Griz vs NDSU

[RationalGriz]

I thought both teams played a great game. That said, I don't see either team as the #1 team. NDSU has some horrible defense backs for being a 4 time National Champion and also their punter turned kicker is not that good. Griz looked good, but only because that offense is meant to wear down the defense. Curious what NDSU had to study for game film? Hard to watch game films from School of Mines I would think. Griz will be tested and I see both these teams losing some games down the road. Hats off to both for giving us a good start to kickoff college football. And hats off to Denny for giving the fans an amazing environment to watch games. Maybe 25 years from now our stadium will get its phase II.

I am not saying whether either of these teams will end up being #1, but since they are the only teams to have played a game, it is pretty difficult to judge them against the rest of FCS and vice versa.

[GRIZ1STCATS2ND]

Regarding CSM game film I had been wondering this the last couple weeks although I saw an article last night where one of the NDSU starters on defense said they have been pouring over his Mines film and the plays that were biting them were plays they were expecting and thought they were prepared for. Not the exact words but similar. I'll see if I can find it. It was a glimmer of hope that Stitts O just may be an issue for some of these defenses. NDSU has some work to do but Montana may be a contender sooner than four years from now.

[luckyirishguy25]

Gotta give the Griz props, they played a great game. IMO if they had a better QB and RB's they'd easily be the #1 team in the country, not saying the players won't get there, but at this point that looked to be their biggest weakness. Still the Griz looked a lot better than I thought they would, our conference is going to be crazy tough this year.

[Sportin' Life]

Polls at this point are meaningless. They were meaningless early in the season in FBS back when there was a bowl system, but they are especially meaningless in FCS with an expansive playoff system. The last thing I want is for the Griz to be highly ranked early in the season, it is better to have a chip on the shoulder. But I don't get a vote, so wherever the Griz land on the next poll, I am perfectly fine -- it won't affect the end result, whatever that will be. At this point in the season a team just wants to be in the top 30.

Gustafson played great, I am really impressed. I think QB play has improved. There were a lot of miscommunications -- maybe about 8 or 10 balls that might have been thrown well, but the receiver ran the wrong route. We don't know if those were on Gustafson, or the receivers, but I think those are likely to get cleaned up as the season goes on.

I agree that the running back play was not great. Nguyen sometimes gets tackled by a puff of air. I am not sure he had any yards after contact.

[SonomaCat]

Griz should be number 1 in my theory of polls but it probably won't happen because the pollsters give more weight to their preseason, evidence-free rankings than they do actual game results.

I would love to see the rankings move radically in the first few weeks of the season every season, but perhaps that would expose the weakness of the pollsters preseason guesses so they see to it that such reshufflings generally don't happen.

[GRIZ1STCATS2ND]

I don't think we should be #1. It was just one game and we haven't even seen any of the other top teams play. Also regarding FBS stealing Stuff....same thing, one game. I can assure you there were talks about a move up in the future when Kent met with Stitt and that is ONE of the reasons he is here. Hope he sticks along for the ride.

[Htowngriz]

Gotta give the Griz props, they played a great game. IMO if they had a better QB and RB's they'd easily be the #1 team in the country, not saying the players won't get there, but at this point that looked to be their biggest weakness. Still the Griz looked a lot better than I thought they would, our conference is going to be crazy tough this year.

Better QB? That was Gus' first collegiate start, and all he did was throw for 430 against the 4 time champs.

[TomCat88]

Is UM's secondary that good or are NDSU's WRs that bad? Those guys got no separation all game.

[catscat]

I'm no offensive guru (or any other kind for that matter) so can someone explain what was innovative about the stitt offense in this game. The only thing I saw that stood out to me was what I thought was a significant number of short passes, mostly over the middle, and under the pass coverage that usually went for anywhere from 6 - 10 yards. There seemed nothing special about the run game nor the downfield passing game other than the receivers did get some separation on the ndsu defenders. I guess the trick play resulting in the fumble was somewhat innovative, but other teams run that type play with relative frequency.

