The vast majority of the talk before the season (and rightfully so) was centered around how does NIU replace Jordan Lynch? Well, with one game still left to play, I think we can finally answer it. You replace him with everybody. NIU didn't fully replace Lynch's production on offense, but they came pretty damn close.

Last year, Lynch threw for 2892 yards, 24 TD, 8 INT.
This year, the three headed monster has thrown for 2464 yards 18 TD, and 3 int.

Only 6 less TD passes and a little over 400 yards of passing with an entire game left is a pretty small gap all things considered. And a group of guys who had never really played a meaningful down this year to only thrown 3 INTs is pretty remarkable. Obviously the bulk of the credit goes to Hare here, but McIntosh started two games and I'm still convinced they lose the Kent State game without Maddie. A total group effort.

Last year, Lynch had 292 carries for 1920 yards and 23 TD.
This was the area where I was really concerned about NIU replacing. Replacing 1920 yards, 23 TD, and 292 carries is a giant chuck of offense to replace.

This year:
Hare 145/850/8 TD
Daniels 69/383/1 TD
Maddie 44/201/1 TD
Huff 9/71/3 TD

3 of those guys didn't play a down last year and Hare obviously played very little. Collectively they posted 267 carries, 1505 yards, and 13 TDs.

Then you add in ACRB who posted 78 more carries, 487 more yards, and 5 more TDs than he did last year and you see NIU did a pretty damn good job of replacing him on the ground.

Did the offense take a bit of a step back? Yes. Again, with one game to go they've scored 15 less offensive TDs than last year. They average 1.4 less yards per carry than last year on offense. But that's where the defense comes in. In the games when they were needed the most: NU, Kent State, Ohio, and to a lesser extent EMU than defense picked up the slack for the offense.

Everytime somebody need to make a play, they did it. Hare deserves the majority of the credit, but it truly was a team effort.

Lynch was so good. So damn good. That's what I've learned.

(12-08-2014 12:46 AM)The Frisky Biscuit Wrote:  Lynch was so good. So damn good. That's what I've learned.

To be honest though, part of me is glad to have that one man show over. I like our team based offense. It's a bit more interesting.

(12-08-2014 12:55 AM)niuguy Wrote:  

(12-08-2014 12:46 AM)The Frisky Biscuit Wrote:  Lynch was so good. So damn good. That's what I've learned.

To be honest though, part of me is glad to have that one man show over. I like our team based offense. It's a bit more interesting.

I understand. There is something about seeing incredible excellence out of one guy that is astounding but it's also awesome to see a large coordinated effort. I can enjoy either.

Part of me wants to say "they could've used the other guys better!" when Lynch was here....part of me wants to say "it works, don't stop!"....

I do believe the one man show did break down a bit against BG, and a whole lot against USU, and NIU had nowhere else to go.

I'm with NIUGuy, watching this multifarious albeit less overwhelming offense work has been a refreshing change of pace...

(12-08-2014 12:55 AM)niuguy Wrote:  

(12-08-2014 12:46 AM)The Frisky Biscuit Wrote:  Lynch was so good. So damn good. That's what I've learned.

To be honest though, part of me is glad to have that one man show over. I like our team based offense. It's a bit more interesting.

Agreed. As much as I enjoyed the days of watching Lynch or Harnish or Wolfe or Turner, the ability to not rely on one single guy makes us a better, more well rounded threat, and IMHO a team capable of competing at the next level.

Eh. I don't disagree that, with all things being equal having a more well rounded offense is a good thing.

But last years offense was better than this year in just about every stat across the board.

There is a weird dynamic when you have a one man band b/c you are rooting for that individual to put up gaudy stats to win awards. I always felt like it was ...awe man let lynch keep it there or let's make sure he gets a throwing td here.

Same way with Wolfe and Turner.

It's nice to not care who the hell gets the ball, you are just rooting for positive plays. And honestly this year...balance. Spread the ball around , use your weapons, get people touches, keep the D off balance.

If an outsider is reading this thread it probably feels like our pinky is up while typing. "It's so hard rooting for a big time star." This is what I call #winningpeopleproblems!

(12-09-2014 08:29 AM)7 Wrote:  Eh. I don't disagree that, with all things being equal having a more well rounded offense is a good thing.

But last years offense was better than this year in just about every stat across the board.

Sure, I'm not arguing we are better now or that we are even more fun now...just that I enjoy this new team in a new way. It's one of the scary/fun things about college football. Your team is always changing as players come and go year to year.

