Games that look more Winnable

[SECHusker]

I am more concerned with playing Mizzou than VT. I know that VT was playing against a stellar D, but only 155 total yds? and allowing 498 (against a team that is not known for being explosive)? Tyrod Taylor 9-20 w/ no TDs. I know we shouldn't look past them because they are still dangerous but that game looks more winnable, and I would say we may have a 60-40 shot at winning if they play like they did against Bama.

 

As for OU, if we get past VT that game looks extremely good as well. I have to believe that our D is/will be better than BYU by the time we play them. Our DBs look to be gaining confidence and the linebackers should have he experience. I know there were some concerns about our pass rush, but appears that we weren't trying to dial it up just contain. Also taking into consideration that we held a decent offense to only 3 points.

[TheCheshireCat]

Mizzou does look scary, but although one might think immediately that Illinois is much better than FAU, they had some serious problems yesterday and I wonder how good they really are. Unfortunately I think it'll be a close one. VT is going to be tough, even if their offense was down, their D looked for the most part very solid.

[SECHusker]

Mizzou does look scary, but although one might think immediately that Illinois is much better than FAU, they had some serious problems yesterday and I wonder how good they really are. Unfortunately I think it'll be a close one. VT is going to be tough, even if their offense was down, their D looked for the most part very solid.

 

I agree with you i think that the VT game is going to be close, and by no stretch of the imagination am I expected a blowout. But I definitely feel more confident going into that game.

 

vs. FAU

[Billyball]

I am more concerned with playing Mizzou than VT. I know that VT was playing against a stellar D, but only 155 total yds? and allowing 498 (against a team that is not known for being explosive)? Tyrod Taylor 9-20 w/ no TDs. I know we shouldn't look past them because they are still dangerous but that game looks more winnable, and I would say we may have a 60-40 shot at winning if they play like they did against Bama.

 

As for OU, if we get past VT that game looks extremely good as well. I have to believe that our D is/will be better than BYU by the time we play them. Our DBs look to be gaining confidence and the linebackers should have he experience. I know there were some concerns about our pass rush, but appears that we weren't trying to dial it up just contain. Also taking into consideration that we held a decent offense to only 3 points.

 

I agree, Mizzou looked much better than I thought they would or had been led to believe they would by the media. In fact I think a case could be made that they were a much better team than they were last year, especially on defense. Perhaps Ilinois is that bad but they were a very experienced team with the same cast of characters that played Missouri to the wire last year while we performed miserably against Misery.

 

Even in his first start I like Gabbert better than Daniels, though it remains to be seen if he can play at that level for a season.

 

VT will tell us a lot. If we come out of there able to move the ball well and score a lot of points, then I will feel much better about playing Misery and Oklahoma. And I strongly disagree with the comment about Oklahoma's defense being suspect. Watching them against BYU, I figured they would shut us down badly at this time. The only weakness I really saw was the offensive line and of course Bradford going down.

 

How we can move the ball against major college defenses will tell the story. Hopefully we are successful at VT and play with or beat them and/or Missouri and continue to improve. IF we get shut down, I say it's time to try it with Green.

[Husker_x]

Not to take away from Mizzery, who did look very crisp yesterday, but Illinois isn't exactly a powerhouse.

 

First off, the opening series of the game ended with their best receiver walking off the field. That doesn't help. Second of all, the Mizzery D managed to contain Juice, which is over half your ballgame right there. Receivers dropped a lot of passes, Juice couldn't hit the broad side of a barn. And lastly, Illinois didn't even make a bowl game last year––and they play in the Big 10. Point being, I think Missouri played an opponent FAU would have had a shot with.

[lilred]

I only saw like the last drive, but VT's offensive line could not protect Taylor at all, they were getting right to him. Hopefully we can get in on some of that.

[SECHusker]

I am more concerned with playing Mizzou than VT. I know that VT was playing against a stellar D, but only 155 total yds? and allowing 498 (against a team that is not known for being explosive)? Tyrod Taylor 9-20 w/ no TDs. I know we shouldn't look past them because they are still dangerous but that game looks more winnable, and I would say we may have a 60-40 shot at winning if they play like they did against Bama.

