Phil Steele says Nebraska will be #17 heading into the season

[walksalone]

Especially when he saw what our running game was doing to their front 7. I can't remember at what point in the 4th quarter (early?) we had a nice drive where we ran the toss sweep with Ameer and some guy that went to Kentucky. They had zero answer for that play, but we go away from it towards the end of the drive and it cost us. I understand the heat of the moment, but still if it's working why go away from it?

winner winner, chicken dinner...

 

[Landlord]

So am I. I am still wondering what his thought process was when there was time left to go in the 3rd quarter, down by less than a score, and throwing the ball all over was the remedy. Makes me wonder if he'd just taken a breath, looked more carefully at the situation, and decided to run the ball, how that would have affected the outcome...

Either he was trying to prove a point or just plain ignorant to what needed to happen. He ended up playing into their strengths, rushing the passer, and not their vulnerabilities, downhill running.

It's remarkably difficult making those kinds of decisions in the moments and elements of an actual, real, live football game. That's what separates actual coaches from the rest of us who have nothing better to do than pretend like we know what we're talking about.

But if you're continually doing something that isn't working, why would you keep doing it, when it inevitably cost them the game?

I mean, I can't give an actual answer, but I can say that I do that in my life all the damn time. In small and big things. And it's only afterwards with hindsight that I see "well that was dumb, it could have been so much easier."

 

[Treand3]

So am I. I am still wondering what his thought process was when there was time left to go in the 3rd quarter, down by less than a score, and throwing the ball all over was the remedy. Makes me wonder if he'd just taken a breath, looked more carefully at the situation, and decided to run the ball, how that would have affected the outcome...

Either he was trying to prove a point or just plain ignorant to what needed to happen. He ended up playing into their strengths, rushing the passer, and not their vulnerabilities, downhill running.

It's remarkably difficult making those kinds of decisions in the moments and elements of an actual, real, live football game. That's what separates actual coaches from the rest of us who have nothing better to do than pretend like we know what we're talking about.

But if you're continually doing something that isn't working, why would you keep doing it, when it inevitably cost them the game?

Especially when he saw what our running game was doing to their front 7. I can't remember at what point in the 4th quarter (early?) we had a nice drive where we ran the toss sweep with Ameer and some guy that went to Kentucky. They had zero answer for that play, but we go away from it towards the end of the drive and it cost us. I understand the heat of the moment, but still if it's working why go away from it?

Absolutely. Additionally, if anyone looked at their losses, they struggled to stop teams that ran at them. I suspected that going into our matchup with them.

 

[clyde40]

UCLA also stuffed a run for I think a two yard loss on that drive and stuffed Marrow on a 3rd and 1 that put an end to the drive. And by the middle of the 4th quarter their defense was blowing through the offensive line no matter what we were doing. It isn't simply, "If Beck would have ran the ball we would have won"

 

[ADS]

UCLA also stuffed a run for I think a two yard loss on that drive and stuffed Marrow on a 3rd and 1 that put an end to the drive. And by the middle of the 4th quarter their defense was blowing through the offensive line no matter what we were doing. It isn't simply, "If Beck would have ran the ball we would have won"

They stopped Mike Marrow? Them, and everyone else. They were blowing thru our line because we were sending out 4-5 recievers every play and they were sending one more defender then we could block.

 

[beanman]

UCLA also stuffed a run for I think a two yard loss on that drive and stuffed Marrow on a 3rd and 1 that put an end to the drive. And by the middle of the 4th quarter their defense was blowing through the offensive line no matter what we were doing. It isn't simply, "If Beck would have ran the ball we would have won"

They stopped Mike Marrow? Them, and everyone else. They were blowing thru our line because we were sending out 4-5 recievers every play and they were sending one more defender then we could block.

Yeah, he's a big fat pu&&y cat.

 

[The Dude]

Remember the hype surrounding Marrow when he came here? Seems comical in retrospect.

 

[beanman]

Remember the hype surrounding Marrow when he came here? Seems comical in retrospect.

Kinda like the hype surrounding a lot of young players that we have yet to see in a game. That's why I'm cautiously optimistic about the young talent on the team. Hopefully they stay healthy and make an impact right away, but I'm going to hold back my excitement...

