McKewon: Carry on

[STL Husker]

Remember how much discussion we had on that play after the Illinois game? Odd that no one mentioned the same play--run correctly--after the Michigan State game. I guess there's nothing to discuss when things are executed correctly, huh?.

Nobody talks much about icebergs unless they sink a luxury liner. Getting by one iceberg doesn't cancel out hitting one, now does it?

Also, I doubt many saw the TD against MSU and thought, "Huh, isnt that the same play we saw against ILL, but executed correctly?". It was after the ILL game that it was revealed that the play call wasn't supposed to be a pass (ie TA's fault, not DL's). You're spot on, Bowfin, that DL getting a mulligan if you will for the ILL call, it doesn't absolve is overall questionable play calling with the talent at hand.

And this is my point exactly. There was a HUGE uproar when we ran this play against Illinois and Tommy improvised, and botched, a short pass. We had a five page thread in which people castigated the coaches and talked about the sheer incompetence of calling this play. It was an iceberg! But the coaches didn't listen to the collective fan wisdom about that iceberg play. They went over the play in practice, and even went so far as to rename the play in an effort to prevent another miscue. So we pull it out again against a stout Michigan State defense. This time we run it correctly and Tommy takes it to the house. And some fans (e.g., you two) still call this play an iceberg—saying the TD against Sparty doesn't cancel out the first time we ran it.

So I guess what you're saying is that if we run a play and it doesn't work we should just tear that page out of the playbook. So we don't ever hit that iceberg again!

While I agree with your overall I point, I do think they heard the screaming about the play call and went overly conservative at the end of the Wisconsin game. I think without such a huge outcry at the Illinois play call, we would have passed on 3rd down in between Wisconsin's field goal attempts. They still had 1 timeout so a running play didn't do much for us, but I think he was gun shy after the huge backlash the previous week.

 

[Undone]

While I agree with your overall I point, I do think they heard the screaming about the play call and went overly conservative at the end of the Wisconsin game. I think without such a huge outcry at the Illinois play call, we would have passed on 3rd down in between Wisconsin's field goal attempts. They still had 1 timeout so a running play didn't do much for us, but I think he was gun shy after the huge backlash the previous week.

I think you're exactly right.

As far as the play calling is concerned on our last offensive series against Wisconsin, it really was the most rational decision either way to try to run. Our offensive line just had no push, and on one of those three downs Imani didn't read his hole that well.

Same basic thing happened against BYU also. Against BYU, Illinois, and Wisconsin, the other team shouldn't have gotten the ball back. The poor execution of our run game (and not just the perceived issue of "not calling enough running plays," but probably in conjunction with it) really stood in the way of us being an 8-4 team.

 

[zoogs]

I think you can go both ways in a situation like the end of the Wisconsin game. And you don't necessarily always have to pick one or the other. Part of it has to do with how much faith you have in the offense versus the defense to get the job done. It's a conservative call to simply chew clock and punt (of course, you never know what might go wrong on a punt, either..........x_x). The safe play is often a good one.

 

[Undone]

I agree.

The play calling in each of those three games on those last offensive series were solid, in my opinion. I wish Tommy had just ducked and slid against Illinois and taken the loss...but it's water under the bridge now.

 

[BigRedBuster]

I thought this was interesting and so I would put it here. I did this for myself because I wanted to see the difference between us and the 4 playoff teams. I am usually surprised at how statistically we can be so close to being so much better.

These stats are per game.

Stat Playoff team us

Fumbles-lost 1.17 - .6 .83 - .41 (I think some fans haven't noticed how really low we have become in fumbles per game compared to where we were at one time)

Penalties 5.7 - 51.42 7.3 - 65.9

Interceptions .69 1.75

Run/Pass 60/40 50/50

So.....Compared to us, the have fumbled a little more, have roughly 1.5 more penalties per game, roughly one more INT per game an run more than we do. However, we had an average of 73 plays per game. So, to get to 60/40, we would only need to run 7 more times per game.

