Huskers..Unbeaten with 3 Losses

[BIGREDFAN_in_OMAHA]

Fundamentals, execution and discipline. Start there.

[holvy83]

there is not that much to look into on this, I know it sucks they way we lost those games, but ON THAT DAY the better team won.

[robsker]

If we are viewing games this way does that mean we didn’t beat Iowa State, Iowa State beat themselves? Or did we almost beat ourselves that game and the end result had nothing to do with Iowa State? Or is it split with us partially beating ourselves and partially Iowa State beating themselves and us partially beating them outright? Or is it all us beating them outright on our own even though they biffed the two point try and threw an interception?

 

I’m confused how this whole concept works.

 

 

OK. Here is how it works. I'll go slow. Lets use tennis as an illustration --- for the principles are the same but the explanation is easier.

 

In tennis, someone wins and someone losses. For the sake of illustration, lets focus for the moment on the loser. Lets call the loser Player A and the winner Player B. Player A give points to player B (Player A's unforced errors) and Player B earns points based upon their excellence (the excellence of Player B). As a correlate, Player B gives some points to Player A (Player B's unforced errors) and Player A takes some points (Player A's excellence). The sum does not work well for player A.

 

In the case of the Huskers this year --- no ones opponents excellence was the determining factor. Our opponents also had, of course, some unforced errors that helped the Huskers. NU was the recipient of generous giving at times (ISU comes to mind). The Huskers did not really earn that one so much --- NU played like crap --- again failing to control well what could be controlled --- and got lucky that ISU had some timely unforced errors. That said, the Huskers gave far, far, far more than they received on the season --- that is, our UNFORCED ERRORS outnumbered those of our opponents by a huge, huge margin. The result? losses that never should have happened (and a near loss to SDSU and one to ISU --- where ISU did help us with some unforced errors of their own).

 

But... mistakes (many, many more mistakes than our opponents) --- not our opponents themselves --- are the issue. Why? Don't know? How to fix it? Not sure. But the problem is not in our inability to match well with our opponents but rather our giving away way more than we should.

 

 

(a term quantified in tennis, actually) That which contri

[robsker]

Fundamentals, execution and discipline. Start there.

 

 

Hmmn. Sounds like coaching? Or, at the very least, coaching and player preparation is a major contributor.

[junior4949]

If we are viewing games this way does that mean we didn’t beat Iowa State, Iowa State beat themselves? Or did we almost beat ourselves that game and the end result had nothing to do with Iowa State? Or is it split with us partially beating ourselves and partially Iowa State beating themselves and us partially beating them outright? Or is it all us beating them outright on our own even though they biffed the two point try and threw an interception?

 

I’m confused how this whole concept works.

 

This is what I'm wondering as well. From the stats, one would bet nearly everytime that Iowa State won that game. I'd hate to guess what Auburn's record would be if every team could that played them could take back a mistake or two. Look at the mistakes South Dakota State had. Winners don't make excuses. We lost the games, and it's time to move on and get better.

[DJR313]

I don't think it's fair to give no credit to the opponents for taking advantage of the Huskers mishaps. I think if Nebraska limits their mental mistakes, they should have won all the games. Talent is there, effort is there. Hopefully some of these mishaps can get cleaned up for next year. The schedule next year is unforgiving.

[robsker]

I don't think it's fair to give no credit to the opponents for taking advantage of the Huskers mishaps. I think if Nebraska limits their mental mistakes, they should have won all the games. Talent is there, effort is there. Hopefully some of these mishaps can get cleaned up for next year. The schedule next year is unforgiving.

 

Nice! I agree with every point. Certainly our opponents who took advantage of NU's unforced errors do get some credit --- never said they should not. Simply --- and consistent with what you say --- "if Nebraska limits their mental mistakes, they should have won all the games." I'd only add this... we cannot expect to eliminate all our mental (and other) mistakes --- but if these mistakes were reduced to what is "normal" (akin to the average team) we'd be cutting our mistakes in half (or better) and, were that the case this year, we'd be 13-0 right now.

[AgMarauder04]

The team is still going through growing pains. Last year, y'all played well against a down North, but pretty stout South and managed to win your way into the title game. This year, you were clearly better, and played a tougher schedule, and still managed to do it. Huskers are right on the cusp of being a BCS challenger every year, but won't be until the execution is there. Like has been mentioned...missed tackles, fumbles, dropped passes...all part of the game.

 

Without dredging up memories of past painful games...it's possible that you *should* have beaten Texas, A&M, and OU, for whatever reasons, you didn't. My guess is that if we realize it here, so do the coaches, and they will fix it.

[BaytownHusker]

As much as I would love to agree with the OP's post, I cant.. O.U. beat us, Texas beat us, A&M beat us with help.. O.U. forced the turnovers to get the ball back and put up points.. Texas if I recall we did drop 5 Td passes but we also let Gilbert run for a ass load of yards and a touchdown in the first half. So as much as I hate to say it we did flat out lose 2 games...

[captain obvious]

Oklahoma played very well for 3 quarters. NU played poorly for 3 quarters, but OK capitalized so well on NU mistakes that I think you still have to give them credit for BEATING Nebraska. I think Oklahoma is a better team. Nebraska has the better defense by a large margin, but the offense is so completely clueless that I think Oklahoma would probably win this game 3 out of 4 times.

 

Saying that NU "lost" the game just because they turned it over and made moronic plays does not excuse the outcome. Nebraska does this in EVERY big game, because they are NOT a championship level team. The reason they lose big games on dumb plays is because they simply cannot execute at a high level against good opponents. Do not excuse them of that.

[bball_backer]

If they played well enough to not self-destruct while watching Nebraska self-destruct, then they played well enough to beat NU. Nebraska was beaten 3 times this year, sorry.

[junior4949]

Oklahoma played very well for 3 quarters. NU played poorly for 3 quarters, but OK capitalized so well on NU mistakes that I think you still have to give them credit for BEATING Nebraska. I think Oklahoma is a better team. Nebraska has the better defense by a large margin, but the offense is so completely clueless that I think Oklahoma would probably win this game 3 out of 4 times.

 

Saying that NU "lost" the game just because they turned it over and made moronic plays does not excuse the outcome. Nebraska does this in EVERY big game, because they are NOT a championship level team. The reason they lose big games on dumb plays is because they simply cannot execute at a high level against good opponents. Do not excuse them of that.

 

 

If you take a look at the BCS top 20 teams, I believe you will see both Okie State and Mizzou ranked higher than any team we lost to except for OU. We have and do execute at a high level against good opponents. Texas was the worst team in the South and the only team not bowl eliible, but we didn't execute against them. We don't execute consistently. This is the problem.

[VA Husker Fan]

Oklahoma out-gained us 454 to 293. To say that we outplayed them and only beat ourselves is wrong. Oklahoma is probably looking at this game and wondering how they didn't blow us out on the scoreboard. Eliminate the letdown on Helu's run, and strip the ball on that interception a split second sooner, and they destroy us.

 

There are a lot of teams that can beat anyone if they play a totally mistake free game and the other team plays a normal game. But nobody plays a mistake-free game. Everybody beats themselves to some small degree. You can look at that Texas Tech 70-10 game in 2004 and say, look, we were in that game late in the first half, take away all those turnovers in the 2nd half and a few defensive breakdowns that gave them big plays, and maybe we're a hail mary from winning it. So certainly you can try to create a (lame) case for most games you're within 3 scores of winning.

[captain obvious]

Oklahoma played very well for 3 quarters. NU played poorly for 3 quarters, but OK capitalized so well on NU mistakes that I think you still have to give them credit for BEATING Nebraska. I think Oklahoma is a better team. Nebraska has the better defense by a large margin, but the offense is so completely clueless that I think Oklahoma would probably win this game 3 out of 4 times.

 

Saying that NU "lost" the game just because they turned it over and made moronic plays does not excuse the outcome. Nebraska does this in EVERY big game, because they are NOT a championship level team. The reason they lose big games on dumb plays is because they simply cannot execute at a high level against good opponents. Do not excuse them of that.

 

 

If you take a look at the BCS top 20 teams, I believe you will see both Okie State and Mizzou ranked higher than any team we lost to except for OU. We have and do execute at a high level against good opponents. Texas was the worst team in the South and the only team not bowl eliible, but we didn't execute against them. We don't execute consistently. This is the problem.

 

I'm not buying the hype on OK State or Mizzou. They have exotic, sometimes explosive offenses but are average to poor on defense. Pinkel/Yost can't adjust to defensive pressure, and the Pokes are so terrible on defense that I wouldn't care if they had two Kendall Hunters.

 

ATM is not a better team than Nebraska, but that was a serious, high-pressure situation and the team basically folded. Championship teams score more than 6 points whether or not the refs are obviously trying to hose them.

 

Hell, the Texas loss alone should be enough to put this CCG loss into perspective. NU just isn't a great team. They are good, but not great.

[manitobahusker]

threads like this make us look like a whiny fan base, own up fact is we lost whether or not were the better team at the end of the day means f all, fact is we lost now lets move forward beat Washington and go into the 2011 season in the Big 10 with a chip on our shoulder