(12-09-2014 08:46 AM)niuguy Wrote:  

(12-09-2014 08:29 AM)7 Wrote:  Eh. I don't disagree that, with all things being equal having a more well rounded offense is a good thing.

But last years offense was better than this year in just about every stat across the board.

Sure, I'm not arguing we are better now or that we are even more fun now...just that I enjoy this new team in a new way. It's one of the scary/fun things about college football. Your team is always changing as players come and go year to year.

Agreed and honestly that's why we've been so successful. While there is so much turnover with kids and coaches we just have a program that identifies the right kids and knows how to develop them and utilize their strengths.

The Hard Way...maybe a catchy slogan but don't underestimate it's galvanizing effect on the ethos of a program.

(12-09-2014 08:29 AM)7 Wrote:  Eh. I don't disagree that, with all things being equal having a more well rounded offense is a good thing.

But last years offense was better than this year in just about every stat across the board.

I haven't looked at the stats, but against the teams with the better defenses, BGSU and Utah State, they shut down Lynch more than usual and we didn't or couldn't adjust our plan to use other options. I would have liked to see Lynch in this year's offense, where we depend on other options a bit more. But, he was a beast and I can see why the offense was geared around him.

(12-09-2014 08:54 AM)NIU17 Wrote:  

(12-09-2014 08:29 AM)7 Wrote:  Eh. I don't disagree that, with all things being equal having a more well rounded offense is a good thing.

But last years offense was better than this year in just about every stat across the board.

I haven't looked at the stats, but against the teams with the better defenses, BGSU and Utah State, they shut down Lynch more than usual and we didn't or couldn't adjust our plan to use other options. I would have liked to see Lynch in this year's offense, where we depend on other options a bit more. But, he was a beast and I can see why the offense was geared around him.

We were really banged up by the end of the season last year. That run of Ball State, Toledo, and even Western Michigan (who was 1-11, but played us very hard in that last game) really took a toll on the team, offensively and defensively. Lynch was not the same guy in the MACC that he was against Iowa and Purdue (same could be said of the previous year against KSU). Last year we went into the MACC with basically Brescacin as the only real option in the passing game.

Whatever might be said of this year's team in terms of their lack of star power, they have tremendous depth and stayed healthier than all the other MAC teams. By the way, ChipDip, that's not luck. That's recruiting depth and a better strength and conditioning program than anyone else in the conference.

(12-09-2014 09:04 AM)cawoo22 Wrote:  

(12-09-2014 08:54 AM)NIU17 Wrote:  

(12-09-2014 08:29 AM)7 Wrote:  Eh. I don't disagree that, with all things being equal having a more well rounded offense is a good thing.

But last years offense was better than this year in just about every stat across the board.

I haven't looked at the stats, but against the teams with the better defenses, BGSU and Utah State, they shut down Lynch more than usual and we didn't or couldn't adjust our plan to use other options. I would have liked to see Lynch in this year's offense, where we depend on other options a bit more. But, he was a beast and I can see why the offense was geared around him.

We were really banged up by the end of the season last year. That run of Ball State, Toledo, and even Western Michigan (who was 1-11, but played us very hard in that last game) really took a toll on the team, offensively and defensively. Lynch was not the same guy in the MACC that he was against Iowa and Purdue (same could be said of the previous year against KSU). Last year we went into the MACC with basically Brescacin as the only real option in the passing game.

Whatever might be said of this year's team in terms of their lack of star power, they have tremendous depth and stayed healthier than all the other MAC teams. By the way, ChipDip, that's not luck. That's recruiting depth and a better strength and conditioning program than anyone else in the conference.

Great points Cawoo. Were Brown, Akeem, and TLL all out for MACC?

(12-09-2014 09:07 AM)NIU17 Wrote:  

(12-09-2014 09:04 AM)cawoo22 Wrote:  

(12-09-2014 08:54 AM)NIU17 Wrote:  

(12-09-2014 08:29 AM)7 Wrote:  Eh. I don't disagree that, with all things being equal having a more well rounded offense is a good thing.

But last years offense was better than this year in just about every stat across the board.

I haven't looked at the stats, but against the teams with the better defenses, BGSU and Utah State, they shut down Lynch more than usual and we didn't or couldn't adjust our plan to use other options. I would have liked to see Lynch in this year's offense, where we depend on other options a bit more. But, he was a beast and I can see why the offense was geared around him.

