Predict the 2013 season

[HuskerNationNick]

I find it amusing the amount of people who said our defense would take "suckage" to a whole new level. That defense grew up as the season went on and they are a group that will be really fun to watch these next couple of years.

You're right about the improvement as the season went on but the people who said that the defense would take suckage to a whole new level were right over roughly the first half of the season.

 

Defense sucked against:

 

Wyoming, SDSU (1st half), UCLA (2nd half), and Minnesota. That's "3" games. So about a quarter of the season.

I'd say that they were pretty tough to watch (with exceptions) through the first 7 games. So . . . roughly half of the season.

 

Fortunately the competition was extremely weak.

 

First 7 games?

Wyoming- Yes

Southern Miss- 284 yards allowed, 13 points. NO

UCLA- Yes

SDSU- Yes

Illinois- 372 yards allowed, 19 points, with our 2nd string playing most of 2nd half. NO

Purdue- 216 yards allowed and 45 seconds away from a SHUTOUT. NO

Minnesota- Yes.

 

4/7 games were defensive let downs. I agree most of the first 7 were, but had our offense been able to keep our defense off the field in the Minnesota game, we would have never been worn and beaten like we were. Hard for a defense, especially a young one to stay on the field when you lose TOP by 10 minutes. That's them almost playing for another whole quarter.

[carlfense]

Southern Miss- 284 yards allowed, 13 points. NO

1 win Southern Miss? Who scored similar points against Texas State, ECU, North Texas, LaTech, Marshall, etc.? YES.

 

Illinois- 372 yards allowed, 19 points, with our 2nd string playing most of 2nd half. NO

4 win Illinois with nearly 200 yards rushing? YES.

 

Purdue- 216 yards allowed and 45 seconds away from a SHUTOUT. NO

Agreed. They played well against 1 win Purdue. That would be one of the exceptions that I was referencing.

 

 

. . . but had our offense been able to keep our defense off the field in the Minnesota game, we would have never been worn and beaten like we were.

It's not the fault of our offense that Minnesota ran the ball 54 times. We were manhandled by MINNESOTA from their second drive on.

 

Hard for a defense, especially a young one to stay on the field when you lose TOP by 10 minutes. That's them almost playing for another whole quarter.

The defense was on the field because they couldn't stop the running game. And that wasn't just because they were tired. Minnesota's very first scoring drive took nearly 7 minutes and covered 75 yards. They passed the ball once for seven yards on that drive.

 

It's laughable to say that this sort of defense can be excused by pointing at the other side of the ball.

 

 

Tough to watch (with exceptions) through the first 7 games. Fortunately the competition was extremely weak.

[Redux]

My prediction for 2013 is that nobody will be happy with the outcome. I think that may be my prediction for 2014 as well.

[JTrain]

I think that may be my prediction for 2014 as well.

 

8-4 or 7-5?

[Redux]

I think that may be my prediction for 2014 as well.

 

8-4 or 7-5?

 

Ok I'm totally full of it. 12-0!!!!! TOP ME OFF BARKEEP!

[HuskerNationNick]

Southern Miss- 284 yards allowed, 13 points. NO

1 win Southern Miss? Who scored similar points against Texas State, ECU, North Texas, LaTech, Marshall, etc.? YES.

Again only 284 yards allowed while in a whole new defensive schem. NO

 

Illinois- 372 yards allowed, 19 points, with our 2nd string playing most of 2nd half. NO

4 win Illinois with nearly 200 yards rushing? YES.

With our 2nd string defense in for a good part of the second half of the game....

This is how our defense performed per drive.... Looks like a win.

Punt- Start of 1st qtr

Forced Fumble

Turnover on downs

Field Goal- Start of 2nd qtr

Punt

Punt

Rushing TD- Start of 3rd qtr

INT

Turnover on downs

Punt- Start of 4th qtr

Punt

Rushing TD

 

. . . but had our offense been able to keep our defense off the field in the Minnesota game, we would have never been worn and beaten like we were.

It's not the fault of our offense that Minnesota ran the ball 54 times. We were manhandled by MINNESOTA from their second drive on.

Its the offense's fault when they can't hold onto the ball, and they can't get a drive to give the defense time to rest. So yes, its the offenses fault that Minnesota ran the ball 54 times. We score, take time off the clock, we keep our defense off the field, lowering Minnesota's ability to have more plays. Is it that hard to realize that?

 

Hard for a defense, especially a young one to stay on the field when you lose TOP by 10 minutes. That's them almost playing for another whole quarter.

The defense was on the field because they couldn't stop the running game. And that wasn't just because they were tired. Minnesota's very first scoring drive took nearly 7 minutes and covered 75 yards. They passed the ball once for seven yards on that drive.

 

It's laughable to say that this sort of defense can be excused by pointing at the other side of the ball.

 

NU only getting 17 first downs and going 4/12 on 3rd down conversion is going to put your defense on the field more than they should. Shouldn't take a genius to figure that out. If our offense wasn't getting off the field as fast as it took them to get on.

 

Starting 2nd quarter

5 plays, 20 yards- punt 1m 36s

5 plays, 19 yards- punt 2m 59s

1 play- fumble 14s

8 plays, 48 yards (15 for facemask)- field goal. Had we not gotten a facemask that gave us a first down, it would have been a 6 play- punt situation. Anyway 3 points scored, eating up 3 minutes.

