Why It's Not as Bad as It Feels

[jsneb83]

33 minutes ago, MountainMan said:

In 2017 UCF lost 15 fumbles and ints combined to gaining 32. I don’t know if 15 is “a lot” but I do know we are on pace for over 25 for the year (and yes I know “on pace is a somewhat silly stat)

 

I’m not looking to argue with you or anyone. I’m just finding humor in people telling everyone why this is more or less fine when any other coach wearing the N would have a lot of unease hovering around him. 

 

Every Nebraska fan is a Scott Frost fan. But Frost the coach has had his cape ripped off so far and it’s a little curious if not disturbing. 

In 2016 (Frost's first year), UCF had 25 turnovers and forced 26 for a +1 margin. They also had 8 turnovers in their first three games. Perhaps people are being a little unfair comparing this team to the 2017 UCF team.

[jsneb83]

Some 2016 Rankings for UCF (Again, Frost's first year):

PPG: 66th

Total Offense: 113th

Turnovers: 103rd

Opp. PPG: 42nd

Total Defense: 39th

Opp. Turnovers: 16th

Penalties: 99th

Penalty YPG: 71st

[Nebfanatic]

2 minutes ago, jsneb83 said:

Some 2016 Rankings for UCF (Again, Frost's first year):

PPG: 66th

Total Offense: 113th

Turnovers: 103rd

Opp. PPG: 42nd

Total Defense: 39th

Opp. Turnovers: 16th

Penalties: 99th

Penalty YPG: 71st

We will eclipse these numbers imo especially on offense given AM starts most games

[krc1995]

51 minutes ago, Nebfanatic said:

We will eclipse these numbers imo especially on offense given AM starts most games

better weight our schedule into your prediction. 

[Nebfanatic]

6 minutes ago, krc1995 said:

better weight our schedule into your prediction. 

I mean yeah all adjusted to per game. Don't think we beat all of those marks but both PPG marks should be attainable and given the conference we play in I like our chances for total defense as well.

 

Edit: Total offense too. 113th is really bad, and Martinez is a weapon. 

[Hunter94]

2 hours ago, Nebfanatic said:

We will eclipse these numbers imo especially on offense given AM starts most games

don't you think its about time to withdraw from the UCF comparisons?  what does any of this prove??

[The Dude]

6 hours ago, MountainMan said:

3.) needlessly spent your offseason taking cheap shots at the previous staff

 

I didn't really care for that either.   But, if you're going to do it you better make damn sure you don't lose to a middling PAC-12 team and a Sun Belt team right out of the gate.  Not a good look.

[CharBroiled]

We're 0-2. We've lost to a PAC-12 team where we made mistakes while trying to make plays, and a PAC-12 team which looks as if it will have a solid season. The second loss was to a squad which went into Tiger Stadium and beat LSU on the road and finished 11-2.
 

This team is different defensively, it's trying to fly to the football and play with an intensity which was lacking for the last several years. Unfortunately, the previous regime had instilled an apathetic attitude and this doesn't change overnight or through spring camps. It will give up some big plays and will be out of position as the current staff tries to atone for the mistakes of the past.

The offense has shown at times what it's capable of as it continues to improve. Unfortunately, Bunch missed some reads and obviously had some jitters in a first start. I'm sure Frost tried to make things as simple as possible to use Bunch's skill set.

I think the best analogy of this whole process is when you rebuild a golf swing and stay committed to the process. The quick fix lessons seem to work for a bit, but sooner than later you go back to the bad habits/old swing which you've used for years. The process will see regression at times, but there will be flashes of the new style/swing. Soon the flashes are more consistent, and after time, it's all muscle memory and the swing has been completely rebuilt.

[ladyhawke]

9 hours ago, Mavric said:

Obviously things haven't worked out well so far.

 

But we are actually doing a lot of things well.  It's mostly that the few things we aren't doing well are having a huge impact on the games.

 

Yes, those things need to be fixed.  But I think we're actually playing a lot better than the results show - as Frost said.

 

Here are the stats to back it up:

 

We are #43 in the country in Yards per Game.  Not great but we were #3 in the country after one game and took a nose dive when he had to play our backup QB.  But we are #103 in the country in Points per Game.  That's a 60 rank difference between how our offense is moving the ball and how we're scoring.  That is the second-worst rank difference in the nation (Purdue is 67 spots worse).  If we can keep moving the ball like that, the points will come.

 

And the crazy thing is it's almost the exact same story on defense.  We are #39 in the country in Yards Allowed per game.  Again, not great.  But we are #90 in the country in Points Allowed per Game.  That's 51 spots worse and that is the worst difference in the country.  

 

Points are obviously what wins and loses games.  But I've long said that yards are a better indication of future success.  Points can be fluky - special teams and defensive TDs come and go, especially on a small sample size.  And turnovers can change field position in a hurry.  But if you're good in the the yards categories - or, in our case, much better than the points have shown - chances are things will even out.

 

I think we'll see a regression to the mean going forward.  Which in this case is a good thing for us.  Maybe not this weekend as we play our toughest opponent so far.  But it will show up soon.

