Husker in WI

Definitely agree, and I think a lot of Martinez's problems last week were similar. The pick he did throw he was staring down Washington all the way, similar to his pick in the Iowa game. Maybe trusts the play design a little too much and just assumes the primary read will work when it's theoretically a mismatch in our favor.

Pretty bold for a secondary that looks really really bad. If Martinez plays like last week that might work, but if he plays like he can making him pass will not help them.

Yeah, it's a pretty weird response. I get saying emotions got the best of you if you just deck a guy late, but twisting a knee is a conscious choice. And "cowards?" First of all plenty of people would say it to his face, they just don't have an opportunity to do so. I'm sure there are some morons making threats, but the majority of comments I've seen are just letting him know it was a cheap move and we don't like him. Social media is pretty much the only place to call out people who publicly do something stupid, I don't think that makes people "cowards." I wish Callier was starting honestly, because regardless of exactly how many husker fans show up I guarantee it would be a very loud negative crowd reaction when he was announced. That would be weird in your own stadium - he'll probably get booed anyway. But again, I don't think that's inappropriate. Very different from booing players based on performance.

Maybe I missed it, but I don't think the coaches ever said anything about being too vanilla. The "too schemey, too much, etc" has been pretty consistent, the fans thought it was vanilla. And as others have pointed out, things that look vanilla to us may be very complicated for the players. So yes a little concerning that in year 2 some gameplans are too complicated, but it sounds like the poor week of practive was as much a factor as the complexity. And I haven't heard any mixed messages from the coaches - it's all been bad practice and making things too complex.

Ah, gotcha. Didn't re-watch it to look at that - is it not under the RPO rules where they can block 3 yards down field though as well? I hate that, at most it should be 1 yard like the NFL. That may only apply to the interior blockers as well though.

The play on Bootle wasn't a pick, it's a screen. If the pass is behind the line of scrimmage they can block before/while it's caught. He clearly expected Sullivan to switch once he was blocked, you can't just watch your receiver block the other DB - either needed to switch onto Bootles man or do a better job warning him of the impending block. The other TD was a good play call, I think Barry was actually in zone but was the only guy close. He not great in coverage man or zone, and that play looked to target our ILBs specifically. Hard to call defense without ILBs having some coverage responsibility though.

Frost also mentioned USA had a lot of defensive changes the staff didn't really know about what of time. So seems like the staff thought they knew what to expect, planned specifically for that, and wouldn't /didn't adjust. Which is fine first game of the year against an inferior opponent, and I don't expect it to be the norm moving forward. They spent all offseason prepping a new defense, other teams on the schedule won't be able to make huge changes in a week, and hopefully it also reminded the staff to have more adjustments ready. I thought we were at the point they could call things not specifically in the game plan, not sure if that isn't true or if they didn't feel the need to do that. As people have pointed out, some of the calls were great and just not executed.

Thought this was the big ten week one thread, and they are actually beating UMass now. But yeah, that would be gross. Wisky looks good, but I have no idea what to make of USF. They've been really good recently, but completely bombed the second half of last year.

It turns out Rutgers may be even worse than we thought..

Tunnel screens could be dead as well, a pretty big piece of those is somebody picking off the trailing corner and/or pursuing LBs and it's almost always a block like the gif above. Used to just yell at the corners for not warning you, now I guess you yell at the ref to throw a flag. I thought the rule could make sense, but not officiated in the way it has been so far.

I'm sure he knew you were referencing a different metric, just replying with one that doesn't favor your point. I think both ratings have issues, but the person defending Morgan's performance is going to prefer QB rating and someone criticizing it will prefer QBR. In either case he was somewhere above average to very good range, and I thought just from the eye test more towards good - very objective, I know.

I don't really love QBR, I suspect he was dinged for sacks that weren't his fault and a potentially harsh opponent adjustment against a probably decent SDSU defense. One or two of the sacks I think he was part of the problem, but several he wasn't and I don't think QBR actually differentiates between sacks - could be wrong there. I think it's better than regular passer rating, but it still has significant flaws. But to your point I don't think anyone is claiming he's a "wow" player.

Fixed it, still impressive but slightly less so. Morgan definitely wasn't the problem though, he looked pretty good. I still don't know what his ceiling is, but he's tough, mobile, and made some nice throws. Question, I got the impression from the Minnesota board that drops aren't actually that unusual for Johnson - kinda the TO issue where he's really really good and makes crazy catches, but also randomly drops catchable balls. Is that actually the case or did the drops come out of nowhere?

They called one in the MN/SDSU game as well, it was pretty similar. So I'm definitely more concerned, these guys are not "outside the field of view," the defenders are just looking past them to the ball carrier.

I think a lot of their struggles were basic first game things - vanilla scheme, rust, and probably overlooking the opponent some. But there were definitely concerning things for them, as others pointed out. Defense looked pretty slow overall, Coughlin was quick off the edge but didn't really show any pass rush moves and frequently ran himself out of the play. Offensively, Faalele was bad but the RG Dunlap was atrocious! Proof that size isn't everything, reminded me of Toniu Fonoti's ill-fated NFL comeback - seeing a 400+ (360 for Dunlap) lb man reverse pancaked by a much smaller d-lineman is a sight to see. Bateman had some great plays, but SDSU did a decent job on Johnson and he dropped a couple balls as well. Smith looked like a running back with multiple knee surgeries in his past. They'll clean it up and be better than that for sure, but the line is a major concern until they prove otherwise.

That's a game changing holding call. Instead of SDSU up 14-13 and getting the ball its still 13-7 Minnesota. Seemed borderline, but the returner did run right by it.

SDSU also figured out that a ton of Johnson's yards come on RPO slants and picked one off. For all the talk of their 750 pound right side of the line being impenetrable, they haven't looked great. Faalele has been run around a few times, and the 360 lb Dunlap got knocked on his @$$ by an undersized DE on a stunt. Minnesota still have more talent and I expect them to pull away, but if I know Minnesota fans they're already throwing in the towel on their season.

Yeah, but commentators bring up a lot of random crap and I don't think the average viewer pays that much attention. Especially first game of the year, most teams have a list of guys suspended/currently working through legal issues. I would bet they mention Hunt, LeGrone, and Washington altogether (maybe even mentioning the earlier pot citations for a few guys), and I would expect the focus to be more on Hunt/LeGrone since they're definitely suspended.

USA DB Tyrone Legette: Former Nebraska CB Tyrone Legette: I don't actually see a lot of similarity there, but yes that's Tyrone Legette's son. Jordon Beaton: Forest Whitaker:

Could just be "in-house" for now before charges are pressed, who knows. I agree if it is totally in-house it's probably not a legal issue, but it seems like the point Walters was making is he would not be providing any details. I don't know if it means the entire issue will stay in-house forever, we'll see.

In fairness to Neal, I thought he played well early last year before they shut him down with a shoulder injury. If we're actually going to roll 9 deep, he could still contribute this year. But he hasn't been mentioned by Tuoti from what I remember, so that may not be the case.

Not to mention the entire o-line 2 deep. Offense will be scary this year, terrifying next year.

The one where we had no other scholarship running backs healthy/clear to play?

+1 for the joke in there, whether or not the Phommachanh/sneeze correlation was intentional.