STrib: Once No. 1, Gophers have fallen fast in run defense rankings

BleedGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 11, 2008
Messages
60,575
Reaction score
15,646
Points
113
per Randy:

It was the best of times, it was the worst of times.

Charles Dickens penned that line in his 1859 novel, “A Tale of Two Cities,” and had Chuck stuck around another 158 years, he could’ve written a not-quite-so-classic sequel: “A Tale of Two Gophers Run Defenses.”

In their 3-0 nonconference start, the Gophers ranked first nationally in run defense, giving up a mere 59 yards per games. That translated into the nation’s No. 1 scoring defense, too, at eight points allowed per game.

Those stats came against teams that rank 77th (Oregon State), 80th (Buffalo) and 112th (Middle Tennessee) nationally in rushing offense. So, there is that.

In their three Big Ten games, however, the Gophers have allowed an average of 213 rushing yards, which ranks 13th of 14 conference teams and 97th nationally in conference games only. And it’s not surprising that Minnesota’s scoring defense in conference games (30.7 points allowed) is 10th in the Big Ten and 83rd overall.

Also not surprising, given those stats: The Gophers are winless in conference, and now an even 3-3 on the season.

http://www.startribune.com/once-no-1-gophers-have-fallen-fast-in-run-defense-rankings/451537633/

Go Gophers!!
 

It's almost like the competition in the B1G is tougher.
 


Unfortunately the schedule doesn't say Buffalo 12 times

They'll be fine. DL recruiting is doing well
 

..and our DEs are outweighed by like 70-100 lbs.

whenever we play a FCS team or a bad non conference team, some poster would inevitably point out that their D line was 50-75+ lbs lighter on avg than our O line, and we would be able to run at will because of this. And it was almost always wrong. So I don't buy this argument on the flip side.
 


If you are good enough you are big enough. We are not good enough.
 


whenever we play a FCS team or a bad non conference team, some poster would inevitably point out that their D line was 50-75+ lbs lighter on avg than our O line, and we would be able to run at will because of this. And it was almost always wrong. So I don't buy this argument on the flip side.

These FCS teams did not respect our passing game and rightly so. Stacking the box with numbers compensates for size difference when you are confident the other team's passing game is very ineffective. Tell me who we lost to that had as ineffective passing offense?
 

These FCS teams did not respect our passing game and rightly so. Stacking the box with numbers compensates for size difference when you are confident the other team's passing game is very ineffective. Tell me who we lost to that had as ineffective passing offense?

Vs MD we didn't force Bortenschlager to beat us by stacking the box enough on early downs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 




whenever we play a FCS team or a bad non conference team, some poster would inevitably point out that their D line was 50-75+ lbs lighter on avg than our O line, and we would be able to run at will because of this. And it was almost always wrong. So I don't buy this argument on the flip side.

Anyone can stop RUTM
 

These FCS teams did not respect our passing game and rightly so. Stacking the box with numbers compensates for size difference when you are confident the other team's passing game is very ineffective. Tell me who we lost to that had as ineffective passing offense?

Michigan State was 9-18 for 120 and 1 int


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Michigan State was 9-18 for 120 and 1 int


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Good point. After watching the replay, not enough was done to make Lewerke beat us with his arm imo. They were in a base front with a safety cheating down just outside unless they were defending the redzone then they had 8-9 in the box. Let's hope they change their approach against poor passing teams going forward. At this point, what do they have to lose.
 






Top Bottom