Jump to content
husker98

Observations from the UCLA game and NU football as a whole

Recommended Posts

I went back and spent a lot of time reanalyzing this game as well as seasons prior and I have some points i hope we can discuss without causing a flame war or anything.

 

 

I'll start off gentle by stating i think Tim Beck is the worst thing to ever happen to Taylor Martinez.

 

My reasoning. When one looks at TM over all as a player the first thing you notice is that TM is a gifted runner. We haven't enjoyed a play maker like him at the QB position since Crouch really. And how is Time Beck using him? Well he wants him to throw the ball that's how. It's like taking one of Oregon's running backs and asking him to run right up the gut in the I formation. He won't succeed for long. He belongs in the open field making people miss. To TM's credit he has made the best of it by getting help improving his pass game but in all reality TM's talent sets call for us to be utilizing him in an offense like Oregons, or Nevada's pistol Read option offense. And instead of Running more read option and Belly G option, and power football with our talented I-backs to set up a deadly play action to Bell and Enunwa we ask Taylor to throw the ball into defense's that know whats coming. Taylor doesn't excel at reading and dissecting defenses like Peyton manning or Brady. He is just an Option QB doing his damned best to do what Beck tells him. And it's eerily similar to what Callahan did to Joe Daily in 2004.

 

Our offense in 2010 was run and option heavy and very successful before injuries derailed it. And we trashed a lot of it. Why? Taylor thrived in this offense!

 

And what do we have now? Well we have what you saw last Saturday. We saw, as we have for some time now, and offense that comes to play for a half. Sometimes two if the incompetent play calling doesn't derail their rhythm. We sort of establish an identity running the ball then pull the chain hard and pass, and then we establish an identity there we score some. Then we pull the chain again, and again, and again. And either at some point in the first or as it was in the second half last Saturday we run up the white flag and cease to operate at all, largely due to pathetic play calling, and of course it's usually on the biggest stage.

 

And who losses and looks the worst out of all this? Certainly not Beck, for some reason he always walks away clean. No instead the option QB and the offense that did as it was told gets trashed along with Bo.

 

But the biggest "victim". That would be our young defense, that played it's heart out. Instead of chewing clock and giving them time to rest and regroup. Beck repeatedly threw them back out there with his pathetic offensive play calling. Putting all the pressure on this young untested defense to make a play to get us back in the game.

 

You can only do this so long and not get burned. We got burned, and bad. UCLA is a great team, we had a chance to beat them, Tim Beck in my mind squandered that opportunity due to his incompetence.

 

Tim has called some good games, but last Saturday was bad, he drug the whole team down.

 

What are your thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow...a Nebraska fan admitting that the Bruins are a good team! (I won't call them great until after the Stanford and Oregon games.)

 

Almost all posters here believe, or at least write, that if Nebraska had only done things differently the outcome would have been different. I think Martinez should have run more and that the defense should have blitzed a little more. But I think that would have only narrowed the margin of defeat. As they say, speed kills, and I think the Bruins just had more speed than Nebraska and the Bruin coaching staff has schemed to take advantage of that speed.

 

Nebraska can still have a good year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll start off gentle by stating i think Tim Beck is the worst thing to ever happen to Taylor Martinez.

 

My reasoning. When one looks at TM over all as a player the first thing you notice is that TM is a gifted runner. We haven't enjoyed a play maker like him at the QB position since Crouch really. And how is Time Beck using him?

I think Time Beck was using him that way because he can't run, because of his turf toe.

 

In which case we probably shouldn't even be playing our run-first QB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that we don't run our modern QBs because they get hurt. It is very hard for a running QB to stay healthy and survive in this league. TM is proof of that. He has been banged up since his freshman year with one injury or another.

 

Now some of that is due to the fact that he gets hit on every single play (Linemen anyone)? But I will agree that all too often Beck seems to ask TM to do things that TM just isn't capable of doing and that gets us into trouble.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow...a Nebraska fan admitting that the Bruins are a good team! (I won't call them great until after the Stanford and Oregon games.)

