When will 'they' believe?

[NUCat320]

Commentary on the Stanford-usc post-game was about how (third year starter) Hogan and the offense were 'off' against NU, and not about how they were 'dominated' by nu.

NU's secondary is among the best the conference has seen. Van Hoose and Harris and Watkins can cover and can hit, and thar doesn't happen with three guys in the same roster...

So, three games, one touchdown.
Ball State scored in the 20s against aTm. Minnesota has hardly scored at all. Michigan won Saturday.

When will the talk start that, oh geez, this is a great, great defense? I think it'll be at least three more games - and beating Harbaugh with a (relatively) prime start time - for the talk to start.

The best part of being a fan is getting ahead of things...

 

[bjm989]

I'd like to see some of the replays of our Stanford game. They don't usually give us the view but did Hogan just not have anyone open downfield like he did against USC. He made a lot of great throws against USC. My sense is that they just weren't there against us - anyone else have an opinion?

What also was a snub is that ESPN (Galloway maybe?) said that Stanford looked much worse against a less athletic (than USC) Northwestern squad. That should keep the chip on our shoulders going forward. Make sure our guys on D hear that one....

 

[pawildcat]

I'd like to see some of the replays of our Stanford game. They don't usually give us the view but did Hogan just not have anyone open downfield like he did against USC. He made a lot of great throws against USC. My sense is that they just weren't there against us - anyone else have an opinion?

What also was a snub is that ESPN (Galloway maybe?) said that Stanford looked much worse against a less athletic (than USC) Northwestern squad. That should keep the chip on our shoulders going forward. Make sure our guys on D hear that one....

That kind of "it's just Northwestern" stuff is the best weapon we can have. I could tell from the Duke boards that they bought into the old sawhorse about the Big 10 not being able to run and thought their offense would have a great quickness advantage over us. Fitz alluded to it after the game.

 

[bjm989]

That kind of "it's just Northwestern" stuff is the best weapon we can have. I could tell from the Duke boards that they brought into the old sawhorse about the Big 10 not being able to run and thought their offense would have a great quickness advantage over us. Fitz alluded to it after the game.

Agree. Remember a few years back we'd lament that our offense didn't have breakaway speed and routinely our skill players would get run down? Two good highlight plays this year where our players were creating further separation on the way to the end zone. In all fairness to others' past perspective, I am not sure we've displayed that speed in recent years.

 

[Williesfan]

I heard those statements on Sportscenter. When NU has years of success the talking heads will change their mentality.

 

[phatcat]

I heard those statements on Sportscenter. When NU has years of success the talking heads will change their mentality.

Yet, people were groveling at the altar of Harbaugh after one really good season.

 

[Hungry Jack]

All things considered, I think it was in our best interests to face Stanford in week 1. But all the stuff about the B1G being slow is laughable.

 

[wildcat229]

I'd like to see some of the replays of our Stanford game. They don't usually give us the view but did Hogan just not have anyone open downfield like he did against USC. He made a lot of great throws against USC. My sense is that they just weren't there against us - anyone else have an opinion?

What also was a snub is that ESPN (Galloway maybe?) said that Stanford looked much worse against a less athletic (than USC) Northwestern squad. That should keep the chip on our shoulders going forward. Make sure our guys on D hear that one....

IMO Stanford just wasn't there when they played us. Sideline looked dead, at least as far as I could tell. I kept waiting for Stanford/Hogan to "wake up" and pull the game out but it never happened. Not taking anything away from our defensive effort, but I think Stanford was still on the coast that day.

Yesterday's result was not totally unexpected. Stanford in the Harbaugh/Shaw era has had USC's number, now going 6-3, I believe.

 

[Jonny2TheP]

All things considered, I think it was in our best interests to face Stanford in week 1. But all the stuff about the B1G being slow is laughable.

I don't know about that. They were starting a 5th year QB oozing with experience while we were starting a QB taking his first collegiate snaps. Yes, they had youth (as did we) at other positions, but that QB experience is such a huge difference. It's really hard to say this was a different Stanford team than played NU or if it wasn't. We don't even know what USC is yet as Stanford was their first real opponent and they've yet to go on the road. Yes, USC has crazy athletes all over the field, but there are hundreds of examples of super athletic teams over the years that didn't translate that to a great team.

I think it's hard to say at this point if Stanford's win last night was more a product of their improvement or USC just being overrated.

 

[Catreporter]

I don't know about that. They were starting a 5th year QB oozing with experience while we were starting a QB taking his first collegiate snaps. Yes, they had youth (as did we) at other positions, but that QB experience is such a huge difference. It's really hard to say this was a different Stanford team than played NU or if it wasn't. We don't even know what USC is yet as Stanford was their first real opponent and they've yet to go on the road. Yes, USC has crazy athletes all over the field, but there are hundreds of examples of super athletic teams over the years that didn't translate that to a great team.

I think it's hard to say at this point if Stanford's win last night was more a product of their improvement or USC just being overrated.

