What is the main reason why the Gophers went 5-7 this season?

What is the main reason why the Gophers went 5-7 this season?

  • Tough schedule

    Votes: 9 8.7%

  • Injuries

    Votes: 54 51.9%

  • Coaches didn't do as well as needed

    Votes: 16 15.4%

  • Recruiting hasn't been as strong as needed last few years

    Votes: 16 15.4%

  • Coaching change in middle of season

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Other

    Votes: 9 8.7%
  • Total voters
    104
Donate To GopherHole
E

El Amin Fan

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Messages
2,920
Reaction score
859
Points
113
There have been many reasons given why this season went as it did. What do you think was the main reason?
 


I think all of those things played a role with injuries and the schedule playing the largest role
 

I don't know that you can really single out any one of those as the main reason. To me it seems like a combo of most of them. I guess if I had to pick one I would go with schedule or possibly not recruiting well enough to be able to fill in for injured players. but to me it really doesn't feel like just one thing led to us being 5-7, it was a combo of multiple things.
 

Injuries or lack of depth (recruiting) on both lines. I'm still amazed that this team had a chance to win in nearly every game this season considering how poorly both lines played. Credit to the coaches for that in my opinion.
 



It was a perfect storm of things. The thing is....the program cannot be in THAT bad of shape if
5-7 is a real disappointment and, largely, a worst case scenario.

In the Wisconsin game, this squad simply ran out of steam. They had been worn down, finally, and
were STILL within a PI call from the refs that wasn't called of possibly being in position for an onside
kick (one thing that we HAVE to work on is having our onside kicks go at least 10 yards. We don't
even give ourselves a chance) to win.

Plus, and I don't want to belabor this because its nobody's fault.....but when the head of your organization
is undergoing possible life-threatening health issues, there is no way that doesn't show up in the results.
In those games prior to Kill's resignation it just seemed that something wasn't right- something was missing.
Once he retired, it was clear at least to me. It left the remaining staff in a position to improvise on the run.
They kept the kids playing hard, and still almost made a bowl game.
 

metrolax said:
In the Wisconsin game, this squad simply ran out of steam. They had been worn down, finally, and
were STILL within a PI call from the refs that wasn't called of possibly being in position for an onside
kick
Click to expand...

Let's not overstate it. If that penalty were called the ball would have been at the Wisconsin 39 yard line. Scoring a TD there was by no means guaranteed.
 

If winning means scoring more points than your opponent, then we only did that five times this year. It also means we failed to do it seven times this year.

So, we were 5-7 because we didn't score more points than our opponents seven times. That falls mostly on the shoulders of the offense.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
 



justthefacts said:
Let's not overstate it. If that penalty were called the ball would have been at the Wisconsin 39 yard line. Scoring a TD there was by no means guaranteed.
Click to expand...

Just more chances for Mitch to turn it over.
 

1. We started the season playing like we were entitled to something. No other way to explain the games against Ohio, Kent State, and CSU. Bad coaching.
2. Injuries.
3. We literally threw away a game against Michigan. Bad coaching.
4. Tough schedule.
 

Ewert86PC said:
If winning means scoring more points than your opponent, then we only did that five times this year. It also means we failed to do it seven times this year.

So, we were 5-7 because we didn't score more points than our opponents seven times. That falls mostly on the shoulders of the offense.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Ya, it's largely on the offense... In our 7 losses the defense gave up 32 points per game. I'd say they deserve half the blame.
 

mnsportsgeek said:
Ya, it's largely on the offense... In our 7 losses the defense gave up 32 points per game. I'd say they deserve half the blame.
Click to expand...
A defense that was dog tired from other teams putting up sustained drives, while our offense was getting nicknamed "Old Three and Out."

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
 



Ewert86PC said:
A defense that was dog tired from other teams putting up sustained drives, while our offense was getting nicknamed "Old Three and Out."

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

They were probably really tired watching us score 45 on Iowa.
 

JZsportswhiz said:
I think all of those things played a role with injuries and the schedule playing the largest role
Click to expand...

The offense, period. Not a big mystery. Turnovers and time of possession. Caused the defense to be on the field way, way too much.
 

mnsportsgeek said:
Ya, it's largely on the offense... In our 7 losses the defense gave up 32 points per game. I'd say they deserve half the blame.
Click to expand...
Offense scores 17 ppg.
Defense gives up 32 ppg.

That is a 1:2 ratio of O scoring to D points allowed. What support did the Defense get from the Offense?

Special teams averaged 3.5 ppg. Roughly a field goal and a half.

The Offense was impotent. That is all you need to know.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
 

Talent: no play makers and no depth. Still have bottom half b1g talent.

