Radioactive Man

Okay, poorly worded. I shouldn't have said get rolled for 60+. I should have said rolled for 600+ yds. Then you would have been correct. I think the claims about the defense, if you talk about their work for the entire season, are justified. But not this game. Could a better game plan and slightly more athletic players hurt us in the future? I don't know we can say that. Let's see how the Michigan game pans out, because we're going to run the same defensive scheme. What would be the game plan that would be better with the players we have? Several times this season, it seemed like the game plan was fine. Against both UCLA and OSU, the defense looked good in both games for the first 4-5 drives. And then it was back to missed tackles, poor coverage, and getting blown off of blocks. That's a problem with the players it seems, rather than the game plan. In both games, the game plan initially looked sound until the lack of athletes on the defense got exposed.

Part of coaching is not taking penalties and protecting the ball. In that respect, we were clearly outcoached. Aside from the 39 yds on 7 plays, it was the missed opportunities to put the game away that really stung. The D actually did better than what you're saying because really there were only two long TD drives. The first TD came after the fumble and then there was the 80 yd run. The thing that has me concerned is the inability of the D to come up with the big play when they need it. Good defenses can do that. Ours just hasn't been able to.

That might be make sense if these guys didn't keep going out and doing stupid things. Every year under Bo this team is one of the most penalized in the conference...no matter which conference they're in. Being undisciplined and unable to protect the ball has become a hallmark of the Huskers. It's like it's become acceptable as long as we can squeak out a win. I would much rather see Bo or any coach for that matter get in a players face for making a mistake that could cost them the game rather than to dismiss it as commonplace for his team. I would want any coach fired if a player made a mistake that cost us the game and had no emotion or dismissed it in a non-caring attitude. That's what Bill Callahan was like. "Well, (insert player name) didn't cover his man correctly and cost us the game. Oh well, get ready for the next game." No coach, you find yourself a new job. I can't understand why folks attack Bo over him so called (embarrassing) a kid on National TV is a disgrace to our program. Its like yelling at a teenager or young adult is wrong. Like parents don't already yell at their teenage kids in high school. I think there's a difference between making a mistake like muffing a punt and making a mistake like negating a turnover with a completely boneheaded personal foul. I understand why Bo tries to keep calm when he gets 3 fumbles from 3 different guys in the span of a few minutes. I don't understand why he wasn't all over Stafford (I think that's who it was) for the PF on that punt that was muffed.

Which I am completely guilty of, but play action on 3rd and short is kinda dumb... true. Our oline hasnt shown enough competence on a consistent basis to call a play like that on third and long from our own, what, 2. and it should have been a safety. Just run the ball up the middle and punt. The play action on 3rd and short wouldn't be as bad of a call if they didn't run it so freaking often. The whole point of running the play action is to catch the defense cheating on the run. But if they know it's probably going to be a pass anyway, how does the play action accomplish what it's supposed to? What I learned was that TM's new found throwing motion isn't a mirage. He put several of those passes on an absolute line. I also learned that our WRs learned how to catch, which is a completely refreshing change from last year.

Okay, poorly worded. I shouldn't have said get rolled for 60+. I should have said rolled for 600+ yds.

The kicker was 11 for 11 up to that point. He hadn't missed all year. And he clearly had the leg to kick a 53 yarder. In what world does a coach go for it on 4th and 7 down by 1 with a minute left in the game when you have a kicker who has the leg to kick the FG and hasn't missed all year? Trying to argue the fact that NW didn't go for it on 4th and 7 in that situation is some sort of vindication of the defense is a complete stretch. couple things.. a) just because you're 11 for 11, doesn't mean you're a lock to hit from 53 if you're longest is 44... b) you, yourself, was apparently upset that they were giving up yards on the final drive that lead up to the aforementioned failed FG attempt, so getting 7 yards was completely plausible... c) the only "stretch" is the fact that no vindication is needed. yes they messed up, but they held them off long enough to win Good lord, are you some strawman master craftsman or something, cause you're great at creating a strawman. No one said it kicking the 53 yarder was a lock. Nor did anyone say getting 7 yards wasn't plausible. But if ANY coach in that situation with a kicker they believe in kicks the field goal. it's very likely that if it was 4th and 2, they go for it. But you have to look at the situation. 4th and 7 despite the 40 yards you just gained in the past minute is a worse bet than the 53 yarder if you know your kicker has the leg to do it.

