Playing UNO, or Playing Sioux Football

As I sit here after UND’s Saturday loss to UNO I’m wondering was UND more interested in playing UNO or playing Sioux Football.

I say this because UND left 3 points (I trust Hellevang from 23 yards) on the field in the second quarter. (Sorbo didn’t make a goal line twisting catch on fourth down.) Those three points would have made it most likely 21-17 at halftime.

Later, in the fourth, when it really was 21-17 (and could have been 21-20, see above), UND went on fourth and one and did not convert again. A field goal here combined with one just before half would have put UND into the lead (23-21) and forced UNO to play from behind for the first time on the day.

Instead, neither was attempted. That ultimately played right to UNO’s advantage and seemed out of character for Sioux Football.

One thought on “Playing UNO, or Playing Sioux Football”

  1. I was surprised by this also. I think coach Lennon was thinking it was going to be a shootout and it did not materialize. The Sioux defense did a reasonable job of holding on… after he did it once.. he got into a pot committed type of mentality. A lot more points other than the FGs were left on the field:
    1) Swing pass INT deep in UNO territory..
    a. Lineman must cut the end and QB has to make proper adjustments if that does not happen. This was a 3 or 7 point swing.
    2) Dressler wide open on post route
    a. Thrown by 10 yards.. this is a 7 point swing..
    3) Holding penalty on TD run …7 point swing..
    To be honest with you, I think the loss was a good learning experience for both the coaches and players. I look for the Sioux to bounce back next week.

Leave a Reply