me. I would like to see some draws and screens worked into the equation. Weber has always had a hard time “selling” a screen but you need to keep the defense honest.
Weber
Cut the sugar-coating. Weber was awful and I can’t allow myself to read anything more positive than that. He remains the Benjamin Button of college QBs. The few passes he made in the 2nd half were to wide open receivers on crossing routes, and I recall a single great pass on the night to his tight end that he dropped in the bucket. He also made a nice side-step from a sure sack and delivered a bullet to the sideline on 3rd and 12. That was positive. Other than that, he still stares down his primary receiver like a freshman, telegraphing his passes. The offensive line was poor at pass protection for part of the night, but I can’t tell if that’s because Weber took too long to throw the ball or what.
I will also note, our wide receivers looked below average. They do nothing out of the ordinary, and I can’t recall a single play that they “made something happen”. There were plenty of opportunities for them to go up and come down with the ball, but I never saw it.
Did any of you feel we were “slow” on kick/punt returns? I never noticed a burst of speed or a well blocked/executed kick or punt return.
I don’t want to sit here and harp on the team, but they stink this season and that’s something that has been well-documented by the experts, and for good reason. There are skill gaps all over the field and I will go on the record saying a 3 win season is what I expect. That is sad and I haven’t thought that way since Jim Wacker was coaching in ‘95 or ’96, may he rest in peace. He had an excuse, but Brewster does not. I can’t see how we can hang with anybody in the Big 10 after what I saw last night. I sense the inability to adjust during the game (see 2nd quarter), and if you take away a few key penalties or bad decisions by MTSU, we lose this game because we never get the 14 point lead to begin with. MTSU without their star QB who accounted for 75% of their offense last season is NOT a good team. We need to take a 14-0 lead and run away with the game. We did not do this by any stretch of the imagination.
Kicking game? If we can’t make a field goal, we may be held scoreless in some Big 10 games this season.
Damn, I’m negative! Just been a fan since birth and I am tired of excuses why we can’t build something special at the U. Decades of frustration and fandom cause my outlook.
I did enjoy watching the running game develop, and I liked that we did not abandon it. With the size advantage we had, we should have punched them in the mouth all night like we did. That was smart play calling for the most part (a positive!!!!!). It also keeps the ball out of Weber’s hands!!!! That should be the goal this season. Keep Weber from hurting us.
Go White Sox!
I'm very scared to see what happens when we play a team with a run defense
And the defense looked terrible as usual. The only players I thought looked good were Bennett and Hoese.
"Everybody in the building is standing except for people in a wheelchair." - Doug Woog
"Coach, if you need one yard, I'll get you three yards. If you need five yards, I'll get you three yards." - Leroy Hoard
by Where's My Burrito? on Sep 3, 2010 12:15 PM CDT up reply actions
What about...
Kirkland? Wills (great in run blocking and to my recollection didn’t get whooped pass blocking)?
As for the defense, there are some easy fixes to what was wrong. Heck, an average tacking performance and we win the game by at least 4 more points. Will they improve? I don’t know, but my gut tells me yes.
You've been Jay Walkered
"We're talking about unchecked aggression here, Dude."
Off Tackle Empire
The Daily Gopher
I forgot about Kirkland and Wills, they did look pretty good too
"Everybody in the building is standing except for people in a wheelchair." - Doug Woog
"Coach, if you need one yard, I'll get you three yards. If you need five yards, I'll get you three yards." - Leroy Hoard
by Where's My Burrito? on Sep 3, 2010 12:26 PM CDT up reply actions
I agree with most of what you said
Weber is still a real bad QB. He really never progresses. Did he have a couple of good plays, yes but a majority of the game he was bad and out played by a Soph. Jr college transfer. The D scared me a lot. Especially with the hurry up and their inability to cover the seems or tackle and stay home on the counters and cut backs. This needs to be fixed but judging this coaching staff over the last 3 years it wont be fixed and this team with win 3 to 4 games this year. Which is really a win win if you ask me. Either the coaching staff finally knows how to adjust and they win 7 to 8 games like they have the talent to or they dont and win 3 and Brewster gets canned.
Great line!
He remains the Benjamin Button of college QBs.
Couldn’t agree more.
