|
|
Post by Yote 53 on Nov 17, 2014 11:50:48 GMT -6
I would also ask everyone whether they think the lack of financial commitment to the football program and athletics in general is because we flat out do not have the money? Or is it because we are choosing to put that money elsewhere. My opinion from what I know is this. We obviously do not have the money coming in like NDSU does for athletics. I feel like we could commit the money it takes to coaches salaries, hiring more assistant coaches for football and getting the dome renovations completed but USD has always chose not to commit that type of money to those programs and build our endowment funds up. We have one of the newest and nicest campuses in the area. How does none of this fall over to our athletics? Make the commitment or fans will not follow. We already see it in this blog. Fans want to follow USD but the univesity is making it very difficult with the lack of commitment they are making. We have been lucky that in the past we have had some success in athletics without making the financial commitment. That will not continue at this level. If we are not careful we will lose every amount of support we have worked so hard to gain in the past 10 years. I pointed this out in a post last week. There is a financial commitment towards some of the programs. A new arena, a new men's bball coach, etc. My contention is that USD has, for as long as I have been around the program, done just barely enough in football to get by. That ain't going to cut it anymore. NDSU's success has spanned decades and multiple coaches. The support of their football program is institutional. They can go through different head coaches yet maintain the success because of the support and resources they give to the program. USD just doesn't do that. We rely on getting lucky with personnel her or there rather tahn institutionalizing the success. SDSU is taking steps to institutionalize their football success. An indoor training facility, new football stadium. When Stig one day moves on that program will continue just fine without him. If USD doesn't act, and now, we will forever be left in the dust. |
|
|
|
Post by yote14 on Nov 17, 2014 11:59:39 GMT -6
I could not have said it any better than how you put it Yote53. Honestly. That is 100% correct. But do you think we have the resources to do more financially right now?
I feel like we do but are just stuck in the habit of not doing what it takes financially because we never have and making that change is too uncomfortable for us to do.
|
|
|
|
Post by yote14 on Nov 17, 2014 12:05:17 GMT -6
Shoot Yote14, my problem with the offense all season is that we never established an identity. I don't think we ran the ball enough to establish an identity! It has just felt like what we run is a collection of plays that don't really have a rhyme or reason. Break down an offense on film sometime. You will see offenses run an offensive system, plays designed to set up other ploss and work off of each other. Perfect example of that was watching a breakdown of the Browns offense yesterday on Countdown. Their running game sets up their passing game. The presnap and immediate psot snap look gives every indication of run and then, boink, nice pass play. The Gophers killed Iowa with it all day long two weeks ago. We have no offensive identity. We have no system. Just some plays strung together. These are very interesting points. It seems like we put some of our favorite plays together because at one time it worked and there is no reasoning behind what we do. This makes me want a new offensive coordinator even worse. |
|
ctc2010
Sophomore Member
Posts: 238 
|
Post by ctc2010 on Nov 17, 2014 12:15:54 GMT -6
Shoot Yote14, my problem with the offense all season is that we never established an identity. I don't think we ran the ball enough to establish an identity! It has just felt like what we run is a collection of plays that don't really have a rhyme or reason. Break down an offense on film sometime. You will see offenses run an offensive system, plays designed to set up other ploss and work off of each other. Perfect example of that was watching a breakdown of the Browns offense yesterday on Countdown. Their running game sets up their passing game. The presnap and immediate psot snap look gives every indication of run and then, boink, nice pass play. The Gophers killed Iowa with it all day long two weeks ago. We have no offensive identity. We have no system. Just some plays strung together. If we're gonna study an offense I think we could pick a little better one than the Browns  |
|
|
|
Post by Yote 53 on Nov 17, 2014 13:41:57 GMT -6
Lol. Just a case in point. Only brought it up because I saw it yesterday. The analyst were giving them credit for their offense though and they aer havving a decent season. It was just really coll how, even broke down in slow mo, you could not tell the difference between the action on run plays vs pass plays until it was too late for the D to react.
