Turk's Game Analysis and Individual Player & Unit Grades

[Turk]

Mr All Turk: Gibson
All Turk Awards: Niswander, Jackson, Gibson, Lowry, Lancaster, Walker, Harris, Godwin, Brown, Ifeadi, Hall

Refs: Grade F
Thank God for instant replay because these asshat refs wanted to give isconsin 3 TD's. Also, with 5 seconds left, they gave isconsin another shot when they refused to call illegal motion on a dizzy Stave. Clement had a heads up play noticing that Gibson's pounding of Stave had him woozy. Also, a no call on a blatant kick to Jackson's face.

isconsin fans: Grade F
A completely bull shit thing for them to throw snowballs, one of which hammered Jackson. Damn thing must have hurt like hell.

Head Coach: Fitz Grade A+ and Turk's coveted Gold Star for the first time this year.
Dominating to the point where we intimidated the isconsin team. Relentless is an understatement. Never have I witnessed a complete and thorough bitch slap to an offense. And it was awesome that we did it to a wisconsin team. Letting the defensive players make the last play call, [one that knocked Stave out] by not blitzing because Lowry felt the front 4 could get to Stave was also interesting. I thought that Fitz made the right decisions 100% of the time, including not killing the clock at the end of the first half. Perfect coaching all around.

DC: Hankwitz : Grade A+ and the Gold Star.
Wow. We barely had to blitz all game. One corner blitz, some really nice stunting, and basically the front 4 dominated on passing downs.

OC: McCall: Grade: B-
Unlike many, I felt his game plan was exactly what was needed. Look, I'm a critic and I'll criticize if I feel it is warrented, but I'll also give credit where it is needed. And this week, for the second week in a row, I feel that the attacks on McCall and our offensive game plan is unwarranted. Two things folks should consider:
1. The Wisconsin defense is for real and NO OTHER team scored as many points as our offense did at Camp Randall all year. They only average giving up 5 points a game at home. A much better Iowa offense only scored 10 points as well, even though Iowa received many TO's as well. Wisconsin's defense is the best in the nation statistically, and watching them yesterday solidified that. Combine that with a QB that still doesn't 'get it' and I believe McCall managed the situation the best he could. People ask what about the high % passes that McCall could have asked Thorson to pass. Well, he did, we even called basic RB screens that are usually VERY safe, but Thorson choked and passed the ball right in the chest of a Wiscy defender. We ran very safe TE crossing routes, and THorson could barely throw the ball. When we tried to pass the ball downfield....it was open....yet Thorson completely whiffed and was DAMN Lucky he didn't have INT"s. I mean, the only way we could have lost this game was if McCall pushed the needle to the right and relied more on Thorson. Thankfully, McCall didn't. The only tweak I would have done is put in Long. Jackson looked gassed and seemed to lose his legs. What is wrong with running Long? Sure he didn't make the 4th and 1 but how about allowing Long to relieve Jackson. Jackson will be spent by his Junior year running like this. At any rate, that is the ONLY thing I would have done differently. Credit given to Wisconsin's defense.

OL: Grade B-
Interesting play given only 3 or 4 plays in the playbook. Two guards pull right or two guards pull left. That said, I believe Olson and Hence struggled MIGHTEDLY and we had problems with the ends. However, Mahoney and North, imo, won their battles and created running room. North had a few pancakes believe it or not and imo was VERY impressive. I know folks are going to hammer me on this but I really think one should consider that _isconsin knew exactly who was getting the ball on every play. That said, there were still small holes and gritty blocking. VERY few lost yardages. Our offense is one dimensional: Jackson. We don't even allow Thorson or anyone else to run other than the few times THorson would predictively be called to run.

WR: Grade Incomplete. We simply do not have a dependable throwing QB so this group really is an incomplete.

