U: Gophers averaging 388.6 yards per game, most in last decade; starting 7 freshmen

Donate To GopherHole
BleedGopher

BleedGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 11, 2008
Messages
60,716
Reaction score
15,968
Points
113
per the U:

Minnesota finished the Illinois game with 438 yards of total offense (178 rush/260 pass) and has averaged 447.5 yards of total offense in the last four games.

Through nine games, Minnesota is averaging 388.6 yards of total offense. If Minnesota ended the season with that same number, it would be the highest for the Gophers since they averaged 407.5 yards during 2007, when teams played eight Big Ten games and four non-conference games.

In addition, Minnesota starts seven freshmen on offense, which is the highest number of any team in the nation. But these freshmen quarterbacks, running backs and receivers are producing.

https://gophersports.com/news/2018/11/8/football-ski-u-number-388-6.aspx

Go Gophers!!
 

It's rough when the defense is has a jailbreak on its hands every other game, but the offense really looks good and like it could be even better as time goes on...
 

A_Slab_of_Bacon said:
It's rough when the defense is has a jailbreak on its hands every other game, but the offense really looks good and like it could be even better as time goes on...
Click to expand...

Time changes everything... A lot of folks were saying just the opposite after the first few games this year -- "defense looks solid, if we just get an offense we could win a lot of games"
 

Turnovers need to be cleaned up for this group to become an elite offense but the pieces seem to be there to make it happen. They will be a top 5 (Big Ten) offense next year in terms of yardage but how many points they score will rest with protecting the ball.
 

Terrible defense caused the offensive stats to be inflated playing from behind and getting more possessions. 2007 is the year being compared to... we were 1-11 that year.
 


MaxyJR1 said:
Terrible defense caused the offensive stats to be inflated playing from behind and getting more possessions. 2007 is the year being compared to... we were 1-11 that year.
Click to expand...

This year's total is the highest total SINCE 2007. There were some bad teams during the stretch from 2008-2017 including a few that won just 3 games.

The point of the article is that an offense that is loaded with freshman is averaging one of the highest yardage totals here in a long time. That is something that should be viewed as a positive by all but the most negative members of our fanbase because odds are good that these players are only going to get better with age/experience.
 

The offense is definitely improving but in terms of scoring this offense is still below 2016 and 2014. Without competent defense the team will be DOA.
 

MNVCGUY said:
This year's total is the highest total SINCE 2007. There were some bad teams during the stretch from 2008-2017 including a few that won just 3 games.

The point of the article is that an offense that is loaded with freshman is averaging one of the highest yardage totals here in a long time. That is something that should be viewed as a positive by all but the most negative members of our fanbase because odds are good that these players are only going to get better with age/experience.
Click to expand...

Yep, numbers this year and in 2007 are inflated because we are/were constantly playing from behind. But that's no reason no to be optimistic about where this offense is heading. They pass the eye test (most of the time).

JTG
 

MNVCGUY said:
This year's total is the highest total SINCE 2007. There were some bad teams during the stretch from 2008-2017 including a few that won just 3 games.

The point of the article is that an offense that is loaded with freshman is averaging one of the highest yardage totals here in a long time. That is something that should be viewed as a positive by all but the most negative members of our fanbase because odds are good that these players are only going to get better with age/experience.
Click to expand...

No doubt I'm excited about this offense. Can run and pass and have been pretty balanced. They will only get better. Interesting that our offense has a better redzone touchdown % than our opponents.
 



Pompous Elitist said:
The offense is definitely improving but in terms of scoring this offense is still below 2016 and 2014. Without competent defense the team will be DOA.
Click to expand...

No arguments there. The exciting part about the offense is that I don't think they are even close to reaching their full potential yet. If they do we won't need the defense to be great but as you said they will at least need to be competent or it won't really matter how good the offense plays.
 

MaxyJR1 said:
No doubt I'm excited about this offense. Can run and pass and have been pretty balanced. They will only get better. Interesting that our offense has a better redzone touchdown % than our opponents.
Click to expand...

That’s because, with our defense this year, the red zone is about 40 yards bigger. They don’t need to get inside the 20 to be in scoring range. Just hand the ball off and watch him go [emoji45]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Bordergopher said:
That’s because, with our defense this year, the red zone is about 40 yards bigger. They don’t need to get inside the 20 to be in scoring range. Just hand the ball off and watch him go [emoji45]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

He’s right...sad. Will this defense set a record for explosive plays?
 