Maroon and Gold Headquarters: The Daily Gopher
by PJS on Sep 3, 2010 3:59 PM CDT up reply actions
Looks like Weber
is going to be the hot-button topic again this year. My contention is that under a good OC like Horton, AW can get us to 6 wins. And I will be happy with a 6 win season with this young group of players.
what?
there is some sort of disagreement on Weber?
My question is this…Is there ANY middle ground? I feel like it is
75% WEBER SUCKS
24% Nothing is ever Weber’s fault
1% of people who can watch with some level of objectivity.
what you say here can, and will, be used against you The Daily Gopher
by GopherNation on Sep 3, 2010 12:13 PM CDT up reply actions
I'd say he's a below average QB
with a bad O-line and nobody to throw to, which make him look worse than he actually is.
"Everybody in the building is standing except for people in a wheelchair." - Doug Woog
"Coach, if you need one yard, I'll get you three yards. If you need five yards, I'll get you three yards." - Leroy Hoard
by Where's My Burrito? on Sep 3, 2010 12:17 PM CDT up reply actions
1 percent
The line needs to string together a decent game in terms of pass protection. Very few QB’s look/play decent when they have no time.
by Minnesota Fats on Sep 3, 2010 1:46 PM CDT up reply actions
Weber just needs to sit
This is a rebuilding year and we should looking to do that. Give the playing time to Moses or Gray. Only reason to play Weber would be if he was a difference-maker but he proved again last night that he won’t be. He will be caretaker quarterback at best, completely basket-case at worst.
Garrick falls in the first camp
what you say here can, and will, be used against you The Daily Gopher
by GopherNation on Sep 3, 2010 12:29 PM CDT up reply actions
That camp will heretofore be referred to as The Garrick/Texas Gopher Camp
"We're talking about unchecked aggression here, Dude."
Off Tackle Empire
The Daily Gopher
I don't know about that
I like the WEBER SUCKS camp.
point is even when he doesn’t throw any picks, converts some key 3rd downs on both scoring drives in the 2nd half, completes 59% of his passes and leads the team to a W. He stills is “terrible”.
what you say here can, and will, be used against you The Daily Gopher
by GopherNation on Sep 3, 2010 12:39 PM CDT up reply actions
GN
You cant tell me that he wasnt just outplayed by a sophomore qb with not a single D1 play to his name. Throw in the fact that Mid Tenn was stacking the box to stop the run and our o line was better then there o line makes this just pathetic. He got himself sacked twice other then that no pressure on him. He should have been 15 for 17 with the drops by Grey and Stoudemire. Can i remind you that we are 1 or 67 BCS teams and the only 1 with a Senior QB 4 year starter that cant look off his primary target, sell a screen, or stand in there on a blitz even when his line picks it up. At least he fell on his fumbled snap and didnt throw a pick.
I am trying to get out of Camp 1
And into camp 3. I’ve been of the opinion that Weber can only succeed if everything goes right on a play. And if that’s the case, then why not play Gray or even Alipate?
But last night he made a GREAT play (do you hear that GN? I’m complimenting him) on a big 3rd down by avoiding a blitzer who came in untouched and getting the ball to McKnight on the sideline for a first down.
I need to see more of that. I’m not expecting him to be great on every play no matter the protection or coverage, but I need to see that he can make something out of nothing on occassion. He got better as the game went on and made three big throws on the 97 yard drive. But I need to see more of it. That should not be an unrealistic expectation for a 4th year starter who’s a 5th yr senior.
I'm on board with this.
And I wish this is the sort of take that the viscerally anti-Weber folks could learn to appreciate.
that is reasonable
because he did get better last night. He was bad early on going 0/4. After that he was 10/14. He made some plays.
How about this. on the 3rd play of the game he called an audible that led to a 25 yard run by Bennett.
The fact is he made several good plays last night that contributed to the win. He wasn’t amazing but he did fine last night. The notion that he was terrible is what bothers me.
what you say here can, and will, be used against you The Daily Gopher
this is going to be a LONG season
if we are getting this much hate on Weber after a win where he didn’t make any significant mistakes, it is going to be a LONG, LONG season. I hate to see the ranting when he actually has a bad game.