QB: Grade D-
Still needs serious work. Think Kafka as a freshman. Talented but doesn't understand squat and can NOT be depended upon. Very stubborn QB who has yet to smash down his poor tendencies. Clayton, will you please STOP rolling out to your right every damn time??? The whole _isconsin defense shifts because of this when you pass. You give yourself and the wide outs NO chance. Even on a few occasions that I saw on TV, if you ever did try to scramble on the left side, it would be WIDE OPEN. Do you remember Nebraska when you scrambled twice to your left and broke your tendencies.....you ran for like 50 yards on both times. Watch the freakn tape, son! The entire isconsin defense just rotated to your right because they damn sure know that after 2 seconds that you will bail out, forget everything you were taught and boot right. Wake up Kid because Turk is putting this inept offense on YOU. You can do it but you have to LEARN and stop the stubborn and lazy tendencies. Stop the insanity. Your coaches can't trust you due to you NOT listening. Wake up!

RB: Grade B+
solid running, no fumbles, tough gritty running.

Special Teams: Grade B
FG needed and made by Mr Dependable. Sure, Mitchell looked Gosh Awful on his kicks but when the 4th quarter arrives and the bame is on the line, he is Mr Money. The punting was phenomenal. 3 or 4 Inside the 20. Punt coverage was awesome. Kickoff TB solid. KO return ol. Punt return fine.

DL: Grade A+
Odd how Millan kept praising Lowry, as well he should, but then not say much about the MAIN guy yesterday. Gibson was a beast for his second game in a row. Quick, and powerful. Lancaster also had a nice game and Ifeadi wrecked havoc.

LB: Grade A
Walker was solid and I was glad to see him getting off blocks as well yesterday. His pass defense was also phenomenal with the one INT and a great PBU. Hall was ok, missed a few tackles but overall decent. Smith played very good but missed a tackle or two.

DB: Grade B
I felt Van Hoose got spent most of the time to the point where Stave knew exactly where to go with the ball. Poor game by Nick. Harris played solid all around. Missed two glaring tackles [two TD's, one of which was called back], but also locked down one side of the field all day and had two monster impact plays of the game. one fumble recovery, and a pbu that ended the ball game on a well thrown ball.

 

[gocatsgo2003]

How in the world could we call Mitchell "Mr. Dependable" after the last couple of weeks?

 

[NJCat83588]

How in the world could we call Mitchell "Mr. Dependable" after the last couple of weeks?

Hows about "Mr. Dependable Late in the Fourth Quarter"?

 

[Turk]

How in the world could we call Mitchell "Mr. Dependable" after the last couple of weeks?

quote mining someone is bad taste. Either that or you have little to no reading comprehension skills.
Step into my classroom.
When someone uses disclaimers , ie, 4th quarter kicks when the game is on the line, the proper reading is to limit the thought to the durational clause given.

Your mistake is that you have no idea how to read so you failed to consider the durational fence i posted. Thus it was quite easy for you to misinterpret your rendering of what was said, and unrestrict the fenced language and come to the false conclusion that mitchell has been undependable over a much longer and inaccurate period.

-5 gcg.

 

[cat inkansas]

quote mining someone is bad taste. Either that or you have little to no reading comprehension skills.
Step into my classroom.
When someone uses disclaimers , ie, 4th quarter kicks when the game is on the line, the proper reading is to limit the thought to the durational clause given.

Your mistake is that you have no idea how to read so you failed to consider the durational fence i posted. Thus it was quite easy for you to misinterpret your rendering of what was said, and unrestrict the fenced language and come to the false conclusion that mitchell has been undependable over a much longer and inaccurate period.

-5 gcg.

Two comments: 1) agree with analysis concerning McCall, considering our passing attack, it is amazing he does as well as he does; 2) need to mention Harris preventing the ball from entering the end zone on the punt that nailed them deep in their own territory----a pretty athletic play.