|
|
ctc2010
Sophomore Member
Posts: 238
|
Post by ctc2010 on Nov 17, 2014 14:55:51 GMT -6
Lol. Just a case in point. Only brought it up because I saw it yesterday. The analyst were giving them credit for their offense though and they aer havving a decent season. It was just really coll how, even broke down in slow mo, you could not tell the difference between the action on run plays vs pass plays until it was too late for the D to react. Just had to throw it in there  When the Yotes' passing offense is rolling they are hard to stop. The problem with the play calling has been getting once nice pass play for a first down followed by 3 runs or a couple of short slants. So many times the last few games they have made that explosive play and then just died out. We don't throw it deep enough in my opinion. |
|
|
|
Post by fightsd on Nov 17, 2014 15:14:01 GMT -6
Lol. Just a case in point. Only brought it up because I saw it yesterday. The analyst were giving them credit for their offense though and they aer havving a decent season. It was just really coll how, even broke down in slow mo, you could not tell the difference between the action on run plays vs pass plays until it was too late for the D to react. Just had to throw it in there When the Yotes' passing offense is rolling they are hard to stop. The problem with the play calling has been getting once nice pass play for a first down followed by 3 runs or a couple of short slants. So many times the last few games they have made that explosive play and then just died out. We don't throw it deep enough in my opinion. I think we throw it deep too much if anything. What happened to throwing mid-range routes that keep drives alive? There's nothing wrong with picking up 6 yds on a curl on first down but I haven't seen us run one all season. If we throw on first down it's overthrown 40 yds down the field. Then we'll follow up with a run for 2 yds up the middle and throw it incomplete on third down. |
|
|
|
Post by Iceman on Nov 17, 2014 23:20:08 GMT -6
I agree with all you guys are saying. First of all, I will say they played hard all game and that was good to see. One thing that really stuck out is we were really getting killed defensively on the outside. We could not contain their running game. In the second half, we actually saw some adjustments that shut that down for most of the second half. It was good to see us make some halftime adjustments that worked for a change. As someone else mentioned, they were bigger, WAY faster, and stronger than us. Our team speed I think is lacking all over.
I also agree that our play calling is just bad. It is really hard to get in a groove at all. First down is always a run, except the first one after the turnover that was a big pass. We are way too predictable. You have to set up the pass with the run and vice versa. There are too many times something works and next time on the field we go completely away from it and you're just like what the hell?
Something is just not right with all the concussions we get. You know it's bad when your kicker gets a concussion. I am pretty sure our backup kicker suits up for home games or I know for sure he has in the past this year.
|
|
|
|
Post by Iceman on Nov 17, 2014 23:33:42 GMT -6
Just had to throw it in there When the Yotes' passing offense is rolling they are hard to stop. The problem with the play calling has been getting once nice pass play for a first down followed by 3 runs or a couple of short slants. So many times the last few games they have made that explosive play and then just died out. We don't throw it deep enough in my opinion. I think we throw it deep too much if anything. What happened to throwing mid-range routes that keep drives alive? There's nothing wrong with picking up 6 yds on a curl on first down but I haven't seen us run one all season. If we throw on first down it's overthrown 40 yds down the field. Then we'll follow up with a run for 2 yds up the middle and throw it incomplete on third down. What ever happened to throwing in some screen passes or some quick dump offs to our running backs. Didn't some of that work against Oregon? People have been bringing up about our third down efficiency. I think a big problem is when we do actually throw the ball on third down, we don't run the correct routes to get us enough yards for first downs. We depend too much on our WRs to make the catch and then get enough yards for a first down. We don't have enough SPEED to be able to do that. Illinois state was really good at this. They ran their routes and caught the balls, many times got tackled right away but still made a first down. Why? Because they knew how many yards were needed for a first down and ran their routes according to how many yards they needed to get a first down. We just throw short passes and hope we can catch the ball and make enough guys miss or do enough to get the first down which rarely happens. |
|