yeah, and lucky was that fade route that kid caught, which was they'd been trying to hit all afternoon, and only got it once... Here's my question to you. On all those other fade routes, how many of them do you think the WR had a step on our corners? I'm genuinely curious if you thought they were blanketed all day or if what I saw, with at least 3 separate plays were the WR had a clear step on our corner but was missed, is off the mark. you're the arbiter of all things Husker football, you tell me... I saw two or three. Those aren't easy balls to throw, because of the timing necessary to make it work... Yes, I'm the arbiter of all things Husker football. Just like you're the self-appoint Internets police. We all have a role. And I did tell you. I saw at least 3 plays where it was the QB missing the WR and not blanket coverage by our corners. Again, that's the problem here. We have a defense that relies far too much on the other team missing their plays rather than going out and making their own. And when they get in a situation where a Franklin or Miller get hot, they get rolled for 60+.

And his longest was 44 yards. Weren't you saying before how they were ripping us up on the final drive? They'd been getting decent chunks of yardage on that last drive, and to say they kicked it because they couldn't get 7 yards is mind boggling... I completely disagree. The guy hadn't missed all year and had the leg. The right play is to kick the FG when there's a minute left and you're down by 1. You can argue all you want that his longest was 44 but the coaches who see the guy kick every day in practice know what kind of leg he has. Just because he hadn't been put in the position to kick anything longer doesn't mean you go for it on 4th and 7 in that situation. Why? Because their staff knew he had the leg to make a 53 yarder...and they were right.

yeah, and lucky was that fade route that kid caught, which was they'd been trying to hit all afternoon, and only got it once... Here's my question to you. On all those other fade routes, how many of them do you think the WR had a step on our corners? I'm genuinely curious if you thought they were blanketed all day or if what I saw, with at least 3 separate plays were the WR had a clear step on our corner but was missed, is off the mark.

Once again, if you would respond to what I actually wrote rather than what you imagine I wrote, there might actually be some discussion on this board instead of this circle jerk of self-congratulatory Internets policing that you seem to be so proud of. I've already posted that TM looked good and showed incredibly maturity. That the D shouldn't get blamed for the first TD. That the D did better than against UCLA or OSU. But please, post another "derp" post since that seems to be your thing Gretchen. Thanks for proving my point.

We broke 3 times. It's hard to count the first score when the D is put in the position they were put. But they bent far on that last drive. NW should never even have had the chance to kick that FG. So again, when it was time to step up and make the big stop, the defense failed. And then were saved by the accuracy of the opposing kicker. Like I've said before, how in the world does the accuracy of the opposing kicker change the fact that he never should have had the chance to make the kick in the first place? It makes no sense. Did the defense fail? The kicker hadn't hit from further than 44 yards, so that was a long shot. The reason he went for a 53yd FG is because Fitzgerald didn't think he could get 7 yards on our defense. Up to that point, of course they're going to march down the field when they're in prevent defense. The kicker was 11 for 11 up to that point. He hadn't missed all year. And he clearly had the leg to kick a 53 yarder. In what world does a coach go for it on 4th and 7 down by 1 with a minute left in the game when you have a kicker who has the leg to kick the FG and hasn't missed all year? Trying to argue the fact that NW didn't go for it on 4th and 7 in that situation is some sort of vindication of the defense is a complete stretch.

They kicked the 53 yard field goal because that's the right play to make if you are down by 1 and have a kicker who up to that point was 11 for 11 on the year and you thought had the leg to do it, which he obviously did because the kick had the distance. It's completely false to say they kicked it because they didn't think they could get 7 yards. It's 7 yards, not 1. Any reasonable coach with a decent kicker who had the leg (which once again, this guy obviously did) kicks the FG to win the game rather than goes for it on 4th and 7.

