This team is going to be fine.

[Branno]

Time to start showing consistency with this program.

Like being one of only four programs in the country to have won at least 9 games each of the past five seasons? Honestly, that puts us in pretty elite company

Yes. Let's beat our chest and be overly proud of losing 1 out of every 3 games we play. This place used to be the home of champions. Now it's the home of "good enough".

that is a powerful statement. i hope all of husker-nation sees this, especially the bo, the ad, and the president of nu.

 

A hitter in baseball that hits 2 out of every 3 balls goes down as the greatest player in history.

 

Even Bama can't finish a season undefeated. Calm down and let's see how the next 11 games go.

[NUance]

I think its safe to say zaire and afalava are the 2 best LBs on this team

They certainly made the fewest mistakes on Saturday.

Gerry made a couple of boneheaded mistakes. But the guy is a true frosh. It's to be expected. Once he gets a few games under his belt and sees more game film he might end up being our best LB.

[Husker_x]

1. It's not that people are expecting a great defense. People are expecting the defense to be better and not make the same mistakes they've been making since 2011. What happened Saturday should never have happened - period.

 

2. Smith had a great game, but he himself is not great. He's just pretty good. While NFL has little to nothing to do with college, I doubt he's more than a back up at the next level. Which is more than Martinez will be at QB, imo.

 

3. How many punches in the mouth or wake up calls does this team need, though? Last year's UCLA game was supposed to be a wake up call, same within tOSU blowing us out. And the year before, Wisconsin was a wake up call. Many of these guys now starting were on the team last year. They don't need any more motivation to play well.

 

4. I agree Beck didn't have his most brilliant game calling plays, but I've been very impressed with him over the last couple of years. He had some fantastic play calling last year. And if a play works, people rarely complain about the call. Just something to keep in perspective.

 

5. I'm not ready to call this a make or break year yet. Pelini has been a very good, all encompassing coach. Few off-the-field issues, his players love him, his players graduate pretty well and he wins most games. That said, a five loss year or even a four loss year with a historically bad defense, and I don't know what Eichorst would do. Eichorst could very well feel the program needs to go a different direction if that happens, and truth be told, I wouldn't blame him.

 

It's far too early to get too doom and gloom about everything. Overall, week one was not a good week one by any stretch of the imagination. But we've got three months of football left, so I'm certainly giving the coaches their opportunity to do what they're paid to do - coach.

 

1. All I read this offseason was how the defense would muddle through the first few games and gel. Well, it's happening. Check back after the noncon and we can return to the point. Wyo's scheme was great and ours was, well, pedestrian. I don't believe this defense has reached it's potential. I hope it will, and the sooner the better.

 

2. Again, check back and the end of the season. He was making pinpoint accurate throws all night, and he was reading our defense like a book. The OC also had a few strokes of genius when he cleared Santos out of the middle. He achieved balance against an inexperienced unit. All that spells a bad day at the office. It shouldn't have happened, but giving up 600 yards and coming away with a win is something to be thankful for.

 

3. Many of them were, many of them weren't. Takes 11 to play defense. Pelini's scheme per former players is based almost entirely on every person doing their job. I guess what I'm saying is cut the young bucks some slack. Until they start actually dropping winnable games, no need to panic.

 

4. Totally agree. Unfortunately he made two game-altering boneheaded decisions that turned this from a comfortable win into a last-possession style barn burner. If Beck is worth his salary, he won't make the same mistakes twice. I trust him.

 

5. Again, totally agree. By break I mean 4-5 regular season losses. Even three with this schedule would telegraph a likely irreversible downward trend. We simply have to win more games to show progress. What worries me is some people (not you) seem to think the wheels have come off when what I think we're witnessing are natural growing pains. If I'm wrong I'll admit it, but I won't happily admit it, because it will probably mean we've dropped several gimmes (on paper) as the season goes along.

 

Also agree with your closing remarks. That was more or less my original point. Pelini has us winning a decent amount of games consistently. He's had a chance to restock the D-line with players fit for B1G-style play. I am more than willing to be patient as a fan with youth and trust that they will progress. Hell, just look at Jean-Baptiste. He had a fantastic game, ugly or no. Last year he had trouble staying on the field. That's coaching. That's progress. No reason to think it can't happen in the front seven. I just think these things take time, and of course this was a lot of these guys' first shot at live action.

