Some of last nights coaching decisions were baffling

[Bowfin]

I think putting Tommie Armstrong back in was the right call. Ryker didn't look particularly sharp, and missed a wide open throw in the end zone.

I do think Ryker needs to get into games more. Bo always has a penchant of over playing his starters when games are decided, exposing them to needless injuries and wear and tear, while at the same time depriving his backups of needed real game experience.

Every time we have a good punt return this year, I want to go back into time and give the Nebraska coaching staff a hard punch to the (fill in the blank) for forfeiting that part of the game all last season. This one issue, more than anything else, gives me some doubts as to how sharp Pelini is.

 

[HuskerinSunDiego]

Not giving the ball to imani after that muffed punt. Thr wildcat was a terrible idea. Mainly because we tripped our own player that led to the perfect punch to cause a fumble

Not giving the ball to Imani once in the entire game was unconscionable.

 

[HuskerNation1]

Not giving the ball to imani after that muffed punt. Thr wildcat was a terrible idea. Mainly because we tripped our own player that led to the perfect punch to cause a fumble

Not giving the ball to Imani once in the entire game was unconscionable.

I totally agree. Not only would it have added some confusion in our rushing attack, it would have allowed another blocker for Ameer at times too.

 

[SouthLincoln Husker]

I realize that Tommy got hurt. And I definitely watched the end of the game. In case you didn't it ended on an interception so I don't understand how that proves pulling Fyfe was the right call.

The only reason we scored was due to a pass inference. I like Ryker, but his first 2 passes were horrendous.

 

[Warrior10]

I realize that Tommy got hurt. And I definitely watched the end of the game. In case you didn't it ended on an interception so I don't understand how that proves pulling Fyfe was the right call.

The only reason we scored was due to a pass inference. I like Ryker, but his first 2 passes were horrendous.

Totally forgot that pass...we did get bailed out there. It was about 5 yards behind Moore.

 

[irafreak]

My only gripe is the onside. Kick it deep. Two first downs end the game either way. However getting a stop after kicking it deep potentially helps your field position immensely, especially with a sorry game clock. Secondly kicking it deep and getting a hold could have allowed the best offensive weapon from last night another crack at breaking one. That being DPE.

Bo kicked it deep two years ago in a similar situation, shocked he didn't do it again.

This was my thought exactly. You have to stop them unless you get that rare onside kick. Kick deep and trust the D. They make that field goal and you're down 8. They start deep and have to punt you get another return shot with DPE AND their kicker had already shanked one earlier. Put the pressure on them.

 

[California Husker]

I thought we could've tried a 48-yard FG as well, but the weather may have figured into that decision.

With the punt, there was the potential for a lot more than just 10 yards of field difference, though ultimately that's what we got. Also, I believe a missed FG means the ball turns over where the holder is, so in reality, it was 18 yards of field position with the potential for up to 20 more.

Tommy got hurt, in case you missed that. In case you also missed the end of the game, putting him back in was the right call.

Can't disagree with the onside call. Had to try. Michigan State could have taken an extra 40 seconds off the clock if Langford had stayed in bounds. Give them a longer field and they could have done it a lot more easily. We were right up against the clock anyway, and getting the ball back was worth the risk. Either way, the defense has to come up with a few stops or it's over. Also, we had 0 timeouts.

When you're down 27-3 and you score, you have to try to make it a 2-point game. We were on the cusp of being blown out. We were very, very lucky to have had enough time for a 3rd scoring opportunity after that first TD. A quick punt return that didn't require an offensive series, and Langford going out of bounds. You have to try to make it a 2-score game because if you don't, it really takes a miracle set of circumstances to have a chance.

Also, bear in mind that missing the first 2-point try isn't a big deal, because you have another shot at 2 points to make up for it later if you need to go the TD-TD-FG route. I don't know why anybody would resign themselves to that route in the first place when there's a chance for better. If you'll notice, we tried for 2, kicked a PAT, and tried for 2 again -- exactly the right calls each time.

This is so funny how you think getting three more chances to score is a "miracle set of circumstances" and yet you seem to think that the prospect of scoring three TDs and successfully converting three consecutive 2-point conversions is somehow feasable. Had Pelini done the smart thing and gone for the 1-point conversion on each of those TDs, they would have had the oportunity to hit a game tying feild goal and at least had a shot in O.T.

 

[SouthLincoln Husker]

I thought we could've tried a 48-yard FG as well, but the weather may have figured into that decision.

With the punt, there was the potential for a lot more than just 10 yards of field difference, though ultimately that's what we got. Also, I believe a missed FG means the ball turns over where the holder is, so in reality, it was 18 yards of field position with the potential for up to 20 more.

Tommy got hurt, in case you missed that. In case you also missed the end of the game, putting him back in was the right call.

Can't disagree with the onside call. Had to try. Michigan State could have taken an extra 40 seconds off the clock if Langford had stayed in bounds. Give them a longer field and they could have done it a lot more easily. We were right up against the clock anyway, and getting the ball back was worth the risk. Either way, the defense has to come up with a few stops or it's over. Also, we had 0 timeouts.

When you're down 27-3 and you score, you have to try to make it a 2-point game. We were on the cusp of being blown out. We were very, very lucky to have had enough time for a 3rd scoring opportunity after that first TD. A quick punt return that didn't require an offensive series, and Langford going out of bounds. You have to try to make it a 2-score game because if you don't, it really takes a miracle set of circumstances to have a chance.