I’ve said this before. I’m really not a huge Weber apologist. He has sucked at times, he has been the reason the offense stalled at times. Not everything is his fault and not all of his mistakes are someone else’s fault. I get caught defending Weber a lot because I think the criticism is often unwarranted. People are just waiting for an incompletion to call for Gray to be the savior.
what you say here can, and will, be used against you The Daily Gopher
I feel like I'm pretty objective
…and I had been a Weber apologist, but he just doesn’t look good, mechanically speaking. His feet often are not set and he just plain misses receivers. Yes, I know that no quarterback is perfect with his throws, but he misses some receivers pretty badly. Of course, he didn’t get any help from his line or receivers or o-line. His supporting cast just magnifies his glaring deficiencies.
The times I have seen Gray actually take snaps, he seems to look better mechanically. However, there is a big part of being a quarterback that is mental, such as reading defenses and adjusting, and it doesn’t appear that the staff trusts him, so I don’t know that benching Weber is going to be the best alternative. The best QB on the team may be Alipate, but we haven’t enough from him to be considered a viable alternative. And by enough from him, I mean anything from him.
Obviously Alipate is a more talented player then Weber
He just hasnt been given a chance yet which bugs me. Weber was starting as a Redshirt Fresh mainly because we had nobody else. Alipate was a higher recruited player with a higher ceiling then Weber but never truely given a chance yet by the coaching staff. If they are going to play Grey so much at WR like they did against MTSU just make the move permanent and start getting the guy with highest abilty at the position (Alipate) more practice time. Im mean jeez they played Grey more at WR then the 4 star JR Green who still has the best hands on the team but is smaller and not all that fast so lots of times has trouble getting open.
ummm
did you watch the Spring game or the Scrimmage?
Alipate looked like crap. He’s had some flashes but he’ll always be no better than a back-up.
"they're calling insane hogs???"
He still probably has Jedd Fisch terminology
randomly scrolling through his head during plays. Might explain why he seems to be playing so tight.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Sep 3, 2010 3:18 PM CDT up reply actions
Horton
Let’s not go and label him “a good OC” after deciding to run a lot on the road against MTSU. Considering Weber’s many faults as a starting quarterback, I’m glad Horton did this last night, but one game really isn’t a large enough sample to draw any substantive conclusions.
Now, what feels like 10 years with Weber, that’s a large enough sample :-)
Maroon and Gold Headquarters: The Daily Gopher
by PJS on Sep 3, 2010 4:02 PM CDT up reply actions
Compared to Jedd Fisch he's a good OC
Although you and I would be considered good OC’s compared to Jedd.
And Weber’s been at the U at least 20 years, right?
I'm not too worked up about this game (to the positive or negative)
it was the first game of the year. There are things to be fixed and they have several days (plus an FCS opponent) to get better.
We were on the road against a likely bowl team that was missing their best player. But really we knelt on the ball from the 4 yard line. We essentially won this game by 14 doing exactly what we needed to do. Exert our control of the line of scrimmage and control the clock with our ground game.
It is really hard to project how we’ll play against good opponents because it will be a completely different type of game and USC is still 15 days away.
what you say here can, and will, be used against you The Daily Gopher
Weber
It is impossible for a QB to succeed beyond high school if they stare at the guy they will throw to from the moment the ball touches their hands. Yes or no? That has been my main problem with Weber from Day 1.
Also, I give Weber a small tax credit to factor that maybe his receivers are not running crisp routes due to lack of experience. Our passing game was ok against a crappy zone last night, but man to man was a total mess. That tells me most likely our receivers are either slower and less athletic than average, are running poor routes, or our QB wasn’t doing something right. Probably a combination.
I will say this in closing, I thought our team “looks” very good. Muscular, athletic, strong, powerful. Looked very good in whites last night. I’m loving Bennett and seeing his 22 and long hair reminded me of the glory days of Maroney/Barber! OK, don’t go nuts on me…I’m just saying, that first drive is how we started every single game no matter who we played in 2002, 2003…great execution. It was so good to see.
To think anything less than USC will put up 45 on us is just burying your head in the sand. Just stop it. Homers win no points on this site.
well...
