Thoughts on Bowl Game

[HuskerNBigD]

 

I was at the game, and the Vols were definitely happy to be there. It was a home game for them, their seniors were cranked, and the Tennessee fans are vocal and enthusiastic. I think our whole problem was a distinct lack of veteran team leadership and the remaining Pelini players just didn't contribute noticeably.

 

Pelini players?

Aren't they playing in a championship game next weekend?

Yeah, FCS. but let's keep pumpin that chest. Get a god damn grip.

[zoogs]

I really don't think this one means too much. We were down way too many guys and lost some more early in the game. It was still a subpar showing, but not one where I'm really concerned about the long-term trendlines. This was the Vols' day.

[Vitalis Jackson]

I really don't think this one means too much. We were down way too many guys and lost some more early in the game. It was still a subpar showing, but not one where I'm really concerned about the long-term trendlines. This was the Vols' day.

this.

[Redux]

QB- With little reliable depth, we did about as good as could be expected. We still sit on personnel that couldn't grasp this offense 100%, that became clear down the stretch and QB suffered because of it.

 

RB- Meh, pretty unimpressed. 61 yards total is sh#t. Newby went down early, so what? We had 2 more than capable backs behind him and still couldn't figure out running straight at the line doesn't work every frickin time.

 

WR- Brandon Reiley made my day. So glad he finally had that big game, just wish it coulda been a win. The rest were servicable I guess.

 

TE- I really expected more from this spot in the bowl.

 

OL- Yeesh. Fyfe gives a 110% of what he could and they did him no favors.

[Mavric]

I really don't think this one means too much. We were down way too many guys and lost some more early in the game. It was still a subpar showing, but not one where I'm really concerned about the long-term trendlines. This was the Vols' day.

This is what is interesting to me about everyone suddenly jumping on the talent bandwagon again. We were missing our top three players for the entire game. Then we lost possibly our fourth best in the middle of the second quarter. Yet we were still in a seven point game with 10 minutes to play. For as bad as we looked, we were still fairly competitive with a team that everyone seems to think was significantly more talented than we were.

 

It doesn't seem to make much sense for people to complain about all the injuries then basically ignore them when jumping on the talent bandwagon. You can never have enough talent. We need to get more. But everyone is acting like we couldn't even be competitive in the games we played with the talent we have. I don't think that is particularly true.

 

Everyone jumped on the talent bandwagon after the Purdue game last year. Oddly enough that pretty much went away after Michigan State and UCLA. Now it's back again. Kind of the flavor-of-the-week I guess. I don't know too many teams that could lose their best four players and not expect a significant drop off.

[BigRedBuster]

Agree Mav.

 

Especially when you look at next year at some key positions.

[zoogs]

I do think if we had a lot more talent and depth, we wouldn't have so much of a drop off. But yeah, generally, I agree.

 

Another article I read made a good point: yes, Nebraska missed a ton of its best players. But some of the worst-performing units on this day came from units that were healthy. Obviously there's some cause-and-effect to figure in as well.

 

Anyway, it's not a radical observation that Nebraska doesn't have the talent to hang with the Alabamas of the world, and it makes sense to hold that up as a standard. I don't think we'll get there without explicitly making that the goal. Though we might never get there regardless.

[Mavric]

I do think if we had a lot more talent and depth, we wouldn't have so much of a drop off. But yeah, generally, I agree.

 

Another article I read made a good point: yes, Nebraska missed a ton of its best players. But some of the worst-performing units on this day came from units that were healthy. Obviously there's some cause-and-effect to figure in as well.

 

Anyway, it's not a radical observation that Nebraska doesn't have the talent to hang with the Alabamas of the world, and it makes sense to hold that up as a standard. I don't think we'll get there without explicitly making that the goal. Though we might never get there regardless.

 

If you're talking about the Linebackers as worst-performing, they were healthy but they're where we have some of our hightest-rated recruits. Banderas, Rose-Ivey and Newby (injured, but people have been questioning the LBs for awhile) were all four-star guys and among the highest-rated guys in the class. So it might not be totally just having the talent. It can also be what we're doing with the talent that we have.

 

I agree about where the bar should be set. At this point, just winning the division appears to be where we need to get first. Which is kind of sad. But getting to the CCG and having a chance win that championship needs to be first. A lot of things need to get better before we set our sights higher than that.

[zoogs]

So it might not be totally just having the talent. It can also be what we're doing with the talent that we have.

Yeah, it's unclear to me whether Banker is good enough of a DC to get to the heights they're aspiring to. He's competent and I like him, though.

 

I think we're poised within striking distance of a CCG appearance any given year. It's not a bad place to be, but it's still a solid stone's throw away from being division favorites, which should be the goal.

 

I was referring to LBs and the OL, which really had a hell of a rough day. I'm not upset that right now we're a 9-4, borderline Top 25 quality team, but it's where we are and where we've been.