 

[Treand3]

UCLA also stuffed a run for I think a two yard loss on that drive and stuffed Marrow on a 3rd and 1 that put an end to the drive. And by the middle of the 4th quarter their defense was blowing through the offensive line no matter what we were doing. It isn't simply, "If Beck would have ran the ball we would have won"

They stopped Mike Marrow? Them, and everyone else. They were blowing thru our line because we were sending out 4-5 recievers every play and they were sending one more defender then we could block.

Again we agree. We're sittin here talking about Mike Marrow. Mike Marrow?!? Their MO is to use a high amount of pressure and confusion against offenses in the pass happy Pac 12 and dropping back to pass out of sets like that was exactly what they want teams to do.

 

[Saunders]

Here's another good one...regarding 2012...

IF EVERYTHING FALLS INTO PLACE meaning the team plays better overall and we get a few lucky breaks, etc. (which happens to every team).....BEST CASE: 11-1. No way the best case is 9-3....no way.

The team I am most worried about honestly....is Ohio St. NOW, they will not be a 12-0 team this year, but they will be a force. I see 2-3 losses in Urban's first year, after that....I am a bit worried that they may become a solid powerhouse with Braxton becoming a junior/senior. At Ohio St doesn't bode well for the Huskers. I am really glad we were able to beat them in our first year in the BIG10. They remind me and portray the Texas of the BIG10....a must beat team even if they were having a down year.

http://www.huskerboa...__1#entry990551

In his defense, nobody thought the Big Ten was going to suck so much a$$ last year. OSU won 6 games by a TD or less, and had two OT wins.

 

[beanman]

UCLA also stuffed a run for I think a two yard loss on that drive and stuffed Marrow on a 3rd and 1 that put an end to the drive. And by the middle of the 4th quarter their defense was blowing through the offensive line no matter what we were doing. It isn't simply, "If Beck would have ran the ball we would have won"

They stopped Mike Marrow? Them, and everyone else. They were blowing thru our line because we were sending out 4-5 recievers every play and they were sending one more defender then we could block.

Again we agree. We're sittin here talking about Mike Marrow. Mike Marrow?!? Their MO is to use a high amount of pressure and confusion against offenses in the pass happy Pac 12 and dropping back to pass out of sets like that was exactly what they want teams to do.

I once saw Mike Marrow get knocked backwards from a lineman farting.

 

[Saunders]

Back to the topic at hand, Steele is the best in the business. Last year in his mag, he had us in a 3 way tie with UM and MSU, with NU holding the tie breaker. Half way through the season (after OSU), he had us running the table. He also had us losing to UW in the CCG.

Guy rates #1 in the Stassen preseason breakdown because he knows his stuff. I always look at Steele'mas (day the magazine arrives) as the unofficial start to the season (followed up by NCAA release and media days).

 

[Treand3]

UCLA also stuffed a run for I think a two yard loss on that drive and stuffed Marrow on a 3rd and 1 that put an end to the drive. And by the middle of the 4th quarter their defense was blowing through the offensive line no matter what we were doing. It isn't simply, "If Beck would have ran the ball we would have won"

They stopped Mike Marrow? Them, and everyone else. They were blowing thru our line because we were sending out 4-5 recievers every play and they were sending one more defender then we could block.

Again we agree. We're sittin here talking about Mike Marrow. Mike Marrow?!? Their MO is to use a high amount of pressure and confusion against offenses in the pass happy Pac 12 and dropping back to pass out of sets like that was exactly what they want teams to do.

I once saw Mike Marrow get knocked backwards from a lineman farting.

Sadly you may be right.

 

[EZ-E]

4 total jet sweeps or end arounds before our game???? You are moron.

Is this a serious response? Obviously they showed more than 4 since there were more than 4 on that highlight video, and obviously not every jet sweep and option play they ran last year was shown on that one highlight video.

The point is, your claim that they didn't show any option or jet sweep before they played us is asinine, since they showed a lot. True fact.

If pointing that out makes me moron, whatever that means, I can live with that.

So you tell me to watch a highlight video, you tell me to watch a specific section of it in which you are trying to validate your point and they show 4 of the play you are talking about????

You are going to have to show me more evidence before I concede any type of point besides your word.

Maybe I should rephrase my previous point, IN THE FIRST MATCH UP AGAINST NU, Wisconsin didn't hurt us with any outside running plays such as the jet sweep.

Now respond to the other points made in that post. I know one point at a time is a lot for you to handle though.

Just admit you were wrong and move on.

So I'm safe in saying you have nothing more to say to the other points.

Okay.

 

[The Dude]

Not really. For the most part it seems like a reasonable enough recap.