 

[Turk]

Two comments: 1) agree with analysis concerning McCall, considering our passing attack, it is amazing he does as well as he does; 2) need to mention Harris preventing the ball from entering the end zone on the punt that nailed them deep in their own territory----a pretty athletic play.

harris' batted ball on that pubt was phenomenal as well as his recovered fumble on the punt and his pbu to end the game. He makes alot of plays and i cant mention all of them all the time. notably, he takes away those screens as well. screens killed us against iowa when harris and his quickness wasnt there to lock it down.

 

[gocatsgo2003]

quote mining someone is bad taste. Either that or you have little to no reading comprehension skills.
Step into my classroom.
When someone uses disclaimers , ie, 4th quarter kicks when the game is on the line, the proper reading is to limit the thought to the durational clause given.

Your mistake is that you have no idea how to read so you failed to consider the durational fence i posted. Thus it was quite easy for you to misinterpret your rendering of what was said, and unrestrict the fenced language and come to the false conclusion that mitchell has been undependable over a much longer and inaccurate period.

-5 gcg.

Your problem is you say inaccurate things with unclear phrasing and think they're true.

 

[Turk]

Your problem is you say inaccurate things with unclear phrasing and think they're true.

your problem is that you selective read when you have to fit yourself into the jerk category of parsing every word i say.

never mind my constant misspelling.

 

[gocatsgo2003]

your problem is that you selective read when you have to fit yourself into the jerk category of parsing every word i say.

never mind my constant misspelling.

I can't take you seriously when you say there are 3 or 4 plays in the playbook.

 

[GlideCat]

I can't take you seriously when you say there are 3 or 4 plays in the playbook.

I noted that statement but did not mind it. Coach McCall appeared to pare down the playbook for this game against a truly exceptional defense. If I take Turk's statement as mildly metaphorical and regarding this game only (which I believe to be correct), then it is just a turn of phrase rather than meant to be technically accurate.

 

[Turk]

GCG, there is no possible way in which you can take me seriously when you reduce your readings to a strict literal reading and do not recognize context or expression of speech. For instance, the statement that we were only running 3 plays all game was never intended to be read literally. The proper reading was that we limited our playbook. Look, I dont have time to continue tutoring you on 4th grade english skills.

 

[iskaboo]

Turk, meaning no offense, it would be a lot easier for some of us if you simply wrote what you mean to say rather than make the reader decide if you meant something different from the literal meaning.

 

[gocatsgo2003]

GCG, there is no possible way in which you can take me seriously when you reduce your readings to a strict literal reading and do not recognize context or expression of speech. For instance, the statement that we were only running 3 plays all game was never intended to be read literally. The proper reading was that we limited our playbook. Look, I dont have time to continue tutoring you on 4th grade english skills.

Reading the words that are written? How silly.

And I assure you my English skills are much more advanced than the 4th grade.

 

[Turk]

carry

Reading the words that are written? How silly.

And I assure you my English skills are much more advanced than the 4th grade.

Carry on!

 

[Turk]

Turk, meaning no offense, it would be a lot easier for some of us if you simply wrote what you mean to say rather than make the reader decide if you meant something different from the literal meaning.

Nah. what i have said is easy to understand in this casual reading. GCG just makes silly strawmen to point out all my ignorance and very very bad problems. lol.

I take his post as a compliment since his only tantrum was that I somehow believe that we only have 3 plays in our playbook.

 

[GlideCat]

Turk, meaning no offense, it would be a lot easier for some of us if you simply wrote what you mean to say rather than make the reader decide if you meant something different from the literal meaning.

And what fun would that be? Strict, literal recitation of facts? Boring! Give me a little metaphor and some downright hyperbole. Bring it on! Otherwise what the heck could we have senseless off-topic grammatical arguments about? This is the NU Board, darn it! Its not what you say but how you say it!

And here are a few more exclamation points in homage to the Wrassler !!!!!!!!!

