Can We Handle the Truth?

[Joe_5700]

BillyBall you are generally a wet blanket in the majority of your posts and you do not disappoint in this one. I do have to disagree with you with the amount of people who thought that we had a NC shot. Even when we were undefeated, all you had to do was watch an Oregon game to see we were not there yet. Only the completely delusional few thought we were NC material. I think we are right where we belong at #15. Spot on about the Pelini brothers, but why post this tirade AFTER the apology?

[Glendower]

For one thing, I really hate it when people throw around the phrase "conspiracy theory" to dismiss reasonable discussions about patterns that are clearly observable. For one, in a very general sense, the phrase, "conspiracy theory," has become a signifier in itself that implies insanity and completely undermines the actual meaning of the two words that make up that phrase. Even on this board I saw "Conspiracy" juxtaposed with "fact." It just means that more than one person is involved in something that might be nefarious (and, very literally, not so nefarious, though this meaning isn't quite so common). A theory is just a system of thought that can explain, and in cases of a real theory, be tested and falsified.

 

If you look at the stats thread, I just did a quick statistical analysis of the average number of penalties called on teams that we've played vs. the number of penalties called on them while they've played us. It was a really basic test, but it does show that there is at the very least a significant statistical anomaly there. This really all needs to be mitigated by other factors (e.g. were their numbers inflated in flag-happy games where both teams received a large number of flags? I think that one of the games had something like 9 and 9 or 10 and 9... some above average numbers for both teams. Also, is there a crew that is ALWAYS lopsided in their calling in every game they call? Well, I guess that would be a sign of something else wholly unrelated to NU), but the point is that there is something there.

 

None of this can imply more than a conspiracy within an individual reffing corps (if they weren't sharing an attitude, it would be hard to lower the number of calls against one of the teams).

 

And yes, this happens MORE when Nebraska loses. Big surprise there. If we'd won, I sure would have been far, far less motivated to dig up the penalty data and key it in. I would have speculated, sure, I might have even looked at some numbers and drawn some rough conclusions for myself and left it at that. Heck, there were probably a lot of bad calls against NU in 1995, I don't know, but no one really cared after the games were over because they won by like 900 points a game. But in a nailbiter like this when the team itself is doing enough on its own to lose, help from the refs is a lot more glaring. I mean, seriously, 2 penalties on a team that was averaging almost 10 per game?

 

One very viable explanation is that these teams get up for big games. They were mentally prepared and played almost error-free ball. That's actually a pretty cool idea in itself! However they pulled 13 against OU, 8 against MU, and 9 against TT. It still could be an explanation.

 

Looking at numbers doesn't imply that anyone in the B12 office issued orders or slipped officials notes on flash paper, texted them from a BW3s, nothing. It just shows a trend that is a good starting point for asking questions.

 

Could/Should have NU played better? Hell yeah. It shouldn't have come down to the refs, but close games often do and can. When one team sets a record for penalties and the other sets a season low (by a significant margin)... I don't know. it seems weird.

 

Other examples:

KU Averages just about 8 (none of the averages include the NU games) against NU: 1. (NU 6)

ISU, just shy of 7, against NU 3 (NU 6)

Texas, 7.5 ppg, against NU 4 (NU 10)

 

I put the NU penalties in there just to show that it wasn't a particularly low penalty game for Nebraska, too (which could be chalked up to a 'let-em-play' officiating staff). However, I am NOT saying that any of those flags were BS-- I'm talking about non-calls... penalties against NU are for illustrative purposes only

 

Don't let the concept of "conspiracy theories" make you feel like you need to turn off your brain and not consider real, concrete evidence. Sure, leave some of the speculation about individuals' thoughts, attitudes, and other mental states up to others, but don't ignore stuff that is right under your nose just because you're afraid of people thinking that you're paranoid.

 

I never bought the "refs screwing us" line before and probably never will again, but there are some pretty extreme examples of bias in the distribution of penalty calls.

[Billyball]

fair enough, opinions are like noses and ah's, everybody has one. And I do believe many previously sane fans have bought into a "conspiracy" of one sort or another. One has only to peruse these threads to see how wide that fan base has become. We had threads droning on and on claiming Carl P was in the right and the Aggie journalist was lying when it was pretty obvious from the gitgo that Carl was telling a whopper that Bo repeated in the Press Conference. The weakass excuse this afternoon when Carl came clean was that Bo didn't know the circumstances of the "assault". There would be only two reasons for that. Carl lied to his brother who was equally out of control on Sat. Night or they had a "conspiracy". that is how every fan outside of Huskerland sees it and that is how Perlman and TO see it. It is beyond what UNL will tolerate and the message has been sent.

 

As to the conspiracy that the refs have decided to screw us, has anyone offered a rational explanation as to why the discrepancy of calls for and calls against began with Bo's regime? To me it seems obvious that he plays an aggressive D, which is fine and obviously WORKS. But a byproduct is likely twice as many calls against you as an opponent with a bend don't break cover two D that most opponents run. I have not seen the calls broken down as to O vs D vs opponents. We likely have and deserve more procedure penalties because we have been sloppy on O for the cast three years. If the league thru the refs were wanting to screw us, they would have called many of our long TD runs back. It is easy on nearly every play to "see" a hold. A flag and they wipe out a td and put us in a long situation. Why didn't that happen?

 

now we had some bad calls Sat night, but a conspiracy? get real. perhaps the most deserved and the most untimely penalty went to Bo Sat. Night. Do you honestly think it wasn't earned?

 

We need to get back to football. If we play the same in the big 10 we will lead the league in penalties. As long as we Aldo lead in scoring D and don't have too manta flags on an inept offense we will be fine.

 

Why not stop this we were screwed whining and beat our opponents in the last two or hopefully three games we play as a member of the Big 12. Go out as winners not whiners!!

 

 

 

 

For one thing, I really hate it when people throw around the phrase "conspiracy theory" to dismiss reasonable discussions about patterns that are clearly observable. For one, in a very general sense, the phrase, "conspiracy theory," has become a signifier in itself that implies insanity and completely undermines the actual meaning of the two words that make up that phrase. Even on this board I saw "Conspiracy" juxtaposed with "fact." It just means that more than one person is involved in something that might be nefarious (and, very literally, not so nefarious, though this meaning isn't quite so common). A theory is just a system of thought that can explain, and in cases of a real theory, be tested and falsified.

 

If you look at the stats thread, I just did a quick statistical analysis of the average number of penalties called on teams that we've played vs. the number of penalties called on them while they've played us. It was a really basic test, but it does show that there is at the very least a significant statistical anomaly there. This really all needs to be mitigated by other factors (e.g. were their numbers inflated in flag-happy games where both teams received a large number of flags? I think that one of the games had something like 9 and 9 or 10 and 9... some above average numbers for both teams. Also, is there a crew that is ALWAYS lopsided in their calling in every game they call? Well, I guess that would be a sign of something else wholly unrelated to NU), but the point is that there is something there.

 

None of this can imply more than a conspiracy within an individual reffing corps (if they weren't sharing an attitude, it would be hard to lower the number of calls against one of the teams).

 

And yes, this happens MORE when Nebraska loses. Big surprise there. If we'd won, I sure would have been far, far less motivated to dig up the penalty data and key it in. I would have speculated, sure, I might have even looked at some numbers and drawn some rough conclusions for myself and left it at that. Heck, there were probably a lot of bad calls against NU in 1995, I don't know, but no one really cared after the games were over because they won by like 900 points a game. But in a nailbiter like this when the team itself is doing enough on its own to lose, help from the refs is a lot more glaring. I mean, seriously, 2 penalties on a team that was averaging almost 10 per game?

 

One very viable explanation is that these teams get up for big games. They were mentally prepared and played almost error-free ball. That's actually a pretty cool idea in itself! However they pulled 13 against OU, 8 against MU, and 9 against TT. It still could be an explanation.

 

Looking at numbers doesn't imply that anyone in the B12 office issued orders or slipped officials notes on flash paper, texted them from a BW3s, nothing. It just shows a trend that is a good starting point for asking questions.

 

Could/Should have NU played better? Hell yeah. It shouldn't have come down to the refs, but close games often do and can. When one team sets a record for penalties and the other sets a season low (by a significant margin)... I don't know. it seems weird.

 

Other examples:

KU Averages just about 8 (none of the averages include the NU games) against NU: 1. (NU 6)

ISU, just shy of 7, against NU 3 (NU 6)

Texas, 7.5 ppg, against NU 4 (NU 10)

 

I put the NU penalties in there just to show that it wasn't a particularly low penalty game for Nebraska, too (which could be chalked up to a 'let-em-play' officiating staff). However, I am NOT saying that any of those flags were BS-- I'm talking about non-calls... penalties against NU are for illustrative purposes only

 

Don't let the concept of "conspiracy theories" make you feel like you need to turn off your brain and not consider real, concrete evidence. Sure, leave some of the speculation about individuals' thoughts, attitudes, and other mental states up to others, but don't ignore stuff that is right under your nose just because you're afraid of people thinking that you're paranoid.

 

I never bought the "refs screwing us" line before and probably never will again, but there are some pretty extreme examples of bias in the distribution of penalty calls.

[Hunter94]

Many fans and a few scribes thought we were an elite football team heading into this season. The coach stoked those flames. With our early success many were using ink instead of a lead pencil to put us into the NCG. We explained away SDSU by claiming that we "played down to our competition". We looked for scapegoats in the loss to TU and blamed playing at home, the OC, etc. It was obvious from a loss to a team that has proven to be as weak as Tejas, that we had problems. Yet with a couple victories, many were back on the NCG "we are the greatest" bandwagon.

 

Iowa State was not taken as another warning sign that we have major flaws. People were concerned at who wecouldjump in the top 5 as we run the table and won the CCG.

 

So we lost at ATM. We got a couple of terrible calls. But instead of looking at the deficiencies in our team, we go into total meltdown with conspiracy theories that would make any of the black helicopter crowd proud. Our HC and his brother were out of control and unprofessional in losing and fed the conspiracy theorists. Only die hard fans who are near sighted, don't see the damage the behavior and the paranoia do to the reputation of our FB team, it's fans and the University.

 

If the basketball Huskers go on the road and shoot two free throws and the opponent shoots sixteen, I'm sure that the coach likely will get a T for complaining, but he wouldn't be screaming at officials between every play instead of coaching his team. He would hopefully not chase the officials yelling at them after the game. I would hope if his brother, an assistant coach would not in a post game temper tantrum, grab someones camera and break it. If he did I would expect him not to lie about the circumstances. I would expect the head coach not to repeat the lie at a pressed. I would expect the coach to condemn the behavior without being threatened by the Chancellor. I would expect the coach to clear the air, explaining that there is no conspiracy of the league office or the big 12 officials. I would expect him to say, " The only reason we lost was that we did not coach and play well enough to win. The University of Nebraska will never look for scapegoats or excuses. We have more games to play and our sole focus will be on being a better football team"

 

We are getting a rep as a whiney team with a whiney fan base. That should not happen. "Woe is me, "they" don't want us to win." is for losers and we should not exinit that behavior on any level of Big Red athletics.

 

We have been the most penalized team in the big 12 since Bo has been here. We averaged over 7 per game the first two years and we are averaging over 8 this year. Did the league start penalizing NU in 2008 because the knew in 2010 we would get a big 10 offer? Cue the black helicopters!! We play very aggressively on defense and often very carelessly on offense. Thar is a recipe for a lot of penalties. That does not excuse poor calls like the late hit call at ATM or picking up the flag on their PI call. And Bo and Carl's big mouths and inability to have their fit and move on during a game will cause you to likely be on the short end of close calls. Zebras are human. They expect passion and anger on a call or two during a game. They don't expect harassment between every play. It is embarrassing to the program and self defeating.

 

I am hoping that instead of a pity party that the staff is working to stop CUs running game and mount an offense instead of the inept performance that is what truly cost us the game in college station. No TDs=Losing. Nearly every time. I hope the fans are there cheering on the Big Red instead of whining about calls and then sitting on their a** quiet if we have some adversity. And win lose or draw, the staff and fans should credit the two teams playing for the outcome and not whine or make excuses! End of rant.

 

 

best post on this loss, spot on, the Pelinis owe the entire Husker community an apology! time to grow up and face their shortcomings....and Wats needs to be run off or next year will be a disaster!

[hskerprid]

Truth as I see it. I think these two losses hurt alot more because they were to Texas teams.The ONLY two Texas teams we play this year and we lose.Deep down after the A&M loss I think not only the bad calls but also the Texas angst came to a boiling point.

[irafreak]

Perhaps had this thread been started the night of or after the game it may hold more merit for me. Everyone tends to be emotional after a game win or lose. Win we're talking about NT hopes and scenarios because it's fun (odds are always low so you have to discuss it while it's still a possibility). Lose and we're going after the reasons.

 

We are not the players. So I see no harm in talking about these things during the week.

 

The point I'm trying to make is that a lot of the conspiracy people (self included) take a few days to go over the facts and then we come to a more balanced conclusion. The refs were pissed at Bo and it affected their calls (human nature). The "meltdowns" on this board are fun. It helps people like me not take things too seriously. It's a chance to vent our frustrations about the issues we see with the team. That is ok (most of the time). So people can either continue to get agitated by "meltdowns" and "pessimism" or just see it for what it is. Frustration being burned off. We all invest ourselves emotionally into the team every year.

[Glendower]

 

As to the conspiracy that the refs have decided to screw us, has anyone offered a rational explanation as to why the discrepancy of calls for and calls against began with Bo's regime? To me it seems obvious that he plays an aggressive D, which is fine and obviously WORKS. But a byproduct is likely twice as many calls against you as an opponent with a bend don't break cover two D that most opponents run. I have not seen the calls broken down as to O vs D vs opponents. We likely have and deserve more procedure penalties because we have been sloppy on O for the cast three years. If the league thru the refs were wanting to screw us, they would have called many of our long TD runs back. It is easy on nearly every play to "see" a hold. A flag and they wipe out a td and put us in a long situation. Why didn't that happen?

 

now we had some bad calls Sat night, but a conspiracy? get real. perhaps the most deserved and the most untimely penalty went to Bo Sat. Night. Do you honestly think it wasn't earned?

 

We need to get back to football. If we play the same in the big 10 we will lead the league in penalties. As long as we Aldo lead in scoring D and don't have too manta flags on an inept offense we will be fine.

 

Why not stop this we were screwed whining and beat our opponents in the last two or hopefully three games we play as a member of the Big 12. Go out as winners not whiners!!

 

 

I'm not sure if you're willfully missing the point about the number of calls on Nebraska's opponents or not. It's not about how many NU gets, that's a strawman, it's about how few their opponents get. It's not about saying "Oh, there was a hold there!" it's based on looking at the number and how far below their team average in penalties many of our opponents are when they play us. A lot of the posters here have said that NU deserves most of those flags, but why do our opponents have season lows against us? I've tried to offer other explanations; it's NOT because it's a big game, they are on average for their other big games. There is something strange happening with a fair amount of regularity and one that is very improbable statistically. There's a 3% chance that the overall pattern of opponent penalties would happen by chance. That's not an impossibility, but it's very, very unlikely. That isn't, of course, singling out the games officiated by one particular crew-- the one that gave A&M 2 flags which is almost 8 shy of their average.

 

And I, for one, think that it's really important to be able to demonstrate this stuff. Doesn't it bother you that there *might* be officials out there who would allow their personal bias corrupt the game like this? Who cares why? To me it a big stinking deal that is bigger than just the B12 if this is happening. I don't care if it's because one official or a couple officials just don't like us, if it's because they're gambling, lazy, incompetent, or whatever. If it's going on, that's a huge deal for the sport. Yeah, my curiosity was piqued because of Nebraska, but I'd like to know if Berks' games are always called like that (one team getting anomalously low penalties)... it seems really shady.

[Jeremy]

Agree that we can't make excuses. Offensively, we played poorly, and I'm not denying that. Here's the problem, though:

 

3rd and 11, from our 49. 6 minutes left in the game. Osborne comes in on a blitz, hits Tannehill right after he throws, and is flagged for roughing the passer, when no other ref in the COUNTRY would throw that flag. It just wouldn't happen.

 

THAT FLAG led to the game-winning FG.

 

Drive before that: 3rd down, and our receiver is clearly interfered with, killing any chance we had at a touchdown. But no, the ref picks up the flag he actually threw and for some unknown reason, declares that the defender, indeed, was not interfering. Bullcrap.

 

And that's why we, collectively the Husker Nation, are upset. We were the same after the '82 Penn State game when the home-cooked refs stretched the field for Penn State's receiver (called a trapped ball a TD, as well), just as we were after the '94 Orange Bowl after the phantom block-in-the-back penalty, and the FSU RB's obvious fumble at the goal line.

 

Call us babies all you want, but this isn't the first time we've been up in arms over poor officiating. The difference here, though, is that it was absolutely the WORST officiated sporting event most of us have ever seen - for any team. It just happened to be by the same crew that penalizes the Huskers by far more than any other team, and they do it by far more than any other crew.

 

So don't sit there and tell me we're making crap up. I'm not saying there's some Beebe-led conspiracy to prevent the Huskers from winning. All I'm saying is that the officiating caused Nebraska to lose the football game. Plain and simple.

[Nebula]

Perhaps had this thread been started the night of or after the game it may hold more merit for me. Everyone tends to be emotional after a game win or lose. Win we're talking about NT hopes and scenarios because it's fun (odds are always low so you have to discuss it while it's still a possibility). Lose and we're going after the reasons.

 

We are not the players. So I see no harm in talking about these things during the week.

 

The point I'm trying to make is that a lot of the conspiracy people (self included) take a few days to go over the facts and then we come to a more balanced conclusion. The refs were pissed at Bo and it affected their calls (human nature). The "meltdowns" on this board are fun. It helps people like me not take things too seriously. It's a chance to vent our frustrations about the issues we see with the team. That is ok (most of the time). So people can either continue to get agitated by "meltdowns" and "pessimism" or just see it for what it is. Frustration being burned off. We all invest ourselves emotionally into the team every year.

This is a good post.

[melscott62]

i think most "elite" teams would have a loss or 2 if they had our the injuries and officiating that we have had. to win a title you have to be good....you have to be healthy.... and you have to be lucky. I know every team has injuries, but we have had a lot of injuries at key positions(namely QB) most teams that dip into their 3 string QB have troubles. yes the 94 team did..... but that was an incredible team

[melscott62]

Perhaps had this thread been started the night of or after the game it may hold more merit for me. Everyone tends to be emotional after a game win or lose. Win we're talking about NT hopes and scenarios because it's fun (odds are always low so you have to discuss it while it's still a possibility). Lose and we're going after the reasons.

 

We are not the players. So I see no harm in talking about these things during the week.

The point I'm trying to make is that a lot of the conspiracy people (self included) take a few days to go over the facts and then we come to a more balanced conclusion. The refs were pissed at Bo and it affected their calls (human nature). The "meltdowns" on this board are fun. It helps people like me not take things too seriously. It's a chance to vent our frustrations about the issues we see with the team. That is ok (most of the time). So people can either continue to get agitated by "meltdowns" and "pessimism" or just see it for what it is. Frustration being burned off. We all invest ourselves emotionally into the team every year.

why is this concept so tough to grasp? I swear I have to say this at least 4-5 times a season. this is a message board(i'm not bashing it, but it is what it is) nothing more.

[captain obvious]

Glendower +1000

[melscott62]

 

As to the conspiracy that the refs have decided to screw us, has anyone offered a rational explanation as to why the discrepancy of calls for and calls against began with Bo's regime? To me it seems obvious that he plays an aggressive D, which is fine and obviously WORKS. But a byproduct is likely twice as many calls against you as an opponent with a bend don't break cover two D that most opponents run. I have not seen the calls broken down as to O vs D vs opponents. We likely have and deserve more procedure penalties because we have been sloppy on O for the cast three years. If the league thru the refs were wanting to screw us, they would have called many of our long TD runs back. It is easy on nearly every play to "see" a hold. A flag and they wipe out a td and put us in a long situation. Why didn't that happen?

 

now we had some bad calls Sat night, but a conspiracy? get real. perhaps the most deserved and the most untimely penalty went to Bo Sat. Night. Do you honestly think it wasn't earned?

 

We need to get back to football. If we play the same in the big 10 we will lead the league in penalties. As long as we Aldo lead in scoring D and don't have too manta flags on an inept offense we will be fine.

 

Why not stop this we were screwed whining and beat our opponents in the last two or hopefully three games we play as a member of the Big 12. Go out as winners not whiners!!

 

 

I'm not sure if you're willfully missing the point about the number of calls on Nebraska's opponents or not. It's not about how many NU gets, that's a strawman, it's about how few their opponents get. It's not about saying "Oh, there was a hold there!" it's based on looking at the number and how far below their team average in penalties many of our opponents are when they play us. A lot of the posters here have said that NU deserves most of those flags, but why do our opponents have season lows against us? I've tried to offer other explanations; it's NOT because it's a big game, they are on average for their other big games. There is something strange happening with a fair amount of regularity and one that is very improbable statistically. There's a 3% chance that the overall pattern of opponent penalties would happen by chance. That's not an impossibility, but it's very, very unlikely. That isn't, of course, singling out the games officiated by one particular crew-- the one that gave A&M 2 flags which is almost 8 shy of their average.

 

And I, for one, think that it's really important to be able to demonstrate this stuff. Doesn't it bother you that there *might* be officials out there who would allow their personal bias corrupt the game like this? Who cares why? To me it a big stinking deal that is bigger than just the B12 if this is happening. I don't care if it's because one official or a couple officials just don't like us, if it's because they're gambling, lazy, incompetent, or whatever. If it's going on, that's a huge deal for the sport. Yeah, my curiosity was piqued because of Nebraska, but I'd like to know if Berks' games are always called like that (one team getting anomalously low penalties)... it seems really shady.

 

I'd like to add Even if the coach is screaming and cussing at them. thats part of the job. just like bo is supposed to roll with the punches and keep his composure no matter what, so are the officials. If they cant call the game fair if a coach is yelling at them then they need to be replaced. that is certainly not a valid excuse for the zebras

[T_O_Bull]

I believe the truth is coming into the light. A 10-2 season is right where this team should be and around #11-#15 in the polls.

 

 

Agreed. Not sure who the OP was referring too, but I haven't considered us elite. And, by no means, did I brush over the N. Dakota st. game. In fact, that game was an eye opener that even with Martinez, this offense was still capable of imploding at any point, vs. any opponent.

 

 

We're about where I thought we would be.

 

That's South Dakota State. Oops on you.

 

T_O_B

 

[T_O_Bull]

I believe the truth is coming into the light. A 10-2 season is right where this team should be and around #11-#15 in the polls.

 

 

Agreed. Not sure who the OP was referring too, but I haven't considered us elite. And, by no means, did I brush over the N. Dakota st. game. In fact, that game was an eye opener that even with Martinez, this offense was still capable of imploding at any point, vs. any opponent.

 

 

We're about where I thought we would be.

 

That's South Dakota State. Oops on you.

 

T_O_B