Hercules

That's what you get when you have an offense built on sand and your only hope to score against a real team is to trick them or throw one over the top. UCLA got serious and started running right at us hard. That was the turning point and they never stopped. An energizer like Imani in a ball-control offense ...if we had one...could've made it a game. This fluffy offense only works for intramural sports. You make a good point that it's not the play-calling....it's the entire offensive strategy. Beck wants to be like Oregon...he gets a hard on watching their offense...we don't have that kind of athlete to be like Oregon. Our offense is nothing like Oregon's. And we do have the kind of athletes, in my opinion.

Too bad we did but TO and Bo pulled the offer because he's a douche bag that we don't want associated with our program. I thought we offered him a lateral move with no play calling responsibilities...?

I love the way Bo runs the program as much as anybody. But you can't let the on-field performance sink to the point where fans "just hope that we're not embarrassed." That's what it's come to, and that's not acceptable. If we had played UCLA close today, if we had played competitively for 4 quarters - I'd be fine. Not satisfied, but not disappointed either. But we got embarrassed. Again. You can't call 63 against Ohio State or 70 against Wisconsin flukes. It's a pattern. Bo's still got this season to right the ship, but his seat should be on fire right now. No doubt, I agree that Pelini still needs to put a good team on the field. What I'm saying however, is that Richt shouldn't be an option because, if he was, essentially what we're saying (knowing his track record) is, "we'll sacrifice everything we uphold off the field just for one or two more wins a year." To summarize, Bo might not be the guy, but Richt surely is not. I don't know enough about Richt to know whether or not that's the case. I didn't think Georgia was having terrible off the field problems, but maybe I'm just out of the loop.

I love the way Bo runs the program as much as anybody. But you can't let the on-field performance sink to the point where fans "just hope that we're not embarrassed." That's what it's come to, and that's not acceptable. If we had played UCLA close today, if we had played competitively for 4 quarters - I'd be fine. Not satisfied, but not disappointed either. But we got embarrassed. Again. You can't call 63 against Ohio State or 70 against Wisconsin flukes. It's a pattern. Bo's still got this season to right the ship, but his seat should be on fire right now.

Richt would be an outstanding hire, but Eichorst would have to pony up some serious stacks.

As far as the Offense vs. Defense debate... Of course both units are to blame for the collapse, along with the special teams. Every phase of the game was bad. However, the offense had a significantly worse game considering the expectations of them. They have 9 returning starters. The best WR corps in the Big Ten. A four year starter at QB. An experienced offensive line. A deep group of running backs. With all of that, they couldn't do ANYTHING in the second half. And in the first half, they managed a TD off of SJB's interception (short field), off of a UCLA special teams blunder (short field), and one long drive (which was extended by a penalty and a fourth down conversion that should have been negated by a false start - Jake Long is the new Andrew Rodriguez). All things considered, I thought the defense played reasonably well in the first half. They didn't play as well as they looked, because I think UCLA was hurting themselves quite a bit. But they still put together a number of quality series, and were far more consistent than the offense was. Of course none of this matters on the bottom line. Neither unit was good enough to overcome the other and win the game. But my expectation was for the more experienced and improved offense to carry the team while the defense figured things out. What UCLA exposed today, however, is that somehow, despite all our returning experience - the offense is not even as good as it was last year. And that is far more upsetting to me than the fact that our extremely young defense gave up 41 points (which is roughly the same as last year). As far as Frazier goes - he can say what he wants. He's one of the best players ever to play at Nebraska. You can listen to him or not, and the University can get mad it him for saying it or not. But he's not going to change. He was a jerk as a player and he's a jerk now, but he is highly competitive and has high standards, and that's what made him so great, as a player and as a leader.

At this point, Eichorst's job is similar to Osborne's in early-mid 2007. He needs to take the pulse of the boosters and recruits week-to-week, because if it reaches the point where the staff loses all forward momentum, that's when it's time to make changes.

Difference situations. Frank looked like he was moving in a positive direction away from what wasn't working. Bo seems to be stuck and from the looks of it, unwilling to change. I agree its different situations. The perception will be the same though. I think. Id like to see them throw some serious money at Ssomeone though. Who knows, maybe Bo will wake up. I think the national perception regarding Nebraska in 2003 was that it had hit a low in 2002, but was starting to adapt and recover. Right now, the national perception of Nebraska is that it's on the way down, and fast.

Nothing against Scott Frost, but why would you hire another inexperienced coach to this staff? Eh, maybe I'm wrong. I think he'll show by the end of the year that he's worth hiring. Doesn't need to be Frost eiether, just needs to be somebody that will actually establish an identity on the offensive side of the ball.

Who? Serious question. Frost. Oregon about to rip up an SEC team.

The defense showed flashes of being very good. That's really all I expected. They'll get better.

#HIRESCOTT

If anyone knows my past on here, they know I am insanely hard on Bo. But even I believe Bo can be the guy. But for him to be that guy, Bo himself must be willing to make changes to the program (ie., coaching staff, weight program, and recruiting). Bo is smart. Sometimes too damn smart for his own good. And the players respect him. Those two things alone still give me some hope he can be a terrific HC for us. You can get embarrassed on national TV only so many times...

Personally, I don't put this loss on Taylor. Like Spielman, I'd like to see him running the ball, and maybe I'm wrong, but it really looks like he's been coached out of that. He looks indecisive and has all year, and Beck has been praising him, calling him a game manager. If Taylor could combine everything - a great game manager and a great playmaker - he'd be the best player in college football. Instead, he's been turned into Zac Lee.

I'm not sure I've ever seen as dynamic a player as Taylor Martinez so overcoached.

Nothing has changed. Nothing.

Anybody else remember in the offseason when Beck tweeted and compared this group to the scoring explosion? http://memecrunch.com/generator/template/20431/willy-wonka/

Game over.

Did we just run a fake punt with a defensive tackle?

short.

STOP RUNNING THE OPTION

1 pass. 2 pass. 3 pass. Out.

21-0 UCLA in the last 20 minutes of play.

The offense has put together a single good drive, and that drive was sustained by a penalty and a fourth and one conversion that was very close to being a false start.

3 plays. one rush for three yards. 3 and out.