Once again, if you would respond to what I actually wrote rather than what you imagine I wrote, there might actually be some discussion on this board instead of this circle jerk of self-congratulatory Internets policing that you seem to be so proud of. I've already posted that TM looked good and showed incredibly maturity. That the D shouldn't get blamed for the first TD. That the D did better than against UCLA or OSU. But please, post another "derp" post since that seems to be your thing Gretchen.

Do you want them to play on offense too? How many times in the first half, did we give up the ball and they start near midfield, and they went 3 and out? That until they scored their first TD, they hadn't had a first down? What the f*ck do you want?? Being put in crap situations like they did on numerous occasions in the first half, I'm not sure what more they could have done... 2 of the 3 fumbles weren't on offense. Look, they definitely played better today. But they completely broke down on the trap play, NW marched it down our throats on the 4th quarter drive, and they couldn't make the stop when then needed on the final drive. That's the problem with this defense. They actually looked good the first 3-4 drives in the OSU game as well. Look how that turned out.

I saw more tipped balls at the line and by our corners and safeties (linebackers to) than any game I've seen all year. They covered well, and contained properly, for going up against one of those dreaded mobile QBs. Take away that 80 yard TD run and NW has 221 yards and 100 rushing yards. They had 121 yards passing. Take away the fumbles and they have 111 yards passing and 211 yards total and 14 points. There were not a whole lot of broken tackles. I don't know what more you could ask for. The defense played well. Offensively, it was frustrating at times. Some of the playcalling and offensive line play was annoying. But regardless, we put up 543 yards (342 passing, 201 running) on 26 first downs and scored 29. Without the turnovers it could've been more. Now doing this for one game is great. If we can do this against Michigan, I'll be pleased. But at least improving off of a win will be much easier than improving off a loss. I'll have to watch a game to see all those tipped balls. I saw a lot more poor throws on fade route than anything else. Granted, the coverage was pretty good on most of those, but how many times today did the NW receiver actually have a step on the corner only to have the ball under/overthrown? WRT the 80 yd run, you can't selectively take away plays to evaluate the team. That would be like saying, take away 4 of the TDs OSU scored and we would have won. I for one can tell you that I distinctly thought when Cotton caught that pass that there was too much time on the clock with this defense. And sure enough, they let NW into FG range and were saved by a foot long wide right.

Then what should be done? Like I said, some of that is only answerable by the coaching staff. I'm not sure what answer you're looking for. It's on the coaching staff to coach ball protection. It's on the coaching staff to teach your guys to actually get up to the line when they line up. Today, the only excusable penalty was the ineligible receiver call. It's on the players to actually catch gift wrapped INTs. If you're looking for suggestions for scheme changes, I don't think the scheme is the problem. It's the inability to tackle and the inability to make plays. If you're looking for personnel changes, I think we're putting best personnel we have out on the field. So again, I'm not sure what type of answer you're looking for. so, just come on, have a fit, and find no viable solution? Actually, I came on here hoping to see if anyone else had a solution to what I thought was an obvious problem. Instead, all I got was self-congratulatory Internets police and accusations about me posting things that I never posted. Well that and repeated assertions that giving up 28 (almost 31) is stopping a team cold and that a win should supersede clear problems with the defense and the coaching.

It's the players job to say he can play. It's the staffs job to determine if he actually can.

We broke 3 times. It's hard to count the first score when the D is put in the position they were put. But they bent far on that last drive. NW should never even have had the chance to kick that FG. So again, when it was time to step up and make the big stop, the defense failed. And then were saved by the accuracy of the opposing kicker. Like I've said before, how in the world does the accuracy of the opposing kicker change the fact that he never should have had the chance to make the kick in the first place? It makes no sense.

