[POST GAME THREAD] Minnesota defeats Purdue 38 - 31

Pompous Elitist

Active member
If we want to rip on individual players for misplays how about naming the 7,8, 9 guys that couldn’t or wouldn’t wrap up on tackling. Much worse IMO.
 

Panthadad2

Active member
Kind of thought so, thanks for confirming.

Any idea how they can improve the run blocking working around that limitation? Is there a variant = run screen pass option that combines the mystery and powerful blocking?
I don't know if the run game is going to get much better. I hope it does, but...

1) No offense is perfect and has strengths and weaknesses. It looks to me like the Gophs, with their strong passing game talent, have chosen to err in that direction. For example, the offense tackles now stay upright on almost all plays which is great for pass blocking but a 3-point stance would be MUCH better for a run-dedicated offense. I'm guessing those big guys are probably a little too slow to pass block from a 3-point stance. On the last drive when the run game was needed, however, Faalele was in a 3-point stance with a tight end and that's where the ball went every time and it worked. You already mentioned the inability to block aggressively downfield on a true RPO play.

2) It looks like other teams are selling out to stop the inside run which is the Gophs bread and butter run game which hasn't helped. Purdue did this, but the Gophs smartly decided to throw over the top with huge success.

3) Related to above, other teams are selling out to stop the inside run which can leave outside lanes, but I'm not sure the Gophs have the running backs with enough speed to get the outside edge consistently. Rodney, when healthy, has bounced to the outside in the past so I'm hoping that helps.

I could be talking out of my *** a little here. Our resident O-Line expert Rockford probably has better input than me.
 

PMWinSTP

Active member
Again, couldn't run; only 2.7 yards per rush and that was with Smith making a terrific effort on every play. Defense gave up the big play again and again, sloppy tackling, couldn't reach the QB, who was killing us. Once again, Morgan and receivers saved the day. But if we can't run against our first four opponents, who will we be able to run against? With their top QB and best receiver/player out, Purdue still almost won. Nevertheless, a win is a win.
That includes four sacks for -28 yards. Rodney averaged over 5 yards/carry. Run game was fine.
 
Take a second and appreciate this win before moving onto Illinois and what actually happened.

In a road game to open the Big Ten season, the Gophers largely dominated. Purdue never really bounced back from losing Sindelar and Moore, but the Gophers made plays. Keep Tanner Morgan upright, he has plenty of weapons. You double TJ, he'll find Bateman, CAB or Douglas. You take away Bateman, 1 of the other 3 step up. You can't cover everyone on every single play. And if you can get more yards out of Smith and Brooks, this offense can get to a whole new level.

We haven't seen QB play like that since arguably Adam Weber. No turnovers, big plays all over the place.

I'm not too concerned about the tackling. The players were in the right places, just gotta finish. Shouldn't have been that close in the end, but all that matters is the W.
 

GophersInIowa

Active member
I missed the second half and haven't had a chance to watch the replay yet. I'm assuming once it got to 38-17, we got conservative on offense and stopped passing for the most part?
 

CentralGopher

Active member
Take a second and appreciate this win before moving onto Illinois and what actually happened.

In a road game to open the Big Ten season, the Gophers largely dominated. Purdue never really bounced back from losing Sindelar and Moore, but the Gophers made plays. Keep Tanner Morgan upright, he has plenty of weapons. You double TJ, he'll find Bateman, CAB or Douglas. You take away Bateman, 1 of the other 3 step up. You can't cover everyone on every single play. And if you can get more yards out of Smith and Brooks, this offense can get to a whole new level.

We haven't seen QB play like that since arguably Adam Weber. No turnovers, big plays all over the place.

I'm not too concerned about the tackling. The players were in the right places, just gotta finish. Shouldn't have been that close in the end, but all that matters is the W.
I felt like the D was playing with intensity right from the start and Purdue wasn't clicking even with Sindelar and Moore in the game and Purdue was never really in it as a result. Who knows if later on they would have gotten it together but I don't give this a game an asterisk because of it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I missed the second half and haven't had a chance to watch the replay yet. I'm assuming once it got to 38-17, we got conservative on offense and stopped passing for the most part?
Yes for the most part. That wasn't the problem though. The defense was a big whif on 3rd downs especially.
 

Oregon Gopher

Guardian of the Western Front
The passing offense was wonderful... Pass blocking (for the most part), Morgan, the receivers, the calls.... A+.

The run game.... Ugg. This big line can't get you a per run average over 3 yards? Unacceptable.

Defense? If they don't improve their tackling, my heart may not survive the season.

What could have been a laugh off victory needlessly turned into a nail biter.
4.4 yds/carry for the running backs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Pompous Elitist

Active member
4.4 yds/carry for the running backs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sure could be a lot worse numbers but this was vs a depleted D. I rewatched some of the first half and I wasn’t seeing all the plus boxes being talked about but have to concede maybe it was a second half issue. I do recall some nice runs to close out the game where they were stacking the line so maybe that’s what people are referring to.
 

Some guy

Active member
I missed the second half and haven't had a chance to watch the replay yet. I'm assuming once it got to 38-17, we got conservative on offense and stopped passing for the most part?
The team was up 31-17
Scored on a pass.

Next time they touched the ball it was already 38-31 and they iced the game with a couple of first downs.

It wasn’t that they called a conservative game, it was that they didn’t possess the ball for a long time.


Edit:
And then I go back and look and I’m completely wrong.
Got sacked on two drives in between.
Disregard everything I said
 
Last edited:

McGopherFan

Active member
I don't know if the run game is going to get much better. I hope it does, but...

1) No offense is perfect and has strengths and weaknesses. It looks to me like the Gophs, with their strong passing game talent, have chosen to err in that direction. For example, the offense tackles now stay upright on almost all plays which is great for pass blocking but a 3-point stance would be MUCH better for a run-dedicated offense. I'm guessing those big guys are probably a little too slow to pass block from a 3-point stance. On the last drive when the run game was needed, however, Faalele was in a 3-point stance with a tight end and that's where the ball went every time and it worked. You already mentioned the inability to block aggressively downfield on a true RPO play.

2) It looks like other teams are selling out to stop the inside run which is the Gophs bread and butter run game which hasn't helped. Purdue did this, but the Gophs smartly decided to throw over the top with huge success.

3) Related to above, other teams are selling out to stop the inside run which can leave outside lanes, but I'm not sure the Gophs have the running backs with enough speed to get the outside edge consistently. Rodney, when healthy, has bounced to the outside in the past so I'm hoping that helps.

I could be talking out of my *** a little here. Our resident O-Line expert Rockford probably has better input than me.
Again, than you for the input. I appreciate it.
 
Great capture! Ya that is mighty tight.
It's not even close, both arms are over the line, 3 yards past the neutral zone.

"No originally ineligible receiver shall be or have been more than three yards beyond the neutral zone until a passer throws a legal forward pass that crosses the neutral zone. A player is in violation of this rule if any part of his body is beyond the three-yard limit."
 

McGopherFan

Active member
It's not even close, both arms are over the line, 3 yards past the neutral zone.

"No originally ineligible receiver shall be or have been more than three yards beyond the neutral zone until a passer throws a legal forward pass that crosses the neutral zone. A player is in violation of this rule if any part of his body is beyond the three-yard limit."
Not saying that the call was not technically correct, but instead that it was likely less than a yard over rather than his feet two yards beyond plus th arms extended.
 

Latest profile posts

Top