 

[gocatsgo2003]

Nah. what i have said is easy to understand in this casual reading. GCG just makes silly strawmen to point out all my ignorance and very very bad problems. lol.

I take his post as a compliment since his only tantrum was that I somehow believe that we only have 3 plays in our playbook.

You really want me to point out everything I think was terrible about your rankings?

 

[ToledoCat]

Nice to see Brown get a win in relief of Henry. I did not see him get exposed. Hope TH is back soon. Brown did ok vs. Ball State in relief as well.

 

[chicagocatfan24]

You really want me to point out everything I think was terrible about your rankings?

I would LOVE if you did this.

He did say we hardly blitzed. Fitz said we blitzed a lot. LOL

 

[Turk]

You really want me to point out everything I think was terrible about your rankings?

carry on!

 

[Turk]

I would LOVE if you did this.

He did say we hardly blitzed. Fitz said we blitzed a lot. LOL

now that is interesting. I didnt see alot of blitzing. Where did Fitz say that?

 

[NJCat83588]

now that is interesting. I didnt see alot of blitzing. Where did Fitz say that?

Not sure about Pat, but Lowry said so in the post-game interview Lou posted:

"Lowry on pass rush: In the first half, we blitzed a lot. In the second half, we went straight more. It was a combination of mixing things up, being aggressive, playing both schemes."

 

[phatcat]

Interestingly, I think we might have fared better if we had been even MORE conservative on a couple of drives. We would run wide and lose yards or throw incomplete and preserve clock for Wisky. With Jack's dodgy kicking, maybe a few yards (and a few less ticks for Wisky) might have made it easier.

This is splitting hairs. I just thought it was interesting that we might have benefitted from it.

 

[gocatsgo2003]

carry on!

So I take that as "no matter what you say, I'll keep saying dumb things"?

 

[Turk]

Not sure about Pat, but Lowry said so in the post-game interview Lou posted:

"Lowry on pass rush: In the first half, we blitzed a lot. In the second half, we went straight more. It was a combination of mixing things up, being aggressive, playing both schemes."

that makes sense. i only noticed a few early blitzes but if lowry said they blitzed alot in the first half, thats good enuf for me. what i found interesting is how Doc allowed lowey and the defense to makethe call on the stave sack. lowry told hankwitz that they wanted to play it straight because the d felt that they could get to the qb with pressure without blitzing. i stand corrected though, as what i saw from my perspective was only a few first half blitzes.
+1 for njcat

 

[Turk]

So I take that as "no matter what you say, I'll keep saying dumb things"?

what i present is my perspective, based on what i observed. Then i appreciate intelligent discussion that adds to my analysis, whether in agreement or not. When other perspectives are added, it prunes or enforces or changes my grades or overall analysis. My writing style is fairly casual and metaphorical with the use of hyperbole and little to no spellcheck. If you disagree with my analysis then fine, but on a weekly basis you fail to engage in the discussion in any constructive way but instead get bogged down with your pettiness that my grammar is incorrect or that somehow im presenting my perspective as the truth. For instance, you cant possibly believe that i only think our offense ran 3 plays.
regards,

 

[GlideCat]

Very stubborn QB who has yet to smash down his poor tendencies. You can do it but you have to LEARN and stop the stubborn and lazy tendencies. Stop the insanity. Your coaches can't trust you due to you NOT listening. Wake up!

I do question your statement that you are presenting these posts as your opinion only. I reference the above as statements like "Very stubborn QB...", "stubborn and lazy tendencies", and "Your coaches can't trust you due to you not listening" which are not the type of statements that would generally be made as opinion. Those are very odd things to say unless you have rock solid inside information from the coaching staff.

 

[Turk]

I do question your statement that you are presenting these posts as your opinion only. I reference the above as statements like "Very stubborn QB...", "stubborn and lazy tendencies", and "Your coaches can't trust you due to you not listening" which are not the type of statements that would generally be made as opinion. Those are very odd things to say unless you have rock solid inside information from the coaching staff.

my opinion based on observance and play calling. Perhaps it is not true, but based on what i observe, it is what i conclude.
My conclusion is based on a game plan that completely took Thorson ot of the game. They simply ddnt trust that he could make plays. If _isconsin had scored that last TD then i suspectthis and the infficiencies out of the qb position would be more glaring. And all learning is condition of being able to learn new tricks as opposed to default patterns we establish along the way. When _isconsins defense is already keyin and anticipating the Thorson right rollout, im almost certain McCall doesnt teach many of the things Thorson defaults to. Its called experience, and Thorson doesnthave it. He may at a later time but i see little evidence that he has learned from the Stanford game.

 

[gocatsgo2003]

what i present is my perspective, based on what i observed. Then i appreciate intelligent discussion that adds to my analysis, whether in agreement or not. When other perspectives are added, it prunes or enforces or changes my grades or overall analysis. My writing style is fairly casual and metaphorical with the use of hyperbole and little to no spellcheck. If you disagree with my analysis then fine, but on a weekly basis you fail to engage in the discussion in any constructive way but instead get bogged down with your pettiness that my grammar is incorrect or that somehow im presenting my perspective as the truth. For instance, you cant possibly believe that i only think our offense ran 3 plays.
regards,

Casual writing that relies on use of hyperbolic metaphors without even bothering to use spell check (which is automatic on either a computer or a phone) with conclusions that change when presented with even a shred of evidence just adds up to lazy writing that isn't meant to do much else than get a reaction out of people.

Calling Mitchell "Mr. Dependable" after consecutive shaky performances, insisting that the poor passing offense is completely on Thorson instead of at least sharing blame with the wideouts, and not even bothering to give Jackson a mention when he was easily one of our best three players on the field are not examples of hyperbole or metaphor. They're just dumb comments. And it's not "quote mining" to point out dumb comments.

 

[GlideCat]

For the record...

I like the Turk's Game Analysis Posts and always read them through. My points are intended as constructive criticism. If you are going to cross the line from saying that a player made specific errors in a specific game to saying that he is personally stubborn and is not listening to his coaches, then you have to have solid information. The statement that someone is not listening to their coaches is a statement of fact and not an opinion. If that is true, then it speaks to the young man's character more than his experience level. To phrase it such that it appears to be fact when it is just opinion is inappropriate to the audience and unfair to the player.

If you keep your reports down to observable facts and clearly defined opinions directly based on those facts (albeit with some metaphor and hyberbole for style) then your reports are great.

 

[Wrestlerneverdiesasacatfan]

Overall, accurately reported. I think Thorson gets a B! Coach didn't want any picks. We played better offense than Wisky! Solid,solid game!

 

[Johnnybigcat]

Great analysis Turk, good to see you giving our OL some loving. I also loved the pancake by Brad on our touchdown.
What are your thoughts about next week?

 

[Turk]

Great analysis Turk, good to see you giving our OL some loving. I also loved the pancake by Brad on our touchdown.
What are your thoughts about next week?

I wals impressed with Mahoney and North. North's panake block on Jacksons TD was phenomenal. North by Northwestern.

 

[CoralSpringsCat]

I wals impressed with Mahoney and North. North's panake block on Jacksons TD was phenomenal. North by Northwestern.

Nice to see so many of our returning OL with meaningful playing time. Our running should be even better next year.

 

[Purple is Forever]

Casual writing that relies on use of hyperbolic metaphors without even bothering to use spell check (which is automatic on either a computer or a phone) with conclusions that change when presented with even a shred of evidence just adds up to lazy writing that isn't meant to do much else than get a reaction out of people.

Calling Mitchell "Mr. Dependable" after consecutive shaky performances, insisting that the poor passing offense is completely on Thorson instead of at least sharing blame with the wideouts, and not even bothering to give Jackson a mention when he was easily one of our best three players on the field are not examples of hyperbole or metaphor. They're just dumb comments. And it's not "quote mining" to point out dumb comments.

You are one reason why I seldom post. I'm not sure if you just like to poke at Turk because you are friends or if you are just being a jerk and wasting our time once again. If you are just being a jerk again, then please go waste your time somewhere else.

Here is what Turk said, and there was nothing casual about it.

"FG needed and made by Mr Dependable. Sure, Mitchell looked Gosh Awful on his kicks but when the 4th quarter arrives and the bame is on the line, he is Mr Money."

It is well known that Mitchell is not only the most dependable kicker in college football after the 3rd quarter, but he also has been automatic and hasn't missed, ever, in his college career.

You claim to be close to the program, so you must know that Mitchell is 15-15 throughout his career in the 4th quarter, including 1 overtime kick against Notre Dame. He has won big games for us over his career. It's like the kid has ice running through his veins.

When the 4th quarter arrives, dependable is an understatement.

 

[chicagocatfan24]

You are one reason why I seldom post. I'm not sure if you just like to poke at Turk because you are friends or if you are just being a jerk and wasting our time once again. If you are just being a jerk again, then please go waste your time somewhere else.

Here is what Turk said, and there was nothing casual about it.

"FG needed and made by Mr Dependable. Sure, Mitchell looked Gosh Awful on his kicks but when the 4th quarter arrives and the bame is on the line, he is Mr Money."

It is well known that Mitchell is not only the most dependable kicker in college football after the 3rd quarter, but he also has been automatic and hasn't missed, ever, in his college career.

You claim to be close to the program, so you must know that Mitchell is 15-15 throughout his career in the 4th quarter, including 1 overtime kick against Notre Dame. He has won big games for us over his career. It's like the kid has ice running through his veins.

When the 4th quarter arrives, dependable is an understatement.

Totally disagree. More people need to call out Turk. Like Glidecat said, he speaks in a way that is completely manipulative of the truth if one can't sniff out that he's full of sh*t. He claims he's giving his opinion, but like Glidecat says, his rhetoric absolutely tries to make it seem like he has inside knowledge of the innerworkings of the program, and those who know better, like myself and GCG, cannot stand to see complete fallacies being construed as truth.

It'd be 1000% different if his rankings and other posts were meant to be a starting point of discussion like he claims. We're all fans and we all love NU football, and it's fun to discuss the team with other people who share our diehardedness. But Turk's rankings and other posts calling out McCall, Thorson (who he basically considered the messiah last year), etc. aren't meant to be discussion points, they're meant for a way to goad people into believing that he is closer to the program and knows the game of football way more than he actually does. Like I said, if you do have any football knowledge or ties to the innards of the program, you know he's making up BS just for making up BS's sake, and it's really infuriating.

 

[Purple is Forever]

Mr All Turk: Gibson
All Turk Awards: Niswander, Jackson, Gibson, Lowry, Lancaster, Walker, Harris, Godwin, Brown, Ifeadi, Hall

Refs: Grade F
Thank God for instant replay because these asshat refs wanted to give isconsin 3 TD's. Also, with 5 seconds left, they gave isconsin another shot when they refused to call illegal motion on a dizzy Stave. Clement had a heads up play noticing that Gibson's pounding of Stave had him woozy. Also, a no call on a blatant kick to Jackson's face.

isconsin fans: Grade F
A completely bull shit thing for them to throw snowballs, one of which hammered Jackson. Damn thing must have hurt like hell.

Head Coach: Fitz Grade A+ and Turk's coveted Gold Star for the first time this year.
Dominating to the point where we intimidated the isconsin team. Relentless is an understatement. Never have I witnessed a complete and thorough bitch slap to an offense. And it was awesome that we did it to a wisconsin team. Letting the defensive players make the last play call, [one that knocked Stave out] by not blitzing because Lowry felt the front 4 could get to Stave was also interesting. I thought that Fitz made the right decisions 100% of the time, including not killing the clock at the end of the first half. Perfect coaching all around.

DC: Hankwitz : Grade A+ and the Gold Star.
Wow. We barely had to blitz all game. One corner blitz, some really nice stunting, and basically the front 4 dominated on passing downs.

OC: McCall: Grade: B-
Unlike many, I felt his game plan was exactly what was needed. Look, I'm a critic and I'll criticize if I feel it is warrented, but I'll also give credit where it is needed. And this week, for the second week in a row, I feel that the attacks on McCall and our offensive game plan is unwarranted. Two things folks should consider:
1. The Wisconsin defense is for real and NO OTHER team scored as many points as our offense did at Camp Randall all year. They only average giving up 5 points a game at home. A much better Iowa offense only scored 10 points as well, even though Iowa received many TO's as well. Wisconsin's defense is the best in the nation statistically, and watching them yesterday solidified that. Combine that with a QB that still doesn't 'get it' and I believe McCall managed the situation the best he could. People ask what about the high % passes that McCall could have asked Thorson to pass. Well, he did, we even called basic RB screens that are usually VERY safe, but Thorson choked and passed the ball right in the chest of a Wiscy defender. We ran very safe TE crossing routes, and THorson could barely throw the ball. When we tried to pass the ball downfield....it was open....yet Thorson completely whiffed and was DAMN Lucky he didn't have INT"s. I mean, the only way we could have lost this game was if McCall pushed the needle to the right and relied more on Thorson. Thankfully, McCall didn't. The only tweak I would have done is put in Long. Jackson looked gassed and seemed to lose his legs. What is wrong with running Long? Sure he didn't make the 4th and 1 but how about allowing Long to relieve Jackson. Jackson will be spent by his Junior year running like this. At any rate, that is the ONLY thing I would have done differently. Credit given to Wisconsin's defense.

OL: Grade B-
Interesting play given only 3 or 4 plays in the playbook. Two guards pull right or two guards pull left. That said, I believe Olson and Hence struggled MIGHTEDLY and we had problems with the ends. However, Mahoney and North, imo, won their battles and created running room. North had a few pancakes believe it or not and imo was VERY impressive. I know folks are going to hammer me on this but I really think one should consider that _isconsin knew exactly who was getting the ball on every play. That said, there were still small holes and gritty blocking. VERY few lost yardages. Our offense is one dimensional: Jackson. We don't even allow Thorson or anyone else to run other than the few times THorson would predictively be called to run.

WR: Grade Incomplete. We simply do not have a dependable throwing QB so this group really is an incomplete.

QB: Grade D-
Still needs serious work. Think Kafka as a freshman. Talented but doesn't understand squat and can NOT be depended upon. Very stubborn QB who has yet to smash down his poor tendencies. Clayton, will you please STOP rolling out to your right every damn time??? The whole _isconsin defense shifts because of this when you pass. You give yourself and the wide outs NO chance. Even on a few occasions that I saw on TV, if you ever did try to scramble on the left side, it would be WIDE OPEN. Do you remember Nebraska when you scrambled twice to your left and broke your tendencies.....you ran for like 50 yards on both times. Watch the freakn tape, son! The entire isconsin defense just rotated to your right because they damn sure know that after 2 seconds that you will bail out, forget everything you were taught and boot right. Wake up Kid because Turk is putting this inept offense on YOU. You can do it but you have to LEARN and stop the stubborn and lazy tendencies. Stop the insanity. Your coaches can't trust you due to you NOT listening. Wake up!

RB: Grade B+
solid running, no fumbles, tough gritty running.

Special Teams: Grade B
FG needed and made by Mr Dependable. Sure, Mitchell looked Gosh Awful on his kicks but when the 4th quarter arrives and the bame is on the line, he is Mr Money. The punting was phenomenal. 3 or 4 Inside the 20. Punt coverage was awesome. Kickoff TB solid. KO return ol. Punt return fine.