Sent from my SM-G920R4 using Tapatalk
 

ESPN guys have us in Detroit and Indiana in New York. We could play California or Central Michigan.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

MaxyJR1 said:
ESPN guys have us in Detroit and Indiana in New York. We could play California or Central Michigan.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Oh, God! Please, no.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
 


Ewert86PC said:
Offense scores 17 ppg.
Defense gives up 32 ppg.

That is a 1:2 ratio of O scoring to D points allowed. What support did the Defense get from the Offense?

Special teams averaged 3.5 ppg. Roughly a field goal and a half.

The Offense was impotent. That is all you need to know.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
Click to expand...


you do realize a FG is worth 3 points and half a FG is 1.5? lol
 

DoubleB said:
you do realize a FG is worth 3 points and half a FG is 1.5? lol
Click to expand...
Ooops, brain wires crossed up half of a point with half of a FG. Thanks for pointing that out.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
 

I think that the "A" team of places like Minnesota, Illinois, Northwestern, etc. can compete with the "A" team of places like Michigan, OSU, MSU, etc. when coached well. There is a HUGE falloff, however, from our starters to our second and third teams compared to the helmet schools. Their 2nd and 3rd stringers would be starters at most schools (just look at OSU's quarterbacks). That is why we just can't afford wholesale injuries and expect to compete.

Sadly, one of the most effective solutions to this is scheduling wimpy non-conference foes. Take a look at NC State's non-conf schedule: Troy, Eastern Kentucky (FCS), Old Dominion and South Alabama. Or look at some of our non-conf schedules under Mason or Brewster. We'd be bowling with any of those.

The problem with that route is that you never really improve without playing good competition.

Lets hope that, in the future, we have a few less injuries and a little easier schedule; at least get back to respectability.
 

I don't think any one reason is the cause. It's combination of factors. If this was ranked choice voting, my order would be:
1. injuries
2. lack of depth (recruiting?)
3. strength of schedule
4. coaching philosophy
5. change in coaches in mid-season
 

I marked other because there needed to be an "all of the above" box. It was a Murphy's Law perfect storm this season.
 

Disruption, plain and simple. You can't fool kids. The Gophers played one good game under Kill , TCU. Except for the Wisconsin game the players were more engaged under Clayes.
 

Definitely injuries and schedule. If anything the gophers showed how much depth they do have with how they played after they were hit. No team in the country would have been able to sustain their normal level of play if they had the amount of injuries we had. And going into the year we knew OSU, TCU and Wisconsin would be tough but Iowa, Northwestern and Michigan came out of nowhere.

I don't think the other reasons listed had very much if anything to do with it.
 

Go Gophers Rah said:
I think that the "A" team of places like Minnesota, Illinois, Northwestern, etc. can compete with the "A" team of places like Michigan, OSU, MSU, etc. when coached well. There is a HUGE falloff, however, from our starters to our second and third teams compared to the helmet schools. Their 2nd and 3rd stringers would be starters at most schools (just look at OSU's quarterbacks). That is why we just can't afford wholesale injuries and expect to compete.

Sadly, one of the most effective solutions to this is scheduling wimpy non-conference foes. Take a look at NC State's non-conf schedule: Troy, Eastern Kentucky (FCS), Old Dominion and South Alabama. Or look at some of our non-conf schedules under Mason or Brewster. We'd be bowling with any of those.

The problem with that route is that you never really improve without playing good competition.

Lets hope that, in the future, we have a few less injuries and a little easier schedule; at least get back to respectability.
Click to expand...

Well told. Recruiting is difficult for Minnesota. What are we doing to learn why? Not the weather or geography -- Iowa and Wisconsin do fine. Not a dearth of in-state talent -- Nebraska, Iowa, Wisconsin do well Saying those schools recruit better because they win is a circular argument, of course. No, there's some reason we have more difficulty than others. Do we know what it is?
 

FanSinceTheFifties said:
Well told. Recruiting is difficult for Minnesota. What are we doing to learn why? Not the weather or geography -- Iowa and Wisconsin do fine. Not a dearth of in-state talent -- Nebraska, Iowa, Wisconsin do well Saying those schools recruit better because they win is a circular argument, of course. No, there's some reason we have more difficulty than others. Do we know what it is?
Click to expand...

Iowa has one good season in the last five. Their recruiting the past 3 or 4 years are certainly no better than Mn. Remember we smacked them last year. Weak schedule and early win against Wisconsin (stars were lined up) got them to 12-0. They beat MSU then they are for real. My guess is they lose big. Teams they played in Big 10 had conference record like 20 and 34. May have been worse than that.
 

swgopherdog said:
Iowa has one good season in the last five. Their recruiting the past 3 or 4 years are certainly no better than Mn. Remember we smacked them last year. Weak schedule and early win against Wisconsin (stars were lined up) got them to 12-0. They beat MSU then they are for real. My guess is they lose big. Teams they played in Big 10 had conference record like 20 and 34. May have been worse than that.
Click to expand...
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom