What did we learn-Game 2 Oregon

Toe said:
Lee might have better mechanics than Armstrong and T-Mart, but he's probably just as guilty of trying to force throws that aren't there as those two were.
Click to expand...
Agreed, Toe. And, for me, even more frustrating were the times Lee missed open receivers. At one point in the second half we had failed to convert our previous 9 third downs. Langsdorf seems a little too pass happy for my taste....And that's a problem when your QB can't even complete 50% of his passes....... :dunno

 
get huskin! said:
I haven't read this thread...  Shame on me.  Ahem...  Hey, I was very very disturbed the first few minutes, right?  THEN, I settled down and just watched the game.  I saw our D swarming TO the ball over and over...  Saw them being in position time after time...  Saw our D shut down their star running back 75% of the time.   Saw Tanner Lee is good, but not the second coming... YET. He's good, has some skills and keeps composed.  Good LORD, he should do nothing but IMPROVE...!  I saw an offense that kept it's composure and some running backs that MADE some holes OUT OF NOTHING.  Saw receivers do some really good things.  I saw some mistakes and miscues, but overall I think the team and coaching staff HOLDS THEIR HEAD HIGH considering this loss.  I saw a much MUCH improved team overall tonight.  Hell no, they ain't playing for the NC this year, but who thought they would???  I wish I could message every player and tell them GOOD JOB and way to stay COMPOSED!  GO BIG RED!
Click to expand...
Just tell them in person when you see them Mrs. Lee. 

 
Quite honestly, Diaco isn't worth the money we paid . . . but that isn't unusual, because defensive coordinators are nearly always over-hyped and over-paid. They are the dumbest set of cabinet coaches; they are only as good as the athletes they are fortunate (or unfortunate) enough to have available as players. An $85k defensive coordinator is likely to be just as effective as an $840k defensive coordinator, although they may not be quite as pretty.

T. Lee isn't the deal. Time to invest immediately in the next competitor at QB. Tommy Armstrong would have won this game today, and I was never a fan of Tommy Armstrong. Lee was half a step behind the action on the field, and he consistently overthrew his receivers. He also focused too narrowly on his favorite receiver. There were several opportunities to win today, and we would have with a good QB. We don't have one yet.

The defense has hope. Good adjustments to the second half, but the physical skills on the field don't yet match the demands of a 3-5 defense. It might pan out as the season evolves, though. Although I mentioned that defensive coordinators like Diaco aren't worth what we spend on them, Diaco's not necessarily any dumber than any other DC.

DEP is severly underutilized.

Let's find a QB with an arm and put the ball into the hands of excellent receivers. I know that Husker fans love the glory days of running the ball up the gut, but that just doesn't produce enough points to win championships. 

It doesn't do any good to recruit great receivers when your QB can't connect with them.

Again, T. Armstrong would have won the game today. That doesn't speak highly of T. Lee at all.

 
I did not learn anything I did not already know since December 4, 2014. You get what you pay for. You hire a .500 coach, you get a .500 result. Riley can have the packers players play for him and he will still manage to lose half his games. He is a nice guy and does not embarrass the university on the sideline and that is about it. We are insignificant and will remain that way until eichorst grows a pair and does what his counterpart in Michigan and Washington did, and that is get a coach with a proven winning record rather than go after a Santa Clause coach.

Nothing against Riley. I am sure he is a nice guy but all his choices are flawed and will not ever get us back to national prominence. We will finish this season 6-6 or 7-5 at best.

 
huskerfan74 said:
I did not learn anything I did not already know since December 4, 2014. You get what you pay for. You hire a .500 coach, you get a .500 result. Riley can have the packers players play for him and he will still manage to lose half his games. He is a nice guy and does not embarrass the university on the sideline and that is about it. We are insignificant and will remain that way until eichorst grows a pair and does what his counterpart in Michigan and Washington did, and that is get a coach with a proven winning record rather than go after a Santa Clause coach.

Nothing against Riley. I am sure he is a nice guy but all his choices are flawed and will not ever get us back to national prominence. We will finish this season 6-6 or 7-5 at best.
Click to expand...
It has nothing at all to do with coaching. It has everything in the world to do with talent and athletes. Coaches should only be evaluated on the athletes they successfully recruit, and that's why coaches need four to five year to develop teams. Pellini was a complete failure in all aspects of his career, and he was a jacka$$. Our current coach hasn't had sufficient opportunity to fail yet. Let's give him a fair chance to fail.

 
Vitalis Jackson said:
It has nothing at all to do with coaching. It has everything in the world to do with talent and athletes. Coaches should only be evaluated on the athletes they successfully recruit, and that's why coaches need four to five year to develop teams. Pellini was a complete failure in all aspects of his career, and he was a jacka$$. Our current coach hasn't had sufficient opportunity to fail yet. Let's give him a fair chance to fail.
Click to expand...


:LOLtartar

 
1.  Lee may not be an upgrade over Tommy. Comp % is similar without the wheels.  I honestly didn't expect him to be a heisman candidate but I certainly didn't expect T-mart/Armstrong with no mobility either. 

2. The team has heart and didn't quit. 

3. The coaches are pretty much what their career numbers say they are. But we have learned that many times before. 

4. RB position is dicey after Bryant. 

5. The defense may have it in them to be solid against more traditional Big 10 offenses. 

6. Farniok should start.

7. Reed is a better safety then Kalu 

 
Offense 

I was so looking forward to a QB that didn't throw into coverage.  Fail.

Defense

Afyer being abused on bubble screen against ASU figured they would have tightened it up for the Ducks.  Fail.

Sloppy play overall.  100% coaching.  You can't win games when you're your own worst enemy.

 
gobiggergoredder said:
Offense 

I was so looking forward to a QB that didn't throw into coverage.  Fail.

Defense

Afyer being abused on bubble screen against ASU figured they would have tightened it up for the Ducks.  Fail.

Sloppy play overall.  100% coaching.  You can't win games when you're your own worst enemy.
Click to expand...
I agree that the play was very sloppy today, and that falls on coaching.  So does having the team be ready to play from the opening kickoff.

I predicted to Teach that Oregon would get the ball first, score quickly, get a 3 and out, and then score again.  NU made it worse with that interception on the first play.  Yes, it was a good pass to Morgan, and it was a fluke bounce off his helmet into the defender.  But, it's still an example of sloppy play and not being ready from the opening kickoff.

 
Back
Top