 

Almost all posters here believe, or at least write, that if Nebraska had only done things differently the outcome would have been different. I think Martinez should have run more and that the defense should have blitzed a little more. But I think that would have only narrowed the margin of defeat.

 

Nebraska up 21-3 has only to keep doing what it was doing to win that game. You sound as if this UCLA victory was inevitable at all times in the game - and it very clearly wasn't.

 

Down 18, UCLA needed Nebraska to collapse to win that game. Nebraska obliged.

 

This mantra you keep selling that UCLA's athletes were clearly superior to Nebraska's is false. The teams are pretty evenly matched athletically.

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow...a Nebraska fan admitting that the Bruins are a good team! (I won't call them great until after the Stanford and Oregon games.)

 

Almost all posters here believe, or at least write, that if Nebraska had only done things differently the outcome would have been different. I think Martinez should have run more and that the defense should have blitzed a little more. But I think that would have only narrowed the margin of defeat.

 

Nebraska up 21-3 has only to keep doing what it was doing to win that game. You sound as if this UCLA victory was inevitable at all times in the game - and it very clearly wasn't.

 

Down 18, UCLA needed Nebraska to collapse to win that game. Nebraska obliged.

 

This mantra you keep selling that UCLA's athletes were clearly superior to Nebraska's is false. The teams are pretty evenly matched athletically.

Exactly.

 

UCLA didnt and doesnt have superior athletes to NU. They are right about even across the board. UCLA is a good team but they aren't as superior as Bruins fans beleive them to be.

 

I wish your team luck the rest of the year but the arrogance is getting a bit old.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TM is a gifted runner. We haven't enjoyed a play maker like him at the QB position since Crouch really.

 

Thing about Taylor is he really isnt a gifted runner, he is gifted with SPEED! If you watch him run, he is great at finding creases and exploiting them up the field with his speed, but he isnt really a make you miss, juke you out of your shorts, lateral runner.

In fact it makes me nuts that half the time it seems like he just runs right into a defenders chest instead of trying to make a move.

And lets stop with the "we should run more option" crap, he isn't good at running it, period.

 

I will agree that Beck has sucked this year at calling plays to let him exploit the defense with his speed, but who knows how much this turf toe has had to do with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow...a Nebraska fan admitting that the Bruins are a good team! (I won't call them great until after the Stanford and Oregon games.)

 

Almost all posters here believe, or at least write, that if Nebraska had only done things differently the outcome would have been different. I think Martinez should have run more and that the defense should have blitzed a little more. But I think that would have only narrowed the margin of defeat. As they say, speed kills, and I think the Bruins just had more speed than Nebraska and the Bruin coaching staff has schemed to take advantage of that speed.

 

Nebraska can still have a good year.

 

Wow really? I don't think anyone on here would not say that UCLA is a good team, heck I think they are. Every game hinges on a couple of plays here and there so did this one. UCLA won and is a good team, but if you think everyone is going to sit here and say they were just that much better you are crazy.

 

I was going to start a new thread but saw this one. Finally watch the second half of the game. Had to go to soccer game and when I say the score didn't feel like watching it.

 

Anyway, most on this board have been talking about how the offense went 3 and out all second half. When the game really hinged on the first series of the second half. NU got the ball and actually picked up a couple of first downs before they punted from UCLA 45 or so. If they get some points there who knows. TM completely missed Bell being basically uncovered on his throw to Long for the first down. Vogal on hail varsity mentions this. It would have been an easy pitch and catch for a TD. That happens its 28-10 and who knows.

 

BP has this team wound too tight. He is right he puts too much pressure on them to be perfect. That is why they play so tight in big games anymore. It really is that simple but it is also a hard thing to correct when it has been ingrained for 6 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow...a Nebraska fan admitting that the Bruins are a good team! (I won't call them great until after the Stanford and Oregon games.)

 

Almost all posters here believe, or at least write, that if Nebraska had only done things differently the outcome would have been different. I think Martinez should have run more and that the defense should have blitzed a little more. But I think that would have only narrowed the margin of defeat.

 

Nebraska up 21-3 has only to keep doing what it was doing to win that game. You sound as if this UCLA victory was inevitable at all times in the game - and it very clearly wasn't.

 

Down 18, UCLA needed Nebraska to collapse to win that game. Nebraska obliged.

 

This mantra you keep selling that UCLA's athletes were clearly superior to Nebraska's is false. The teams are pretty evenly matched athletically.

Exactly.

 

UCLA didnt and doesnt have superior athletes to NU. They are right about even across the board. UCLA is a good team but they aren't as superior as Bruins fans beleive them to be.

 

I wish your team luck the rest of the year but the arrogance is getting a bit old.

 

To go along with the OP, one area UCLA is obviously superior is coaching. I would trade Nebraska's entire staff for theirs.

 

If I took the time to look through the newspaper archives, I could find at minimum 3 times that Beck has apologized for not doing what he should have done during a game. Maybe he is Captain Hindsight, but it is getting old. Watson 2.0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with this A LOT!! I was venting with a friend about this exact point!

 

The victim was the Defense! What a shame that they take the blame. Should they have stopped UCLA better? Yes. But granted, one touchdown was a perfect pass to a very well covered receiver.

 

Take this scenario. We have ONE good drive in the 3rd Quarter. Just one, that's it. We score a TD. We're talking a score of 28-34, if things continued on the similar path and that one drive was just an anomaly of the rest of the second half. One drive does that. Sure the comeback still looks bad, but I still say the blame is on the offense. One good drive for us, takes one good drive from UCLA. Time of possession is a very important thing.

 

How many 3 and outs did we have in the 3rd quarter? I don't even remember! One too many for a defense to get slightly rested. I mean, they had to be ready perpetually through the game.

 

My thoughts during the game was "why aren't we running the ball?!?!" Oh, they were loading the box? This is Nebraska, we accept that challenge. Imani Cross will be more than happy to accept that challenge. Instead, we threw the ball. All they had to do was kept loading the box and wait until we got predictable. The 3 and outs were easy to come by then.

 

Also, another rant before I leave... There was a 3rd and long (9 or 8) where Taylor threw a ball to #__. He was open, and would have gotten the first down. He dropped it. I don't doubt #__'s abilities, nor do I curse him for dropping the ball, I am sure he feels terrible about it. The point I am trying to make is that it's 3rd and long and we had gone 3 and out every drive up until that point (if my memory serves me correctly). Why in the heck aren't our #1's out there?!?!? That ball belongs to Enunwa or Bell. Not #__. Nothing against #__, this is not an attack on him. 3rd and Long. All your best players HAVE to be out there! (I opted out of putting the players number on there, this isn't about him)

 

Anyway, I actually love the scheme, and concepts. The creative option game was so awesome to see the first year! But now, I don't see it. Although the shifting and motions in the first half of the game was great to see also (great to see UCLA trying to catch up on what to do next), but what happened to that? Where did that go? It was gone in the second half.

 

I don't blame any players on this, nor the defense (fully) for the loss. The play calls on offense were terrible in the second half. I am not calling for anyone's head or anything, I just want to play better and for the coordinators to put the team in the best position.

 

Anyway, I always try not to rant, but once I saw someone that agreed with me, I have to chime in... Please do not have a smart remark unless it's accompanied with a hilarious GIF...

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nebraska as a whole.....don,t seem to recurit well.. the new kids coming along today don,t look at nu as a top notch football program, at least the 5 star studs...i recently looked at 23 unsigned 5 star kids, and not one even had nebraska on there list.....recruiting is huge in college football,,,cannot recruit the good kids, you are just another iowa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow...a Nebraska fan admitting that the Bruins are a good team! (I won't call them great until after the Stanford and Oregon games.)