Also, bear in mind that missing the first 2-point try isn't a big deal, because you have another shot at 2 points to make up for it later if you need to go the TD-TD-FG route. I don't know why anybody would resign themselves to that route in the first place when there's a chance for better. If you'll notice, we tried for 2, kicked a PAT, and tried for 2 again -- exactly the right calls each time.

This is so funny how you think getting three more chances to score is a "miracle set of circumstances" and yet you seem to think that the prospect of scoring three TDs and successfully converting three consecutive 2-point conversions is somehow feasable. Had Pelini done the smart thing and gone for the 1-point conversion on each of those TDs, they would have had the oportunity to hit a game tying feild goal and at least had a shot in O.T.

Wrong, with the time remaining going for 2 was the correct choice. Complaining about this is hindsight!

 

[zoogs]

Let's break this down, then. We got three more chances to score because:

- DPE punt return TD taking almost no time off the clock

- Langdom runs out of bounds, spotting us an extra 40 seconds

- missed FG spots us great field position.

It was pretty lucky that we had an opportunity to get that last drive in. You're right that any comeback would have been a miracle, so let's look at the possible outcomes.

Going for 2 and making it:

2 score game. Michigan State would've had more pressure to score again rather than clock it out, another factor not being considered.

Going for 2 and missing it:

You can still make it a FG-to-tie game if you get another 2-point conversion. We had this chance when that's how the game happened to shake out.

Having two opportunities to go for 2 to achieve the same result you desperately wished we had punted to from the outset, makes it acceptable risk, in my opinion.

By the way, had we punted on the chance to close the margin to 2 scores, and Michigan State managed a FG in the ensuing 12 minutes, it'd have been a 3-touchdown game anyway, and so much for the "TD, TD, FG to tie" master plan.

 

[Chaddyboxer]

My only gripe is the onside. Kick it deep. Two first downs end the game either way. However getting a stop after kicking it deep potentially helps your field position immensely, especially with a sorry game clock. Secondly kicking it deep and getting a hold could have allowed the best offensive weapon from last night another crack at breaking one. That being DPE.

Bo kicked it deep two years ago in a similar situation, shocked he didn't do it again.

Totally agree. Only real questionable coaching decision I had in the game.

 

[chamrocck]

Yes. We gave Sparty the ball AND the wind to start the game. Why is this a big deal and a major blunder? It obviously affected decisions to not kick field goals at the 13:35 from 48, 5:45 from 53, and most definitely affect the fade route to kenny bell at the 3:48 mark the was a pick.

I was scratching my head seeing this right away too. We had to get points early in this game and we should have made Sparty go against the wind early.

 

[Chaddyboxer]

I don't blame this loss even remotely close on Tommy or even Beck for that matter. Just rewatch the game....Tommy still threw for over 275 yards with a line that could not even constitnetly block 3 to 4 man pressures. Mich st barely blitzed last night...it was such a pathetic showing by the offensive line.

 

[3rd and long]

Did any of you catch Sipple's editorial out this morning.

http://journalstar.com/sports/huskers/sipple/steven-m-sipple-another-wild-ride-leaves-huskers-woozy/article_9669d092-456a-5bb1-a2d7-d45d1581f512.html

He made some good points that everybody would agree with, but this one baffled me...."Its hard to blame Nebraska offensive coordinator Tim Beck."

What the heck? I don't understand why Sipple feels the need to suck up to this coaching staff and not call it like it is. While I agree that Armstrong and the O-line didn't play well, TA didn't get really razzled until the 2nd quarter, and up until that point in time, the playcalling was horrendously predictable. It was obvious that MSU was keying on Abdullah, so why not mix up the rushing attack by using the Jet Sweep, or putting Cross in with Abdullah to create confusion. Instead, time and again, we see Ameer back there alone with Armstrong with absolutely no variation. This team desperately needed some early creativity to gain confidence that they could build upon through the rest of the game, and unfortunately it wasn't until late in the 3rd quarter and 4th quarter when the playbook opened up and we had MSU guessing what we were going to do. So while some of the players underperformed, I completely disagree with Sipple's refusal to put any accountability on Beck.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________

Do you know how many posts there have been just this year sreaming, "quit getting cute and just POUND THE ROCK"?

While I agree with you that we needed to adjust and try something, anything different, I just have to laugh. No matter how Beck calls a game, someone doesn't like it.

Sorry, screwed up the quoting function.

 

[NUinID]

I don't blame this loss even remotely close on Tommy or even Beck for that matter. Just rewatch the game....Tommy still threw for over 275 yards with a line that could not even constitnetly block 3 to 4 man pressures. Mich st barely blitzed last night...it was such a pathetic showing by the offensive line.

Actually MSU blitz a ton early, they did a lot of run blitzing.

As far as not taking the ball and the wind, its a decision. If NU scores after the RG INT its a moot point. I certainly thought they would get at least a FG out of that possession.

 

[SouthLincoln Husker]

I don't blame this loss even remotely close on Tommy or even Beck for that matter. Just rewatch the game....Tommy still threw for over 275 yards with a line that could not even constitnetly block 3 to 4 man pressures. Mich st barely blitzed last night...it was such a pathetic showing by the offensive line.

Actually MSU blitz a ton early, they did a lot of run blitzing.

As far as not taking the ball and the wind, its a decision. If NU scores after the RG INT its a moot point. I certainly thought they would get at least a FG out of that possession.

The coaches said after the game that they did not blitz, their front 4 just man handled us.