Ah! The voice of reason.  Thank you Mavric.  I've hesitated to write on the board until the dust settled.  Perhaps we should all take a step back and see what's really going on here:

1.  Scott never pretended to be 'god'-The fans just pushed all of that 'He can walk on the water' crap not Scott.  From the beginning he has been asking for help from ALL of us.

2.  We have a VERY green team.  Some of these boys have never played in a place like Nebraska before.  The players that have been playing for Riley were in such sorry shape that they have literally had to start over all over again.

3.  We have an entirely new scheme.  For anyone to expect these boys to transition to what was on the table for the last 3 years (whatever the heck that was!) is living in a dream world.

4.  What were the expectations in the first place?  Again, I'm reminded how so many of us wrote on the Scott Frost Mega Thread how we would be satisfied if our boys would just be competitive-well guess what THEY HAVE BEEN!  They never gave up-never.  And if you think they did then we weren't watching the same game. 

5.  No one feels as badly about losing these games as the coaching staff and the players feel.  For us to b**** and moan at them after a loss is like kicking a dog when it's down.

  Are there things that need improvement?  Absolutely!  But can't we communicate what needs to change without ripping the character of this staff and these players?  I think we

can.  It IS going to be a bumpy ride folks, so buckle up.  But also remember:  These are 18-23 year old college students, NOT the NFL and NOT the Nebraska of the 90's.  Give them some room to grow and change.  We still have a lot of football to play.  (And if you want to label me a 'sunshine pumper' you go right ahead.  I would much rather be on the side of building these boys/staff up than tearing them down.) GBR!

 

[Mavric]

6 hours ago, krc1995 said:

Where can I go to look up these stats?  Just curious how many spots we climb if we make those couple of field goals. 

 

I usually look here

[dspanther05]

7 hours ago, Saunders said:

Not even remotely comparable.

 

Riley took over a team that hadn't won less than 9 games in over 7 seasons. And proceeded to drive it into the ground.

 

Frost has to fix that mess.

This is the point people need to read over and over.  I don't understand why people can't see this difference.  The program was in a good state with Bo Pelini when he was ousted.  Might not been where people wanted it at, but it was 9 wins every year. It was not in a good state when Riley took over.  It was a dumpster fire of epic proportions. Riley was also a 30+ year head coach with a .500 record, we knew what he was, but we hired him anyway.  This isn't an apples to apples comparison.  

[krc1995]

We’re -4 on turnover margin and -7 al the end of 2017. Really, the only stat that matters in my mind. 

[Mavric]

7 hours ago, MountainMan said:

The irony here is hilarious. The same guys who were calling for Riley's head after the BYU game are now preaching "patience" and claiming that the Nebraska Way pixie dust will take time to work. 

 

As I noted elsewhere:

 

We out-gained Colorado by 170 yards.  BYU out-gained us by 66 yards

We out-rushed Colorado by 285 yards.  BYU out-rushed us by 6 yards

Against Colorado we averaged 6.8 yards per play.  Against BYU we averaged 5.7 yards per play

Against Colorado we completed 65.5% of our passes.  Against BYU we completed 58.5% of our passes

Against Colorado we had 7 sacks.  Against BYU we had 3 sacks

Against Colorado our starting QB went down with injury when we could have iced the game with a couple more first downs.  Our starting QB played the entire game against BYU.

 

So it's pretty disingenuous to try to say to try to play the Riley/BYU card.  There are A LOT of differences.  Not that you probably care.

[MountainMan]

3 hours ago, JJ Husker said:

I guess I’ve missed the part where anyone has said it’s fine and not an issue. Turnovers are never fine. Losing is never fine. But I don’t at all see where his cape has been ripped off or why there should be unease hovering around him. He has a big job to do and he’s working on it and I’m quite confident that he is more well suited to succeed than anyone. The difference seems to be that some of us are willing to give him a reasonable amount of time to accomplish the task and others, not so much.

Maybe no one is saying it’s “fine” but I think there’s a post or two in here saying it’s “not as bad as it looks” 

[krc1995]

4 hours ago, MountainMan said:

In 2017 UCF lost 15 fumbles and ints combined to gaining 32. I don’t know if 15 is “a lot” but I do know we are on pace for over 25 for the year (and yes I know “on pace is a somewhat silly stat)

 

I’m not looking to argue with you or anyone. I’m just finding humor in people telling everyone why this is more or less fine when any other coach wearing the N would have a lot of unease hovering around him. 

 

Every Nebraska fan is a Scott Frost fan. But Frost the coach has had his cape ripped off so far and it’s a little curious if not disturbing. 

I pretty much agree with you but at this point, I think we should appreciate that we have fans at all and that people are still upset by losing.

 

Frost is it. He’s the last hope. I knew the over-hype before the season could have ramifications if we were slow to start. Fan rhetoric of “give him time” was paired with people saying anything less than 7 wins would be a disaster season. How do these things even go together?  Remember when Riley went 7-0 and lost to Wisconsin in OT in Madison?  He was anointed king, albeit temporarily. And that was 2016. Only two fricken years ago.