 

Almost all posters here believe, or at least write, that if Nebraska had only done things differently the outcome would have been different. I think Martinez should have run more and that the defense should have blitzed a little more. But I think that would have only narrowed the margin of defeat.

 

Nebraska up 21-3 has only to keep doing what it was doing to win that game. You sound as if this UCLA victory was inevitable at all times in the game - and it very clearly wasn't.

 

Down 18, UCLA needed Nebraska to collapse to win that game. Nebraska obliged.

 

This mantra you keep selling that UCLA's athletes were clearly superior to Nebraska's is false. The teams are pretty evenly matched athletically.

Exactly.

 

UCLA didnt and doesnt have superior athletes to NU. They are right about even across the board. UCLA is a good team but they aren't as superior as Bruins fans beleive them to be.

 

I wish your team luck the rest of the year but the arrogance is getting a bit old.

 

To go along with the OP, one area UCLA is obviously superior is coaching. I would trade Nebraska's entire staff for theirs.

 

If I took the time to look through the newspaper archives, I could find at minimum 3 times that Beck has apologized for not doing what he should have done during a game. Maybe he is Captain Hindsight, but it is getting old. Watson 2.0

You think he should blame the players instead? C'mon. Either way you'd be pissed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Pelini released the tape himself to divert the fans' attention away from what they saw in the UCLA game...

 

...which turned out to be a pretty good strategy, if it were only true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow...a Nebraska fan admitting that the Bruins are a good team! (I won't call them great until after the Stanford and Oregon games.)

 

Almost all posters here believe, or at least write, that if Nebraska had only done things differently the outcome would have been different. I think Martinez should have run more and that the defense should have blitzed a little more. But I think that would have only narrowed the margin of defeat.

 

Nebraska up 21-3 has only to keep doing what it was doing to win that game. You sound as if this UCLA victory was inevitable at all times in the game - and it very clearly wasn't.

 

Down 18, UCLA needed Nebraska to collapse to win that game. Nebraska obliged.

 

This mantra you keep selling that UCLA's athletes were clearly superior to Nebraska's is false. The teams are pretty evenly matched athletically.

Exactly.

 

UCLA didnt and doesnt have superior athletes to NU. They are right about even across the board. UCLA is a good team but they aren't as superior as Bruins fans beleive them to be.

 

I wish your team luck the rest of the year but the arrogance is getting a bit old.

 

To go along with the OP, one area UCLA is obviously superior is coaching. I would trade Nebraska's entire staff for theirs.

 

If I took the time to look through the newspaper archives, I could find at minimum 3 times that Beck has apologized for not doing what he should have done during a game. Maybe he is Captain Hindsight, but it is getting old. Watson 2.0

You think he should blame the players instead? C'mon. Either way you'd be pissed.

 

He was apologized for his play calling and scheme. Like going away from what was working. Nothing to do with the players making plays.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TM is a gifted runner. We haven't enjoyed a play maker like him at the QB position since Crouch really.

 

Thing about Taylor is he really isnt a gifted runner, he is gifted with SPEED! If you watch him run, he is great at finding creases and exploiting them up the field with his speed, but he isnt really a make you miss, juke you out of your shorts, lateral runner.

In fact it makes me nuts that half the time it seems like he just runs right into a defenders chest instead of trying to make a move.

And lets stop with the "we should run more option" crap, he isn't good at running it, period.

 

 

Yep, agree 100%

Been saying that for several years

Being a straight line fast guy DOESNT always mean that is going to make you a great football player

There is speed and there is football speed, which is the ability to make people miss, change directions on a dime without losing acceleration and running through people

TM looks so awkward when he runs into contact

When he finds a crease and can run in a straight line-watch out

He doesnt make people miss in the open field or the pocket

Unfortunately those type of creases rarely exist for long against top teams

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nebraska as a whole.....don,t seem to recurit well.. the new kids coming along today don,t look at nu as a top notch football program, at least the 5 star studs...i recently looked at 23 unsigned 5 star kids, and not one even had nebraska on there list.....recruiting is huge in college football,,,cannot recruit the good kids, you are just another iowa

Stop with this crap. NU has never recruited better than they have in the last 4 years. T.O. never had more than one top 10 class. Aside from one year due to a small class Bo has been top 15-20 the last 4 years. That is about on par with what T.O. did and better than Call "dumpster fire starter" ahan.

