Why so much pessimism?

[The King]

Why is everyone so worried about our team after this game? It was essentially a glorified scrimmage in which we were obviously working on specific things.

 

I need to get a few things out on the table that need to be said.

 

1) Do you really think our defense is the same without Dennard? Dennard allows us to do many different things on D, with different defensive packages, because you know he'll lock down his side of the field. Our defense was very basic. We were obviously trying to get as many people reps as possible. Against more experienced teams, I don't think we see nearly as many people on D, or O.

 

2) We went away from our #1's frequently to try and provide experience for younger players. We did this before the fourth quarter. I highly doubt we see that many substitutions against, say, Wisconsin. This shouldn't be surprising as Bo or possibly Carl said, they need to get people game reps to see how people react in games vs. practice.

 

3) Offense was very basic. I struggle to believe thats our entire playbook. Beck, was obviously, trying to perfect plays. After the game, he admitted he stuck to the same play to execute it correctly. Which was dumb. But like I said, thats something you do in practice, and it appears the staff was using this as a scrimmage more than a game to crush the opponent.

 

4) Both teams were rusty. We got the win, yet people are complaining we didn't score 40+. LSU, Oregon, tOSU, Wisconsin, are all better than us because they (Wiscy and OSU) just reamed their opponent. - whoever thinks Oregon looks better than us is kind of silly... 4 turnovers, multiple penalties... At least we didn't get flagged left and right. LSU - Look at that offense... even ours looked better than that. They clearly play offense to not lose...

 

5) POSITIVES. Our penalties looked to be fixed, our turnovers fixed as well - those fumbles on the pitches were obviously sloppy - a work in progress, which I believe is something Beck wanted to work on. The option seemed to be huge.

 

6) Our D looked good. Our secondary is only going to get better with Fonzie, which I mentioned above.

 

7) Our WR played well. They didn't -lose- the game for us. Which is huge.

 

8) Wish we saw more Carnes and the 3 RB's, but oh well.

 

9) Stafford is a baller.

[HuskerInLostWages]

I believe everyone is up-in-arms due to the quality of play we've had from our offense the last few years. We see the defense playing very well only to see our offense shite the bed. I'm pretty sure everyone knows this was the first game, but it's hard to watch our offense start off and sputter yet again in the red zone and we settle for a field goal. Getting really irritated that we can't put the ball into the endzone from inside the 10 and constantly settling for a FG. We need to fix that issue first and foremost on the offense. If we spend 3 downs inside the 10 and can't get into the endzone, it's exactly the same crap as last year and will end up losing us some games yet again. Hard to give credit to the offense when you've seen this before...many times.

 

Just my opinion of course.

[Moiraine]

Offense was very basic.

I'm not going to whine over the first game (other than 2 very short posts I already made) but I have to say I see this comment a lot and it always irritates me. It just isn't relevant for this game. We had trouble running the basic stuff we did with lots of messed up assignments and messed up pitches. Those things will happen in an opener, so I'm not complaining about them, but they make the "offense was very basic" argument not work very well. You can't use that as an excuse when the actual problem in the game was mental errors. If it's basic those things should be limited because there are less plays to think about.

 

Also, the team we were playing is not Division I. Shouldn't we have been able to run it on them regardless of how basic or complicated the play calling was? I think that is the biggest issue people are having and I understand the concern. Sans the huge runs, obviously.

[secretasianman]

Why so much pessimism?? Because our inside run was getting stuffed by an FCS opponent! Because if you contain Martinez, this offense is stopped!! Because Martinez can't pass!! Against a better team, at least 4 of his passes would have been picked off!! Because our offense looks unorganized!!

 

You're saying NU looked better than Oregon?? Hello?! Put down your crackpipe! Oregon was playing an SEC team, we were playing an FCS team. Oregon would destroy is! Look how fast their offense is. Ours takes forever to develop a play. We had over 10 plays go for negative yardage against an FCS opponent.

[The King]

Offense was very basic.

I'm not going to whine over the first game (other than 2 very short posts I already made) but I have to say I see this comment a lot and it always irritates me. It just isn't relevant for this game. We had trouble running the basic stuff we did with lots of messed up assignments and messed up pitches. Those things will happen in an opener, so I'm not complaining about them, but they make the "offense was very basic" argument not work very well. You can't use that as an excuse when the actual problem in the game was mental errors. If it's basic those things should be limited because there are less plays to think about.

 

Also, the team we were playing is not Division I. Shouldn't we have been able to run it on them regardless of how basic or complicated the play calling was? I think that is the biggest issue people are having and I understand the concern. Sans the huge runs, obviously.

 

It was very basic - we were clearly working on specific plays. Maybe we were running those plays consistently to get the mechanics figured out and to let the youth get familiar with it in a game environment. Whatever it is, our playbook was not completely exposed. Just because it isn't good, doesn't mean its not basic.

 

True, but James Madison beat VA tech, who ended up being a pretty decent team - its not like we lost and the game wasn't even that close. I seem to remember a certain Moc's fan on here saying they would score over 20 and he was fairly confident. That didn't happen. Sure it is enough to be a concern, but to think we look like a team that shouldn't be near the top 10? Overreaction by a fan base, but hey, what are message boards for!

 

I'm also kind of curious as to what the people that are highly disappointed thought the score would be, I'm curious as to what there expectations were for a game, that we were told pretty much before the game was pretty much an audition to see how people reacted.

[The King]

Why so much pessimism?? Because our inside run was getting stuffed by an FCS opponent! Because if you contain Martinez, this offense is stopped!! Because Martinez can't pass!! Against a better team, at least 4 of his passes would have been picked off!! Because our offense looks unorganized!!

 

You're saying NU looked better than Oregon?? Hello?! Put down your crackpipe! Oregon was playing an SEC team, we were playing an FCS team. Oregon would destroy is! Look how fast their offense is. Ours takes forever to develop a play. We had over 10 plays go for negative yardage against an FCS opponent.

 

Maybe you didn't notice, but I'm from Oregon, and I'm surrounded by Oregon fans. They would be the first people to admit (it also helps that I follow them quiet fanatically as well) that was a sloppy game and they wouldn't expect to beat anyone playing like that.

 

They were constantly out of place, missing blocks, playing sloppy (penalties, turnovers) and out of place in general. Oregon fans expected a big win this game. They expected to put up 40+ and to allow significantly less, especially missing Shepard and Jefferson (mostly Shep). Oregon fans are FURIOUS that they lost to a team that played not to lose, in regards to their offense. So, sorry, yes, Nebraska looked better than Oregon.

 

At least Nebraska didn't turn it over 4 times, get flagged 12 times, and lose to a team that had a horrendous offense that was just playing not to turn it over.

[Ziebol]

Why so much pessimism?? Because our inside run was getting stuffed by an FCS opponent! Because if you contain Martinez, this offense is stopped!! Because Martinez can't pass!! Against a better team, at least 4 of his passes would have been picked off!! Because our offense looks unorganized!!

 

You're saying NU looked better than Oregon?? Hello?! Put down your crackpipe! Oregon was playing an SEC team, we were playing an FCS team. Oregon would destroy is! Look how fast their offense is. Ours takes forever to develop a play. We had over 10 plays go for negative yardage against an FCS opponent.

 

So I can't tell but what team do you root for cause obviously Nebraska isn't doing it for ya .

[The Dude]

Let's be fair, Beck took over an abysmal offense. Give him at least a little time before we start pushing the panic button. Pelini's defense was pretty terrible for about half the season his first year. I'm encouraged because penalties were better, ball security was better. If we wanted to put up more points, we could have. Nebraska mailed in that 4th quarter.

 

Offensive line and WRs are still an issue for this team, but I'm willing to let them develop a little before I throw the towel in.

 

If we still see guys running into each other by the Wyoming game, I'll be concerned.

[EbylHusker]

I'm not sure which Oregon - LSU game the OP was watching, but alright... That ridiculous analysis of the two teams pretty much undermines any credibility from the rest of the post.

 

The annoying part about the game was the lack of consistency and inability to execute even some basic stuff. And I do expect hitches the first game or two, however this game should have gone smoother, especially when you consider the opponent. Oregon or LSU would have handily beaten us yesterday, just to continue the previous line of thought.

 

There wasn't much in the way of an aggressive, effective, or consistent O-line. The jury is still out on Martinez (which is fine). Receivers were also inconsistent and there were too many instances of soft finishes to the routes. That won't cut it against top Big 10 opponents.

 

We lost a lot of talent in our secondary and I'm not sure if Dennard alone will be enough to shore them up. They will definitely improve with the season, though. Still, our secondary is going to be our weak point on defense this season, that much is blatantly obvious (and was long before the season started, I'm not trying to say it's a revelation).

 

Relative lack of penalties was nice.

 

Overall it was an exceedingly "meh" performance punctuated by some great flashes and way more "wtf" moments than I care to see from a Nebraska team, no matter which game or opponent they're playing. And quite frankly, that is just below expectation, even for the first game and the considerations that go into effect because of it.

 

The score was fine, but it didn't reflect the inconsistent nature of the team's play. Part of watching the game is actually seeing how the team plays, not just pointing to the score at the end and grinning when you win. Especially against an FCS team...

[zoogs]

There's no reason to worry too much or anything, but it was what it was. An opener that was very unclean. Obviously there's a lot of kinks to work out.

 

These things happen. It's the opener. I don't think anyone has to be told to relax, because nobody is really panicking. But as far as discussing the game goes, there were positives and there were negatives.

[NEBRASKANHEAT]

Why is everyone so worried about our team after this game? It was essentially a glorified scrimmage in which we were obviously working on specific things.

 

I need to get a few things out on the table that need to be said.

 

1) Do you really think our defense is the same without Dennard? Dennard allows us to do many different things on D, with different defensive packages, because you know he'll lock down his side of the field. Our defense was very basic. We were obviously trying to get as many people reps as possible. Against more experienced teams, I don't think we see nearly as many people on D, or O.

 

2) We went away from our #1's frequently to try and provide experience for younger players. We did this before the fourth quarter. I highly doubt we see that many substitutions against, say, Wisconsin. This shouldn't be surprising as Bo or possibly Carl said, they need to get people game reps to see how people react in games vs. practice.

 

3) Offense was very basic. I struggle to believe thats our entire playbook. Beck, was obviously, trying to perfect plays. After the game, he admitted he stuck to the same play to execute it correctly. Which was dumb. But like I said, thats something you do in practice, and it appears the staff was using this as a scrimmage more than a game to crush the opponent.

 

4) Both teams were rusty. We got the win, yet people are complaining we didn't score 40+. LSU, Oregon, tOSU, Wisconsin, are all better than us because they (Wiscy and OSU) just reamed their opponent. - whoever thinks Oregon looks better than us is kind of silly... 4 turnovers, multiple penalties... At least we didn't get flagged left and right. LSU - Look at that offense... even ours looked better than that. They clearly play offense to not lose...

 

5) POSITIVES. Our penalties looked to be fixed, our turnovers fixed as well - those fumbles on the pitches were obviously sloppy - a work in progress, which I believe is something Beck wanted to work on. The option seemed to be huge.

 

6) Our D looked good. Our secondary is only going to get better with Fonzie, which I mentioned above.

 

7) Our WR played well. They didn't -lose- the game for us. Which is huge.

 

8) Wish we saw more Carnes and the 3 RB's, but oh well.

 

9) Stafford is a baller.

 

 

 

I haven't read any other threads, watched any post game coverage or read any articles (had to go straight to work after the game). So perhaps everything I'm about to say is completely redundant and been said a million times since the game. BUT, why is there pessimism? Because there was nothing, other than some new formations that I witnessed yesterday that looks any different than anything I've seen the last two seasons.

 

1. No push from the offensive line

2. QB locking onto a receiver and telegraphing every throw

3. Receivers dropping balls

4. Offensive players looking confused

5. Had it not been for the speed of T tragic to outrun inferior athletes, the offense showed no other ability to be productive.

 

 

What's not to be pessimistic about? That it was only the first game is a fair point. And obviously there is plenty left to be determined. But, I witnessed nothing on Saturday to make me think that it's not business as usual. We hear that during practices T tragic is looking amazing, the offense is really looking sharp, yet none of it translates to gameday.

 

And sorry, but after the last two seasons of watching some of the best defenses and best defensive players this school has ever seen get wasted by a putrid offense, I reserve the right to be pessimistic until proven otherwise.

[bournehusker]

I'm optimistic that cotton will be fired after the season. As for our team....we are championship caliber on defense and kicking. Again. But worse on offense than last yr. Oline is awful. Saying we were simple is dumb. We couldn't push...block...or execute while being super simple ...that means we will look worse when we get more complex. Wrs can't catch and rbs are helpless without an oline. Expect to win 9 games but nothing more.

[adc7236]

I think many of us wanted to see a real change from last year. We saw some new wrinkles in the offense and less penalties, but other than that...it was the same flavor as last year. As others have already said, dropped balls, QB staring at receivers with no look-off, not progressing through reads, lack of production from our O line etc.

 

Call it pessimism or what you ever fits.....it was disappointing for me.

[Husker66]

for all the talk of challenging for B1G championships, we needed to look a lot more like Boise State or LSU against their competion and a lot less like NU did against ours.....to be that, we would have had our 1st team out at halftime like back in the day...real happy with kicking game, defense will be fine...but like Nebraskanheat said, that offense which has squandered the last two years for us should be clicking much better...LSU or Boise would have flat out depantsed us yestarday. it could be a long season.

[Axl_sued_me]

Who ever thinks that Nebraska looked better than Oregon needs to go back to sleep or start pounding the coffee right now.