I wonder if/when we will ever see both sides of the ball function at the same time around here. 1999 was probably the closest we have come to that. Averaged 32 points a game that year and gave up around 16.

In the Mason years for the most part the offense would carry us and the defense would struggle.
In the Brewster years.......yeah let's just skip those and pretend they never happened
In the Kill/Claeys years the defense was good but the offense was just brutal much of the time.
In the Fleck years....jury is still out but the signs are very positive for the offense....not so much for the D at the moment.
 



I hate to say it, but Geezo Beezo had some rocking offenses too. Usually because we were down 20 about 5 minutes into the game. We are clearly more talented on offense than the last number of years, but until it leads to wins, it doesn't mean much.
 

Sparlimb said:
I hate to say it, but Geezo Beezo had some rocking offenses too. Usually because we were down 20 about 5 minutes into the game.
Click to expand...

Wacker only trailed by 20 or more once in the first quarter (took longer than 5 minutes).
 

Would’t put ton of stock in “offensive stats” on teams that are constantly behind anywhere from two to five scores (or, in our case sadly, more at times) in Conference play. First, teams play you differently with solid leads. Second, there’s constant desperation for big plays on the losing team’s offense and they’re winging it more. Third, there’s the human element of “letting up” by teams when either a.) they know no matter what they will beat you, and/or b.). There is a natural “losing interest” in the game results (i.e. it’s “garbage time” for them - but we’re still trying like hell). Our Offense just doesn’t stink, but stats accumulated when there’s nothing on the line - or when we are playing “Southwestern-Eastern Central Tech at Little Rock” isn’t much to get excited about honestly. The Offense is “ok”, the Defense is brutal, the coaching is not up to BIG standards, and that equates to a bad team that will play in front of 18,000 people on Saturday.
 

MaxyJR1 said:
Terrible defense caused the offensive stats to be inflated playing from behind and getting more possessions. 2007 is the year being compared to... we were 1-11 that year.
Click to expand...

This, when you're playing from the front, you run more and put up few yards. All that stat means is that we're giving up big leads and need to throw the ball a ton this year.
 

Treswell said:
Wacker only trailed by 20 or more once in the first quarter (took longer than 5 minutes).
Click to expand...

Quit counter-arguing my quickly typed assertions with facts and logic.
 

FargoRedd said:
Would’t put ton of stock in “offensive stats” on teams that are constantly behind anywhere from two to five scores (or, in our case sadly, more at times) in Conference play. First, teams play you differently with solid leads. Second, there’s constant desperation for big plays on the losing team’s offense and they’re winging it more. Third, there’s the human element of “letting up” by teams when either a.) they know no matter what they will beat you, and/or b.). There is a natural “losing interest” in the game results (i.e. it’s “garbage time” for them - but we’re still trying like hell). Our Offense just doesn’t stink, but stats accumulated when there’s nothing on the line - or when we are playing “Southwestern-Eastern Central Tech at Little Rock” isn’t much to get excited about honestly. The Offense is “ok”, the Defense is brutal, the coaching is not up to BIG standards, and that equates to a bad team that will play in front of 18,000 people on Saturday.
Click to expand...

I'm going to put some stock in an offense that can score 20-30 points in a blowout vs a team that couldn't score at all last season in blow outs.

Yes, 21 points don't mean the same thing when down by 28 or 35 as they do when the score is tied, but I'd sooner take a team that can score than one that can't.
Also, I think the rip on these team leading into last week was that they weren't scoring in the 2nd half. Now they did and we don't like it because it was catchup points.

We're finding a lot of nuances to be negative about when some are trying to enjoy the season.
 

FargoRedd said:
Would’t put ton of stock in “offensive stats” on teams that are constantly behind anywhere from two to five scores (or, in our case sadly, more at times) in Conference play. First, teams play you differently with solid leads. Second, there’s constant desperation for big plays on the losing team’s offense and they’re winging it more. Third, there’s the human element of “letting up” by teams when either a.) they know no matter what they will beat you, and/or b.). There is a natural “losing interest” in the game results (i.e. it’s “garbage time” for them - but we’re still trying like hell). Our Offense just doesn’t stink, but stats accumulated when there’s nothing on the line - or when we are playing “Southwestern-Eastern Central Tech at Little Rock” isn’t much to get excited about honestly. The Offense is “ok”, the Defense is brutal, the coaching is not up to BIG standards, and that equates to a bad team that will play in front of 18,000 people on Saturday.
Click to expand...