[jmfb]

I'm not ready to throw in the towel

But I'm so SICK of those 3rd and 1 illegal motion penalties, 3rd and inches is much different that 3rd and 6- we went 0-2 in converting those.

Drive killers

5+ years of it

[The Dude]

The thing that keeps me optimistic for this season is we don't play the schedule to have a 2007-type collapse. We just don't. We play 2 decent offenses in UCLA and Michigan, and probably no elite offenses. Okay? Maybe 2 blowout losses (assuming things don't go awry vs. Northwestern). That's the status quo around here.

 

If being fine means keeping our heads above water, yeah, we'll be fine.

[TheSker]

If being fine means keeping our heads above water, yeah, we'll be fine.

In Pelini's tenure, being fine has meant being in contention for conference championships in two different conferences and consistently winning a number of games that only a handful of other programs have done as consistently as Nebraska.

[The Dude]

If being fine means keeping our heads above water, yeah, we'll be fine.

In Pelini's tenure, being fine has meant being in contention for conference championships in two different conferences and consistently winning a number of games that only a handful of other programs have done as consistently as Nebraska.

Yes. Keeping our heads above water.

[Blackshirt96]

I also think the proclamations of imminent destruction are coming in way too soon.

 

1. This defense does not have to be great or even good in September/October. It has to be mediocre, create a few turnovers, and focus on improving.

 

2. We played against a fantastic QB. Yes, it's Wyoming. Welcome to the age of parity. Not only was he good; he was on fire. He was playing in an extremely effective system run by an extremely effective OC (or HC in this case). Lots of 1-on-1 matchups in space against young, inexperienced LBs.

 

3. Our young defense needed a good punch in the mouth. Anyone on that team who had any illusions of relying on talent should now be blissfully awake. There is so much work to do. But then we all knew that--it was all anyone could talk about all offseason.

 

4. We had that game put away when Beck went full retard and called up a Taylor Martinez interception when we were up 18 and in field goal range. Had we run the ball like we were doing, we either get a first down or three points, thus making it a three score game and likely deflating Wyoming for good. At the very least we'd have gotten field position instead of a giant interception return. Long story short, we let the bastards back in when we didn't have to. The Wyo D was gassed, plain and simple, and we decide it's time to throw the football. That's on Martinez. That's on Beck.

 

This is a make or break year for Pelini. If I have any reputation it's probably as a doom and gloomer, which I'm not. I prefer the term "realist." Realism tells me that as long as we keep winning in September--and early October--there is nothing to complain about. Having true and redshirt freshmen as a regular part of your rotation at a half a dozen positions means you're going to get points put up on you by experienced, talented players, especially in spread systems with so many one-on-one matchups. It's just going to happen. As long as we win and the defense continues to learn and improve, I'd say we're on schedule. The only thing that matters is winning and getting this defense to grow up by November. It's still possible--even likely. If it doesn't happen, the coaching change conversation is inevitable, no matter what the sunshine pumpers union would like to believe.

 

Now I'm not happy about the Wyoming game, but we didn't lose. That's something. On to next week.

I consider myself a kool-aid drinker & I agree with most of this. The only thing I don't agree with is blaming Martinez for the interception. That was on Beck & the WR. If you rewatch it you will see it was a timed route & the WR ran an "in" when he should have ran an "out". Like you said though it sould have been a run play anyways.

[TheSker]

I also think the proclamations of imminent destruction are coming in way too soon.

 

1. This defense does not have to be great or even good in September/October. It has to be mediocre, create a few turnovers, and focus on improving.

 

2. We played against a fantastic QB. Yes, it's Wyoming. Welcome to the age of parity. Not only was he good; he was on fire. He was playing in an extremely effective system run by an extremely effective OC (or HC in this case). Lots of 1-on-1 matchups in space against young, inexperienced LBs.

 

3. Our young defense needed a good punch in the mouth. Anyone on that team who had any illusions of relying on talent should now be blissfully awake. There is so much work to do. But then we all knew that--it was all anyone could talk about all offseason.

 

4. We had that game put away when Beck went full retard and called up a Taylor Martinez interception when we were up 18 and in field goal range. Had we run the ball like we were doing, we either get a first down or three points, thus making it a three score game and likely deflating Wyoming for good. At the very least we'd have gotten field position instead of a giant interception return. Long story short, we let the bastards back in when we didn't have to. The Wyo D was gassed, plain and simple, and we decide it's time to throw the football. That's on Martinez. That's on Beck.

