Tommie Frazier Twitter reaction

[HuskerShark]

I don't get why everybody is so upset. All offseason and especially two weeks ago UCLA was going to come in here and put up 700 yards and 70 points.

 

That's what happens when you beat Southern Miss 56-13. Wild expectations and then this. Our reaction would've been a lot different had the Southern Miss game gone like the Wyoming game.

 

I don't think it's a wild expectation to expect your team not to suck it up. ESPECIALLY when we come out 21-3 to start the game. This game is ALL on our coaches and their inability to adjust as needed.

[The Dude]

I don't get why everybody is so upset. All offseason and especially two weeks ago UCLA was going to come in here and put up 700 yards and 70 points.

I predicted a 17-13 NU victory. But I'm not really upset by the way it transpired. Pretty standard at this point.

[It'sNotAFakeID]

going into this game we all knew slow, clock eating play by our offense was going to be needed...didn't happen.

 

Exactly. And while that didn't directly lead to the defense giving up 38 straight points--the defense ultimately has the last say in whether or not the other team scores--but the offense not staying on the field definitely didn't help.

[clyde40]

This being said, I appreciate what Tommie had to say. I am tired of status Quo. I dont put all blame on Bo.. but at the end of the day, he hires the OC/DC so blame falls to him.

 

Something needs to change or we are going to keep losing like we did today. We were up 21-3 and lost 41-21... THAT IS A PROBLEM.

 

I dont think Bo will like being told to fire his OC/DC and bringing in vets.. so then you fire him. Somehow get Scott Frost in here as our OC and bring in Bohl as our Head coach and a monty Kiffin type Def. coord.

 

That all sounds good on paper. IMHO I think the odds of us changing coaches and ending up better off are really slim.

[Junior]

But I think he should have more to say. He was a quarterback, after all. He should know just how valuable it is for the defense to have an offense that can stay on the field.

 

Dude. What. The. F.

 

I've read about a dozen posts from you today talking about the Offense. The Offense has problems. That's understood. But you cannot absolve the Defense from blame by continually pointing the finger at the Offense.

 

I don't get it. It's like you're looking at the whole team and blaming half. It was an equal meltdown. It's not the Offense's fault that the Defense blew up. Again. It's not the Defense's fault that the Offense stopped scoring or moving the ball after the first quarter.

 

Why, when people point out that the Defense sucked today, do you constantly point the finger back at the Offense? At what point does the Defense have to stand up and take their own blame?

 

 

Alright, let me walk you through my reasoning:

 

Question #1: What was the difference between the first half and the second half in terms of what the offense was doing and what the defense was doing and how they were doing those things? Specifically, how.

 

Well, on defense they stopped covering receivers and tackling, mostly. If you can't see that... well...

 

The Avery missed sack that turned into a first down was a turning point for our defense. They fell apart after that. You simply can't argue otherwise.

 

But what did the offense stop doing? They stopped staying on the field. They didn't just not score, they didn't get a first down.

 

Yep, and maybe if the defense had created another turnover, or another 3 and out, things would have changed for the offense... See how it works both ways? Guess what? It's a team game. The offense didn't help the defense, and the defense didn't help the offense. But if going into the game you had said Taylor Martinez would have 200 passing yards, 3 touchdowns and no turnovers... don't you think we probably would have won the game?

 

Damn, I remember when a 21-3 lead would have been lights out for the other team.

[It'sNotAFakeID]

I don't get why everybody is so upset. All offseason and especially two weeks ago UCLA was going to come in here and put up 700 yards and 70 points.

 

That's what happens when you beat Southern Miss 56-13. Wild expectations and then this. Our reaction would've been a lot different had the Southern Miss game gone like the Wyoming game.

 

I don't think it's a wild expectation to expect your team not to suck it up. ESPECIALLY when we come out 21-3 to start the game. This game is ALL on our coaches and their inability to adjust as needed.

 

Don't you think our expectations, and then our reactions to this game would've been different had we not blown the doors off Southern Miss?

 

I understand what everyone is saying, I really do. I like figuring out the why's and how's of just about everything--it's been what I've been taught and it's a big part of my major.

[zoogs]

There were a LOT of just plain bone-headed and very, very costly mis-tackles the defense made after playing a pretty sharp first half against a high-powered offense. To an extent we should expect this UCLA offense to roll up the yards, and the points. The job done in the first half was very impressive and the second half breakdown is still inexcusable.

 

Like knapp says you can look to both sides of the ball and point out problems and failures and I think both of them failed in pretty serious ways. The offense was in a groove in the first half. Sure two of the TDs were on 30-yard drives but they still put points on the board and it sent UCLA reeling. The only reason they got back in the game at all is because the offense promptly stopped being able to stay on the field. You give a talented offense like that an opening, they're liable to take it.

 

I was a little stunned by how fast everything fell apart. I figured we had it in the bag. The totality of the collapse was brutal and it falls on everyone's shoulders. Overall I do have to sympathize with BBXII; I feel better about the defense than I do about the offense. They flashed potential (especially the DL early on) and showed they could hang with a great offense, but not forever. The offense......if it keeps that up, it's hard to imagine how we'll win against any team that has a dangerous offense to match. It's college football. Good offenses need to carve up defenses.

[knapplc]

I don't know. Don't you think that maybe, just maybe the offense not staying on the field for more than 3 plays and 45 seconds at a time might have just tired the defense out a little bit? That maybe, just maybe having UCLA start every one of their drives in the second half at around midfield combined with the defense being back on the field after just 45 seconds might have made it easier for the Bruins's offense to score 38 points?

 

Here's what I saw from the first half.

 

The offense sustained drives (more than they did in the second half), even if they didn't end in points. It allowed the defense to catch a breather and work through any possible adjustments. The defense played really well as a result. Because they played well, the offense wasn't forced to do things it wasn't comfortable in doing.

 

It's a cycle. When the cycle goes wrong, you have to look where it went wrong, and I think it was on the offense. Not to say the defense wasn't at any fault, because their failings put the offense in a bad position.

 

So blame the Defense for not stopping they cycle. That makes as much sense. Or blame Special Teams. But to point the finger at the Offense, and say they were the ones to blame, makes absolutely zero sense.

 

Is the Offense to blame? Yes, absolutely.

 

Is the Defense to blame? Yes, absolutely

 

Is Special Teams to blame? Yes, absolutely.

 

Are the Coaches to blame? Yes, absolutely.

 

But it is not the Offense's fault that the Defense couldn't stop Hundley & Co. any more than it is the Defense's fault that Special Teams had several crap plays any more than it is Special Teams' fault that the Offense failed to move the ball.

 

You're not wrong in that the Offense screwed the pooch today. They certainly did. But you cannot blame the Offense's for the fact that the Defense suddenly stopped playing solid football.

 

Ciante Evans, on the collapse: "I guess we just lost our step and our sense of urgency. Guys were unfocused."

 

Stanley Jean-Baptiste on why the Defense collapsed: “I guess thinking that we've got the game won, thinking that they’re going to lay down.”

 

This is a systemic issue with Bo Pelini's teams. We've seen this time and again, where our guys show up to win, not to play. They seem to think that teams are just going to roll over for them because they're so great - or something, I don't know what. But when their opponents don't respect them, and strive to come back on them, and give 110% effort in contrast to Nebraska's 50% effort, our guys too often look caught unawares, like they can't fathom a team not bowing to the greatness of Nebraska. And they don't, and they don't think we're great.

 

Those quotes above should scare the crap out of anyone thinking we're getting back to playing solid defense. This is a defense that has surrendered 500 or more yards of offense in two of three games. Wearing a legacy that has has surrendered 500 yards in four of their last five games. And despite that, the best explanation one of our best senior players can come up with is that they think the opponent is "going to lay down."

 

Sheesh. You cannot blame that on the Offense. That's solely on the Defense. Let the Offense own their own problems - many as they are. Let the Defense stand up and take responsibility for their own problems.

[It'sNotAFakeID]

Agreed. I know I haven't mentioned it in here, but I'm not saying ALL of this was our offense's fault. I understand that football is a team game and that one side influences the other and that neither side helped the other one out too much in the second half. I get it.

[fatboyspanky]

This being said, I appreciate what Tommie had to say. I am tired of status Quo. I dont put all blame on Bo.. but at the end of the day, he hires the OC/DC so blame falls to him.

 

Something needs to change or we are going to keep losing like we did today. We were up 21-3 and lost 41-21... THAT IS A PROBLEM.

 

I dont think Bo will like being told to fire his OC/DC and bringing in vets.. so then you fire him. Somehow get Scott Frost in here as our OC and bring in Bohl as our Head coach and a monty Kiffin type Def. coord.

 

That all sounds good on paper. IMHO I think the odds of us changing coaches and ending up better off are really slim.

So you'd be fine with the status quo rather than aspiring to be the best? I don't know if I could live with myself if I had that attitude.

[Junior]

There were a LOT of just plain bone-headed and very, very costly mis-tackles the defense made after playing a pretty sharp first half against a high-powered offense. To an extent we should expect this UCLA offense to roll up the yards, and the points. The job done in the first half was very impressive and the second half breakdown is still inexcusable.

 

Like knapp says you can look to both sides of the ball and point out problems and failures and I think both of them failed in pretty serious ways. The offense was in a groove in the first half. Sure two of the TDs were on 30-yard drives but they still put points on the board and it sent UCLA reeling. The only reason they got back in the game at all is because the offense promptly stopped being able to stay on the field. You give a talented offense like that an opening, they're liable to take it.

 

I was a little stunned by how fast everything fell apart. I figured we had it in the bag. The totality of the collapse was brutal and it falls on everyone's shoulders. Overall I do have to sympathize with BBXII; I feel better about the defense than I do about the offense. They flashed potential (especially the DL early on) and showed they could hang with a great offense, but not forever. The offense......if it keeps that up, it's hard to imagine how we'll win against any team that has a dangerous offense to match. It's college football. Good offenses need to carve up defenses.

 

Things fell apart after that Avery missed sack. That was THE turning point of the game. Like the Braxton Miller run a year ago. Something bad happens and this team can't recover. Somehow I imagine Taylor Martinez is to blame for that.

[Count 'Bility]

But what did the offense stop doing? They stopped staying on the field. They didn't just not score, they didn't get a first down.

 

So... the Offense couldn't stay on the field. Why is that an acceptable excuse for the Defense not covering, getting pressure, tackling, or in general playing well?

 

This is just absurd. The WHOLE TEAM fell apart. One side of the ball is not to blame. Baffling. Seriously baffling.

Knapp. I hate to get in the middle of this becuase you are right. It was definitely a team loss. But I really think ByeBye's comments are being a little misconstrued. Hear me out.

 

I think he's basically just providing an argument against the numerious claims that this was on the defense when clearly the offense did do even close to their part either. He's just point it out, not claiming it as THE reason. The lack of offense when the D was playing lights out is a pretty overlooked fact this evening. Beck should known that wasnt gonna hold up for 4 quarters and he had a chance-2 actually-to blow the game WIDE open.

 

This is what's really disappointing. Over the years until today, we have games where we're led by the offense and the defense sucks'. We have games when we're lead by the defense when the offense sucks. We have microcosms of the same within games. From half to half, and at times even quarter to quarter. Hell, possession to possession even. We've started slow but found ways to win. We've started slow and come back to blow teams out. We've started slow and been ran off the field. But today was different. This team literally came out guns a blazin on both sides of the ball. Everything was sharp. We built a 21-3 lead and this young D was in shutdown mode. Now, if we can look at up to that point only and forget about the score, there were a lot of things that were very encouraging. But it's a 4 quarter game. And that's been the issue for 5+ seasons now. One play. One damn play and the whole thing goes south. To me, it's way more than x's and o's and adjustments this and scheme that. This team has psychological issues. They have for a few years now. Just no killer instinct. No excuse we shouldntve had at minimum a 31-3 lead at halftime. The game shouldve been wrapped up by half, but we took the foot off long before then. UCLA didnt make halftime adjustments, they got back in the game long before half. They were in the game at half. Like Wyoming, we had control of the game and took the foot off. This program is in a state right now where we're trying to get back on the map so to speak, and 2 of our first 3 games, we let off with a commanding lead and let the opponent back in it. One to almost beat us, and one knock the livin hell out of us. And this is very concerning, for obvious reasons.

[Minnesota_husker]

This being said, I appreciate what Tommie had to say. I am tired of status Quo. I dont put all blame on Bo.. but at the end of the day, he hires the OC/DC so blame falls to him.

 

Something needs to change or we are going to keep losing like we did today. We were up 21-3 and lost 41-21... THAT IS A PROBLEM.

 

I dont think Bo will like being told to fire his OC/DC and bringing in vets.. so then you fire him. Somehow get Scott Frost in here as our OC and bring in Bohl as our Head coach and a monty Kiffin type Def. coord.

 

That all sounds good on paper. IMHO I think the odds of us changing coaches and ending up better off are really slim.

Mid-season-- yes

 

off season.. I think that if we can bring in the right guys, i think that veteran coaches can help greatly. And it takes pressure off Bo.

 

 

Bringing in new coaches usually does equate to a steep learning curve.

[clyde40]

I don't get why everybody is so upset. All offseason and especially two weeks ago UCLA was going to come in here and put up 700 yards and 70 points.

 

That's what happens when you beat Southern Miss 56-13. Wild expectations and then this. Our reaction would've been a lot different had the Southern Miss game gone like the Wyoming game.

 

I don't think it's a wild expectation to expect your team not to suck it up. ESPECIALLY when we come out 21-3 to start the game. This game is ALL on our coaches and their inability to adjust as needed.

 

Don't you think our expectations, and then our reactions to this game would've been different had we not blown the doors off Southern Miss?

 

I understand what everyone is saying, I really do. I like figuring out the why's and how's of just about everything--it's been what I've been taught and it's a big part of my major.

The hardest part about the game is the fact that we were up 21-3 and let up enough that once we let them back into the game it was over. I would have laughed if yesterday somebody told me we would have been up 21-3 at any point in the game. It was nice to see what this team is capable of and I can't wait until this defense get's some more experience but I wasn't impressed at all with the final results either.

[knapplc]

But what did the offense stop doing? They stopped staying on the field. They didn't just not score, they didn't get a first down.

 

So... the Offense couldn't stay on the field. Why is that an acceptable excuse for the Defense not covering, getting pressure, tackling, or in general playing well?

 

This is just absurd. The WHOLE TEAM fell apart. One side of the ball is not to blame. Baffling. Seriously baffling.

Knapp. I hate to get in the middle of this becuase you are right. It was definitely a team loss. But I really think ByeBye's comments are being a little misconstrued. Hear me out.

 

I think he's basically just providing an argument against the numerious claims that this was on the defense when clearly the offense did do even close to their part either. He's just point it out, not claiming it as THE reason. The lack of offense when the D was playing lights out is a pretty overlooked fact this evening. Beck should known that wasnt gonna hold up for 4 quarters and he had a chance-2 actually-to blow the game WIDE open.

 

This is what's really disappointing. Over the years until today, we have games where we're led by the offense and the defense sucks'. We have games when we're lead by the defense when the offense sucks. We have microcosms of the same within games. From half to half, and at times even quarter to quarter. Hell, possession to possession even. We've started slow but found ways to win. We've started slow and come back to blow teams out. We've started slow and been ran off the field. But today was different. This team literally came out guns a blazin on both sides of the ball. Everything was sharp. We built a 21-3 lead and this young D was in shutdown mode. Now, if we can look at up to that point only and forget about the score, there were a lot of things that were very encouraging. But it's a 4 quarter game. And that's been the issue for 5+ seasons now. One play. One damn play and the whole thing goes south. To me, it's way more than x's and o's and adjustments this and scheme that. This team has psychological issues. They have for a few years now. Just no killer instinct. No excuse we shouldntve had at minimum a 31-3 lead at halftime. The game shouldve been wrapped up by half, but we took the foot off long before then. UCLA didnt make halftime adjustments, they got back in the game long before half. They were in the game at half. Like Wyoming, we had control of the game and took the foot off. This program is in a state right now where we're trying to get back on the map so to speak, and 2 of our first 3 games, we let off with a commanding lead and let the opponent back in it. One to almost beat us, and one knock the livin hell out of us. And this is very concerning, for obvious reasons.

I'm right there with you that both sides of the ball have major issues. I'm simply saying that one side's issues are not to blame for the other side's. That works both ways.