The difference between 31-17 and 45-7?

[Joe_5700]

^This. We still want to get good pass catching recruits so if we just run run run they're not going to want to come to Nebraska. Maybe that's complete crap, because most players would want to go to a team where they could possibly play for the NC, but others want to go to play on a team that fits their style.

 

I think Watson let off the gas a little bit, but his first quarter play-calling spoke for itself. An excellently called quarter.

 

Was it more the play calling or the execution?

[JOEY]

I would of been really happy if we blew them out,but I was satisfied enough with the W.

[GMoose]

Come on gang, we all know that Bo is content with a W. As far as I'm concerned, after that first quarter, Bo went into 4th quarter mode-burn the clock and play defense, which is what we did until they scored a few.

 

I've come to accept this. If we would have kept our foot on the gas we could have hung 40+ IMHO

[The Dude]

This last month better be all about style points if we really want a chance to go to the 'ship.

[GMoose]

This last month better be all about style points if we really want a chance to go to the 'ship.

That's such a long shot at this point that we'd basically be backing in if we did get there somehow, and I'm not even sure if I would want that...

[okaive]

Personally I think we run the ball to much using the same tactics. As you could see with Mizzou, they basically had us everytime, especially when TM had the ball. They stopped him in his tracks or made him go back a few yards.

 

We need to keep them guessing and TM has the arm to do it. He has proven it the last couple of games. We just need the receivers not to drop the ball like they were with Texas.

 

Also, I think we were lucky with Mizzou. I talked to a few friends that watched the game on tv and they said they didn't really see it, but watching it live, you could see our defense leaving gaping holes on one side when Mizzou was running the ball. I can't remember who tackled, but if they didn't have that speed, Mizzou would have had atleast 2 if not 3 touch downs.

[bshirt]

This isn't to bash Wats at all, he called a good game overall. But re-watching the game, I just have to wonder what the final would've been if we get that first first down in the second quarter. We were just coming off the Gomes INT, had the ball at the 32 and had 100% of the momentum with the crowd completely jacked. On first down we run Helu through a big hole and pick up a pretty easy six yards.

 

Second down, we run play-action hoping the safety bites and Reed beats his man deep. He doesn't, but I suppose the risk is warranted. We wanted the kill shot. But then on 3rd and 4, we run an empty backfield and they blitz TM for an easy sack. We have to punt, and they get great field position and take it down for their first score, which eventually led to them making a game of it, sort of.

 

If we ride Helu and TM on that drive (mixing in the occasional first down pass) and score to make it 31-0 with, say, 8:00 left in the half, chances are Missouri is done. At that point their will would surely be shot.

 

The media perception is, Iowa throttled Michigan State and Nebraska "handled" Missouri. Probably the reason we didn't get as much love in the human polls as many expected (10th in Coaches and 11th in Harris). Not that any of this is likely to matter, but I do think those two plays may have been the turning point in letting Mizzou hang around and keep it respectable.

 

 

100% agree. We let them off the hook.

[irafreak]

Come on gang, we all know that Bo is content with a W. As far as I'm concerned, after that first quarter, Bo went into 4th quarter mode-burn the clock and play defense, which is what we did until they scored a few.

 

I've come to accept this. If we would have kept our foot on the gas we could have hung 40+ IMHO

Actually I felt like we needed to but didn't go into burn the clock mode up 24. I still think Watson (good game overall) just got too cute. Ram it at them a bit more. I didn't mind lateral runs to wear the defense out and keep em moving or passes to stretch the field...just thought a few more power runs to soften em up some more...

[GMoose]

Come on gang, we all know that Bo is content with a W. As far as I'm concerned, after that first quarter, Bo went into 4th quarter mode-burn the clock and play defense, which is what we did until they scored a few.

 

I've come to accept this. If we would have kept our foot on the gas we could have hung 40+ IMHO

Actually I felt like we needed to but didn't go into burn the clock mode up 24. I still think Watson (good game overall) just got too cute. Ram it at them a bit more. I didn't mind lateral runs to wear the defense out and keep em moving or passes to stretch the field...just thought a few more power runs to soften em up some more...

Definitely agree with this. That's been Wats' vice this year.

[JTrain]

This isn't to bash Wats at all, he called a good game overall. But re-watching the game, I just have to wonder what the final would've been if we get that first first down in the second quarter. We were just coming off the Gomes INT, had the ball at the 32 and had 100% of the momentum with the crowd completely jacked. On first down we run Helu through a big hole and pick up a pretty easy six yards.

 

Second down, we run play-action hoping the safety bites and Reed beats his man deep. He doesn't, but I suppose the risk is warranted. We wanted the kill shot. But then on 3rd and 4, we run an empty backfield and they blitz TM for an easy sack. We have to punt, and they get great field position and take it down for their first score, which eventually led to them making a game of it, sort of.

 

If we ride Helu and TM on that drive (mixing in the occasional first down pass) and score to make it 31-0 with, say, 8:00 left in the half, chances are Missouri is done. At that point their will would surely be shot.

 

The media perception is, Iowa throttled Michigan State and Nebraska "handled" Missouri. Probably the reason we didn't get as much love in the human polls as many expected (10th in Coaches and 11th in Harris). Not that any of this is likely to matter, but I do think those two plays may have been the turning point in letting Mizzou hang around and keep it respectable.

 

 

100% agree. We let them off the hook.

 

[Glendower]

Reverting to the pass really baffled me a couple of times. It's like Watson feels like he has to prove that we pass for a reason and end up eating an entire series.

I'm no Watson apologist, but I have no problem with mixing it up to keep defenses honest and keeping them off guard. Make sure there is a deep threat to keep the S's deep and keep them guessing.

 

I'd like to see 15-20 passes per game, it will still allow us to get high profile pass catching WRs and TEs.

 

I understand that, but it's not like there was any problem moving the ball on the ground-- certainly there wasn't a need to throw on first down. Oh well, it's not like we lost

[Glendower]

i think you are on to something. it seems like we are not cut throat enough. maybe you need that to go undefeated for 12 games. i look at oregon, and every game, drive, play is to win the national championship. and win you think about it, the season is not a series of games. it is one long game and you can never let up. maybe a killer instinct with more swagger would have helped against texas. it is not enough to just win, it is about developing a never-quit, play-at-your-top-level mentality.

 

 

It seems like every team has had their near-stumbles, it's just that this year we came up on the wrong side against Texas But think about how easily the 97 squad could have been in this boat! One gram of butter on Davidson's fingers and no NC! They ended the season by POUNDING manning and Tennessee-- there is no way that Missery was better than that Tennessee team.

 

I don't remember the individual games of 94 and 95 well enough, they might be an exception (wasn't that into it back then except to see the crushing, though I don't think anyone was within 2 TDs of them). Although, maybe if we came up with a more relative meaning for "struggle" for those teams, we'd see that some of them were closer than they should have been. But now with all of the parity (or parity talk...) there isn't anyone that can be *as* looked past as the "bad" teams of the past.

 

Edit-- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1995_Nebraska_Cornhuskers_football_team#Washington_State That looks like the closest that the 95 team had to a "blunder."

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1995_Nebraska_Cornhuskers_football_team#Kansas Hmm or this one. I don't remember Kansas being ranked so high! But I was just used to nebraska being better than everyone, so rankings didn't mean very much. But yeah, when you just have so much talent, ability, and awesome coaches, even a "bad" game where you're "outplayed" for a half, still has you up 11 points at the end of that half. Yeesh.

[husker_99]

Watson is like Greg Davis in Austin. He's only good if he has got talent once he doesn't he gets exposed because he can't coach.

[Chaddyboxer]

Watson is like Greg Davis in Austin. He's only good if he has got talent once he doesn't he gets exposed because he can't coach.

So...your statement tells me that Joe Ganz should've been up for the heiseman!? B/C Joe Ganz led a very productive offense with mediocre talent...give me more facts and I will definitely believe ya bro...I am not the biggest Watson fan..but your statement isn't very strong right now lol

[husker_99]

Watson is like Greg Davis in Austin. He's only good if he has got talent once he doesn't he gets exposed because he can't coach.

So...your statement tells me that Joe Ganz should've been up for the heiseman!? B/C Joe Ganz led a very productive offense with mediocre talent...give me more facts and I will definitely believe ya bro...I am not the biggest Watson fan..but your statement isn't very strong right now lol

 

No. A coach can take mediocre talent and make it good. Look at our defense since Bo was HC. got better each season.