We could still go 9-3.

lol

(09-23-2016 09:36 AM)RedandBlackAttack Wrote:  lol

+1. 3-9 is much closer to reality.

(09-23-2016 09:40 AM)Dog Fan Wrote:  

(09-23-2016 09:36 AM)RedandBlackAttack Wrote:  lol

+1. 3-9 is much closer to reality.

this is a good football team whose recent dip can be directly related to Drew Hares injuries and 3 very difficult non com games 2 of which were tough road trips. Think how much of our offense was related to yardage the QB made. I think I would play Maddie. I think he can throw as good as Graham and probably can run better. Have to get running game going. As Coach Novak told me a few years ago as we were riding high, that there will be a time when things don't go as well and that is when the fan base will be tested.

(09-23-2016 10:20 AM)GCD70 Wrote:  

(09-23-2016 09:40 AM)Dog Fan Wrote:  

(09-23-2016 09:36 AM)RedandBlackAttack Wrote:  lol

+1. 3-9 is much closer to reality.

this is a good football team whose recent dip can be directly related to Drew Hares injuries and 3 very difficult non com games 2 of which were tough road trips. Think how much of our offense was related to yardage the QB made. I think I would play Maddie. I think he can throw as good as Graham and probably can run better. Have to get running game going. As Coach Novak told me a few years ago as we were riding high, that there will be a time when things don't go as well and that is when the fan base will be tested.

I agree about using Maddie. We have very little to use. However, before we give up on Graham, I would love to see two QBs on the field, with Maddie at WR - and actually use the two as alternating QBs at the same time. Pass to Maddie, who passes to another WR or the TE. Pass to Maddie to move the D and then a pass back to Graham. Hand off to Maddie on a jet sweep, who stops dead and passes. Of course, this will take some split-second timing and receivers who are where they need to be, but the goal here would be to confuse the D. We are not good enough to get through the game without some trickery. At least Rod is (was) good for some trickery.

Yeah maybe if we had Lynch or Harnish at QB.

(09-23-2016 10:20 AM)GCD70 Wrote:  

(09-23-2016 09:40 AM)Dog Fan Wrote:  

(09-23-2016 09:36 AM)RedandBlackAttack Wrote:  lol

+1. 3-9 is much closer to reality.

this is a good football team whose recent dip can be directly related to Drew Hares injuries and 3 very difficult non com games 2 of which were tough road trips. Think how much of our offense was related to yardage the QB made. I think I would play Maddie. I think he can throw as good as Graham and probably can run better. Have to get running game going. As Coach Novak told me a few years ago as we were riding high, that there will be a time when things don't go as well and that is when the fan base will be tested.

There will always be reasons/excuses for losses. A good team overcomes these. We are not a good OOC team. Let's see is we can continue being a good MAC team in a much-improved conference.

Okay yeah, so we're not a good OOC team. This thread title is literally referencing the MAC play, and not OOC soooo

(09-23-2016 10:40 AM)zdsmith Wrote:  Okay yeah, so we're not a good OOC team. This thread title is literally referencing the MAC play, and not OOC soooo

Okay, so we're nowhere near good enough to run the table from here on out. If you think we're good enough to beat WMU, CMU, and Toledo with a second-string QB and weak O and D line play, well, pass me the pipe. Yes, we can improve - to a point. But IMO nowhere near the level of the 3 top teams in the West.

Hare doesn't play defense. We've allowed an average of 41 points per game in our last 6 games dating back to the Ohio game late last season. Sure, having Hare might have extended drives keeping our opponents off the field and keeping their scoring down some. But, our defense has been well below average also.

(09-23-2016 10:56 AM)Field Turf Wrote:  Hare doesn't play defense. We've allowed an average of 41 points per game in our last 6 games dating back to the Ohio game late last season. Sure, having Hare might have extended drives keeping our opponents off the field and keeping their scoring down some. But, our defense has been well below average also.

it sure helps when you set the tone on offense.

