What do we have based on what we saw today?

Donate To GopherHole
BigBird1030

BigBird1030

Former Manager Guy
Joined
Sep 11, 2010
Messages
17
Reaction score
0
Points
1
I think the Gophers in a lot of way looked like a functional football team today. Their first half performance left something to be desired but I was impressed with their adjustments in the second half.

The rushing defense was decent for most of the game and I think the tackling was better than anything I've seen in the last 5 years.

Obviously, this team has a long way to go, but I can take some encouragement from a competitive game against a team with a good deal of talent (even if Lane Kiffin didn't think so in his postgame interview).
 

Losing sucks, but much to be encouraged about! The first half was in my eyes mostly nerves. I really believe that if we play a pre-season game or a game vs a cupcake before playing USC, we win that game.
 

An OK defense, that will get better all year, especially the front 4. A very young offensive line that BETTER improve all year. A coaching staff that knows what they are doing.
 

What do we have based on what we saw today?

The first pilings were set for the foundation in concrete.

The coaching staff now has game film for teaching and figuring out who can do what (and who can't).

We almost had an epic start to the Kill era.
 

Todays game.

I think there is plenty to be excited about but I am one of those in the camp that feel the Gophers should win 5 to 6 games and anything less than that will be a let down.

The Gophers really changed up the defense in the second half becoming much more aggressive with their D-backs. They attacked the pass catchers and they didnt miss the tackles like they did in the first half. The Gophers need to stay aggressive all season long.

The offense to me was confusing. When the Gophers ran more generic runs that were direct and quick they saw some success when they ran the reads and options it was to slow developing and USC quickness got to the ball before big gains could be had. We didnt see the Gophers use Gray to the outside at all maybe that was due to the USC speed but we saw today why 6'5" QBs dont run up the middle as much as Gray did. They get hurt and the success is minimal when a normal RB could get those gains with a hard power running attack.

I think it is clear this team is going to have to throw the ball more than the coaches may like or want. I know the coaching staff would like to run 60% of the time or more. I just dont see that happening in the Big Ten and simply put you need to get McNight, Lair, and the other pass catchers the ball. I did think the O-line got better as the game went along and it is a group that should get better throughout the year. Lots of young talent in that group that will be better as the team gets more familiar with the offense.

Marques Gray is a great runner but he needs to be quicker in making his choices to throw or even to run he hesitated far to much today. Shortell looked good today.
 


Shortell needs to see more time than what he saw before Gray got injured. There is no sense in wasting 2 years of this guys eligibility just to be a back up.

I'm not definitively saying that Shortell would take over for Gray but IMO having Shortell and Gray (moving him to a WR/HB hybrid) on the field would be best for our team.
 

What we have:

- Good coaches that make good adjustments
- A good RB that can make some plays if given the opportunity
- An OL that needs to keep working
- The two QBs Kill wants for his system/rotation
- Some good tacklers
- A lot of enthusiasm
- Momentum despite the loss
- Work left to do
- Plenty of reasons for optimism
 


Former Goofer said:
Shortell needs to see more time than what he saw before Gray got injured. There is no sense in wasting 2 years of this guys eligibility just to be a back up.

I'm not definitively saying that Shortell would take over for Gray but IMO having Shortell and Gray (moving him to a WR/HB hybrid) on the field would be best for our team.
Click to expand...

First of all, your log-in name is offensive. If you're a Gopher fan, what's your problem? Choose a name that doesn't make fun of the home team. And if you're not a Gopher fan, then stfu.

By the way, you act like Shortell is the second coming of Joe Montana. Shortell was not exactly a 5-star recruit. He looked good in limited action today, and he'll get plenty more action in the future. Gray is the starting QB, and his ability to touch the ball each snap gives the Gophers a much better chance to win than having a Frosh QB attempt to get him the ball every 10 plays or so.

I thought we saw how well that failed experiment worked last year...but history tends to fool some people.
 




What do we have? A future. At this point we should be thrilled about that. Kill is still unproven, and the team is not going to be great this year. That said we have a SOLID start to a new regime. We should all feel better about the Gophers future tonight tham we felt last night.
 

If I may quote a musical:

What've we got?

We've got heart
All you really need is heart
When the odds are sayin' you'll never win
That's when the grin should start
 

We've got a ton more talent than the head coach has wanted to admit, and we've got a coaching staff that can coach. And it's going to get better from here!
 



We have a lot of passive aggressive Minnesotans who will start whining for the backup QB despite the fact that he had a lower completion percentage and more turnovers.
 

Potential future.

But, I will retract that statement if we don't see a 2 TD win or greater against the Aggies (is that New Mexico State's mascot?).
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom