INDIANA STATE.

[EQguy]

Re: INDIANA STATE.

I watched the condensed video. I like three screen plays! If Sumner makes a better pass, Jones would have scored a TD. I hope to see some screens next week.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Stig mentioned in his postgame interview with Terry V that the TE screen to Cam is a once in a lifetime deal as teams will now be prepared for it.

[Jacks-02]

Re: INDIANA STATE.

He isn't. Still hurt from the sprained ankle in Fargo.

The first time I watched it I thought he was limping bad too, but on second look I thought maybe he was just playing it safe with the ankle while trying to slow down quick before he got to the pavement at the end of the end zone.

[Jacks#1Fan]

Re: INDIANA STATE.

Belated as usual (that way I can say what I want, and very few will see it), was gone for the weekend, but want to express my opinion on the parts of this thread and others that pertain to the value of Austin Sumner to this year's team. Disclaimer: I'm not his dad (well, OK, I met his dad once). Everybody has an opinion naturally, but it is hard for me to understand why anybody would not think we could have been a better, more successful team if Sumner had not gotten injured. So what you are saying, if you don't agree, that a four-year senior starter, with all conference recognition and the stats to back it up, wouldn't likely be more productive than a sophomore transfer juco in his first seven games in Division I. That is not a knock on Lujan...it is just a logic that seems to get lost here.

We would still have the same offensive line, and defensive line, etc., and so the argument is made we would have been just as bad (or good) without him. I will just add one more thing for posters to ponder...Zach Zenner's production is down compared to last year. Opposing MVFC teams have stacked the box and figured if they stop Zenner, they win. Interesting to me, that in Sumner's first game after sitting out all those games with a broken foot, Zenner got more yards against the Bison than in the last couple of years. And those long runs that ZZ broke in past years, were largely held in check in some of our games this year...but against Indiana State, he gets a 94-yard TD and a 67-yard run (nullified by penalty).


As far as I can see, the difference in the last two games is that Sumner is in the game, and whether he is better or not, opposing coaches believe they need to shift some of their defense to the QB.

[UWMandSDSU]

Re: INDIANA STATE.

Belated as usual (that way I can say what I want, and very few will see it), was gone for the weekend, but want to express my opinion on the parts of this thread and others that pertain to the value of Austin Sumner to this year's team. Disclaimer: I'm not his dad (well, OK, I met his dad once). Everybody has an opinion naturally, but it is hard for me to understand why anybody would not think we could have been a better, more successful team if Sumner had not gotten injured. So what you are saying, if you don't agree, that a four-year senior starter, with all conference recognition and the stats to back it up, wouldn't likely be more productive than a sophomore transfer juco in his first seven games in Division I. That is not a knock on Lujan...it is just a logic that seems to get lost here.

We would still have the same offensive line, and defensive line, etc., and so the argument is made we would have been just as bad (or good) without him. I will just add one more thing for posters to ponder...Zach Zenner's production is down compared to last year. Opposing MVFC teams have stacked the box and figured if they stop Zenner, they win. Interesting to me, that in Sumner's first game after sitting out all those games with a broken foot, Zenner got more yards against the Bison than in the last couple of years. And those long runs that ZZ broke in past years, were largely held in check in some of our games this year...but against Indiana State, he gets a 94-yard TD and a 67-yard run (nullified by penalty).


As far as I can see, the difference in the last two games is that Sumner is in the game, and whether he is better or not, opposing coaches believe they need to shift some of their defense to the QB.

Zach Zenner is averaging 142.6 yds/game this year. Last year he averaged 143.9 yds/game.

[NoVaJack]

Re: INDIANA STATE.

Zach Zenner is averaging 142.6 yds/game this year. Last year he averaged 143.9 yds/game.

I was thinking the same thing. He's had a tremendously successful year without the long runs that marked previous seasons, which is the sign of a great back.

[Nidaros]

Re: INDIANA STATE.

Belated as usual (that way I can say what I want, and very few will see it), was gone for the weekend, but want to express my opinion on the parts of this thread and others that pertain to the value of Austin Sumner to this year's team. Disclaimer: I'm not his dad (well, OK, I met his dad once). Everybody has an opinion naturally, but it is hard for me to understand why anybody would not think we could have been a better, more successful team if Sumner had not gotten injured. So what you are saying, if you don't agree, that a four-year senior starter, with all conference recognition and the stats to back it up, wouldn't likely be more productive than a sophomore transfer juco in his first seven games in Division I. That is not a knock on Lujan...it is just a logic that seems to get lost here.

We would still have the same offensive line, and defensive line, etc., and so the argument is made we would have been just as bad (or good) without him. I will just add one more thing for posters to ponder...Zach Zenner's production is down compared to last year. Opposing MVFC teams have stacked the box and figured if they stop Zenner, they win. Interesting to me, that in Sumner's first game after sitting out all those games with a broken foot, Zenner got more yards against the Bison than in the last couple of years. And those long runs that ZZ broke in past years, were largely held in check in some of our games this year...but against Indiana State, he gets a 94-yard TD and a 67-yard run (nullified by penalty).


As far as I can see, the difference in the last two games is that Sumner is in the game, and whether he is better or not, opposing coaches believe they need to shift some of their defense to the QB.

I know you are not Sumner's dad, and I once knew is uncle or maybe grand uncle who was sight impaired. An SDSU grad btw. JackJD knew his other grand uncle the attorney in Watertown. This family has over come some real sight impairments and Austin seems to be free of those disabilities. The QB is the coach on the field no doubt Austin has made many, many, more good decisions then bad ones. I do think though that Lujan did a yeoman's job at stepping in when AS went down. We might have not have six wins if we had to depend on the third and fourth stringer to be the back ups. Otherwise I am in totally agreement with your take on the game.

[MontanaRabbit]

Re: INDIANA STATE.

Belated as usual (that way I can say what I want, and very few will see it), was gone for the weekend, but want to express my opinion on the parts of this thread and others that pertain to the value of Austin Sumner to this year's team. Disclaimer: I'm not his dad (well, OK, I met his dad once). Everybody has an opinion naturally, but it is hard for me to understand why anybody would not think we could have been a better, more successful team if Sumner had not gotten injured. So what you are saying, if you don't agree, that a four-year senior starter, with all conference recognition and the stats to back it up, wouldn't likely be more productive than a sophomore transfer juco in his first seven games in Division I. That is not a knock on Lujan...it is just a logic that seems to get lost here.

We would still have the same offensive line, and defensive line, etc., and so the argument is made we would have been just as bad (or good) without him. I will just add one more thing for posters to ponder...Zach Zenner's production is down compared to last year. Opposing MVFC teams have stacked the box and figured if they stop Zenner, they win. Interesting to me, that in Sumner's first game after sitting out all those games with a broken foot, Zenner got more yards against the Bison than in the last couple of years. And those long runs that ZZ broke in past years, were largely held in check in some of our games this year...but against Indiana State, he gets a 94-yard TD and a 67-yard run (nullified by penalty).


As far as I can see, the difference in the last two games is that Sumner is in the game, and whether he is better or not, opposing coaches believe they need to shift some of their defense to the QB.

Show us one person who said with Sumner we wouldn't have been any better. I don't think that was anyone's argument. There is no doubt our offense would have been more dynamic and potent with Austin. He's really good.

That being said even with Sumner we likely aren't in a position to get a seed and first round bye which was the goal according to Stig at the beginning of the year. I think that was most posters' take on the whole with/without Austin debate.

We have a shot to make the playoffs, but we a relying on a committee to put us in. Doesn't give me a warm fuzzy feeling.

[SF_Rabbit_Fan]

Re: INDIANA STATE.

Show us one person who said with Sumner we wouldn't have been any better. I don't think that was anyone's argument. There is no doubt our offense would have been more dynamic and potent with Austin. He's really good.

That being said even with Sumner we likely aren't in a position to get a seed and first round bye which was the goal according to Stig at the beginning of the year. I think that was most posters' take on the whole with/without Austin debate.

We have a shot to make the playoffs, but we a relying on a committee to put us in. Doesn't give me a warm fuzzy feeling.

Exactly. You don't win games in the MVFC to the point of seeds and bye's with the kind of defense we've put on the field this year. I'm not sure if Tom Brady under center changes that equation too much.

I think everyone can agree that it feels great to have Austin back!

[MontanaRabbit]

Re: INDIANA STATE.

Exactly. You don't win games in the MVFC to the point of seeds and bye's with the kind of defense we've put on the field this year. I'm not sure if Tom Brady under center changes that equation too much.

I think everyone can agree that it feels great to have Austin back!

First Tk, now SF Rabbit Fan and I agree on something.

Must be the weather.

[TK22867]

Re: INDIANA STATE.

Show us one person who said with Sumner we wouldn't have been any better. I don't think that was anyone's argument. There is no doubt our offense would have been more dynamic and potent with Austin. He's really good.

That being said even with Sumner we likely aren't in a position to get a seed and first round bye which was the goal according to Stig at the beginning of the year. I think that was most posters' take on the whole with/without Austin debate.

We have a shot to make the playoffs, but we a relying on a committee to put us in. Doesn't give me a warm fuzzy feeling.

I agree. No one was really debating the basis of what that certain poster had to say, but the manner in which the poster went about it was way, way, way over the top, and didn't really consider the inadequate play of the lines on both sides of the ball.

[goon]

Re: INDIANA STATE.

Zach Zenner is averaging 142.6 yds/game this year. Last year he averaged 143.9 yds/game.

5.8 yards a carry this year and 5.7 yards a carry last year. I think just the UNI and Youngstown and NDSU games his numbers are still pretty good, but not great, so it just maybe felt like his game by game wasnt as good with out the long runs. I expect some pretty good numbers from him the last 2 games of the year also. Hope he has a few more long ones left for the last 2 games of the year and the playoffs hopefully.

[SF_Rabbit_Fan]

Re: INDIANA STATE.

5.8 yards a carry this year and 5.7 yards a carry last year. I think just the UNI and Youngstown and NDSU games his numbers are still pretty good, but not great, so it just maybe felt like his game by game wasnt as good with out the long runs. I expect some pretty good numbers from him the last 2 games of the year also. Hope he has a few more long ones left for the last 2 games of the year and the playoffs hopefully.

Yep. It isn't coincidental that his seasons with 2000+ were both (multi-game) playoff years.

Last season through 10 games - 1,372 yards
This season through 10 games - 1,426 yards

If we make the playoffs, there is a very good chance Zenner reaches 2000 yards for a third straight year.

[Jacks#1Fan]

Re: INDIANA STATE.

I believe all of the recent posts in response to my post yesterday (on the value of Austin Sumner to this team) were meaningful and fair. But in defense of my argument, which I might not have made clear, I used ZZ's performance in the two games since Sumner returned to point out what I felt was a logical conclusion: he had a better game against NDSU up there, and broke several long returns on the road in Indiana than he had in the previous games this year. I believe that is at least partially due to having Austin Sumner, with his reputation and skills to back it up, in the minds of the coaches who faced us in the last two games. And I firmly believe, if that had been the case all season, that we would have fared better (with the same oline, dline etc.) than we did (possibly turning a 3-point loss on Hobo Day to a win, for instance). That's my feeling...and I'm sticking to it.

ZZ has performed like the true outstanding talent that he is, but I think everybody will agree, he has been beaten to death much of the season for every yard he grinds out. Maybe some of those would have come easier.

[SUPERBUNNY]

Re: INDIANA STATE.

I believe all of the recent posts in response to my post yesterday (on the value of Austin Sumner to this team) were meaningful and fair. But in defense of my argument, which I might not have made clear, I used ZZ's performance in the two games since Sumner returned to point out what I felt was a logical conclusion: he had a better game against NDSU up there, and broke several long returns on the road in Indiana than he had in the previous games this year. I believe that is at least partially due to having Austin Sumner, with his reputation and skills to back it up, in the minds of the coaches who faced us in the last two games. And I firmly believe, if that had been the case all season, that we would have fared better (with the same oline, dline etc.) than we did (possibly turning a 3-point loss on Hobo Day to a win, for instance). That's my feeling...and I'm sticking to it.

ZZ has performed like the true outstanding talent that he is, but I think everybody will agree, he has been beaten to death much of the season for every yard he grinds out. Maybe some of those would have come easier.

I'm with you Jacks#1fan. This isn't rocket science. Any opposing Defensive Coordinator looking at our team with Lujan (an unproven QB) in there rather than Sumner (pre-season MVFC QB) is going to focus even more on stopping ZZ and the ground game and less on the pass. That's very simple. They are still stacking to stop the run much of the time even with Sumner in there.

The thing that is a game changer is the emergence of Weineke. He is an unreal WR and along with Schneider and the other WR's demand respect any time but definitely more with Sumner back under center. What would have happened without Sumner getting hurt? I think we would have found another win but it doesn't matter. I'm just glad he is back for the team and for himself to finish his career on the field not on the sidelines.

I would think that if we win out and make into the playoffs without any more major injuries that the opposing coach would not be digging the draw. We may hit our stride and get hot at just the right time.

First things first, have to go 1-0 this week!

SUPERBUNNY

[jack power]

Re: INDIANA STATE.

I believe all of the recent posts in response to my post yesterday (on the value of Austin Sumner to this team) were meaningful and fair. But in defense of my argument, which I might not have made clear, I used ZZ's performance in the two games since Sumner returned to point out what I felt was a logical conclusion: he had a better game against NDSU up there, and broke several long returns on the road in Indiana than he had in the previous games this year. I believe that is at least partially due to having Austin Sumner, with his reputation and skills to back it up, in the minds of the coaches who faced us in the last two games. And I firmly believe, if that had been the case all season, that we would have fared better (with the same oline, dline etc.) than we did (possibly turning a 3-point loss on Hobo Day to a win, for instance). That's my feeling...and I'm sticking to it.

ZZ has performed like the true outstanding talent that he is, but I think everybody will agree, he has been beaten to death much of the season for every yard he grinds out. Maybe some of those would have come easier.

In general i think you're trying to make an argument where there is none. Btw,ZZ had one long run Saturday. They stacked the box,it had nothing to do with the presence of Sumner. It was excellent blocking and a fast running back.