What we learned today

[Hujan]

Burkhead is effective out of the wildcat when we don't have a legitimate run threat already lined up at the QB position (i.e. Martinez). When Martinez is playing, it's pointless because it doesn't give us much that we don't already have taking the snaps. That is why the wildcat has only gotten use lately.

 

Not entirely true. The Wildcat is superior for pure downhill, north-south running than the zone-read. This is partially because there is some time lost in the handoff from the QB to the RB. The Wildcat obviously does not have this problem. (This is not to mention the reduced fumble risk; increased fumbles are an unfortunate side effect of the zone-read.) You also effectively swap out the QB for an extra blocker since the QB now takes the place of a WR.

 

Now, you can argue whether the Wildcat's enhanced downhill-running effect is more productive than the misdirection of the zone-read. But I think it's nice to have both in the arsenal. Why? Because speed on defense stops the zone-read. But to be fast, a D must usually give up size, which makes them vulnerable to straight-ahead running. In other words, when one fails to work, the other should deliver.

[skersfan]

I have said it since the first time I saw him play. Cody will never play QB at Nebraska. He was there today to distribute the ball, done adequately most of the game. But the staff has no faith in him. The talent is not there and he has never displayed that it was.

 

I hope we have all learned that.

 

I said yesterday that I expected a lot of problems with him in the backfield. I must admit he did play alot better than I expected.

 

We learned that a motivated, dedicated, disrespected team and coach put up quite a fight. I think they are going to be players in this conference from now on. They have a great coach, with the guts to rock the ship. I hope we learned to respect our competition, but that is doubtful.

 

I thought after the first few plays we would lose this game. Pauls must play because Ahman puts big bucks in the program. I have learned that most fans turn very quickly when things do not go as thought. This is normal for this team and program. you never know what you are going to get.

 

I know we won. And I am thankful for that. I hope the MNC game talks goes away. This team does not need to hear it again this year. I know I am sick of listening to every excuse, path, twist that would get us there. I do not ever want to see what happened in 2001. I would guarantee if we got there it would be far worse this time. Top ten team I agree with, but we have no business playing the top programs this year.

[macroboy]

Watson caught Mizzou in some bad defensive schemes early, then was held to 7 points the rest of the game.

Hardly a "hell of a game" if you ask me.

 

Without our defense forced turnovers, we'd have lost by 3 TDs today.

Watson's had 3 years to develop Green. Look what it's produced.

 

Didn't you also want to mention Watson had the sun in his eyes as another lame excuse?

Do you have an ax to grind against Watson? He absolutely butchered the #1 run defense in the B12 last week. And that's with the starting QB on the bench for the 2nd half. How is setting the single-game rushing record NOT a "hell of a game"? Especially against that competition.

 

And without the 2 turnovers from us which led to 14 points, ISU only scores 10 points in regulation. I'm pretty sure we scored more than 10 even without the TO's.

 

And Watson has only had a year and a half with Martinez, and TM is looking better every game. I'm really impressed with his progress this season as both a passer and game manager.

 

Do you have any other lame straw man arguments you'd like to put forward?

 

 

 

You're wrong about scoring more than 10 points w/o the TOs.

 

Martinez is a natural talent. Watson has little or nothing to do with his speed

or reflexes. Based on his performance developing Green, I doubt Watson has developed

much if anything in the quality of the kid's play.

 

No, He's right about the TO's. Helu's fumble at our 43 and Paul's at our 14. Both led to TD's and both short fields. You don't get to throw out our takeaways but keep theirs....well, you do to support your argument but it doesn't work.

 

Right, when a player is mediocre Watson isn't developing them but when we watch them grow it is bc/ of their own natural talent. Yep. I see your point.

 

 

We were talking about our scores, not ISUs.

How exactly can you determine how much Martinez has grown based on a few games?

And if he has, how can you claim it's Watson's doing?

Oh, I guess you can make any non-quantifiable claims to support your premise. Right.

 

I think we were talking about both teams TO's and points, and those are quite quantifiable.

So my claims about Martinez/ Watson are different from your Green/ Watson claims how?

Oh, you are quite guilty of your last sentence. Right.

You really aren't that good at the whole debate/ argument thing.

You seem to think condescension and flowery language makes up for your lack of content.

I'm sure your teachers love reading your papers.

Maybe you can blame it on Watson.

[zoogs]

I was frustrated by the lack of openness in our offense today. Green threw some real stinkers early, but he did rebound and I felt we could have opened the gameplan up more a bit, but it is also hard to question the highly conservative approach we took today, especially as the game situation evolved the way it did.

 

But basically: we can pound the ball like that, and average what, 5 yards or something good on the ground, and still have a sputtering offense if we are lacking any semblance of a passing attack. It makes a big difference, when we could be throwing 20 times a game and getting 7,8,9 yards per attempt out of that. Contrary to people who won't be happy unless we NEVER throw because honestly we barely did today. And most of them came later in an attempt to spark the offense to something.

 

I think we learned a lot about Cody Green. If he really thinks he should be the starter, well. He's got a lot of humble pie to eat up. He did not do well today at all, and the offense was completely lifeless in his hands. Part of that I would tie to him not being asked to do very much but hand off time and time again, but I suppose that is also a result of the staff having little conference in him.

 

I think there are big questions about this team's focus and mentality, and that goes right to the staff and specifically the head coach. Why did we play down to these guys today? Why are we unable to handle some of the typical in-season situations in approaching games, that we absolutely need to get better at? Both the small games (SDSU, ISU) and the big ones (Texas). It's been an inconsistent job on that front this year.

 

I think that's why the defense was so resoundingly lackluster. Yes, there was a terrific pick-six and another interception in that stretch of inspired play, but after the way we shut down a premier passer like Gabbert, how was Austin Arnaud able to do what he did? This group has a long way to go, still, to keep up the reputation they garnered last year. Until then, we have to realize that the defense is not just going to win games for us if we shut down the offense and pound the ball all day. The offense has to pick up more of the slack. I guess they get a pass, as we were down to our #3 QB, and there is evidently something seriously missing in his game at this point in time. I'll add that as much criticism as I've always had for Taylor, we definitely missed him today and the dimension that he brought to the game would have made a huge difference today, the way we run things. Huge. With Lee, I also think we win handily, but in a different way. Green's head isn't in the game or something - it's sort of hard to place. Still needs to be brought along as a passer, and unable to establish himself as the running threat he ought to be. Questionable.

 

This was a very disappointing and scary effort, and while it is good for the team to have this kind of wake-up call, at some point you have to wonder 'How many of these wake-up calls do you need?' We are riding some real highs and lows instead of making a championship run, and it's not quite clear to me what's at the root of that, but it's probably a complicated combination of things. I guess you just take the good with the bad.

 

What's important, is that we won today and we're 8-1. Goddamn it was scary, but it's over, thankfully to our benefit; now onto the next week.

[macroboy]

We will agree to disagree.

My comment on your reading skills was an observation

based on your ignoring my previous post, not ad hominem.

If I'd said you were too dense to understand my post, that would be

ad hominem. That help clear things up?

 

If Green is untalented, then Watson should have rotated him to a new

position rather than continue to try to force a square peg into a

round hole. In any case Green has been in the system a lot longer than

Martinez. I doubt Watson has had much if any influence on Martinez

capabilities as a QB, but he should have on Green. The results are

disappointing to say the least. So I don't equate the two.

And I hold Watson responsible for what we saw today either way.

 

 

 

Just in case you didn't know, the purpose of a football offense is to

score points. Not avoid turnovers (although that's a plus), not to gain

yards (although that's also good), but to score points. Watson's offenses

don't score many points against good defenses, except as short term flukes

exploiting temporary defensive lapses like the first 10 min of the Missouri

game.

I guess we will disagree.

 

I have read and responded to all your points while you have responded to only a few of mine, so your condescending tone that I can't read or understand your points appears hypocritical. Does that help clear things up?

 

Green has been at NU for one spring more than Martinez. That's it - a few months. Reread your comments and understand why I consider them biased at best.

 

Your sarcasm aside (I think we all know that offenses want to score points), that's not the only purpose. For instance, if you hold a 24 point lead already, running out the clock and not turning over the ball become more important. And maybe continuing to try scoring points with the starting QB injured might actually not be the best strategy for winning the game. That is if winning the game is the ultimate goal instead of just scoring points on offense. I think, and I hope others reading this do as well, that you're trying to craft an argument against Watson not based on the actual facts, but instead on your own previous belief. You are still trying to convince us that Watson had a bad game against what was the best defense in the league (arguably), despite the facts that NU put up 31 points and didn't play with the starting QB for half the game.

 

You have no clue what my beliefs are.

We don't know each other (thankfully).

Bias is in the eyes of the beholder apparently.

I haven't responded to all of your points because I

consider most of them irrational and not worth the effort.

And it's not sarcasm, I mean everything I say.

This exchange no longer serves a useful purpose.

You even have to re-use my lines because you can't come up with

any of your own.

 

You're boring me.

 

Good night.

 

Wow. Just, wow.

[HuskerLover1]

What did we learn today?

 

 

1. Cody Green is a heck of an athlete but not QB material.

2. Niles Paul won't protect the ball and should never return another kickoff or punt.

3. Watson can't coach an offense.

4. We can't get consistent pressure on the QB without blitzing.

5. If we won't (or can't) pass on first down against a stacked defense, we will probably lose.

 

Did I miss anything?

Why is my post the only one that get's removed for saying Niles Paul Suck's? Wait I know why.

[huskerscott]

cause ur targeting a defenseless player, literally.

 

 

 

Sorry had to do it. Welcome to the Board.

[chamrocck]

More again of stuff mostly already knew:

We need TMart as he dynamically changes the offense.

Hagg is a gamer.

We miss/need Dennard.

Running the Wild Cob with Rex can be effective.

David has to get better in coverage.

Inconsistent pressure from the D-line...great against Mizzou...not so much today.

Inconsistent tackling.

Paul fumbles.

We need someone to step up as a playmaker at WR.

Big 12 refs

 

New stuff:

How has Ankrah been looking?

[RedDenver]

You have no clue what my beliefs are.

We don't know each other (thankfully).

Bias is in the eyes of the beholder apparently.

I haven't responded to all of your points because I

consider most of them irrational and not worth the effort.

And it's not sarcasm, I mean everything I say.

This exchange no longer serves a useful purpose.

You even have to re-use my lines because you can't come up with

any of your own.

 

You're boring me.

 

Good night.

 

Wow. Just, wow.

It was fun.

[Ratt Mhule]

More again of stuff mostly already knew:

We need TMart as he dynamically changes the offense.

Hagg is a gamer.

We miss/need Dennard.

Running the Wild Cob with Rex can be effective.

David has to get better in coverage.

Inconsistent pressure from the D-line...great against Mizzou...not so much today.

Inconsistent tackling.

Paul fumbles.

We need someone to step up as a playmaker at WR.

Big 12 refs

 

New stuff:

How has Ankrah been looking?

 

Good use of emoticons! Really gave me a good visual. Kinda like using powerpoint when giving a speech

[Fuzzy]

Can we all agree that Watson is an inconsistent coach, which is why sometimes our offense is inconsistent?

 

Once i saw Burkhead running the wildcat, i thought to myself, thank you, now we have a shot to win this game, but when we started to drift away from it, i started questioning what in the hell was Watson thinking taking out something that looks to be working.

[sd'sker]

Can we all agree that Watson is an inconsistent coach, which is why sometimes our offense is inconsistent?

 

Once i saw Burkhead running the wildcat, i thought to myself, thank you, now we have a shot to win this game, but when we started to drift away from it, i started questioning what in the hell was Watson thinking taking out something that looks to be working.

here is what i do not get. it is not like the offense just had a bad game. so did the defense. when the team is inconsistent (specifically tonight and against texas) it is the whole team, not just offense or defense.

[RedDenver]

Can we all agree that Watson is an inconsistent coach, which is why sometimes our offense is inconsistent?

 

Once i saw Burkhead running the wildcat, i thought to myself, thank you, now we have a shot to win this game, but when we started to drift away from it, i started questioning what in the hell was Watson thinking taking out something that looks to be working.

here is what i do not get. it is not like the offense just had a bad game. so did the defense. when the team is inconsistent (specifically tonight and against texas) it is the whole team, not just offense or defense.

I thought the defense played well against UT. Not great, but good.

[sd'sker]

Can we all agree that Watson is an inconsistent coach, which is why sometimes our offense is inconsistent?

 

Once i saw Burkhead running the wildcat, i thought to myself, thank you, now we have a shot to win this game, but when we started to drift away from it, i started questioning what in the hell was Watson thinking taking out something that looks to be working.

here is what i do not get. it is not like the offense just had a bad game. so did the defense. when the team is inconsistent (specifically tonight and against texas) it is the whole team, not just offense or defense.

I thought the defense played well against UT. Not great, but good.

yeah, but there was poor tackling. i thought the offense played well, but they could not catch a ball. those things matter.

nonetheless, it seems like we either play on all cylinders, both sides of the ball, or we fall flat. just my perception.

[RedDenver]

yeah, but there was poor tackling. i thought the offense played well, but they could not catch a ball. those things matter.

nonetheless, it seems like we either play on all cylinders, both sides of the ball, or we fall flat. just my perception.

Good point about the missed tackles. I've often wondered if maybe Bo's high and low emotional states translate to the team. Osborne was the most consistently temperate coach I've ever seen, and his teams were always consistent. Maybe this is part of the team taking on Bo's personality.