Tangent Thread - December 2015 Edition

[Mierin]

Favored by 8.5 and lost by 10?

That is probably a blowout.

Vegas odds have sh#t all to do with whether the results of game were a blow out or not.

 

[ADS]

It really depends on what your definition of a blowout is.

A 10 point loss compared to the sh#t stains such as 2011 Wisconsin, 2012 Wisconsin, 2011 Michigan, 2014 Wisconsin, 2013 Iowa, 2008 Missouri is certainly not a blowout. Even if it was a bad team.

 

[Joe_5700]

There's no basis for thinking we'll get blown out in this game.

I think that UCLA will have no problem piling up points against NU's D. I think Rosen picks Banker's D apart. The only way NU keeps it close is if the offense keeps scoring with them, like NU did against Michigan State.

There's no basis for thinking we'll get blown out. Thinking we'll lose, yes.

Right. No basis whatsoever to think the Huskers will get blown out. Just like back in August when there was no basis whatsoever to think the Huskers would have a losing season.

How do you figure? We hadn't played a game yet with the new staff.

We haven't been blown out this year. We could get blown out by UCLA but nothing that has happened this season indicates that will happen.

The Miami game was a blowout for 3 quarters, and then they went brain dead, and let NU back in it.

Purdue was also a blowout, until NU put up some late points in the 4th quarter. It's a fallacy to say that NU wasn't blown out in any games this year.

Until is a pretty important word, eh? The Miami game went to OT. Anyone who says that game was a blow out is a moron.

The Miami game WAS a blowout. Penalties and Miami's undisciplined play let us back in the game. To say otherwise is just being delusional. I see that you are accepting that the Purdue game was a blowout.

 

[Mierin]

It really depends on what your definition of a blowout is.

A 10 point loss compared to the sh#t stains such as 2011 Wisconsin, 2012 Wisconsin, 2011 Michigan, 2014 Wisconsin, 2013 Iowa, 2008 Missouri is certainly not a blowout. Even if it was a bad team.

Yes of course. But some idiots like to call every loss a blowout just so they can piss and moan more and predict future blowouts. As if losing to Purdue isn't bad enough as it is.

 

[Mierin]

There's no basis for thinking we'll get blown out in this game.

I think that UCLA will have no problem piling up points against NU's D. I think Rosen picks Banker's D apart. The only way NU keeps it close is if the offense keeps scoring with them, like NU did against Michigan State.

There's no basis for thinking we'll get blown out. Thinking we'll lose, yes.

Right. No basis whatsoever to think the Huskers will get blown out. Just like back in August when there was no basis whatsoever to think the Huskers would have a losing season.

How do you figure? We hadn't played a game yet with the new staff.

We haven't been blown out this year. We could get blown out by UCLA but nothing that has happened this season indicates that will happen.

The Miami game was a blowout for 3 quarters, and then they went brain dead, and let NU back in it.

Purdue was also a blowout, until NU put up some late points in the 4th quarter. It's a fallacy to say that NU wasn't blown out in any games this year.

Until is a pretty important word, eh? The Miami game went to OT. Anyone who says that game was a blow out is a moron.

The Miami game WAS a blowout. Penalties and Miami's undisciplined play let us back in the game. To say otherwise is just being delusional. I see that you are accepting that the Purdue game was a blowout.

No, I'm not. Scroll up. A game that goes into OT is not a blow out, again, unless you are a moron. For part of the game it was a blowout but it's the end result that matters. I don't care how much that part of the game pissed you off, if you say it's a blow out it's just because you're angry and want to add another thing to cry about.

 

[teachercd]

It really depends on what your definition of a blowout is.

A 10 point loss compared to the sh#t stains such as 2011 Wisconsin, 2012 Wisconsin, 2011 Michigan, 2014 Wisconsin, 2013 Iowa, 2008 Missouri is certainly not a blowout. Even if it was a bad team.

Yes of course. But some idiots like to call every loss a blowout just so they can piss and moan more and predict future blowouts. As if losing to Purdue isn't bad enough as it is.

Or...they are just realistic?

Was that UCLA game (in Lincoln) a blowout?

 

[Mierin]

It really depends on what your definition of a blowout is.

A 10 point loss compared to the sh#t stains such as 2011 Wisconsin, 2012 Wisconsin, 2011 Michigan, 2014 Wisconsin, 2013 Iowa, 2008 Missouri is certainly not a blowout. Even if it was a bad team.

Yes of course. But some idiots like to call every loss a blowout just so they can piss and moan more and predict future blowouts. As if losing to Purdue isn't bad enough as it is.

Or...they are just realistic?

Was that UCLA game (in Lincoln) a blowout?

I'm assuming you mean Miami. I don't think the final score is the ONLY thing to take into account but it's most of it so I would probably say it's not a blow out but I've probably wavered before. If I did think it was a blow out it'd be the only 10 point game I'd ever call a blow out and it'd be because I'm a Nebraska fan who doesn't like Miami. But you're not comparing apples to apples. Well, maybe a Granny Smith to a Fuji.

In the Miami game both teams scored 10 in the 4th quarter. So Nebraska was still playing as well as or better than Miami 'til the end.

In the Purdue game, Nebraska outscored Purdue 29-13 in the 4th quarter. I would say that makes that game less of a blow out because they were coming back.

I think some are calling that a blowout just because of the high scoring.

 

[NUance]

Google team rankings if you want more stats.