 

3rd quarter

3 plays, 4 yards- punt 1m 36s

3 plays, 3 yards- punt 1m 8s

8 plays 72 yards- TD 2m 19s

 

4th quarter

9 plays, 66 yards- FG 3m 51s

3 plays, -2 yards- punt 1m 18s

2 plays, 10 yards, INT

 

10 drives, 1 TD, 2 FGs. 4 of them going for more than 2 minutes, only 2 of them for more than 3 minutes. Longest drive was 72 yards, with one being 66. Closest one to that was 48 yards in the second half, and next one was a 10 yard drive at the END of the game. We held the ball for 18m 31s for 3 quarters, while Minny got it for nearly 26m.

[deedsker]

The other thing that killed us against Minnesota was a first round draft pick Ra'Shede Hageman going up against a new starter at guard for a missing All-American Spencer Long.

[carlfense]

So yes, its the offenses fault that Minnesota ran the ball 54 times.

Awesome. This might top your Thad Randle expectations.

[TheSker]

but you'd have to make a case for why Bo's teams have had so many issues in this area, spanning six years and hundreds of different players. I don't believe it is a coincidence.

We must reduce turnovers from the quarterback position. It was an issue from all 3 quarterbacks this season, but Martinez has been the quarterback for 1/2 Pelini's tenure at Nebraska.....so "hundreds of different players" might be a stretch.

[HuskerNationNick]

So yes, its the offenses fault that Minnesota ran the ball 54 times.

Awesome. This might top your Thad Randle expectations.

A healthy Thad Randle would have hit his expectations this year, but I figured he would beat the injury bug. He did not, but that has nothing to do with what was said. Ignore everything that was said to support my side, you just seem to not realize when your wrong. If an offense can't stay on the field, this gives your opponent the opportunity to make more plays... not sure how hard that is to realize.

[carlfense]

Ignore everything that was said to support my side, you just seem to not realize when your wrong. If an offense can't stay on the field, this gives your opponent the opportunity to make more plays... not sure how hard that is to realize.

Heh. Yeah. Our offense couldn't stop Minnesota's run game.

 

Anyways, we'll almost certainly see a similar season next season. The people who refuse to acknowledge reality will dwindle again . . . just like they did over this past season. Happy holidays. (carlfense is a little into the egg nogg . . . if you can't tell.)

[HuskerNationNick]

Ignore everything that was said to support my side, you just seem to not realize when your wrong. If an offense can't stay on the field, this gives your opponent the opportunity to make more plays... not sure how hard that is to realize.

Heh. Yeah. Our offense couldn't stop Minnesota's run game.

 

Anyways, we'll almost certainly see a similar season next season. The people who refuse to acknowledge reality will dwindle again . . . just like they did over this past season. Happy holidays. (carlfense is a little into the egg nogg . . . if you can't tell.)

Your absolutely making no sense. If our offense controls the clock, holds onto the ball more than 5 plays at a time, it limits the opponents number of plays. Does this not make sense to you at all?

 

Yep, our whole offense will see the injury bug, we will be playing our 3rd string, walk on QB once again, and we will be in the same boat. Get over yourself dude. Your just being ignorant as f#*k, and quite unpleasant to be honest. People like you make this board undesirable anymore.You don't like where this program is, and are that unhappy, maybe you should just stop following and become an Alabama fan. Oh wait, you would still be losing one game a year that you should have won. You use to be a pleasant poster.

[carlfense]

Your absolutely making no sense. If our offense controls the clock, holds onto the ball more than 5 plays at a time, it limits the opponents number of plays.

On Minnesota's very first scoring drive, what exactly should our offense have done to stop Minnesota's offense? Or are you going to continue to ignore what actually happened?

 

Yep, our whole offense will see the injury bug, we will be playing our 3rd string, walk on QB once again, and we will be in the same boat. Get over yourself dude. Your just being ignorant as f#*k, and quite unpleasant to be honest. People like you make this board undesirable anymore.You don't like where this program is, and are that unhappy, maybe you should just stop following and become an Alabama fan. Oh wait, you would still be losing one game a year that you should have won. You use to be a pleasant poster.

Oh, no. I'm sure there will be an entirely new litany of excuses next year. Young quarterback. New offensive linemen. Bad luck. Etc. Same results.

 

No worries. The hope will return with a new coaching staff. I'll wait.

[HuskerNationNick]

On Minnesota's very first scoring drive, what exactly should our offense have done to stop Minnesota's offense? Or are you going to continue to ignore what actually happened?

First drive, doesn't equal a WHOLE game. Our defense couldn't adjust. Outside of the Husker's first offensive drive, we didn't really have sh#t afterwards. The defense kept the game close, whether you want to believe that or not. Our offense couldn't score points, couldn't get more than 5 plays off on most drives. You give your opponent more opportunities to score, its eventually going to happen.

 

Don't hold your breathe for that new coaching staff, you might not be around to post. Its not going to happen.

[carlfense]

Don't hold your breathe for that new coaching staff, you might not be around to post. Its not going to happen.

Fortunately, again, this is one of those situations where we will definitively find out who is right and who is wrong. We'll see. GBR.