A) Defining moments. They happen. AND of course anything can. The reason last years seem so incredulously impossible this year is because the are last years. Those weren't "shots at glory," they were best efforts that turned out much better than expected. There will be others this year. It is like shooting at the side of a barn. Three shots hit close, okay draw a circle around them. Will three shots hit there again? Probably not. But it doesn't mean three shots won't his close together somewhere else, like in "2013 OK."
B) I had to repeat this. I have a friend who is on ISD who is enamored with Sean Mele, over there who does a weekly breakdown of the games. My friend thinks Sean figured out the problem with the running game. I think my friend is right about Sean, and Sean is right about the running game.
Remember after the MSU game when Kelly said that the running game problems weren't just on the interior linemen? To really oversimplify on certain formations ND only ran certain directions until MSU. Cam's longest runs came off of running against the power, which was a break in tendency.
Also Tarean Folston's best run he bounced away from the safety he saw lurking to the left, which happened to be the power side, so the run ran away from that to the other side.
Also, our running has devolved through happenstance to run at a numeric advantage of the opponent. However you want to say it. The majority of the running plays Saturday against MSU were run against numeric superiority. Tendencies changed three times in the game for our best three runs.
And we are not getting hung up on the double teams anywhere near as much anymore, and are starting to get to the second level. If anything, too quickly. They will get balance. This is exciting!
If the coaches design a running game around play action and establishing numerical superiority, we will grow a running game out of nowhere and help our passing game!