Yeah, I've heard of Google. I just figured if you had actually looked it up you'd know right where to find it.

Sorry, was on phone; meant "teamrankings.com."

I wasn't sure of the extention, so that's why I said google that exact phrase.

Hey cm husker: Even I disagree with some of the things you say I've got to give you props for that teamrankings.com site. LINK That's a great site! It's not a place I've used before to look up stats. Thanks!

:

 

[teachercd]

Nope, I am talking about the UCLA game in Lincoln when NU was up big at the half and got smoked in the second half...what that a blowout win for UCLA?

 

[cm husker]

I'm not sure if the stats on team rankings are 100% accurate. I notice some minor variation between the NCAA official site (my preferred, but their historical data is buried) and team rankings. I like team rankings because they break out so many variables.

 

[ColoradoHusk]

The Miami-NU game was 33-10 with 11 minutes left in the game. It could have/should have been even more than that but Kaaya threw a boneheaded INT in the end zone at the beginning of the 4th quarter. By all intents and purposes, it was a blowout.

I give credit to NU for playing hard, and making a miraculous comeback to send it to OT. But, it shouldn't have even gotten to OT. Miami's idiocracy, with a coach who would be fired a month later, was the reason NU got back in the game.

 

[BigRedBuster]

The Miami-NU game was 33-10 with 11 minutes left in the game. It could have/should have been even more than that but Kaaya threw a boneheaded INT in the end zone at the beginning of the 4th quarter. By all intents and purposes, it was a blowout.

I give credit to NU for playing hard, and making a miraculous comeback to send it to OT. But, it shouldn't have even gotten to OT. Miami's idiocracy, with a coach who would be fired a month later, was the reason NU got back in the game.

So.....let me get this straight.
If we make mistakes that allows Miami to score 33 points it's because Miami is so much better than we are. If we make a come back and score 33 points to tie it, it's simply because Miami made some mistakes and we still suck.

 

[Mavric]

The Miami-NU game was 33-10 with 11 minutes left in the game. It could have/should have been even more than that but Kaaya threw a boneheaded INT in the end zone at the beginning of the 4th quarter. By all intents and purposes, it was a blowout.

I give credit to NU for playing hard, and making a miraculous comeback to send it to OT. But, it shouldn't have even gotten to OT. Miami's idiocracy, with a coach who would be fired a month later, was the reason NU got back in the game.

So.....let me get this straight.

If we make mistakes that allows Miami to score 33 points it's because Miami. If we make a come back and score 33 points to tie it, it's simply because Miami made find mistakes and we still suck.

Well ... that's pretty much what a lot of people said about the Michigan State game last year - in reverse of course.

 

[teachercd]

The Miami-NU game was 33-10 with 11 minutes left in the game. It could have/should have been even more than that but Kaaya threw a boneheaded INT in the end zone at the beginning of the 4th quarter. By all intents and purposes, it was a blowout.

I give credit to NU for playing hard, and making a miraculous comeback to send it to OT. But, it shouldn't have even gotten to OT. Miami's idiocracy, with a coach who would be fired a month later, was the reason NU got back in the game.

So.....let me get this straight.

If we make mistakes that allows Miami to score 33 points it's because Miami. If we make a come back and score 33 points to tie it, it's simply because Miami made find mistakes and we still suck.

Well ... that's pretty much what a lot of people said about the Michigan State game last year - in reverse of course.

Ohhhh the 5 TO game!

 

[cm husker]

I think the biggest issue with Read, is that it's literally his only job, and for $500k, we wanted VT level special teams units. Bo's special teams units were farmed out to different assistant, and were actually pretty good most of his tenure, except the disastrous 2013 season where we could barely catch a punt. IIRC, they were in Phil Steele's top 10 ST units 5 of 7 seasons (one of the few places to track that stuff), and we routinely had good kicking and coverage units. The return units were decent to good most years too. 2015 wasn't that bad, other than our kick return unit, which was non-existent until Stanly Morgan got the nod. That said, Brown got better, and we did get a bit better in the return units over the year.

That is what bothers me the most. I think we are getting very little bang for the buck with him. How is he as a recruiter?

Was going to bring this up. He appears to basically be a non-factor in recruiting - other than recruiting kickers, punters and long-snappers. Kickers are people too but that means he's probably only recruiting one guy per year (on average).

Can't remember which prominent new-hire head coach said this in the last week but he said he hires an OC, a DC and an OL coach. For the rest of the assistants, if you can't recruit, you don't work for him. Seems like a pretty good strategy to me.

That was Will Muschamp, who just got hired at South Carolina.

Damn, Bo might never make it back to D1, he does not have a single commit yet and it is mid December. Some things never change.

Based on what? This site lists 6, including a 3 star (YSU's first since at least 2010): http://ysu.247sports.com/Season/2015-Football/Commits

I don't take much on these boards seriously or personally, but it really irks me when you and others basically claim that Bo didn't recruit, because that is the same as saying "our players suck" which couldn't be further from the truth. We have a great roster of talent.

It's up to these coaches to produce wins. And if they can't produce wins with this talent, then some "recruiting upgrades" aren't going to get us to championship form. Maybe it will get us back to 8 or 9 wins a season, which is apparently a firable offense at Nebraska (and we'll be right back where we started in a few years).

Of course, because of Riley's advanced age, we may be back to square 1 in a few years no matter what.