Yikes!! ^^^^^ Angry poster
 

Face The Facts said:
I'm going to put some stock in an offense that can score 20-30 points in a blowout vs a team that couldn't score at all last season in blow outs.

Yes, 21 points don't mean the same thing when down by 28 or 35 as they do when the score is tied, but I'd sooner take a team that can score than one that can't.
Also, I think the rip on these team leading into last week was that they weren't scoring in the 2nd half. Now they did and we don't like it because it was catchup points.

We're finding a lot of nuances to be negative about when some are trying to enjoy the season.
Click to expand...

. . . You are right, if you look at it from that angle. But, boy, do we have to stretch to find stuff. I guess if we’re just down to “find a stat that looks good and give it no context” now as a program, then there’s positivity. The Offense is not “bad”. But, this mentality sure seems like we’ve perfected rationalization to an art form for this program - and it’s certainly a looong stretch from the “Elite this” and “Elite that” silliness that was thrown around here relentlessly for 18 months (although, that seems to have been tamped down significantly of late. Thank God.). I get it. Plus, it’s a game - so being entertained is part of it - and they’ve done some entertaining things at times on Offense. My point was I would definitely place these offensive stats in context given we’re getting smoked a lot in Conference play.
 

FargoRedd said:
. . . You are right, if you look at it from that angle. But, boy, do we have to stretch to find stuff. I guess if we’re just down to “find a stat that looks good and give it no context” now as a program, then there’s positivity. The Offense is not “bad”. But, this mentality sure seems like we’ve perfected rationalization to an art form for this program - and it’s certainly a looong stretch from the “Elite this” and “Elite that” silliness that was thrown around here relentlessly for 18 months (although, that seems to have been tamped down significantly of late. Thank God.). I get it. Plus, it’s a game - so being entertained is part of it - and they’ve done some entertaining things at times on Offense. My point was I would definitely place these offensive stats in context given we’re getting smoked a lot in Conference play.
Click to expand...

More of their points appear to be in the first half than in the second. (when games are closer).

Keep going with your theory however. A stat that looks good might be hard to find, but just making B.S. up is working well for you.

If you wanted a negative angle, it would have been more correct for you to say, "The offense dies out in the second half". It wouldn't have been correct for the most recent game, but it would have been more accurate than posting what you did.

If you want to be a good troll, try to bring better analysis to your game.
 

Face The Facts said:
More of their points appear to be in the first half than in the second. (when games are closer).

Keep going with your theory however. A stat that looks good might be hard to find, but just making B.S. up is working well for you.

If you wanted a negative angle, it would have been more correct for you to say, "The offense dies out in the second half". It wouldn't have been correct for the most recent game, but it would have been more accurate than posting what you did.

If you want to be a good troll, try to bring better analysis to your game.
Click to expand...

You are right. Being able to score is an upgrade. Maybe we will outscore Purdue. Stranger things have happened. I’m not all that defensive or emotionally invested in it in any event. Neither, from all appearances, is the general public. The Gopher Offense is better and at times entertaining. Bored with the topic now . . . Good Night and God Bless.
 

It's like a switch was flipped between the Kill/Claeys and Fleck Eras.

The offense wasn't the team's strength. Now, it's the defense that is the problem child.
 


Anyone have the stats for our red zone scoring percentage?
 


There are players to be excited about for sure and it seems like we have more weapons than in the past, but piling up a lot of yards when you are down by 3 TD's can be fools gold.
 

There are lots of players to be excite about on both sides. However, they have to immediately stop the demoralizing blood letting explosive plays. Some of this are on the players and the lack of good depth. However, a big blame goes to coaching.

We can't have people miss their gap assignments. With a few exception the tackling is porous. They need to drill tackling, and ball protection for that matter daily. All-in-all, there are glimmers of hope here and there.
 

I will say that the O-line has looked better recently. One can look at the offense's performance a number of different ways and they've all be expressed here. We're clearly better on O than last year, but some of that is attributable to game situation. WR quality is the best I've seen it in my nearly 60 years of watching Gopher football. If Bateman stays healthy, he's playing on Sundays in a few years (hopefully starting in 2022).
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom