This team is going to be fine.

[Warrior10]

Taylor Martinez was 17 - 22. One was a bad interception. Another one should have been. A couple were brilliant fade route touch passes for TDs. Another was an absolute laser for a TD. Another was an absolute laser that the receiver dropped. One was a lucky deflection when Taylor was trying to make something out of nothing after a bad snap.

 

If you were to plot out the 63 running plays and detail the fumbles, short gainers and no-gainers, you'd have a similar mixed bag, but nobody ever argues for running less because the Huskers have generally been running the correct amount.

 

I trust Taylor will be throwing on some third down situations and the Huskers will be running on others. That's the game of football.

A media member pointed out that after watching a replay of the game the ball that "should have been picked" was tipped at the line. I didn't notice it live and haven't rewatched game, but just what I read.

[TheSker]

Taylor Martinez was 17 - 22. One was a bad interception. Another one should have been. A couple were brilliant fade route touch passes for TDs. Another was an absolute laser for a TD. Another was an absolute laser that the receiver dropped. One was a lucky deflection when Taylor was trying to make something out of nothing after a bad snap.

 

If you were to plot out the 63 running plays and detail the fumbles, short gainers and no-gainers, you'd have a similar mixed bag, but nobody ever argues for running less because the Huskers have generally been running the correct amount.

 

I trust Taylor will be throwing on some third down situations and the Huskers will be running on others. That's the game of football.

I agree, and the Huskers certainly have as talented a group of receivers as any team in the country. Whether running or passing, turnovers are a key statistic.....and because he's a dual threat quarterback, Martinez turns the ball over both ways. There's also the old adage, when you pass the ball, one of three things can happen and two of them are bad.

[Enhance]

quite correct Enhance. I agree.. many teams get a reasonable subset of their wins that way. What differs is the truly good teams end with only 1-2, perhaps 3 losses (at best) because while they do a good subset of their wins by beating fish (like NU does) they ALSO get wins against quality opponents too (to a higher degree than does NU).

 

For things at NU to be fine by NU standards... an average of 2.5 losses a year over time would be needed... with a spattering of 1 loss seasons with a 0 loss season per decade on average (and a 3 and even a 4 loss season thrown in every now and then). But a continual 4 loss season after 4 loss season is not fine.

I agree with that. I know for me, I don't mind a four loss season because those will likely happen. But, as you mentioned, it'd be nice to have something to offset that like a really good two loss or one loss season, in tandem with a B1G championship and a nice run into the playoffs. I'm not expecting nor believing another dynasty is possible, but we certainly have the capabilities to be in the same atmosphere of what we once were.

[Guy Chamberlin]

There's also the old adage, when you pass the ball, one of three things can happen and two of them are bad.

 

Never quite got this. When you run the ball just as many things can happen. A good gain. No gain. A loss. Or a fumble.

 

Last year Nebraska fumbled the ball 35 times and lost 22 of them. We had 13 interceptions.

 

Every team would love to have a punishing ground game, but the good ones also aren't afraid to throw on third down. Or first down. The less the defense expects it, the better. Right now I really like Nebraska's balance, and they've barely tested all the weapons they have.

[3rd and long]

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.

 

Martinez almost hit Burtch in the head with that pass. Not sure where you're getting "five yards" but it was slightly behind Burtch. The problem was, Burtch wasn't looking for the pass. He didn't turn his head until the ball had already been intercepted. If he has his head in the backfield at his break, at the worst he disrupts the pass for an incompletion. At best it's a catch for a first down.

 

My mistake on this. In real time it looked like it was way behind the receiver and if they replayed it I must have missed it. So I was going off what it appeared to me at game speed without a second look.

 

I do however still maintain that the call itself is not the problem. Way back when (fading memory with old age) in the Big X11 championship game against Texas. Fourth and one (or something like that) for Texas and they run play action (when everyone is expecting run) and turn it into a TD. If the play fails, its a terrible call, but it succeded and now it was a great call.

 

Yes, we probably could have closed out the game there with Cross powering it, but once in a while you need to do the unexpected. If we had run it, and the play would have been stuffed for no gain, how many would have been saying we should have thrown it there?