 

If your going to put this out there, give us some facts to back it up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know if Tim Beck is the worst thing that ever happened to TM as OP mentioned. But that fake read option pass to Kenny Bell is stupid. Not only does the corner just stay his ground to make a tackle, but the play brings the defense to the sideline where they throw it. That play should never be called again. It's stupid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the other hand, how hard is it to be multiple? Either complete a forward pass or run the ball. Different formations, same concept. Throw or Run. The head scratcher is passing on third and short following a couple of good runs. Or running on 3rd and long. Other than that, the fellas need to make some plays. It's just passing / blocking / running. These receivers are just waiting to make plays.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow...a Nebraska fan admitting that the Bruins are a good team! (I won't call them great until after the Stanford and Oregon games.)

 

Almost all posters here believe, or at least write, that if Nebraska had only done things differently the outcome would have been different. I think Martinez should have run more and that the defense should have blitzed a little more. But I think that would have only narrowed the margin of defeat.

 

Nebraska up 21-3 has only to keep doing what it was doing to win that game. You sound as if this UCLA victory was inevitable at all times in the game - and it very clearly wasn't.

 

Down 18, UCLA needed Nebraska to collapse to win that game. Nebraska obliged.

 

This mantra you keep selling that UCLA's athletes were clearly superior to Nebraska's is false. The teams are pretty evenly matched athletically.

Exactly.

 

UCLA didnt and doesnt have superior athletes to NU. They are right about even across the board. UCLA is a good team but they aren't as superior as Bruins fans beleive them to be.

 

I wish your team luck the rest of the year but the arrogance is getting a bit old.

 

To go along with the OP, one area UCLA is obviously superior is coaching. I would trade Nebraska's entire staff for theirs.

 

If I took the time to look through the newspaper archives, I could find at minimum 3 times that Beck has apologized for not doing what he should have done during a game. Maybe he is Captain Hindsight, but it is getting old. Watson 2.0

 

Agree completely. I'm at a loss trying to understand why it isn't until after the games he realizes this...or how he can't seem to learn from his mistakes and thus keeps making the same ones in game after game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did not say that UCLA players were superior than Nebraska's - or at least I did not mean to. What I meant is that at the key positions I thought the UCLA players were faster than the Nebraska ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did not say that UCLA players were superior than Nebraska's - or at least I did not mean to. What I meant is that at the key positions I thought the UCLA players were faster than the Nebraska ones.

 

Which would you rather have? Nebraska's players with the UCLA coaching staff, or the UCLA players with Nebraska's coaching staff?

 

It's really starting to hit home with me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow...a Nebraska fan admitting that the Bruins are a good team! (I won't call them great until after the Stanford and Oregon games.)

 

Almost all posters here believe, or at least write, that if Nebraska had only done things differently the outcome would have been different. I think Martinez should have run more and that the defense should have blitzed a little more. But I think that would have only narrowed the margin of defeat.

 

Nebraska up 21-3 has only to keep doing what it was doing to win that game. You sound as if this UCLA victory was inevitable at all times in the game - and it very clearly wasn't.

 

Down 18, UCLA needed Nebraska to collapse to win that game. Nebraska obliged.

 

This mantra you keep selling that UCLA's athletes were clearly superior to Nebraska's is false. The teams are pretty evenly matched athletically.

Exactly.

 

UCLA didnt and doesnt have superior athletes to NU. They are right about even across the board. UCLA is a good team but they aren't as superior as Bruins fans beleive them to be.

 

I wish your team luck the rest of the year but the arrogance is getting a bit old.

Arrogance? If I say that I think the Bruins were faster than Nebraska, that's arrogance? Wow! Let's put it this way: if the Bruins were not faster how were they able to score 28 points in one quarter? Wasn't that due to the speed of both the Bruin defense and offense?