Win tomorrow then run the MAC. Its still possible my friends

NIU total defensive rank: #121
NIU rushing defense rank: #122
NIU penalty yardage rank: #116
NIU punting: #89 (out of 97)

WMU is #10 in rushing offense (ahead of USF and SDSU) and Toledo is #25

Toledo and Central Michigan currently have top 15 defenses and WMU is #30.

With a lot of the big MAC games early the defense needs to figure it out fast or NIU will be out of the race by mid-October.

(09-23-2016 11:08 AM)HuskieTap22 Wrote:  NIU total defensive rank: #121
NIU rushing defense rank: #122
NIU penalty yardage rank: #116
NIU punting: #89 (out of 97)

WMU is #10 in rushing offense (ahead of USF and SDSU) and Toledo is #25

Toledo and Central Michigan currently have top 15 defenses and WMU is #30.

With a lot of the big MAC games early the defense needs to figure it out fast or NIU will be out of the race by mid-October.

BEAT WESTERN ILLINOIS. That is all.

Can't win 9 without winning ONE.

And the Bears are going to go 14-2!

we started 2011 2-3 before going 9 in a row and winning the MAC.
we started 2010 off 1-2 (and that one was against a tough north dakota) before going on a nine game tear.

so, there is precedent for us, bc frankly that Wyoming game should have been a win. it wasn't but we've seen this before and we've been able to get our act together in the past.

(09-23-2016 12:12 PM)thehappyhuskie Wrote:  we started 2011 2-3 before going 9 in a row and winning the MAC.
we started 2010 off 1-2 (and that one was against a tough north dakota) before going on a nine game tear.

so, there is precedent for us, bc frankly that Wyoming game should have been a win. it wasn't but we've seen this before and we've been able to get our act together in the past.

Yeah but it at least felt like we were competitive in those games, except maybe against Wisconsin who had Russel Wilson. Truth be told when Doeren lost to CMU in 2011 I wasn't optimistic about the season but he quickly shored up the problems on defense. I just don't see Carey pulling it off.

(09-23-2016 10:20 AM)GCD70 Wrote:  

(09-23-2016 09:40 AM)Dog Fan Wrote:  

(09-23-2016 09:36 AM)RedandBlackAttack Wrote:  lol

+1. 3-9 is much closer to reality.

this is a good football team whose recent dip can be directly related to Drew Hares injuries and 3 very difficult non com games 2 of which were tough road trips.[b] Think how much of our offense was related to yardage the QB made. I think I would play Maddie. I think he can throw as good as Graham and probably can run better. Have to get running game going. As Coach Novak told me a few years ago as we were riding high, that there will be a time when things don't go as well and that is when the fan base will be tested.

Good grief! So now the trip to Wyoming was a "very difficult non conference game"? Go back before that game and check out the predictions from Huskie fans. The vast majority were predicting NIU to blowout the Cowboys.

Furthermore, NIU supporters were blasting Hare's play after that Wyoming game. When he does play, he's terrible - when he is injured, he was the glue that held the team together. Can't be both ways, gang. Which is it?

The apologists for this regime fall over themselves making excuses for the losses.

Yes, the losses were bound to come, but I don't think that is what has most Huskie fans frustrated. It's how we "look" in these losses. Uninspired, disjointed, undisciplined, etc. We don't see this as a rebuilding phase that is bound to get better - it's a sinking ship that continues to take on water.

But sure...maybe Hare will return in a few weeks and all will be perfect!

(09-23-2016 11:01 AM)GCD70 Wrote:  

(09-23-2016 10:56 AM)Field Turf Wrote:  Hare doesn't play defense. We've allowed an average of 41 points per game in our last 6 games dating back to the Ohio game late last season. Sure, having Hare might have extended drives keeping our opponents off the field and keeping their scoring down some. But, our defense has been well below average also.

it sure helps when you set the tone on offense.

We routinely win the opening coin flip and then decide to kick the ball to the other team and let them get a crack at our defense first, so we can then play from behind.
So . . .

that apparently is Rod's idea of "setting the tone"