Athlon Sports Predicts Huskers Season: six panelists say 10-2 or 11-1

[Saunders]

I agree and I've posted so before.

But the game could have been different if they played Colter at QB the entire (or at least vast majority) of the game.

Sure, it's entirely possible, but not plausible. Colter went nowhere running the zone read, and he's not enough of a threat to throw. He was a non factor and nothing he did helped them score. In fact, it's just as possible (and more likely based on the what he actually did) that NW wouldn't have even been in the game with Colter playing QB, because' Siemian's few passes kept them in it and led to points.

The year before he threw for 115 yards and a TD, ran for 57 yards and 2 TDs and had 57 yards receiving. That's 26 touches (plus however many handoffs) on their 78 plays. Last year he only got 19 touches on 75 plays. Perhaps we were doing a better job against him running the ball but Siemian was 15/35 passing the ball instead of the 16/24 they were throwing against us the previous year and Colter was 10/10 the week before (Minnesota, granted), 6/9 the following week (still only Iowa but better), 8/14 the week after that @ Michigan and 13/20 the week after that @ Michigan St. It just didn't make any sense why he didn't get more chances at QB throwing the ball when that's how they torched us the year before.

That is plenty plausible to me.

So he got 26 touches in 2011 and 19 in 2012. Not much difference there. While it's possible and maybe even plausible, it seems very unlikely to me. I agree with saunders that it's more likely they would have done even worse. Remember that they were trying to get Mark the ball in space, which could be why Colter got a few less touches. I'd MUCH rather Colter had the ball than Mark.

Just by having him at QB with the threat of the run is what gave them the 80 yard TD. IMO to think that they would have been worse by playing him more doesn't make any logical sense at all. NW's coaches did us a favor last year that they are likely not going to repeat.

And Nebaska gave Northwestern a 28 point swing in the 1st half, making it a close game instead of a blowout.

 

[RedDenver]

Just by having him at QB with the threat of the run is what gave them the 80 yard TD. IMO to think that they would have been worse by playing him more doesn't make any logical sense at all. NW's coaches did us a favor last year that they are likely not going to repeat.

It makes sense if you think (as I do) that the combination of Trevor Siemian and Venric Mark is the better backfield for NW. And was Kolter under center for the 80 yard run? (I honestly don't know.)

So he got 26 touches in 2011 and 19 in 2012. Not much difference there. While it's possible and maybe even plausible, it seems very unlikely to me. I agree with saunders that it's more likely they would have done even worse. Remember that they were trying to get Mark the ball in space, which could be why Colter got a few less touches. I'd MUCH rather Colter had the ball than Mark.

That's 50% more touches than last year. I'd say that's significant.

And it's not so much what Colter was doing running the ball. He was on fire throwing in the games surrounding ours and they torched us with the pass the year before. But they stuck with the guy completing 43%.

Not sure where you're getting 50%: 26/19 = 0.36 or 36%. But no matter the percentage that's only 7 more touches. Our pass defense was the strongest part of our D and was better than our pass D from the year before. They might have gotten as close as they did because they did NOT pass as much. That might have been great coaching, or it might have been a mistake. There's just no way to know.

 

[True2tRA]

I thought the whole world was scratching their heads after Northwestern went the entire game last year without utilizing Colter in the same way they had in their victory the year before. I think somehow the conversation turned to a simple count of how many touches he got instead of the more important focus which is which way they utilized those touches. If I recall the game correctly, I specifically remember while watching saying " wow, they really are not using Colter in the same manner as last season". I didn't even think it was debatable. It would be like putting Ameer Abdullah at QB, having him attempt 30 passes and at the end of the game wondering why he only had half the numbers as he would normally get with thirty touches at HB. In other words, the amount of " touches" doesn't mean jack sh#t.

 

[Mavric]

I thought the whole world was scratching their heads after Northwestern went the entire game last year without utilizing Colter in the same way they had in their victory the year before. I think somehow the conversation turned to a simple count of how many touches he got instead of the more important focus which is which way they utilized those touches. If I recall the game correctly, I specifically remember while watching saying " wow, they really are not using Colter in the same manner as last season". I didn't even think it was debatable. It would be like putting Ameer Abdullah at QB, having him attempt 30 passes and at the end of the game wondering why he only had half the numbers as he would normally get with thirty touches at HB. In other words, the amount of " touches" doesn't mean jack sh#t.

This.

i spent the whole game unable to figure out what they were doing but glad they were doing it - between throwing things at the TV when we fumbled.

 

[RedDenver]

I thought the whole world was scratching their heads after Northwestern went the entire game last year without utilizing Colter in the same way they had in their victory the year before. I think somehow the conversation turned to a simple count of how many touches he got instead of the more important focus which is which way they utilized those touches. If I recall the game correctly, I specifically remember while watching saying " wow, they really are not using Colter in the same manner as last season". I didn't even think it was debatable. It would be like putting Ameer Abdullah at QB, having him attempt 30 passes and at the end of the game wondering why he only had half the numbers as he would normally get with thirty touches at HB. In other words, the amount of " touches" doesn't mean jack sh#t.

That's a good point. I thought Kolter mostly ran zone read against us which is his specialty. Fitzgerald is a great coach IMO, so I've got to think he knew what he was doing. Trevor was considered the better passer, maybe that's why they played it that way.

 

[Flood]

People are talking a lot about the 9am Pacific Time start for the UCLA game. They've got two weeks to prepare for the game, and I'm sure Mora will have them acclimated to the start time. That won't be any kind of advantage.

Plus school doesn't start for them until I believe the week after. So they will likely come to Lincoln a few days early to get used to the time zone. So that shouldn't be that much of a factor.

Start time will not be a factor for UCLA, at all. Mora has had them practicing at 7am Pacific since he arrived. So a 9am start time in Lincoln should have zero advantage.

Our greatest advantage may be that Johnathan Franklin is now playing for the Packers. He shredded our defense last year.

 

[teachercd]

The early start time is only a disadvantage for us Husker fans

 

[kchusker_chris]

The early start time is only a disadvantage for us Husker fans

Didn't Bo mention last year that he didn't really like the 11am start times because the kids are still dragging a little that early? I remember him commenting on something regarding the early start time - just kind of generalizing things at some point last season or the season before.

 

[The Dude]

The early start is the only explanation for Niles Paul's Fumble Heard 'Round the World in 2009.

 

[teachercd]

11am games seem to be a a gas can of debate for people. They either love them or hate them and reasons for the love or hate seem to annoy the other party.

 

[knapplc]

I moved a bunch of stuff from this thread. You can find it HERE.