Personally, I think 10/17 for 150 with no picks is pretty successful. That’s not to downplay the locking on to receivers thing. Its not good, he does still do it too much, and it will come back to bite the team if it doesn’t improve. That said, he’s about to be Top 10 in the conference ALL TIME in every major statistical category. I don’t care that he’s a 4 year starter, that is still impressive and dare I say it, a sign of at least some success.
awesome
get 00 on scholarship.
maybe he can play QB
what you say here can, and will, be used against you The Daily Gopher
Excellent
Love it. Is it me, or did they show little or NO Goldy last night? The reason I say that is because my 2 year old stood staring at the television with hopes of seeing his hero “Golga”….but we never got a good closeup! Is he going low profile after the “mock prayer” incident?
love the 2-yr old story
I spent the first drive asking my 2yr old if we were going to run or pass. Every time he said “Pus it”, he was wrong.
what you say here can, and will, be used against you The Daily Gopher
nah
they just didn’t want to get Jay Walkered.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Sep 3, 2010 3:21 PM CDT up reply actions
Good Gopher Game! (need some improvements)
First, a great job well done by the big O-line, Bennet, Kirkwood, Eskridge, and Hoese. Without these work horses we would’ve had 0 points. The O-line will really give the advantage to the Gophers on 3rd, 4th, and goal line situations when short yardage is needed. Plus making holes for our RBs and FBs. They do need some improvement on containing the passing rush though. This will be Bennet’s best season of his career with help from the o-line and health Gods. I really like what Freshman Kirkwood had to show us. He’s a compact strong running back with power like 000 Buckshot penetrating that D-line. Hoese was excellent on short yardage situations and busting the ball into the endzone. “Touchdown!!!”
Second, good job to the Gopher Defense, Weber, and the receiving core. Defense way to hold MTS in the 1st, 3rd, and 4th quarters. 2nd quarter Defense you scared me, I thought the breaks came loose and the wagon was going downhill. Rallis had a nice interception and put that drive to a halt. Weber goes into panic attack whenever someone breaks through the O-line. Honestly, Webers’ passes was exactly what I thought it was going to be, “Good not Great”. One big improvement on Weber was a game with no interceptions Yeah!!! Given that it’s his senior year all of you pretty much know how he’s going to perform given his history. I wouldn’t put all the blame on Weber though, his receivers should have hauled in some of his passes. The receivers did make some nice catches when the Gophers needed it and help to break up the running plays.
Third, as I type Ellestad better be on football field somewhere practicing 40yd field goals for 8hrs a day till next Sat. because he needs it. All I can say for Ellestad is crappy game, though great job for putting the ball “BETWEEN the PIPES” for the extra points.
Great job for the coaches too, way to manage ball possession and giving Freshman Kirkwood some playing time.
Observations
1. Good to see Bennett back to what 2008 was looking to be—actually even better. Hopefully, this can continue. Kirkwood also looked good. RB looks to be a position of strength and depth.
2. QB is a position of weakness. Weber looks like a high school quarterback out there. His passes were extremely erratic. If he is our starter, I shudder to think what Gray’s play is like in practice—or maybe Weber is just one of those guys who play well during practice, but at full speed during games he cannot perform. Perhaps a significant portion of that is due to…
3. The offensive line isn’t very good at pass protection. If we struggle against MTSU, this isn’t going to be pretty during Big 10 play. As I’ve been saying in our positional breakdowns, if we don’t have the talent on the offensive line, experience doesn’t help very much; it just institutionalizes poor play.
4. I think Ellestad will be fine. I know he still hasn’t hit anything 40+, but he has the leg. It isn’t like he shanked those kicks, he just pushed them wide. Those certainly could have been some big misses, however.
5. I understand the desire to establish the run—but the play calling was pretty vanilla. 1st down run. 2nd down run. 3rd down pass. On 1st down we ran the ball 31 of 37 times last night. We average 4.2 yds per rush, so this isn’t a bad strategy (BTW, did you realize that MTSU averaged 6.6 yds per carry last night? That is very worrisome.) However, our passes on 1st down were 4/5 for 72 yards and one sack for a 12 yard loss. I’m not saying we need to pass a ton more on 1st down, but we had success doing it—which could probably be attributed to being set up by the run. So let’s look at 2nd down. We ran the ball 21 of 25 times. Passing on 2nd down was 2/4 for 4 yards. We passed more on 1st down than 2nd down. 3rd down we rushed the ball 6 out of 15 times. In the 9 pass plays, Weber was 4/8 for 75 yards and a sack.
