Post-Practice Presser - August 14

[ColoradoHusk]

Mav is correct in his post above regarding going for it on 4th downs.  Coaches should go for it on 4th down way more often than they do, especially in their opponent's territory.  The potential gain in going for it is substantially more than punting the ball or attempting a long field goal.

 

EDIT:  Adding in some additional commentary on going for it on 4th downs.  People act like going for the first down or TD on 4th down is a huge gamble.  A few years ago, people started Carolina Panthers' Head Coach Ron Rivera "Riverboat Ron" due to his propensity for going for it on 4th downs.  I prefer not to call him "Riverboat Ron", but "Statistical Analysis Ron".

[Ziebol]

Tre Neal is gonna be huge for us. Not just cause of his play, but because of his mindset and approach to the game.

[skersfan]

27 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

 

The going for two on their first TD seems like a mental toughness and attitude lesson for the players and it seemed like it worked.  

 

The part that I am absolutely giddy about with this staff is that every single thing they do from weight room workouts to warmups before practice to players like Wistrom and Peter coming in...and on and on.....is all about attitude, precision, detail....mental toughness.  It's about accountability and playing for the school and the guy beside you...instead of the NFL or me me me...or "I don't want to".

 

These next three weeks can't go by fast enough.

I am a college football fan, I truly only care about college football, with Nebraska being first and fore most.  I don't really care who has NFL talent or doesn't.  I want players that live to be a Nebraska player.  Most of our great players will tell you the NFL was fantastic, but by far their most important and fondest memories are playing at memorial stadium.  Frost gets that, and that is what he is trying to instill.  Be great at Nebraska, you will get your chance at the NFL.  Average at Nebraska, which we have seen for many years now, you might not get that chance.

[Mavric]

 

[KingBlank]

1 hour ago, RedSavage said:

Member that time Oregon lost to Nebraska by three cus Helfrich decided to go for two, four different times?  Pepperidge farm remembers.

 

That being said, I don't mind going for 2 and going for it on 4th down in the right situations and I have full confidence in these coaches to make the right call majority of the time.

They lost because Tommy went Tommy and BEAT them.

[grandpasknee]

1 hour ago, Comfortably Numb said:

 

Don't know what was going on last year...?

 

The Strain is what was going on Tre. Thank God that's done with.

I know I could definitely see it....

[RedSavage]

17 minutes ago, KingBlank said:

They lost because Tommy went Tommy and BEAT them.

I'm not trying to discredit him bc he played a heck of a game and was definitely part of the reason we won.  But lets do some complicated math:  if they had kicked the extra point all four times instead of going for it, would they have had more points or less points than us at the end of the game?

[KingBlank]

54 minutes ago, RedSavage said:

I'm not trying to discredit him bc he played a heck of a game and was definitely part of the reason we won.  But lets do some complicated math:  if they had kicked the extra point all four times instead of going for it, would they have had more points or less points than us at the end of the game?

Im assuming you are in the camp of Nebraska didn’t really beat Ohio State because of the quarterback injury.  No you have idea how that game would have gone with those 4 points being scored.  Did Northwestern not win the game because Nebraska didn’t kick a field goal but instead NW got a pick 6?  

[cheekygeek]

1 hour ago, RedSavage said:

I'm not trying to discredit him bc he played a heck of a game and was definitely part of the reason we won.  But lets do some complicated math:  if they had kicked the extra point all four times instead of going for it, would they have had more points or less points than us at the end of the game?

Actually, it was 5 times, wasn't it? And it is a legitimate question, so in my opinion KingBlank is out of line with his last comment.

 

Here is some analysis from Hail Varsity made at the time: https://web.archive.org/web/20160922154005/http://hailvarsity.com/news/analysis/oregon-right-keep-going-2/2016/09/

 

[Enhance]

We always have to be cautious playing the 'what-if' game because it works both ways, even when it comes to kicking XP's and two-point conversions. It's very similar to those who suggest Nebraska almost won six games last year. They also almost only won two. So, @KingBlank is raising a fair point that we can't really say for certain what those few points would've meant in the long run. The game could've had an entirely different outcome had Oregon only gone for XP's.

 

In this case, Oregon lost for a lot of reasons and that includes their inability to convert two-point conversions. I think it's a bit bold to say 'they lost because they couldn't convert two-point conversions.' Oregon didn't play overly well and also didn't convert a key 4th down at the end of the game. Had they converted, who knows what happens.

[cheekygeek]

DeWitt forgetting to mention J.D. Speilman (until specifically questioned about him) at kickoff/punt returner was a little surprising to me. But it would not surprise me to see him replaced with a little more speed and "miss-ability" (like a Maurice Washington).

[cheekygeek]

10 minutes ago, Enhance said:

So, @KingBlank is raising a fair point that we can't really say for certain what those few points would've meant in the long run.

 

That's really nice of you to spin his last post in the most charitable way possible, but what he in fact did was use a huge logical fallacy (strawman argument) to make his point (in addition to assuming that his "opponent" would argue against his strawmen). Particularly surprising/disturbing coming from a MOD.

 

39 minutes ago, KingBlank said:

Im assuming you are in the camp of Nebraska didn’t really beat Ohio State because of the quarterback injury.  No you have idea how that game would have gone with those 4 points being scored.  Did Northwestern not win the game because Nebraska didn’t kick a field goal but instead NW got a pick 6?  

 

[Enhance]

7 minutes ago, cheekygeek said:

That's really nice of you to spin his last post in the most charitable way possible, but what he in fact did was use a huge logical fallacy (strawman argument) to make his point (in addition to assuming that his "opponent" would argue against his strawmen). 

 

I ignored 80% of what he said and keyed in on the following portion:

47 minutes ago, KingBlank said:

No you have idea how that game would have gone with those 4 points being scored.

 

As such, he raises a fair point in my opinion, even if the method of arriving at that point is problematic.

[RedSavage]

49 minutes ago, KingBlank said:

Im assuming you are in the camp of Nebraska didn’t really beat Ohio State because of the quarterback injury.  No you have idea how that game would have gone with those 4 points being scored.  Did Northwestern not win the game because Nebraska didn’t kick a field goal but instead NW got a pick 6?  

You’re right in that it’s anybodys guess how the outcome of that game would’ve differed but personally, I think it would’ve been basically the same, except Oregon would’ve won.  I don’t think them kicking the XP would’ve made any difference in the amount of points we scored.  

[The Dude]

Man, is Dewitt the smartest football coach in the history of football coaches?