DodgeBall 2.0? No.

[Cerebus]

I've seen many posters call this team DodgeBall-like or even DodgeBall 2.0, a comparison I don't buy at all.  I posted this in another thread but really wanted to emphasize it:

3 minutes ago, Cerebus said:

SL and this team won more games this September than any Dodge team did in any one year.

In fact, this team this year already has as many wins as Dodge did in his first three years combined.

If this team can win two more games this year (out of @LaTech, UTEP, ARMY, and @Rice) it will have won more games than Dodge did his entire career here. 

 

 

[Harry]

Agree 100%.

[Green Lantern]

Agreed. Craziness to even compare. I’m frustrated with the inconsistent play of this team as much as anybody, but if someone had said we’d be 5-3 (4-1 in CUSA) before the season “take it or leave it”, I’d have jumped up, taken the deal and given em a ten second frencher for good measure.

The Dodge era was the WORST!! This is trending towards the best. It’s still early in the SL tenure. I like the results so far.

[Mad Hatter]

The SL defense has struggled, but they do come up with a stop here and there.  With the TD era you knew we'd score some points but the defense couldn't come up with that one, or maybe 2 stops needed in close games.  

No one has seen English play, but you have to figure having him up front would only help this defense which is still putting us in a position to win some games.  I think having him out this long has made the defense reconfigure their approach.  

SL has turned the program around, and has us at least in a position to compete.  The recruiting for defense is going to be critical if we want to take the next step.

 

[emmitt01]

Those that say this is Dodge 2.0 actually grade out pretty well on their posts.  In fact, if it wasn't for 2 or 3 logic leaps and misrememberings, the outcime of this thread could have been totally different.

[LongJim]

Not even in the same universe.

[golfingomez]

2 hours ago, Cerebus said:

I've seen many posters call this team DodgeBall-like or even DodgeBall 2.0, a comparison I don't buy at all.  I posted this in another thread but really wanted to emphasize it:

 

 

let me clarify, because i agreed on the other post regarding bizzaro Dodgeball. 

I sat through a lot of Dodgeball... and i remember exactly how terrible it was. My comment was specifically aimed at last night's game, when we looked like a team that couldn't get out of it's own way... 

Offense starts out great? Special Teams gives up two TD returns.

Defense is playing well? Offense gifts the opponent with two turnovers, giving them a short field, leading to two FG's.

Trying to level out and play well? Give up 30 yards on post play penalties.

Offense has a 60+ yard TD run to grab back momentum? Play called back on a penalty that was completely unnecessary.

Right until the end of this game, it felt like we were off balance and were just headed for a loss... but unlike Dodge, somehow this team eeked out a victory. Dodge teams would have lost by 10.

I in now way think the program is on that same path, as i have said in the past. But last night's game had that feel.

BTW, best unit on the field last night was the D, it was 35-23 at half and the D had given up 1 legitimate drive

1st score - KO return for TD

2nd score - INT by Fine gives OD the ball at around midfield, D holds them to a FG.

3rd score - KO return for TD

4th score - Fumble by Wilson gives them the ball inside our 20! D holds them to a FG

5th score - Legitimate drive for a FG

Halftime

[untjim1995]

The offense looks very similar, but these kids are actually coached by real college coaches. Dodge teams weren’t, hence the red zone trouble, the poor use of timeouts, and the overall record. 

[jacksondf]

This has been a strange team to watch-no doubt.   I think a better description of this team came from the Dave Campbell podcast when they described UNT as "A poor man's Texas Tech". 

[Caw Caw]

The problem in inconsistency and mid-game struggles are almost certainly due to a lack of depth in my opinion. This team has performed very well and played at a high-level, then the fatigue sets in, especially in positions we lack star power and depth overall, like at linebacker and on the O-line. Defensive line is suffering from missing some guys, but if healthy, are pretty deep.

I don't think it's a play problem as much as a depth problem. Obviously still young team-type of mistakes. Which is fine, as i've mentioned some other places, I think long term, keeping as many red-shirts on as possible is the path to this program taking the next step. As Mason alluded to, we've been better than the teams we've played in our close wins, and we've learned to win ugly. The next logical step is to learn to put these games to bed. Having a competitive team beyond the two-deep isn't something Litrell inherited and are working to create.

If our twos/threes were better than they are currently, we would have beaten Iowa.

[Mean Green 93-98]

I think the comparison is inevitable simply because of what we have experienced at UNT.  Our current offensive focus and offensive style are much more like what we saw under Dodge than what we saw under Mac or Dickey.  For the most part, I don't think the comparison has anything to do with ability to punch the ball in the end zone or pull out wins in close games--obviously in those areas, Littrell and staff have massively outperformed the Dodge crew.

[greenminer]

2 hours ago, golfingomez said:

Offense has a 60+ yard TD run to grab back momentum? Play called back on a penalty that was completely unnecessary.

Can someone elaborate on that call? The MGRN said it was just football being football, and nothing worth being flagged (paraphrasing).

[MeanMag]

Dodge's teams found a way to lose one score games. Littrell's teams find a way to win them.

UTSA fans were complaining about losing a bunch of one score games. Dodge had more of them than anyone. It indicates bad culture, but I don't want to tell UTSA that. Losing, even one score games, is the result of not winning them. It's the difference between being winners and having a winning culture and not getting down (Littrell), and a losing culture (Dodge).

This is definitely not Dodgeball 2.0. This is New Denton.

 

[FirefightnRick]

A point of reference.

Through Dodge' first 4 games of the 2007 season our defense gave up an average of 55 points a game...YES.....PER GAME...., and that burned deeply into the memories of those of  us who witnessed it in person.

The only times in which I've seen (or have used the descriptive myself)...this current program referred to as Dodge 2.0 is after debacles such as last year's head scratcher at UTEP, or last year's loss at UTSA (which I was at myself)... or last week at FAU.

Dodge 2.0 refers to all offense and no defense.  This year we're all offense..(top 25) and very little defense...(tied for 108th, down one spot from last week's 109th).   It's not a reference to the overall program,.....but simply the vast distance between the offense and defense.

Luckily this team knows how to win the games that Dodge 2.0 couldn't.  

 

 

Rick

Edited October 29, 2017 by FirefightnRick

[Cerebus]

3 hours ago, greenminer said:

Can someone elaborate on that call? The MGRN said it was just football being football, and nothing worth being flagged (paraphrasing).

Murray was locked up with a ODU defender.  Defender slips and falls to his knees.  Murray pushes him over.  I always thought that was just part of finishing your block.

The only possible mitigation is that Murray pushed him by putting his hands on the defenders helmet.  It seemed pretty ticky tack to me.