DL: Grade A+
Odd how Millan kept praising Lowry, as well he should, but then not say much about the MAIN guy yesterday. Gibson was a beast for his second game in a row. Quick, and powerful. Lancaster also had a nice game and Ifeadi wrecked havoc.

LB: Grade A
Walker was solid and I was glad to see him getting off blocks as well yesterday. His pass defense was also phenomenal with the one INT and a great PBU. Hall was ok, missed a few tackles but overall decent. Smith played very good but missed a tackle or two.

DB: Grade B
I felt Van Hoose got spent most of the time to the point where Stave knew exactly where to go with the ball. Poor game by Nick. Harris played solid all around. Missed two glaring tackles [two TD's, one of which was called back], but also locked down one side of the field all day and had two monster impact plays of the game. one fumble recovery, and a pbu that ended the ball game on a well thrown ball.

Turk,
it is always refreshing to read your analysis as you put things in the proper perspective. Prior to your posting, this board was in negative mode and ripping McCall and our offense after we just had one of the most dominating performances against Wisconsin. I also felt that McCall's offensive game plan was exactly what was needed. Any other game plan and we lose.

As another poster mentioned, I believe that the Wisconsin defensive coordinator actually set things up to capitalize on the list of mistakes that a young QB can make, but McCall never gave him that chance. I came away from the game feeling as if I just watched a chess match.

Again, thanks for everything you do for northwestern football and thanks for giving McCall credit when credit is due him.

 

[MRCat95]

+1
Mahoney and North both just dominated UW's DL the entire game. I admit I did not expect that and kudos to those guys for improving since early in the season and coming ready to play!

I wals impressed with Mahoney and North. North's panake block on Jacksons TD was phenomenal. North by Northwestern.

 

[Purple is Forever]

Totally disagree. More people need to call out Turk. Like Glidecat said, he speaks in a way that is completely manipulative of the truth if one can't sniff out that he's full of sh*t. He claims he's giving his opinion, but like Glidecat says, his rhetoric absolutely tries to make it seem like he has inside knowledge of the innerworkings of the program, and those who know better, like myself and GCG, cannot stand to see complete fallacies being construed as truth.

It'd be 1000% different if his rankings and other posts were meant to be a starting point of discussion like he claims. We're all fans and we all love NU football, and it's fun to discuss the team with other people who share our diehardedness. But Turk's rankings and other posts calling out McCall, Thorson (who he basically considered the messiah last year), etc. aren't meant to be discussion points, they're meant for a way to goad people into believing that he is closer to the program and knows the game of football way more than he actually does. Like I said, if you do have any football knowledge or ties to the innards of the program, you know he's making up BS just for making up BS's sake, and it's really infuriating.

Turk is an icon. He has appeared on the huddlecast with CJ, and judging by his courtside seats I'm guessing he is a substantial supporter of the program. I don't personally know Turk but I assume he is invited to practices and other events due to presumed giving levels. I'm sure he talks to those within the athletic department often.

But don't change the subject. My post was regarding Gocatsgo's Mitchell remarks. He was wrong. Mitchell is the most dependable 4th quarter kicker, in the nation. Maybe gocatsgo should start acknowledging the things Turk points out instead of making himself look like a 5 year old.

 

[purple11]

+1
Mahoney and North both just dominated UW's DL the entire game. I admit I did not expect that and kudos to those guys for improving since early in the season and coming ready to play!

This O line does deserve a ton of credit. Guys are stepping up big time !! Gotta give credit to Frazier, for him to come back after what he has been through and play as well as he has is remarkable. He seems to be the vocal leader on the line and is playing at a high level. For coaches to give him Offensive Player of the week for Purdue should tell you something.

Hoping Mertz and Park can come back, but confident this group can beat Illinois.

Go Cats !!