Should we fire Satterfield??
- Thread starter Huskerfollower4life
- Start date
runningblind
All-American
How is what she said wrong? Here is the definition of an Eckel:
Eckel: A "quality possession" if a team scores a big play touchdown or gets a first down inside the opponent's 40-yard line. Eckel Rte: Frequency of creating a quality possession. Pts/Eckel: Points per quality possession.
That graphic shows that we are above average in Eckels, see definition above, but are below average in Points per Eckel. While not specifically red zone, that means we are bad at turning big plays/first downs in the opponents territory into points. Those are similar things.
PasstheDamnBallGuy
Starter
I know this isn't the thread for it but that is an insane false start call. I know there is not a formal or even informal conspiracy against us but there has to be some sort of bias that they have refused to look into.
Husker in WI
All-Conference
I feel like some crews do call the tiny flinches, but this was much less of a false start than the uncalled one OSU had on their 3rd and 1 sneak. The inconsistency is ridiculous.
You would think the conference would want better, and I have to imagine the refs would agree to more oversight/accountability if it came with a significant pay raise. I don't like the "make them have post-game press conferences!" idea, what do you want them to say? And they do answer questions postgame, just not to the beat reporters. But it's absolutely possible to set up a scoring system and reward/penalize based on performance.
I do also think replay should have to more formally justify their calls. There is no way you can say there was irrefutable evidence the ball hit the ground on Neyor's catch, and I'm honestly wondering if they didn't know the call on the field or didn't have the same angle as the broadcast. That baffled me the first time I heard it, but there have been a few games over the years where they admit an angle clearing showing the opposite of their ruling just wasn't available to them.
Archy1221
Heisman Trophy Winner
Husker in WI
All-Conference
It's not a play where he's supposed to look for anything other than leaping over the top - it's just also not something we want called from the 2. If he's looking to cut as he approaches the line, he's not going to have the momentum to leap over as designed. I don't like that Rhule seems infatuated with leaping over the top on goal line plays - what are we, like 2 for 5 on those?
Archy1221
Heisman Trophy Winner
I don’t understand how this isn’t supposed to be an immediate hit read to the inside receiver for big yardage?
how is there not an immediate blitz check in this route? The QB and inside receiver should recognize it and he should replace the blitzer in the middle. While the outside receiver coming across is open later, it takes more time than it needs.
Archy1221
Heisman Trophy Winner
If the play was a designed leap play then I guess it was a garbage call. Any interior push at all from the dline on a leap play blows it up. Give the RB a chance to be successful at least.
Husker in WI
All-Conference
This was the less egregious bad spot - we thought (correctly) that the ball should be spotted at or just inside the 1, that's what was relayed to Satt for the playcall. It was actually spotted almost at the 2. I don't think we have any checks for the formation with 2 DL on the field, and they didn't want to waste a timeout. In hindsight they should have, or just not been so excited to run Robinson and Jeudy on the field and waited to confirm the spot.
Both spots were bad, but I do think Rhule deserves some blame in handling them poorly. IMO should have been an immediate timeout when they realized the clock was running on Emmett's first down, both to save time and hopefully get replay to look at it. And then on this one, I agree it's a bad playcall. It worked later in the game from inside the one, but knowing the actual spot of the ball before calling a play that will only work in extremely short yardage is critical.
Archy1221
Heisman Trophy Winner
The bigger issue is not identifying defensive responsibilities on the blitzes. We aren’t replacing the blitzer in the middle with the closest receiver to the middle.
Im assuming the opponents can see this based on prior game film, because it’s pretty clear the safety has the TE and he is in no hurry to pick him up. A quick replacement by the TE to the middle nets 10-15 yards easy and it’s an easy throw.
Is also like to know why the left side receiver is running his man into the middle potentially allowing his defender to have a play on a later throw across the middle to the receiver we do have crossing. Like you said, run a fade and either he’s open or the defender is out of the play. Either way it’s good for NU.
Archy1221
Heisman Trophy Winner
Btw I’m not trying to argue with you at all on this as I think we agree. Just wanted to point out my observation to this piece.
In a tight game with a fourth and 2 at the goal line, wouldn’t a time out be more than justified if you believe the play call is wrong based on the spot you didn’t end up getting? To me, that’s a huge coaching blunder, not to mention there is a reason you don’t see many RB leap plays anymore which in my mind was another coaching blunder on the same play.
Husker in WI
All-Conference
Oh yeah, I think we agree. For as solid as the results were in the first half of the year, I think this staff wildly overthinks the execution of trying to nail the last ~4 minutes of each half. They want to make so sure the other team doesn't have any time left that things get really weird with the pace.
You'd like to keep all 3 timeouts in your pocket for the end of the game against a team like OSU, but I 100% agree you need to burn one before that 4th and goal. I suspect they were kicking themselves for using timeouts early in the first half which contributed to the mismanagement of that final drive, and were committed to not using them except in an emergency in the second half. Overreaction, IMO. Or maybe they just thought the play would still work just as well from the 2. Either way, it's a coaching blunder/miscalculation.
Guy Chamberlin
Heisman Trophy Winner
I've been defending Satterfield because it looked to me that his playcalling worked well against lesser teams, and a still flawed offensive line thwarts a lot of the execution. We always think our call would work better than the OC's failed play, cause we never have to prove it. In honesty, I'm not sure what I'd call differently.
But I'm starting to have my doubts. Certainly curious what another OC would do with Raiola and the talent behind him.
But I'm starting to have my doubts. Certainly curious what another OC would do with Raiola and the talent behind him.
Undone
All-American
Hate saying this on the internet, but he's kind of been playing with a "deer in the headlights" thing for years. I'm not sure if it's effort as much as he just isn't focusing in on where his movements need to go to.