 

This is a make or break year for Pelini. If I have any reputation it's probably as a doom and gloomer, which I'm not. I prefer the term "realist." Realism tells me that as long as we keep winning in September--and early October--there is nothing to complain about. Having true and redshirt freshmen as a regular part of your rotation at a half a dozen positions means you're going to get points put up on you by experienced, talented players, especially in spread systems with so many one-on-one matchups. It's just going to happen. As long as we win and the defense continues to learn and improve, I'd say we're on schedule. The only thing that matters is winning and getting this defense to grow up by November. It's still possible--even likely. If it doesn't happen, the coaching change conversation is inevitable, no matter what the sunshine pumpers union would like to believe.

 

Now I'm not happy about the Wyoming game, but we didn't lose. That's something. On to next week.

I consider myself a kool-aid drinker & I agree with most of this. The only thing I don't agree with is blaming Martinez for the interception. That was on Beck & the WR. If you rewatch it you will see it was a timed route & the WR ran an "in" when he should have ran an "out". Like you said though it sould have been a run play anyways.

 

Here's what Rich Fisher said about it......Fisher said. “Burtch was fine. He ran the right route. I wouldn’t say it’s on anybody. Burtch did the right thing.”

[3rd and long]

I'm curious about something. To those blasting Beck for calling for a pass at that point. If it hits for a TD, is it then a great call?

 

Beck didn't miss the receiver by five yards, TM did. If the passes are thrown like that, it doens't matter at what point we are at in the game. Yes, we probably could have continued to run it and possibly closed the game out at that point. But we also have to be able to use the passing game at any point of the game, not just when we are down big. That call didn't turn the game around, the pass did.

 

As to our defense. I'm torn, that 600 yards is ugly, but there really does seem to be some legimate talent out there. I thought Santos looked absolutely horrible in the first quarter but seemed to improve from that point on. Gerry, McMullen, and #44 (damn, just blanked on his name) all look like they are going to be solid. If our other two linebackers come back, and are as good as touted here, that is a good sign.

 

I just am not sold on the scheme. Without a Suh force up front it seems highly ineffective. Smith did play really well, but our defenses over the past few years have a habit of making OK quarterbacks look a lot better than they really are.

[robsker]

The thing that keeps me optimistic for this season is we don't play the schedule to have a 2007-type collapse. We just don't. We play 2 decent offenses in UCLA and Michigan, and probably no elite offenses. Okay? Maybe 2 blowout losses (assuming things don't go awry vs. Northwestern). That's the status quo around here.

 

If being fine means keeping our heads above water, yeah, we'll be fine.

 

the easy schedule we have had these last years and will have this year masks the reality of the quality of the team. NU has been winning 9 games a season for a while --- where 4-5 wins come against teams that 90% of the major conference programs would go undefeated against. That is, more than 1/2 the NU wins are against absolute fish... teams that anyone of quality would beat. Teams like Wyoming of this year. Against decent teams, NU over the Pelini era is playing about .500 football. When NU plays good teams, NU loses 80% of the time... and often NU gets obliterated by such teams.

 

Those who trumpet the "9 win thing" seem (at least as I interpret their posts) to think that that is fine. But is it really? Is 1/2 our wins against fish... and then playing .500 against decent teams and getting ripped by good teams really fine? My point is that the 9-win thing is largely a function of a great deal of games against weak teams. Look more closely at the quality teams NU has played and the record is very much not fine. NU has just been fortunate to play schedules where the competition is not that great (really the B1G has only 1-2 good teams a year here recently and only another 2 or so that are even decent... the rest are less than decent).

 

All is not fine. Being .500 against decent teams makes NU well.... merely decent. Given the history of NU football, being merely decent --- even if it is consistently decent and no less --- is not enough.

 

No... things are not fine.

[RedDenver]

The thing that keeps me optimistic for this season is we don't play the schedule to have a 2007-type collapse. We just don't. We play 2 decent offenses in UCLA and Michigan, and probably no elite offenses. Okay? Maybe 2 blowout losses (assuming things don't go awry vs. Northwestern). That's the status quo around here.

 

If being fine means keeping our heads above water, yeah, we'll be fine.

