Special Teams Not Special

[Wally]

I know the defense took a beating yesterday, but the special teams were embarrassing.



Punt Team/Coverage: LeCompte had the terrible 1st punt, but did kick great after that.

Punt Return: I really liked CJ back there previously, but yesterday he was a wild card. I think Dudzik did drop back to return late in the game.

KO Team/Coverage: Horrendous. That is all

KO Return: No threat of a long return whatsoever. I don't know if the issue is up front getting blocks or the returner.

FG Team: Overall, Keller has been great. Did have the one miss yesterday, that could have sealed it. Least of the worries for special teams


When we are starting at the 20-25 and the opponent is starting at the 35-40, it's a recipe for disaster. It gives the defense much less margin for error and we need more margin right now. Fix the specials and I think that can help the defense. However, the one time we did pin CCU back, they immediately completed a long pass to totally flip the field. Nonetheless, some changes need to be made.

[BisonTeacher]

FG Team: Overall, Keller has been great. Did have the one miss yesterday, that could have sealed it. Least of the worries for special teams

I wasnt impressed with the play calling leading up to that fg. It felt reminiscent of bohl at gophs pt 1. Three runs playing for fg instead of a first down. IMO we should never have kicked that or wanted to. Play for the first down not the FG.

I remember when I was in school we used to say..."We dont kick Field goals at North Dakota State. "

[Gully]

I wasnt impressed with the play calling leading up to that fg. It felt reminiscent of bohl at gophs pt 1. Three runs playing for fg instead of a first down. IMO we should never have kicked that or wanted to. Play for the first down not the FG.

I remember when I was in school we used to say..."We dont kick Field goals at North Dakota State. "

The flip side of that is we did force them to use all of their timeouts (or is it timesout ). If he makes that field goal, the game was over and, if not, they had a long way to go with no time outs. I understand the other point of view, but I've also watched teams pass, throw incompletions, and end up punting to the team and then they still had timeouts left. I'm just happy this way worked out for us.

[BisonTeacher]

The flip side of that is we did force them to use all of their timeouts (or is it timesout ). If he makes that field goal, the game was over and, if not, they had a long way to go with no time outs. I understand the other point of view, but I've also watched teams pass, throw incompletions, and end up punting to the team and then they still had timeouts left. I'm just happy this way worked out for us.

So getting first downs wouldnt have caused them to use time outs? And who said anything about passing? How about a QB keeper or a sweep or something rather than 3 runs up the gut. PLay for the FG farther down the field...not from there.

[Gully]

So getting first downs wouldnt have caused them to use time outs? And who said anything about passing? How about a QB keeper or a sweep or something rather than 3 runs up the gut. PLay for the FG farther down the field...not from there.

Well of course it would, but you're assuming those other plays called would have yielded first downs. I'm pretty sure they called the plays they thought gave them the best chance to gain first downs. Back in the playoff game at EWU they called a QB keeper on 3rd down (I think) and a bunch of people complained they should have run straight at them. Hindsight is 20/20. The risk of a stretch play of QB keeper is you're more likely to loose yards (making a fg even farther) than running straight at them.

I guess I just assumed you meant passing when you said you weren't a fan of, "three runs, playing for a fg", my bad.

The other point is that in the first Gophers game we were behind so that was a little different situation. Here we were playing with a lead and knew we had a great chance to win even if we didn't score. Against the Gophers, we had to score to win (and didn't).

[BisonTeacher]

Im saying they could have been a little more creative than 3 up the gut. Cuz 3 up the gut has been so successful for us lately? Sure they were hoping to get first down...but in my opinion...they were playing for a fg from there.

[bloodmakesthegrassgrow]

Im saying they could have been a little more creative than 3 up the gut. Cuz 3 up the gut has been so successful for us lately? Sure they were hoping to get first down...but in my opinion...they were playing for a fg from there.

I don't think we ran 3 up the gut. I think on 3rd down we ran that same off tackle play to the left that we ALWAYS run on 3rd down when it's crunch time, and that the other team knows we ALWAYS run on 3rd down when it's crunch time. It's maddening. It's also maddening that we kick Field Goals when we're inside the 5.

[BisonTeacher]

I don't think we ran 3 up the gut. I think on 3rd down we ran that same off tackle play to the left that we ALWAYS run on 3rd down when it's crunch time, and that the other team knows we ALWAYS run on 3rd down when it's crunch time. It's maddening. It's also maddening that we kick Field Goals when we're inside the 5.

Was that to get to a particular hash mark though? Ie...for the kicker?

[Bison 4 Life]

The kickoffs have GOT to get better. Even if Lecompte isn't ok to go, why pooch it every time? How many out of bounds flags have we gotten this year? We were crippled in field position nearly the entire game. It is absolutely a liability.

[Gully]

I just watched it again. First down was a fly sweep to a WR (#16). Second down was a QB run off tackle. Third down was a run that looked to be off tackle or maybe even trying to go outside. I don't think the hash was a consideration. I don't recall NDSU doing that too much, especially on longer field goals. That's more of a concern for shorter field goals.

It wasn't like they ran power three times in a row.