Dave Feit: The Fallacy of ‘Close’

Dogs In A Pile

Dogs In A Pile

Active member
Nebraska football’s final scores in 2021 didn‘t tell the whole story, and the ‘close’ narrative undersells the revamping that began last November.

The 2021 Nebraska football team was not “close.”

They were nowhere close to contending in a mediocre division, nor were they even that close to a bowl game.

Yes, you can look at the individual games and see that eight of the nine losses were by 8 points or less. But let’s broaden our scope to the big picture.

In the big picture, the 2021 Huskers were not “close” to anything positive.

.....

Dave Feit: The Fallacy of ‘Close’

 
I mean right from the subheading, the article smells like a load of horses#!t. "Nebraska football’s final scores in 2021 didn‘t tell the whole story, and the ‘close’ narrative undersells the revamping that began last November." The 2021 season and the revamping that happened afterward are two different things. You don't judge the season by things that happened after the season.

  • Nebraska led for an average of 11 minutes, 7 seconds in their losses.* They were tied for an average of 17:47, and trailed for 31:06 per loss. In other words, Nebraska was tied or trailing for 81.5% of their losses. As you digest those numbers, remember: Nebraska led for almost 47 minutes of the Iowa game.
  • <snipped a bunch of other crap that basically repeats the same idea>
Click to expand...


Does the amount of time in the lead vs behind really matter in determining how 'close' a game is? If there were a basketball game where one team was behind the entire game, but never by more than four points, would you argue that the game wasn't close?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes, he started with a premise - Neb 2022 was not very good but failed to make as strong a case as he could have in some ways. However, it is also true that the team was not as bad as their awful w-l record would normally indicate.  
 

In the end, he basically demonstrated, as so many others have suggested.  ‘21 Husker football was a complete enigma and few teams can compare in so many ways.  
 

- Raw talent was better than the record suggests. 
-  Team talent was not well coached and after 4 previous seasons with comparable win-loss results,  it appears talent remains very raw.  
-  team effort was steady and the team refused to quit but at the same time failed to achieve. 
-  Errors and poor execution of basic football skills and techniques were recurring across most areas and position groups of entire team.

-  areas of weakness failed to be corrected or get better throughout the season.  
-  Despite a huge roster (biggest in D1), talent is not evenly apportioned across the position groups.

-  Year 4 - ‘21 showed little capacity for adjustments to bolster weak areas or emphasize stronger areas, similar to prior seasons as well. 
- Game management by coaching contributed to team shortcomings.

- No fear of failure did not prevent an apparent fear of success as the team managed to play just below the level of most opponents, good or bad.  
- One might say the team lost games more than they were beaten.  

 
didnotreadlol.gif


 
Dave Feit seems to be employed at writing these poorly thought out remedial level articles, I don’t know how.  His usual work would’ve earned Ds and Fs in the 10th grade journalism class I took over 40 years ago.

 
Back
Top