What did we learn? Wisconsin edition

ColoradoHusk said:
I am fine being critical of Frost, but I didn't see how Frost mis-managed the clock at the end of the game.  They were in great shape with over 30 seconds left, 3 timeouts, and the ball at the 11 yard line.  The holding penalty was a killer, but that really didn't hurt things when it came to clock management.  I do think NU should have tried to get those 10 yards back on 1st and 2nd downs, instead of doing deep routes to the end zone, but that's still not bad clock management.  NU didn't lose plays due to the clock running out.  The goal was to score a TD with as little time left as possible, and then go for 2 and the win.
Click to expand...
Agreed, one of the few times Frost managed the clock well. 

 
Guy Chamberlin said:
Isn't it a little overly cranky to complain about the playcalling when the offense gains 450 yards against one of the stingiest defenses in college football, only punts twice, and had an offensive response to every Wisconsin score? Well.....except for that last one. And that drive had to compensate for holding calls on our notoriously overwhelmed offensive linemen. And that 4th and 20 call was actually a pretty good play call, thwarted by a pretty s#!tty officiating call.

I'm changing my mind. The QB and the play-calling isn't the defining problem with this team. 
Click to expand...


My feeling is that SF's situational awareness seems weak, thin, whatever.  He does not seem clear on anything but the goal.  And the goal is not enough, contrary to many locker room speeches.  Each step going toward that goal has to be executed under changing circumstances;  those are the steps that decide things in the end.  There are variables that can mess it up (those freaky officials, an unexpected turnover, a missed kick, etc), but situational awareness brings us to clarity on the variables as they unfold.  Our HC seems to have little of that ability.  I recall Tom Osborn being amazing at that as he adjusted to things during the game. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Frost in his post game presser he was sure we were going to score and he didn’t want to leave time on the clock. 
 

not sure if this is brilliant or delusional. In his fantasy world we were also going for two. 

We weren’t all that desperate with a minute and half and three timeouts left. There is no reason we couldn’t have had a couple of run plays or short screens. 
 

 
krc1995 said:
Frost in his post game presser he was sure we were going to score and he didn’t want to leave time on the clock. 
 

not sure if this is brilliant or delusional. In his fantasy world we were also going for two. 

We weren’t all that desperate with a minute and half and three timeouts left. There is no reason we couldn’t have had a couple of run plays or short screens. 
 
Click to expand...
I did like the presser saying he had already told the team "when" we score we are going for 2.  It wasn't "if" we score, it was when.  The subconscious picks on this.  I know it sounds like psycho babble, but it works.  I had called prior to the drive to go for 2.  The reason? Statistics.  Frost has had 4 OT games at NU.  Not one point or even a 1st down in any of those tries.  And to piggyback on what @Haggis alluding to, Frost has shown the destination very well, but has failed to map the journey.  I do not think he or the staff had a clear and articulable plan on how they wanted to accomplish the goal.  The whole build a foundation idea.  This was a total rebuild from the jump.  We talk about frost being in over his head in the B1G, not multiply that inexperience with trying to build a program from the ground up.  He and his staff's experience with this?  Nada.  We do not have the most basic building blocks of successful build in place ie penalties, attention to detail (route running/RB in wrong stop), techniques etc....I am hoping a new O staff can go back and address this stuff.  

 
He could have managed the clock a bit better (we left the game with an unused timeout, and used the other two on dead balls after all) to give us more time for creativity in play-calling, but that wasn't too much of an issue.

Way, way more of an issue is the playcalling from 1st & 20 onwards. Four straight plays where it looked like every single route took forever and went all the way into the endzone. Adrian had to throw each one falling away off his back foot because they took so long, and the middle/underneath was wide open for the taking.

Mind-boggling how Frost didn't put Adrian in a position to succeed from the point of the holding penalty on. I don't put the last four plays on AM at all.

 
After all these years, I hope some have learned it is is more than the coach, (past, present or next one) that is the solution or the problem.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Why are we still trying a hard count in the redzone?   Has Frost not watched any of the games he's coached the last 4 years?

Somebody is going false start and we're not going to trick the defense into jumping off sides.

What's the definition of insanity?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Dude said:
Why are we still trying a hard count in the redzone?   Has Frost not watched any of the games he's coached the last 4 years?

Somebody is going false start and we're not going to trick the defense into jumping off sides.

What's the definition of insanity?
Click to expand...
Great question.  Prior to Wisky we were 112th in the red zone.  now down to 116.  I don't care how many yards we get or records we break, you will win nothing but a 5th year as a HC at NU with that efficiency.

 
Lorewarn said:
Way, way more of an issue is the playcalling from 1st & 20 onwards. Four straight plays where it looked like every single route took forever and went all the way into the endzone. Adrian had to throw each one falling away off his back foot because they took so long, and the middle/underneath was wide open for the taking.
Click to expand...
Yea I kept wanting an intermediate tight end target that had been working all game.   

And originally on that drive there was plenty of time and timeouts, the entire playbook was an option if the clock was managed well.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
observer3 said:
Yea I kept wanting an intermediate tight end target that had been working all game.   

And originally on that drive there was plenty of time and timeouts, the entire playbook was an option if the clock was managed well.
Click to expand...
The entire playbook was still available.  The clock management wasn't an issue.  There were 3 timeouts remaining with 30+ seconds left.  That's plenty of time to work the middle of the field, Frost and Martinez chose not to.  Stop confusing a clock management issue with a play calling issue.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
ColoradoHusk said:
The entire playbook was still available.  The clock management wasn't an issue.  There were 3 timeouts remaining with 30+ seconds left.  That's plenty of time to work the middle of the field, Frost and Martinez chose not to.  Stop confusing a clock management issue with a play calling issue.
Click to expand...
Well I did also call out the play selection.   To me the offense seemed to be running end-zone passes as if they didn't have time to run anything else.   They burned a lot of clock early in the drive then rushed at the end.  I agree they still could have used a timeout to run something up the middle, even late in the drive.   Not using the timeout is also related to clock management.

 
lo country said:
I want power football so bad.  I am hoping that Frost wanting "fresh ideas" and not "go too far from what we are doing" was coach speak to save face.  I hope Trev said you scheme sucks.  The field is 100 yards long.  not 80.  Your O has gotten you 4 seasons of losing.  Possibly the worst coach in NU history.  Your O is almost dead last in red zone efficiency. So as a fellow Husker, I am throwing you a bone, but you keep that craptastic scheme next year, I'll leave you in Ireland.  
Click to expand...
fifY

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top