This drives home to me that it's little things that make a big difference. Now, I know that there were situations this year that were just bad. An example is 4 INTs against Iowa that if they don't happen we win. But, on average, if we even make small strides in these categories, it can pay off huge in the win loss category.

This isn't a situation where....OMG....we are being penalized HUGE amounts or we are passing WAY more than successful teams. Make small improvements and see big change.

 

[BigRedBuster]

Here are two more that show how our offense isn't..."OMG WE ARE HORRIBLE"like some fans want to make it out to be.

Team Points per game yards per play

Nebraska 32.5 6.08

Clemson 38.5 5.78

Alabama 34.1 5.78

OU 45.8 6.95

MSU 32.1 5.56

Make small changes in certain situations see big difference in results.

 

[74Hunter]

...none, Riley said, hit the team harder than the collapse at Illinois. The third-and-7 play in which Nebraska, almost assured of victory if it had just burned more game clock with a running play, had some kind of disastrous mix-up that resulted in a bootleg pass from Armstrong.

Riley and offensive coordinator Danny Langsdorf changed the name of the play after that game so there wouldnt be any confusion, and even used it for a touchdown against Michigan State. The new name: quarterback sweep.

Remember how much discussion we had on that play after the Illinois game? Odd that no one mentioned the same play--run correctly--after the Michigan State game. I guess there's nothing to discuss when things are executed correctly, huh?

This is a classic case of a "call plays that work" mentality. When the play works as designed no one says a thing, but let it get screwed up and by gawd the coaches need firing!

Yeah. Funny what happens when you call a run play, as opposed to a "tagged" pass play.

 

[NUinID]

Here are two more that show how our offense isn't..."OMG WE ARE HORRIBLE"like some fans want to make it out to be.

Team Points per game yards per play

Nebraska 32.5 6.08

Clemson 38.5 5.78

Alabama 34.1 5.78

OU 45.8 6.95

MSU 32.1 5.56

Make small changes in certain situations see big difference in results.

As your brief little comparison shows offensively we are not too far off overall with the 4 playoff teams. It is the execution at crutial times that makes a big difference. Crutial mistakes played a big part in the outcome of games this year. IMO if TA doesn't throw 2 pick 6's against NW and Iowa we probably win those games. It is as simple as that. He doesn't throw it on 3rd and 7 against Illinois we probably win that game.

 

[Undone]

Great stats by Buster.

Again - Better execution on the last offensive series (not even drive) against BYU, Illinois, and Wisconsin sees us at 8-4 instead of 5-7.

 

[BigRedBuster]

Here are two more that show how our offense isn't..."OMG WE ARE HORRIBLE"like some fans want to make it out to be.

Team Points per game yards per play

Nebraska 32.5 6.08

Clemson 38.5 5.78

Alabama 34.1 5.78

OU 45.8 6.95

MSU 32.1 5.56

Make small changes in certain situations see big difference in results.

As your brief little comparison shows offensively we are not too far off overall with the 4 playoff teams. It is the execution at crutial times that makes a big difference. Crutial mistakes played a big part in the outcome of games this year. IMO if TA doesn't throw 2 pick 6's against NW and Iowa we probably win those games. It is as simple as that. He doesn't throw it on 3rd and 7 against Illinois we probably win that game.

That's my main point with my two posts.

Some fans want us to believe that we are an absolute pathetic team and our offense is horrible. That just simply isn't the case. Our record looks like we are and....ultimately....that's the most important stat. However, right now we are a 5-7 team. How do we improve. These stats show me that little improvements and changes in execution here and there can make a big difference.

 

[ColoradoHusk]

Here are two more that show how our offense isn't..."OMG WE ARE HORRIBLE"like some fans want to make it out to be.

Team Points per game yards per play

Nebraska 32.5 6.08

Clemson 38.5 5.78

Alabama 34.1 5.78

OU 45.8 6.95

MSU 32.1 5.56

Make small changes in certain situations see big difference in results.