Also, did I miss the "fast paced" part? The offense lined up fairly quickly, but then often were not that quick in actually running the play. I've watched MSU do this for years (as well as some other BSC teams) so what's the big deal? Going for it on 4th down doesn't seem that innovative after watching the number of times, field positions, and required yardages that Cal Poly goes on 4th down. Even the 'Cats go on 4th down albeit a bit more conservatively.

I found stitt's half-time interview interesting when he said the griz had run 45 plays in the first half so ndsu would really be tired in the 4th quarter. Apparently the griz are immune to this phenomenon because ndsu ran 41 plays in the first half. (I can't imagine that a highly conditioned college athlete notices that much difference in 4 plays). Maybe I'm missing something here so feel free to point out what it is.

Thanks in advance for the enlightenment.

[Griznationalist]

Is UM's secondary that good or are NDSU's WRs that bad? Those guys got no separation all game.

Montana led the BSC last season in pass defense efficiency, lowest average yards per opponent's pass completion, and red zone defense. I double-checked this fact on the BSC website, but I had thought it to be the case before I checked. I think NDSU has a strong receiving corps. The Bison just happened to face on Saturday one of the top two defenses they will meet all season.

[Griznationalist]

I'm no offensive guru (or any other kind for that matter) so can someone explain what was innovative about the stitt offense in this game. The only thing I saw that stood out to me was what I thought was a significant number of short passes, mostly over the middle, and under the pass coverage that usually went for anywhere from 6 - 10 yards. There seemed nothing special about the run game nor the downfield passing game other than the receivers did get some separation on the ndsu defenders. I guess the trick play resulting in the fumble was somewhat innovative, but other teams run that type play with relative frequency.

Also, did I miss the "fast paced" part? The offense lined up fairly quickly, but then often were not that quick in actually running the play. I've watched MSU do this for years (as well as some other BSC teams) so what's the big deal? Going for it on 4th down doesn't seem that innovative after watching the number of times, field positions, and required yardages that Cal Poly goes on 4th down. Even the 'Cats go on 4th down albeit a bit more conservatively.

I found stitt's half-time interview interesting when he said the griz had run 45 plays in the first half so ndsu would really be tired in the 4th quarter. Apparently the griz are immune to this phenomenon because ndsu ran 41 plays in the first half. (I can't imagine that a highly conditioned college athlete notices that much difference in 4 plays). Maybe I'm missing something here so feel free to point out what it is.

Thanks in advance for the enlightenment.

Montana did not huddle and converted 4 of 6 fourth down attempts. When was the last time you saw no huddles and the winning team attempting even half that many fourth downs? If you sincerely, genuinely answer the question instead of answering with another question or a rhetorical comeback, the enlightenment will be self-evident. Last time you saw no huddles and the winning team going for it on 6 fourth downs?

[Hawks86]

Montana did not huddle and converted 4 of 6 fourth down attempts. When was the last time you saw no huddles and the winning team attempting even half that many fourth downs? If you sincerely, genuinely answer the question instead of answering with another question or a rhetorical comeback, the enlightenment will be self-evident. Last time you saw no huddles and the winning team going for it on 6 fourth downs?

Why does it have to be the winning team for it to be innovative to go for it on 4th down? We had a few 3 for 3 4th down conversions last year and led the league in 4th down conversions. It really won't feel innovative when he is 1 of 6.

[Griznationalist]

You answered with a question and you provided no answer.

When was the last time you saw a team not huddle (from the first to the last play of the game), and attempt 6 fourth-down conversions?

If you answer genuinely, your answer will self-evidently establish the innovative aspect.

[Griznationalist]

For catscat, the answer is in why NFL and college coaches are traveling to Missoula and other places to learn Stitt's innovative plays. But these guys are just professionals at the trade.

http://www.foxsports.com/college-footba ... nes-082915

[GRIZ1STCATS2ND]

Time of possession compared to number of offensive plays run.....yes not fast paced at all.

[Griznationalist]

You do not understand "fast-paced."