We were really banged up by the end of the season last year. That run of Ball State, Toledo, and even Western Michigan (who was 1-11, but played us very hard in that last game) really took a toll on the team, offensively and defensively. Lynch was not the same guy in the MACC that he was against Iowa and Purdue (same could be said of the previous year against KSU). Last year we went into the MACC with basically Brescacin as the only real option in the passing game.

Whatever might be said of this year's team in terms of their lack of star power, they have tremendous depth and stayed healthier than all the other MAC teams. By the way, ChipDip, that's not luck. That's recruiting depth and a better strength and conditioning program than anyone else in the conference.

Great points Cawoo. Were Brown, Akeem, and TLL all out for MACC?

7 would know for sure. I want to say, one of either Brown or TLL suited up, but were clearly very limited and going on guts alone. The other was out. I know Ken Bishop played, but was not himself.

(12-09-2014 09:10 AM)cawoo22 Wrote:  

(12-09-2014 09:07 AM)NIU17 Wrote:  

(12-09-2014 09:04 AM)cawoo22 Wrote:  

(12-09-2014 08:54 AM)NIU17 Wrote:  

(12-09-2014 08:29 AM)7 Wrote:  Eh. I don't disagree that, with all things being equal having a more well rounded offense is a good thing.

But last years offense was better than this year in just about every stat across the board.

I haven't looked at the stats, but against the teams with the better defenses, BGSU and Utah State, they shut down Lynch more than usual and we didn't or couldn't adjust our plan to use other options. I would have liked to see Lynch in this year's offense, where we depend on other options a bit more. But, he was a beast and I can see why the offense was geared around him.

We were really banged up by the end of the season last year. That run of Ball State, Toledo, and even Western Michigan (who was 1-11, but played us very hard in that last game) really took a toll on the team, offensively and defensively. Lynch was not the same guy in the MACC that he was against Iowa and Purdue (same could be said of the previous year against KSU). Last year we went into the MACC with basically Brescacin as the only real option in the passing game.

Whatever might be said of this year's team in terms of their lack of star power, they have tremendous depth and stayed healthier than all the other MAC teams. By the way, ChipDip, that's not luck. That's recruiting depth and a better strength and conditioning program than anyone else in the conference.

Great points Cawoo. Were Brown, Akeem, and TLL all out for MACC?

7 would know for sure. I want to say, one of either Brown or TLL suited up, but were clearly very limited and going on guts alone. The other was out. I know Ken Bishop played, but was not himself.

Here is the box score for that game:

http://scores.espn.go.com/ncf/boxscore?gameId=333402459

TLL did play, Brown did not.

Lynch had 126 rushing yards in that game. Hell, NIU averaged 5.6 YPC as a team. To say Bowling Green shut Lynch down is a bit of an exaggeration. NIU just got behind and Lynch, not surprisingly, couldn't get them back into the game having to use his arm. To be fair to Lynch though, he was throwing to Canada, hurt Tommy, and pretty much nothing else.

I wouldn't take anything from the Utah State game.

I'd rather have a balanced offense like this years if it were also as good as the Jordan Lynch show. I don't think our offense in 2015 will evolve quite to that point, but I'm hoping Hare can make enough improvements that will have a balanced and consistently powerful offense next year.

This year's offense had more options around the QB than last year. Once Da'ron and TLL got hobbled, there wasn't anybody other than Stingily, Canada, and a couple of freshman. This year, Beebe, ACRB, and Ducee both had a year under their belts and Akeem and Da'ron were healthy, so there were a lot more options for Hare at this point this year than there were for Lynch at the same point last year.

You do have to wonder if how poorly Lynch played in the Orange Bowl and WhoCares.Org Bowl had to do with the fact he spent the previous 3 months getting his ass kicked once a week. His passing numbers the last 3 games of last year were pretty bad. You would have to think the beating he took had something to do with that.

(12-09-2014 10:26 AM)7 Wrote:  You do have to wonder if how poorly Lynch played in the Orange Bowl and WhoCares.Org Bowl had to do with the fact he spent the previous 3 months getting his ass kicked once a week. His passing numbers the last 3 games of last year were pretty bad. You would have to think the beating he took had something to do with that.

Definitely. If you go back and watch him in both MACC's he started, he has no burst. He got the job done running the offense because he was f*^&ing JL6, but he was not the same.