You never want to let a quarterback get into a groove (remember the Miami Ohio guy that beat us with some great throws down the stretch in '95!). That's what happened with Hogan last night. USC didn't get the pressure from their rush that we got and their coverage of the tight ends (by the linebackers?) was lacking. That is what I saw. The Duke game has convinced me we have a special defense this year. Strong at all three levels. Now, if we can get our own passing game up to speed, the sky is the limit.

 

[GECat2]

I do not care if Stanford had an off day when they played NU. Bottomline is we won and held them to 6 points. Senior quarterbacks are supposed to lead their talented teams to victory. It did not happen. They did not lose on a trick play or last second field goal. Their offense had it handed to them by our defense. I was reminded of that last night by watching how much time the Stanford QB had to throw and how wide open their receivers were downfield.

 

[Jonny2TheP]

You never want to let a quarterback get into a groove (remember the Miami Ohio guy that beat us with some great throws down the stretch in '95!). That's what happened with Hogan last night. USC didn't get the pressure from their rush that we got and their coverage of the tight ends (by the linebackers?) was lacking. That is what I saw. The Duke game has convinced me we have a special defense this year. Strong at all three levels. Now, if we can get our own passing game up to speed, the sky is the limit.

We aren't getting the national respect yet and I'm fine with that. Everything I'm hearing is how Stanford didn't play well the first game or slipped up at NU, etc. But of the two legit opponents we played, they averaged 36 (Stanford) and 46 (Duke) points in their other games. I'm not saying these are top ten offenses, but each had had success in their other games.

Man, I love having a good defense. This is just so different than NU teams of the last 15 years, and it sure is fun.

 

[NJCat83588]

Man, I love having a good defense. This is just so different than NU teams of the last 15 years, and it sure is fun.

So true. Right now, there are no weak links on this deep defense. So much fun to watch them work.

 

[OblioCat]

ESPN College Football Sunday believes. Jason Seahorn and Kevin Carter gave props and mentioned how Cats were in Hogan's face and USC wasn't vs. Stanford

 

[Catreporter]

ESPN College Football Sunday believes. Jason Seahorn and Kevin Carter gave props and mentioned how Cats were in Hogan's face and USC wasn't vs. Stanford

That's what I said in another thread. And I added that the USC underneath coverage was poor compared to the Cats.

 

[Jonny2TheP]

That's what I said in another thread. And I added that the USC underneath coverage was poor compared to the Cats.

But, but, but that's U S freakin C and we're talking about Northwestern. Based on history that doesn't fit the narrative so it's clear that Stanford just played terrible in the first week and gave the game away.

Stop using logic and present day analysis to form your opinion and just let history and recruiting rankings do it for you.

 

[cattul]

Commentary on the Stanford-usc post-game was about how (third year starter) Hogan and the offense were 'off' against NU, and not about how they were 'dominated' by nu.

NU's secondary is among the best the conference has seen. Van Hoose and Harris and Watkins can cover and can hit, and thar doesn't happen with three guys in the same roster...

So, three games, one touchdown.
Ball State scored in the 20s against aTm. Minnesota has hardly scored at all. Michigan won Saturday.

When will the talk start that, oh geez, this is a great, great defense? I think it'll be at least three more games - and beating Harbaugh with a (relatively) prime start time - for the talk to start.

The best part of being a fan is getting ahead of things...

'They' didn't see yesterday's game. The ACC Network is the next best thing to a cloak of invisibility.

'They' didn't see last week's game, because...well, did anybody watch Oklahoma State play UTSA yesterday? Of course not. Nobody watches a non-name program playing a scrub.

'They' probably won't watch next week's game either.

So, 'they' saw the Cats beat Stanford, following two disappointing seasons. If the Cats keep winning, 'they' will catch on.

I think you have the timeline right with Michigan. 'They' know Michigan, and will be unduly impressed if the Wildcats beat the Wolverines.

 

[shakes3858]

IMO Stanford just wasn't there when they played us. Sideline looked dead, at least as far as I could tell. I kept waiting for Stanford/Hogan to "wake up" and pull the game out but it never happened. Not taking anything away from our defensive effort, but I think Stanford was still on the coast that day.

Yesterday's result was not totally unexpected. Stanford in the Harbaugh/Shaw era has had USC's number, now going 6-3, I believe.

Yes Stanford really wasn't there and had low energy all day. That tends to happen when your oline can get protect the QB or get push in the run game, your RB/heisman candidate can't get anywhere and you're losing. Our defense kicked their ass. That's why there was no energy.

 

[corbi296]

I'd like to see some of the replays of our Stanford game. They don't usually give us the view but did Hogan just not have anyone open downfield like he did against USC. He made a lot of great throws against USC. My sense is that they just weren't there against us - anyone else have an opinion?

What also was a snub is that ESPN (Galloway maybe?) said that Stanford looked much worse against a less athletic (than USC) Northwestern squad. That should keep the chip on our shoulders going forward. Make sure our guys on D hear that one....