 

I stand by what I said - I think that the Bruins were faster than Nebraska.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow...a Nebraska fan admitting that the Bruins are a good team! (I won't call them great until after the Stanford and Oregon games.)

 

Almost all posters here believe, or at least write, that if Nebraska had only done things differently the outcome would have been different. I think Martinez should have run more and that the defense should have blitzed a little more. But I think that would have only narrowed the margin of defeat.

 

Nebraska up 21-3 has only to keep doing what it was doing to win that game. You sound as if this UCLA victory was inevitable at all times in the game - and it very clearly wasn't.

 

Down 18, UCLA needed Nebraska to collapse to win that game. Nebraska obliged.

 

This mantra you keep selling that UCLA's athletes were clearly superior to Nebraska's is false. The teams are pretty evenly matched athletically.

Exactly.

 

UCLA didnt and doesnt have superior athletes to NU. They are right about even across the board. UCLA is a good team but they aren't as superior as Bruins fans beleive them to be.

 

I wish your team luck the rest of the year but the arrogance is getting a bit old.

 

I stand by what I said - I think that the Bruins were faster than Nebraska.

This

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow...a Nebraska fan admitting that the Bruins are a good team! (I won't call them great until after the Stanford and Oregon games.)

 

Almost all posters here believe, or at least write, that if Nebraska had only done things differently the outcome would have been different. I think Martinez should have run more and that the defense should have blitzed a little more. But I think that would have only narrowed the margin of defeat.

 

Nebraska up 21-3 has only to keep doing what it was doing to win that game. You sound as if this UCLA victory was inevitable at all times in the game - and it very clearly wasn't.

 

Down 18, UCLA needed Nebraska to collapse to win that game. Nebraska obliged.

 

This mantra you keep selling that UCLA's athletes were clearly superior to Nebraska's is false. The teams are pretty evenly matched athletically.

Exactly.

 

UCLA didnt and doesnt have superior athletes to NU. They are right about even across the board. UCLA is a good team but they aren't as superior as Bruins fans beleive them to be.

 

I wish your team luck the rest of the year but the arrogance is getting a bit old.

 

I stand by what I said - I think that the Bruins were faster than Nebraska.

This is absolutely false

 

Fixed it for you.

 

Anyways, no way did UCLA have the faster team. Why can I say this? We were up 21-3. If UCLA had superior athletes they would have came into Memorial Stadium and whooped us from the beginning. Instead, here is what happened:

 

Drive 1: 6 plays, 37 yards, 2:15 = PUNT

Drive 2: 3 plays, 8 yards, 0:56 = INTERCEPTION

Drive 3: 8 plays, 49 yards, 2:32 = FIELD GOAL

Drive 4: 4 plays, -4 yards, 1:33 = TURNOVER ON DOWNS

Drive 5: 8 plays, 36 yards, 2:33 = MISSED FIELD GOAL

 

Total: 29 plays, 127 yards, 9:49 = 3 POINTS

 

Those were your first 5 drives of the game, and they lasted until about halftime. Comparatively, Nebraska's first 5 drives:

 

Drive 1: 3 plays, 3 yards, 0:34 = PUNT

Drive 2: 4 plays, 28 yards, 1:30 = PASSING TOUCHDOWN

Drive 3: 17 plays, 92 yards, 6:42 = PASSING TOUCHDOWN

Drive 4: 10 plays, 36 yards, 5:27 = PUNT

Drive 5: 2 plays, 26 yards, 0:38 = PASSING TOUCHDOWN

 

Total: 36 plays, 175 yards, 14:51 = 21 POINTS

 

Nebraska was athletically equal to or better than UCLA on Saturday. Mentally though, when things started turning south, it seemed the whole team went into a shell and never came out. Last week could have turned ugly for the Bruins, it really could have and should have. But UCLA fought and fought and fought, and they deserved to win the game when it was all said and done.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×