Close games

[ColoradoHusk]

So....we kept them out of the end zone because we were lucky?

Were they lucky to keep us out of the end zone when we were close?

Ok, the D made good stops to force them into FG's.  I think with NU's D, any time the D can force the team into a pick (punt or FG attempt) is a win for the D.

EDIT: I think Wisconsin's OC made a terrible play call on 3rd and 2 from NU's 10-15 yard line with 5 minutes left in the game.  They were gashing NU with the run the entire drive, could have ran the ball to at least take 30-40 more seconds off the clock, and probably gained the first down.  In that instance, NU was fortunate/lucky.

 

[BigRedBuster]

Ok, the D made good stops to force them into FG's.  I think with NU's D, any time the D can force the team into a pick (punt or FG attempt) is a win for the D.

EDIT: I think Wisconsin's OC made a terrible play call on 3rd and 2 from NU's 10-15 yard line with 5 minutes left in the game.  They were gashing NU with the run the entire drive, could have ran the ball to at least take 30-40 more seconds off the clock, and probably gained the first down.  In that instance, NU was fortunate/lucky.

And, we've had play calls that the other team was lucky didn't work.

My point is, you can't say one was lucky and the other wasn't.  We were gashing them pretty good too with the run game.

 

[ColoradoHusk]

And, we've had play calls that the other team was lucky didn't work.

My point is, you can't say one was lucky and the other wasn't.  We were gashing them pretty good too with the run game.

And I mainly retracted my fortunate comment, except for the final drive.  That was the stupidest play call all day for Wisconsin.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

I mean ......

We out-gained them for the day. 

We had better yards per pass. 

We had better yards per rush. 

We were better on third down. 

We had fewer penalties. 

And we tied the turnover battle.

But if you insist...

I do. 

Wisconsin won by 16 points.  

Playing desperation ball against a prevent defense, we gained a lot of yards that didn't show up on the scoreboard, a pretty common Red Zone issue you see every Saturday and Sunday. 

 A couple plays could have made it closer. A couple plays in the other direction could have made it more of a blowout.  Hat's off to the offense for never giving up. There were definitely signs of encouragement. Frost coached a good game. But some of you are pulling a hamstring turning this into a close game. 

 

[BigRedBuster]

I do. 

Wisconsin won by 16 points.  

Playing desperation ball against a prevent defense, we gained a lot of yards that didn't show up on the scoreboard, a pretty common Red Zone issue you see every Saturday and Sunday. 

 A couple plays could have made it closer. A couple plays in the other direction could have made it more of a blowout.  Hat's off to the offense for never giving up. There were definitely signs of encouragement. Frost coached a good game. But some of you are pulling a hamstring turning this into a close game. 

I've shown where one player ( a good kicker) very well could have erased that 16 point deficit.  

That's a far cry from your opinion that we were totally out classed and never would have had any chance of winning.

 

[Mavric]

Playing desperation ball against a prevent defense, we gained a lot of yards that didn't show up on the scoreboard, a pretty common Red Zone issue you see every Saturday and Sunday. 

Before the kneel-down at the end of the first half, we had gained 235 yards.  After that point, we gained 258 yards.

So - since we roughly gained the same amount of yards in both halves - you're trying to peddle the idea that Wisconsin was playing prevent defense the entire game as a way to be dismissive of what we were actually able to accomplish.

That's quite a leap.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

I've shown where one player ( a good kicker) very well could have erased that 16 point deficit.  

That's a far cry from your opinion that we were totally out classed and never would have had any chance of winning.

We have Barrett Pickering back, the guy who hit 14 of 18 field goals last year,. As with good kickers on  better teams, Pickering missed one.  One good player could also have prevented Martinez from taking a 20 yard sack on the previous play. One good player might not have thrown a momentum killing interception in the second quarter. One player, any player, on special teams could have tackled the Wisconsin kick returner who negated our touchdown drive in 12 seconds. Etc. etc.  

Nebraska gave its best in the first quarter, and a better Wisconsin team reasserted itself in the second and basically coasted to a 16 point win, holding off a scrappy Nebraska offense that needed touchdowns, not field goals, and made the same fourth down decisions made by good coaches with better kickers. 

 

[BigRedBuster]

We have Barrett Pickering back, the guy who hit 14 of 18 field goals last year,. As with good kickers on  better teams, Pickering missed one.  One good player could also have prevented Martinez from taking a 20 yard sack on the previous play. One good player might not have thrown a momentum killing interception in the second quarter. One player, any player, on special teams could have tackled the Wisconsin kick returner who negated our touchdown drive in 12 seconds. Etc. etc.  

If you think Pickering is anywhere close to back to kicking normal, you’re not paying attention. 
 

And, missed or not kicked Field goals within normal FG range is very very different than saying that maybe if we had a different QB we would have scored more. 

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

Before the kneel-down at the end of the first half, we had gained 235 yards.  After that point, we gained 258 yards.

So - since we roughly gained the same amount of yards in both halves - you're trying to peddle the idea that Wisconsin was playing prevent defense the entire game as a way to be dismissive of what we were actually able to accomplish.

That's quite a leap.

If teams were allowed to win according to the total yards they amass, you'd have a point.

And no, Wisconsin wasn't playing prevent defense in the first quarter. Some good playcalling and outstanding execution by Nebraska had Wisconsin on its heels. That's a very good defense and I was impressed what the Huskers did.

Then Wisconsin found its bearings, asserted itself, made the adjustments and looked like a team that was 16 points better than Nebraska for the rest of the game. We racked up a lot of yards without scoring, which isn't uncommon. Red Zone defenses get tougher and so does the playcalling. 

Not really sure what we're arguing at this point,  Nebraska needed to score two touchdowns and two two-point conversions in the last two minutes in order to tie the game. So I'm simply taking issue with the "Close Game" thread title. 

 

[PoloWearingBeaver]

I mean ......

We out-gained them for the day. 

We had better yards per pass. 

We had better yards per rush. 

We were better on third down. 

We had fewer penalties. 

And we tied the turnover battle.

But if you insist...

What bowl game do we get to go to if we finish 4-8 or 5-7 but we beat Wisconsin in every offensive category except the only on that matters?

 

[84HuskerLaw]

I think we lost the game to the better team but i also believe this was our best game of the year at the same time.  I also believe that had we played as well in each of our prior games we would have won Colorado Purdue Indiana  and maybe more.  

 

[Igetbored216]

Yeah, I wouldn't call a 16 point loss a "close" game. Nebraska's offense definitely surprised me by moving the ball against a great defense, but they failed in the only offensive category that matters.