Fast-paced does not mean frenetic. It is about not huddling (to keep the D disorganized) and THEN getting to the line and taking your time to almost let the play clock run out before the snap (trust me, that's no "breather" opportunity for the D). It eats clock, keeps the D winded, and the additional plays come through the 4th-down conversion series (not through frenetic rushed playcalling of the no-huddle 2-minute drill nature).

[91catAlum]

You answered with a question and you provided no answer.

When was the last time you saw a team not huddle (from the first to the last play of the game), and attempt 6 fourth-down conversions?

If you answer genuinely, your answer will self-evidently establish the innovative aspect.

Going for six 4th downs is certainly ballsy, nobody's taking that away. But is it innovative?
I guess it depends on how you define innovative.

[Griznationalist]

It's more than that. I posted above a link to a national story on why NFL and college coaches are coming to Missoula and to clinics elsewhere that Stitt attends to learn his innovations. Here's another piece of insight into it:

http://www.foxsports.com/college-footba ... ens-112114

[catscat]

I'm no offensive guru (or any other kind for that matter) so can someone explain what was innovative about the stitt offense in this game. The only thing I saw that stood out to me was what I thought was a significant number of short passes, mostly over the middle, and under the pass coverage that usually went for anywhere from 6 - 10 yards. There seemed nothing special about the run game nor the downfield passing game other than the receivers did get some separation on the ndsu defenders. I guess the trick play resulting in the fumble was somewhat innovative, but other teams run that type play with relative frequency.

Also, did I miss the "fast paced" part? The offense lined up fairly quickly, but then often were not that quick in actually running the play. I've watched MSU do this for years (as well as some other BSC teams) so what's the big deal? Going for it on 4th down doesn't seem that innovative after watching the number of times, field positions, and required yardages that Cal Poly goes on 4th down. Even the 'Cats go on 4th down albeit a bit more conservatively.

I found stitt's half-time interview interesting when he said the griz had run 45 plays in the first half so ndsu would really be tired in the 4th quarter. Apparently the griz are immune to this phenomenon because ndsu ran 41 plays in the first half. (I can't imagine that a highly conditioned college athlete notices that much difference in 4 plays). Maybe I'm missing something here so feel free to point out what it is.

Thanks in advance for the enlightenment.

Montana did not huddle and converted 4 of 6 fourth down attempts. When was the last time you saw no huddles and the winning team attempting even half that many fourth downs? If you sincerely, genuinely answer the question instead of answering with another question or a rhetorical comeback, the enlightenment will be self-evident. Last time you saw no huddles and the winning team going for it on 6 fourth downs?

I've seen MSU as a winning team that went the whole game with no huddles and win without having to go for it 6 times on 4th down on numerous occasions. Going for it on 4th down is not innovation. It may be gutsy if you can't get a first down in 3 attempts, but it isn't innovative. Case in point is how many times Cal Poly goes on 4th down. I suspect you'll see some of that soon. No huddle is not innovative - as I indicated, MSU has done it for years. Lots of other teams do it as well. I'm still waiting for a credible explanation as to what was innovative about what I saw on Saturday. BTW, seems to me that the definition of an innovative team would be one that could get first downs in 3 rather than 4 downs. Having to "go" on fourth down is not a sign of success. Kudos to the griz for converting on them and having the guts to "go," but, once again, that doesn't define or explain innovation.

[catscat]

It's more than that. I posted above a link to a national story on why NFL and college coaches are coming to Missoula and to clinics elsewhere that Stitt attends to learn his innovations. Here's another piece of insight into it:

http://www.foxsports.com/college-footba ... ens-112114

Your links don't provide insight as to what is innovative. I think lots of people know about the back shoulder throw. At least I hear about it lots and if I hear about it, it must be pretty common knowledge. So others think stitt is innovative, but you've yet to provide an explanation of what was innovative on Saturday. (Other than the no huddle, go for it on fourth - which is neither innovative or explanatory). All I saw was good execution of a rather common offense. Still waiting for the enlightenment.