 

the easy schedule we have had these last years and will have this year masks the reality of the quality of the team. NU has been winning 9 games a season for a while --- where 4-5 wins come against teams that 90% of the major conference programs would go undefeated against. That is, more than 1/2 the NU wins are against absolute fish... teams that anyone of quality would beat. Teams like Wyoming of this year. Against decent teams, NU over the Pelini era is playing about .500 football. When NU plays good teams, NU loses 80% of the time... and often NU gets obliterated by such teams.

 

Those who trumpet the "9 win thing" seem (at least as I interpret their posts) to think that that is fine. But is it really? Is 1/2 our wins against fish... and then playing .500 against decent teams and getting ripped by good teams really fine? My point is that the 9-win thing is largely a function of a great deal of games against weak teams. Look more closely at the quality teams NU has played and the record is very much not fine. NU has just been fortunate to play schedules where the competition is not that great (really the B1G has only 1-2 good teams a year here recently and only another 2 or so that are even decent... the rest are less than decent).

 

All is not fine. Being .500 against decent teams makes NU well.... merely decent. Given the history of NU football, being merely decent --- even if it is consistently decent and no less --- is not enough.

 

No... things are not fine.

Isn't that exactly what the old Big 8 was? It was Oklahoma and one other team most years, so TO played at least 5 cupcakes within the conference. Look back at how bad KSU (before Snyder was the worst team in Div 1A), CU (before McCartney), ISU, KU, OSU were. Parity has steadily made those cupcakes better and distributed the talent a little more evenly, so Bo has it harder to reach 9 games as far as opponent quality, IMO. We do play more games now making it easier to win 9, so that seems to about balance it out.

[TheSker]

The thing that keeps me optimistic for this season is we don't play the schedule to have a 2007-type collapse. We just don't. We play 2 decent offenses in UCLA and Michigan, and probably no elite offenses. Okay? Maybe 2 blowout losses (assuming things don't go awry vs. Northwestern). That's the status quo around here.

 

If being fine means keeping our heads above water, yeah, we'll be fine.

 

the easy schedule we have had these last years and will have this year masks the reality of the quality of the team. NU has been winning 9 games a season for a while --- where 4-5 wins come against teams that 90% of the major conference programs would go undefeated against. That is, more than 1/2 the NU wins are against absolute fish... teams that anyone of quality would beat. Teams like Wyoming of this year. Against decent teams, NU over the Pelini era is playing about .500 football. When NU plays good teams, NU loses 80% of the time... and often NU gets obliterated by such teams.

 

Those who trumpet the "9 win thing" seem (at least as I interpret their posts) to think that that is fine. But is it really? Is 1/2 our wins against fish... and then playing .500 against decent teams and getting ripped by good teams really fine? My point is that the 9-win thing is largely a function of a great deal of games against weak teams. Look more closely at the quality teams NU has played and the record is very much not fine. NU has just been fortunate to play schedules where the competition is not that great (really the B1G has only 1-2 good teams a year here recently and only another 2 or so that are even decent... the rest are less than decent).

 

All is not fine. Being .500 against decent teams makes NU well.... merely decent. Given the history of NU football, being merely decent --- even if it is consistently decent and no less --- is not enough.

 

No... things are not fine.

 

Pelini's record vs top 25 is not great.....valid point. Solich's was not good either and Callahan's was the worst of the three. When the Big 12 was formed, Tom Osborne felt the landscape of college football was changing. Many of the changes were designed to create parity......I'd say that's happened. It's only one example, but it's a recent one.....Bill Snyder is famous for scheduling a cream puff pre-conference schedule starting in the late 80's. Well, oops Bill, it's 2013....watch out for NDSU.

[TAKODA]

I think we got decent pressure on their qb only rushing 4 against 5. We did not use a base "D" all night and probably will not see much base "D" in the next few games. Obviously this will be dictated by what our opponents run at us. We are young and we won and should have or could have won by more had we stuck that drive in the end zone where TM threw the pick as well as the 4th down where we should have had Cross handle the ball. The officials looked as if they were having troubles making correct calls all night too. Chalk up a win and hopefully a learning experience that brings out the best of us in future games. We need to grow up in a hurry (including play calling) before we play UCLA or the sigh of relief will be replaced by anger, heartache and calls for a lynching by many here on this board.

[Junior]

This 3 game argument it ridiculous. Last year is last year, these are young guys they're only going to get better.

 

 

Then the 9 wins per year argument is equivalently ridiculous. Because they are also not this year.

 

Once is a fluke, twice is a coincidence, three is a trend.