**** What did we learn - Sparty edition ****

[Eagle1]

 

I learned (after this game) that a bunch of Husker fans can't tell what really happened on the field, during the game and simply rely on the final score to tell them all they want to know. They see only a five point loss and it looks pretty good, if that's all the deeper you look. I guess these are the "at the end of the day" people. I never did care for that phrase. I like seeing how the result was obtained and it would be nice if that result was the result of being prepared, properly coached, and acting and playing like the team knew what the hell to do.

 

I guess it makes for exciting games, where anything, no matter if it's deserved or not, is possible. I'd prefer a team that earns it for a full four quarters, not one that plays like ass for 3.5 quarters and then the other team takes their foot off our neck and makes it appear to be closer than it ever really was. The lack of quit in this team is an awesome thing but this loss is not an indicator of anything good. It is simply evidence that we were once again outclassed on a big stage. Luckily many around the country will only see the final score. It's sad that "knowledgeable" Husker fans who actually watched the ineptitude, use that score as some evidence that things are somehow different/better.

Without DPE heroics, it is not even a close game.

 

Without Davisons miracle catch back in the day, we don't win a title. Don't remember anyone complaining about how that ended up. Seriously, football is a game of plays, some big, some not so big. I couldn't care less what made it a close game. Without a phenomenal catch by one of their receivers you could take away one of their scores too. So lets subtract any and all great plays, only count the average run of the mill plays, subtract corresponding scores resulting from those plays, and that's the real score. Um yeah, ok. And not to mention for most of the game our guys played uninspired. Now, there are some who blame that directly on the coaches, but those that do have never coached or know little about it. You can jump up and down, do cartwheels, and yell all you want sometimes and it won't make the players play hard and that is at all levels. We've all seen uninspired effort by teams before and then at some point later they'll play inspired leaving everyone wondering if it's the same team. That is not on the coaches. They are not cheer leaders and anyone thinking differently, as I said has either not coached or not coached long enough, or has not coached a team or program that is trying to get rid of old ways and rise again. Argue all you want, stupid points won't change that fact, but the only ones that will get it are people who do coach or have in those situations. Our guys' effort and attitude is solely on the players. Now, were there bad calls and plays by coaches? Sure, as is true of every game and I'm sure they were frustrated with themselves about them too. And to add one more, if the game was in dry weather and especially on turf, we win. Our speed and ellusiveness at several positions would have changed things.

[JJ Husker]

 

 

I learned (after this game) that a bunch of Husker fans can't tell what really happened on the field, during the game and simply rely on the final score to tell them all they want to know. They see only a five point loss and it looks pretty good, if that's all the deeper you look. I guess these are the "at the end of the day" people. I never did care for that phrase. I like seeing how the result was obtained and it would be nice if that result was the result of being prepared, properly coached, and acting and playing like the team knew what the hell to do.

 

I guess it makes for exciting games, where anything, no matter if it's deserved or not, is possible. I'd prefer a team that earns it for a full four quarters, not one that plays like ass for 3.5 quarters and then the other team takes their foot off our neck and makes it appear to be closer than it ever really was. The lack of quit in this team is an awesome thing but this loss is not an indicator of anything good. It is simply evidence that we were once again outclassed on a big stage. Luckily many around the country will only see the final score. It's sad that "knowledgeable" Husker fans who actually watched the ineptitude, use that score as some evidence that things are somehow different/better.

Without DPE heroics, it is not even a close game.

 

Without Davisons miracle catch back in the day, we don't win a title. Don't remember anyone complaining about how that ended up. Seriously, football is a game of plays, some big, some not so big. I couldn't care less what made it a close game. Without a phenomenal catch by one of their receivers you could take away one of their scores too. So lets subtract any and all great plays, only count the average run of the mill plays, subtract corresponding scores resulting from those plays, and that's the real score. Um yeah, ok.

 

Sure, that works for the final result of any single game. All the plays count, big, small, good, bad, average, whatever. It doesn't matter how you win, if you win. BUT the problem is you can't, or rather shouldn't, make a living winning games that way. It may be a fine line but having a good game plan- adjusting it as necessary, executing, and playing the game right is a much preferable way to win games IMO. Teams that leave it up to a few big plays, last second heroics, or the other team imploding would have a much lower success rate I would think. I think that is where the criticism of having to rely on those types of plays comes from- at least it is for me.

[Mavric]

I've been a big Mitchell supporter for three years but he really didn't have a good game. Some of it was good plays by their receivers but he didn't tackle or cover well and he totally gave up on the reverse that scored a TD. Terrible effort by he and Cooper on that play.

[Danny Bateman]

I've been a big Mitchell supporter for three years but he really didn't have a good game. Some of it was good plays by their receivers but he didn't tackle or cover well and he totally gave up on the reverse that scored a TD. Terrible effort by he and Cooper on that play.

 

Cooper is a strong candidate for most disappointing player so far. Bando's not going down without a fight though.

[Mavric]

 

I've been a big Mitchell supporter for three years but he really didn't have a good game. Some of it was good plays by their receivers but he didn't tackle or cover well and he totally gave up on the reverse that scored a TD. Terrible effort by he and Cooper on that play.

 

Cooper is a strong candidate for most disappointing player so far. Bando's not going down without a fight though.

 

 

I've not been a Cooper fan for some time. I was looking for a Gerry/Alexander tandem since the middle of last season but obviously that didn't work out. With all the flak Bando gets for being slow, I'm pretty surprised that I've not seen any of the same complaints from Cooper.

 

I said in the spring that Cooper is slightly above average but Alexander and Gerry are game-changers. Gerry supposedly wouldn't have started until Alexander took himself out, though I claimed he would have started chipping away at Cooper's snaps as the season wore on.. Now, halfway through the season, he's our leading tackler with 37 including four TFLs, 3 QB hurries, 1 INT, 1 INT called back, 1 pass breakup and one forced fumble. Cooper has 25 tackles, no TFLs, 1 QB hurry, 1 INT (a gift on a desperation heave as he fell on his butt), no pass breakups and no forced fumbles.

[lo country]

 

 

I've been a big Mitchell supporter for three years but he really didn't have a good game. Some of it was good plays by their receivers but he didn't tackle or cover well and he totally gave up on the reverse that scored a TD. Terrible effort by he and Cooper on that play.

 

Cooper is a strong candidate for most disappointing player so far. Bando's not going down without a fight though.

 

 

I've not been a Cooper fan for some time. I was looking for a Gerry/Alexander tandem since the middle of last season but obviously that didn't work out. With all the flak Bando gets for being slow, I'm pretty surprised that I've not seen any of the same complaints from Cooper.

 

I said in the spring that Cooper is slightly above average but Alexander and Gerry are game-changers. Gerry supposedly wouldn't have started until Alexander took himself out, though I claimed he would have started chipping away at Cooper's snaps as the season wore on.. Now, halfway through the season, he's our leading tackler with 37 including four TFLs, 3 QB hurries, 1 INT, 1 INT called back, 1 pass breakup and one forced fumble. Cooper has 25 tackles, no TFLs, 1 QB hurry, 1 INT (a gift on a desperation heave as he fell on his butt), no pass breakups and no forced fumbles.

 

6 games in, I agree that had Leroy continued on the path from last season that he and Gerry would now be the starting safeties.