 

As for OU, if we get past VT that game looks extremely good as well. I have to believe that our D is/will be better than BYU by the time we play them. Our DBs look to be gaining confidence and the linebackers should have he experience. I know there were some concerns about our pass rush, but appears that we weren't trying to dial it up just contain. Also taking into consideration that we held a decent offense to only 3 points.

 

I agree, Mizzou looked much better than I thought they would or had been led to believe they would by the media. In fact I think a case could be made that they were a much better team than they were last year, especially on defense. Perhaps Ilinois is that bad but they were a very experienced team with the same cast of characters that played Missouri to the wire last year while we performed miserably against Misery.

 

Even in his first start I like Gabbert better than Daniels, though it remains to be seen if he can play at that level for a season.

 

VT will tell us a lot. If we come out of there able to move the ball well and score a lot of points, then I will feel much better about playing Misery and Oklahoma. And I strongly disagree with the comment about Oklahoma's defense being suspect. Watching them against BYU, I figured they would shut us down badly at this time. The only weakness I really saw was the offensive line and of course Bradford going down.

 

How we can move the ball against major college defenses will tell the story. Hopefully we are successful at VT and play with or beat them and/or Missouri and continue to improve. IF we get shut down, I say it's time to try it with Green.

 

I agree with you OU D is going to be stout, but my comment was made in regards to BYU's D. I think our D will be better than BYU's D by the time we face OU. I think OU's D may have to carry them for a while, because I doubt OUs second QB got that many reps with the first team offense, not to mention who knows when Gresham will be back and they are breaking in new receivers and a new line.

[SaturnDrew]

I am more concerned with playing Mizzou than VT. I know that VT was playing against a stellar D, but only 155 total yds? and allowing 498 (against a team that is not known for being explosive)? Tyrod Taylor 9-20 w/ no TDs. I know we shouldn't look past them because they are still dangerous but that game looks more winnable, and I would say we may have a 60-40 shot at winning if they play like they did against Bama.

 

As for OU, if we get past VT that game looks extremely good as well. I have to believe that our D is/will be better than BYU by the time we play them. Our DBs look to be gaining confidence and the linebackers should have he experience. I know there were some concerns about our pass rush, but appears that we weren't trying to dial it up just contain. Also taking into consideration that we held a decent offense to only 3 points.

 

After watching the games this week, I must say that on one hand, the Oklahoma and Virginia Tech games look more winnable now than they did last week. BYU and Alabama exposed many weaknesses in their games.

 

On the other hand, Missouri and Baylor are looking a little more difficult. Especially Missouri. Still winnable, but not by so much any more.

 

And Kansas State, sorry. You still suck.

[redout22]

I think OU is still going to be difficult. They will have Bradford back and their o-line will have a lot more experience.

Also

I knew the K-State game would probably be a win but after watching them yesterday. WOW

[I AM FOOT FOOT]

remember these teams only played 1 game so far,it might take a few weeks to see where they really are . huskers too

[NshawU]

Games that scare me: VT, Mizz, Kansas, BAYLOR, OU, CO, Tech. Of course, I'd argue that all of those are winnable (depends on the Bradford situation).

 

ISU and KSU are the only games I'm really comfortable with. Should be an interesting season.

[Shadow_Husker]

Games that scare me: VT, Mizz, Kansas, BAYLOR, OU, CO, Tech. Of course, I'd argue that all of those are winnable (depends on the Bradford situation).

 

ISU and KSU are the only games I'm really comfortable with. Should be an interesting season.

 

 

CO Scares you? idk what they have done the last few year's that suddenly makes them so good, but seem's like everyone think's they will be the next USC or something. I will admit they Always Play Nu tough, But in the last few year's they have done nothing that is Remarkable to me. Just my $.02

[BuffSurveyor]

Be cautious of bad Koolaid. It can make you sick.

[NshawU]

CO Scares you? idk what they have done the last few year's that suddenly makes them so good, but seem's like everyone think's they will be the next USC or something. I will admit they Always Play Nu tough, But in the last few year's they have done nothing that is Remarkable to me. Just my $.02

 

Well, we had a tough game against them last year in Lincoln when I thought we were much better than them. Boulder is never an easy place to play, either.

[Shadow_Husker]

Like i said they play us tough No doubt, But still they dont worry me much. they havent done anything that good since Hawkins has been there, dunno why they would change now but it is possible