What I’m trying to say with all of this is that our play calling was pretty predictable and vanilla. This may have been okay against MTSU since we were running the ball effectively, but this isn’t going to cut it against USC or Big 10 opponents on our schedule.
Some nice points...
…and I agree the play calling was vanilla. But I don’t find that to be worrisome because I think being very vanilla was the goal. Do what we needed to do to win, do it well, and don’t give away anything for future opponents. I suppose another way to look at it is that we’re not getting experience in more plays, sets, or looks. But I don’t expect the play calling to stay this vanilla all season. I think it was a byproduct of the focus on establishing the run and not giving away more looks then they had to.
Ellestad
The only worrisome thing about Ellestad’s kicks was that the 2nd was an identical look to the first and he missed it the same way. But like you point ok, they really weren’t bad misses and this is hopefully an easy correction for him.
They were huge in the game b/c of the field position/momentum shift (and of course b/c of the 6 fewer points on the board). Hope he doesn’t take it too hard and bounces back.
Right...
…he missed them in the same fashion. That should be something he can correct. Besides, these were medium FG, that just barely missed (in fact, the first one looked like it actually went OVER the top of the post). I’m confident we will see him bounce back. Two misses on the road at a shitty stadium are nothing to worry about…yet. I would be a bit more concerned if it was at home where he should be familiar with the turf and the surroundings.
MTSU high run avg.
Was due to 1 play. They really didnt establish the run and in running situation were stuffed. This was a non issue (except for Tinsley and Manuel missing tackles).
Non-issue? Really?
Take away the 51 yard run and the Blue Raiders still averaged 4.5 yards per carry—better than our own average that night. There were also 8 carries of 7 yards or more. Big 10 teams will destroy us if that trend continues.
don't forget
the stats Rushing first downs Minn – 18 MTSU 5 Rushing TD’s Minn 3 MTSU 1
if that trend continues we’ll be fine
"they're calling insane hogs???"
Right on the $
Ellestad hasn’t lived up to any kind of hype. Wait till he starts kicking the kick offs out of bounds again like last year. Who will kick in 2011?
Where the heck was Gray? Darrell Thompson was quoted as saying Gray should start in front of Weber. Don’t you want your best playmaker on the field more. Weber doesn’t play like a 5th year player. When he’s average we get excited.
Weber
I am not a Weber supporter, but I can’t believe all the venom being injected after this game. Yes, he missed open receivers early and still can’t seem to complete a slant pass (which frustrates me to no end), but double his production and 20 of 34 for 300 yards and no INT’s is a very good game even with no touchdowns. It’s not his fault we ran it so well he didn’t need to throw the ball much. Then when you add in the fact that he started 1 for 5 in completions and you would clearly see that he played very well after the first couple of series.
In short, save this BS for when he has a bad game.
????
When we had to go to the pass he was pathetic…thus killing drives when they were stacking the box. Handing the ball off was our only consistent offense. He only had 150 yds….in the real world you double the plays that he passes and cut out 15 carries from Bennett and you have Bennett at 93 yards on 15 carries…still really good…but would what are the odds that Weber doesnt throw a pick in 17 more pass attempts? Ill take the run game results and keep webers passes to a minimum….
If you need anymore proof, look at our record when we have a runner go for 100 yards a game…its pretty good if i recall…something like 10-2 over those last 12 games…..
by DallasGopher on Sep 4, 2010 12:59 AM CDT up reply actions
I'm kind of with you Narby
I don’t get the Weber hatred after this game. I know that I go round and round with some guys here but I feel like people have been waiting since December for him to throw an incomplete pass.
Not sure I would buy the double his attempts argument but he didn’t make any significant mistakes and he made some big throws in the second half. I know DG touts that any significant drive was all the run game but Weber was 3/4 for 67 yards on the 97 yard drive that tied the game. He was 3/3 in the go ahead drive including a 3rd and 12 conversion. He also called the audible on the third play of the game that resulted in a 25 yard Bennett run. I’m not promoting him for any awards or anything but I clearly do not understand the venom either.
People have the right to rip him for leading Stoudermire into the safety or starting the game 0/4 but you cannot just ignore some of the things he did to help us win the game. Again he wasn’t MVP by any stretch but I was more concerned about lack of tackling, our pass protection at RT and our secondary.
what you say here can, and will, be used against you The Daily Gopher
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