Then what should be done? Like I said, some of that is only answerable by the coaching staff. I'm not sure what answer you're looking for. It's on the coaching staff to coach ball protection. It's on the coaching staff to teach your guys to actually get up to the line when they line up. Today, the only excusable penalty was the ineligible receiver call. It's on the players to actually catch gift wrapped INTs. If you're looking for suggestions for scheme changes, I don't think the scheme is the problem. It's the inability to tackle and the inability to make plays. If you're looking for personnel changes, I think we're putting best personnel we have out on the field. So again, I'm not sure what type of answer you're looking for.

What's my agenda? My agenda is one of a frustated life-long Husker fan. Clearly, you seem to understand me better than I do, so what's the agenda?

I don't get this. That field goal goes through, we gave up 30 after a bye week. How is that stopping them cold? I don't get this. That field goal goes through, we gave up 30 after a bye week. How is that stopping them cold? Well unfortunately I missed the game, but just looking at the stats.... 35 less points 195 less yards by the opposing offense Opposing teams 3rd down efficiency from 45% to 25% Opposing teams yards per play from 8.4 to 4 All this against two similar offenses But you can take with with a grain of salt because like i said I did not see the game. They definitely did better than they did against OSU, but OSU and NW are not similar offenses. Not when OSU has Braxton Miller. But doing better against a worse offense is not the claim being made. The claim being made is that NW was "stopped cold". Just because the defense improved from an F to a C doesn't mean they stopped anyone cold.

That being said, what do you expect when you just have individuals come on, even after a win, and post such garbage. I know you guys do your best to keep the board friendly and a good place for discussion, but when you've got folks coming on here with no other intention than to stir the pot, you have to expect a reaction. He's trying to have a discussion......he isn't fitting the mold of a troll and isn't stirring the pot. He has valid points and genuine concerns and trust me.....if he was a troll he'd be gone. If you can't handle the topic don't post in it. It's not much of a discussion, it's just "fire bo, fire bo" over, and over. I'm trying to ask what should be done to change it... As I've said to another poster in another thread, quote me once where I've called to have bo fired. Just once. Believe me, I've posted on many message boards. I can take mindless posts and insults from the Internets. But at least make them about what I've actually said. I've already said that at this point in the season, I'm not sure what can be done with the players that we have. There are clearly coaching issues as well with the number of penalties and the ridiculous number of times we put the ball on the ground. How do you fix that? I'm not sure anyone can answer that question other than the coaching staff.

I don't get this. That field goal goes through, we gave up 30 after a bye week. How is that stopping them cold? If we lost, the story would have been a lot of bad mistakes sinking us again in a game where we outmatched the opponent on the field for the entire game. You're right, though. That FG goes through and the whole tenor of the discussion changes. Thank goodness for that...although in either case, I think we can still say two things: crazy amount of mistakes and ball security issues. And our defense is back. One big breakdown aside on that long run, we kept those guys in check. That's largely been my point. I don't think you evaluate your team's performance based on the the accuracy of the opposing kicker. That makes no sense. I guess I'll feel differently about our defense being back. After UCLA and OSU and after giving up 28 to NW even though we had 2 weeks to prepare, I think it's premature to say the defense is back. The good news is that it is clearly that TM has a completely different level of maturity than he did last year and it only seems to be getting better.

That being said, what do you expect when you just have individuals come on, even after a win, and post such garbage. I know you guys do your best to keep the board friendly and a good place for discussion, but when you've got folks coming on here with no other intention than to stir the pot, you have to expect a reaction. The problem is clearly that you think pointing out the flaws in the team today DESPITE THE WIN is having "no other intention than to stir the pot". I've been signed up for years here and mainly just lurked on and off, but rarely have I been more frustated than watching this game and thought I could come here and discuss the problems with this team. Coming a foot away from giving up 30 to a middle of the pack team after having 2 weeks to prepare is scary. Good things today, TM played his guts out and the WRs were getting good separation all day. That's a step in the right direction. But you can't keep relying on the offense to have to put up 35 or 40 week and week out just to stay in the game.

I don't get this. That field goal goes through, we gave up 30 after a bye week. How is that stopping them cold?