Hogan is a good QB who will be a top 100 pick in the NFL draft. Against NU he just did not have a lot of open receivers and when he did our DL was rushing him or obstructing the passing lanes. Our defense is legit with solid talent/depth across the board and star talent at each level in Lowry, Walker, Igwuibuike and Harris. Stanford's running game was not effective and we put them in obvious/difficult to convert passing situations. USC did none of that last night. The scary thing is that our young guys on the DL are bound to get better and our depth with the dbs extends beyond Queiro and Watkins. If we can stay healthy, this defense will have people talking all year.

 

[Trigatos]

Hogan called week 1 a hiccup in the post game. Even cutliffe said it was more about duke mistakes than anything NU did. I will take every mistake and hiccup our D can throw at em

 

[Sheffielder]

Everyone needs to quit crying about how NU gets no respect. We get no respect because more often than not, we've choked when we start getting attention and are atrociously inconsistent.

Ask TCU, Baylor, Stanford, and Sparty if a program can't change how it's perceived by the national college football media. It just takes consistency that we have yet to see for more than two years at a time. We've never cracked the third year. It can absolutely happen but if all goes well this season I'd say we're still two full years away from changing our stripes.

 

[beetlemania74]

Hogan called week 1 a hiccup in the post game. Even cutliffe said it was more about duke mistakes than anything NU did. I will take every mistake and hiccup our D can throw at em

Every coach and player says this, particularly in close losses. Fitz does it too. It's not meant as disrespect for the opponent - it's just a focus on how they themselves can improve. When we lost to Minnesota last season, was it because they had a talented defense and outplayed us? No, it was because we couldn't sustain drives on offense and because we gave up a kickoff return for a TD.

 

[pawildcat]

Every coach and player says this, particularly in close losses. Fitz does it too. It's not meant as disrespect for the opponent - it's just a focus on how they themselves can improve. When we lost to Minnesota last season, was it because they had a talented defense and outplayed us? No, it was because we couldn't sustain drives on offense and because we gave up a kickoff return for a TD.

"When we lost to Minnesota last season, was it because they had a talented defense and outplayed us? No, it was because we couldn't sustain drives on offense and because we gave up a kickoff return for a TD."

Which, interestingly enough, was almost the exact formula for Duke's loss yesterday. Any coach who talks about turnovers usually has a point, because that's often the biggest determinant in which team wins the game. Certainly, if Duke cleans up their turnovers yesterday it's a different game. On the other hand, NU had a couple of mistakes that put us in the hole as well.

 

[Alan Smithee]

Every coach and player says this, particularly in close losses. Fitz does it too. It's not meant as disrespect for the opponent - it's just a focus on how they themselves can improve. When we lost to Minnesota last season, was it because they had a talented defense and outplayed us? No, it was because we couldn't sustain drives on offense and because we gave up a kickoff return for a TD.

Yeah I'm less interested in what the opposing coach has to say following a game than some neutral observer. The opposing coach is the ONE person who most has too keep the focus on what his own players can do.

That said, Cutliffle had no problem going to the locker room at halftime (with a lead) saying that his team was "getting whipped."

 

[DocCatsFan]

Commentary on the Stanford-usc post-game was about how (third year starter) Hogan and the offense were 'off' against NU, and not about how they were 'dominated' by nu.

NU's secondary is among the best the conference has seen. Van Hoose and Harris and Watkins can cover and can hit, and thar doesn't happen with three guys in the same roster...

So, three games, one touchdown.
Ball State scored in the 20s against aTm. Minnesota has hardly scored at all. Michigan won Saturday.

When will the talk start that, oh geez, this is a great, great defense? I think it'll be at least three more games - and beating Harbaugh with a (relatively) prime start time - for the talk to start.

The best part of being a fan is getting ahead of things...

They believe now. Look at the polls.

 

[CommodoresAndCats]

Stanford's offense might not have been on their A game so to speak but this Northwestern defense is scary good. The overall speed and depth of the defense is fantastic. Additionally, the open field tackling has been tremendous, plays to the outside haven't worked against us since the first guy there makes a play. Duke and Stanford are both good if not great CFB offenses that use polar opposite styles. If we can stop them then I think we can stop just about anyone.

 

[GlideCat]

Stanford's offense might not have been on their A game so to speak but this Northwestern defense is scary good. The overall speed and depth of the defense is fantastic. Additionally, the open field tackling has been tremendous, plays to the outside haven't worked against us since the first guy there makes a play. Duke and Stanford are both good if not great CFB offenses that use polar opposite styles. If we can stop them then I think we can stop just about anyone.

In addition, our secondary now plays tight against the receivers about half the time and plays off about half the time. Compared against the last two years when they played off almost all of the time.

It a different everything on defense. They are good and seem to know it.

 

[SmellyCat]

In addition to what everyone else said, I also feel that defenders always appear to be in the right place, which seems to indicate they're preparing very well.