As your brief little comparison shows offensively we are not too far off overall with the 4 playoff teams. It is the execution at crutial times that makes a big difference. Crutial mistakes played a big part in the outcome of games this year. IMO if TA doesn't throw 2 pick 6's against NW and Iowa we probably win those games. It is as simple as that. He doesn't throw it on 3rd and 7 against Illinois we probably win that game.

That's my main point with my two posts.

Some fans want us to believe that we are an absolute pathetic team and our offense is horrible. That just simply isn't the case. Our record looks like we are and....ultimately....that's the most important stat. However, right now we are a 5-7 team. How do we improve. These stats show me that little improvements and changes in execution here and there can make a big difference.

Those are very interesting numbers. I have thought the offense has performed very well at times, but also very poorly at times. When there is so much inconsistency in the offense and defense, which we saw this year, the results of the games are going to come down to a few plays in each game. NU just didn't execute at a high level in those crucial plays in the last minutes of the game.

However, if you look at the top teams, they dominate most of their games, so the outcome doesn't come down to 1-2 crucial plays. Bo failed to get the team to that level, and that's why he would have 4 losses every year. Riley needs to get the team to that level so that 8-4 isn't a "good season" for Riley. Basically, Riley (or whomever the coach is) needs NU to get back to the point where it's has an automatic 7-8 wins, and then the remaining 4-5 games comes down crucial plays/luck/whatever.

 

[junior4949]

Not sure what article you guys read, but that actually eroded even more of my confidence in Riley. This says it all:

It doesn’t mean Riley, when reviewing the 2015 season, is satisfied. When asked if he thought Nebraska would finish 5-7, Riley said, “Probably not.”

"Probably not"?!?! How about, "Hell f'ing no!" Jesus, this guy went into the 2015 season thinking 5-7 was a real possibility. Nebraska is going to go anywhere until Charmin pulls his head out of his a$$, starts benching malcontents, and shifts to a power-run offense that relies on the run to setup the pass, not the other way around.

Nebraska doesn't have a ton of depth. A 5-7 season for a team with very little depth is ALWAYS a possibility if key players get hurt. Teams with little depth are similar to NFL teams. Look what's happened to the Patriots since Gronkowski got injured.

 

[zoogs]

If your requirement is that Riley scream "Hell f'ing no" in response to that question, then you will undoubtedly be disappointed.

The article touches on sincere vs insincere criticism, which I think is a good point. The coaches may feel a way about the performance of the team but they're not necessarily going to air it out in public if it's not productive, especially when it comes to tearing down the team or the players.

It's not hard to find cause to jump on the coaches, if you want to. There's all sorts of quick quips there to be had. From "BENCH THE MALCONTENTS" to "FREE WILBON ... because ... he shouldn't be benched..."

 

[Elf]

...none, Riley said, hit the team harder than the collapse at Illinois. The third-and-7 play in which Nebraska, almost assured of victory if it had just burned more game clock with a running play, had some kind of disastrous mix-up that resulted in a bootleg pass from Armstrong.

Riley and offensive coordinator Danny Langsdorf changed the name of the play after that game so there wouldnt be any confusion, and even used it for a touchdown against Michigan State. The new name: quarterback sweep.

Remember how much discussion we had on that play after the Illinois game? Odd that no one mentioned the same play--run correctly--after the Michigan State game. I guess there's nothing to discuss when things are executed correctly, huh?

This is a classic case of a "call plays that work" mentality. When the play works as designed no one says a thing, but let it get screwed up and by gawd the coaches need firing!

Yeah. Funny what happens when you call a run play, as opposed to a "tagged" pass play.

You do realize they fixed that error?

 

[Bowfin]

starts benching malcontents

The team went 5-7. I would hope nobody was content with such goings on.

Anyhow, who were the malcontents and what was their motivation to be one? I hear more and more about these guys, but nobody has added any substance to the idea. I have seen some lack of hustle and lack of spirit several times, but that isn't being a malcontent.