Why is Nebraska *This* Terrible

[beorach]

I don't believe Nebraska IS that terrible.  A lot of the stats the kids have put up to date leave a lot to be desired is all.  Tomorrow is a new day.

 

As for people saying UCF had a bad defense last season, that just isn't accurate.  The stats within the total defense category were somewhat below average but their numbers in the passing, rushing, and scoring defense categories were all well above average to great.  Their stats in the turnover margin category were second only to Miami's based on my bowl game printout.

[BIG ERN]

I made this post in August on reasons we might not be good this year...

 

QB: Nebraska is starting a TRUE freshman quarterback for the first time in school history. To add to that nervousness that freshman also didn't play his senior in high school due to a shoulder injury on his throwing arm. Why do I bring that up you ask? Well, the two backups are two walk-ons. Andrew Bunch had a mediocre season at the juco level and Masker is straight outta high school with no D1 offers. It could be tough sledding for this unit that has to travel to the crowds in Ann Arbor, Madison, Columbus, and Iowa City. 

 

RB: A lot of hype is surrounding the running backs as the Huskers brought in juco AA Greg Bell and true freshman Maurice Washington is turning heads. Neither of those guys have taken a hand off at the D1 collegiate level yet. Ozigbo is also slated to get some carries and here's a guy who averaged just 3.8 ypc last season and spent more time in the doghouse than out on the football field. Sadly he had the most rushing yards for Nebraska which ranked 22nd in the B10 for an individual player. 

 

OL: This unit returns some good interior experience, but also a unit that was dead last in the B10 for rushing yards per game. Was it the lack of playmakers or could these guys not get any push? We are about to find out. There is also no depth at the tackle position so the big men on the outside need to make sure to keep healthy otherwise some guys named Gaylord and Sichterman will have to do. 

 

WR: Hard to be negative when you have Stanley Morgan and JD Spielman back from last year. The three backups haven't proven anything and we are hoping that Mike Williams can stretch the defense to open things up underneath. Without Stanley we only return 2 total receiving TD from this unit. 

 

TE: "We are going to throw to our tight ends this year" is a trend all Nebraskan's are familiar with. That was slightly true last year, but opposing defenses caught almost half the passes from our quarterback than all our tight ends combined. Now starter Jack Stoll had a staggering 89 yards and 2 TD. The two other tight ends are freshman who haven't seen the field yet. 

 

Defense: I had to group all the units into one since they were so bad last year. Gave up 36.4 ppg and ranked last in the B10 in rush defense and total defense. The defense created very few sacks, tackles for loss, or turnovers. The top 3/5 tacklers also graduated. Lets hope that this 3-4 is a lot better than what Diaco had to offer. 

 

K/P: We will call it a win if we don't have to use Lightbourn as much in the punt game. The shaky part is starting a true freshman kicker who may need to knock a few down to decide if we win or lose.  The failed XP in the spring game was not a good start. 

[Big Red 40]

I really don’t think we are that terrible. The team as a whole is better than they’ve showed . 

Our dynamic playmaking QB has been iffy through an injury , bad blocking , and dumb freshman mistakes . The offense revolves around him and I think once he’s healthy and comfortable the whole team will get better . 

Offensive line is not good they got  shoved around all day by Michigan especially I don’t know how you fix that . 

Still giving up too many big plays on missed assignments, and poor tackling . I think this is an area we can fix through coaching, film room etc . 

First two games I thought were very winnable games that we let slip away , and the third game was against a team we aren’t on par with right now .

I don’t think we have the team to compete with the Ohio states, Michigan’s, Penn States of the world but we should be able to fix some things,  work hard and win some games this year. I see no reason we can’t compete with Purdue at home and beat them . All is not lost . 

[Huskers93-97]

I just hope the young kids dont pick up any cultural habits from the older guys that spent 3 years with Riley.

[wiuhusker]

The article brings up a lot of really good points. I think it simply comes down to O-Line play and finding a way to get off the field on 3rd down. So far this year we have been very mediocre at both of those things. 

[Moiraine]

I think we’re better than our record but I fear the players don’t believe it and that will lead to more losses. 

[WyoHusker56]

1 hour ago, BIG ERN said:

I made this post in August on reasons we might not be good this year...

 

QB: Nebraska is starting a TRUE freshman quarterback for the first time in school history. To add to that nervousness that freshman also didn't play his senior in high school due to a shoulder injury on his throwing arm. Why do I bring that up you ask? Well, the two backups are two walk-ons. Andrew Bunch had a mediocre season at the juco level and Masker is straight outta high school with no D1 offers. It could be tough sledding for this unit that has to travel to the crowds in Ann Arbor, Madison, Columbus, and Iowa City. 

 

RB: A lot of hype is surrounding the running backs as the Huskers brought in juco AA Greg Bell and true freshman Maurice Washington is turning heads. Neither of those guys have taken a hand off at the D1 collegiate level yet. Ozigbo is also slated to get some carries and here's a guy who averaged just 3.8 ypc last season and spent more time in the doghouse than out on the football field. Sadly he had the most rushing yards for Nebraska which ranked 22nd in the B10 for an individual player. 

 

OL: This unit returns some good interior experience, but also a unit that was dead last in the B10 for rushing yards per game. Was it the lack of playmakers or could these guys not get any push? We are about to find out. There is also no depth at the tackle position so the big men on the outside need to make sure to keep healthy otherwise some guys named Gaylord and Sichterman will have to do. 

 

WR: Hard to be negative when you have Stanley Morgan and JD Spielman back from last year. The three backups haven't proven anything and we are hoping that Mike Williams can stretch the defense to open things up underneath. Without Stanley we only return 2 total receiving TD from this unit. 

 

TE: "We are going to throw to our tight ends this year" is a trend all Nebraskan's are familiar with. That was slightly true last year, but opposing defenses caught almost half the passes from our quarterback than all our tight ends combined. Now starter Jack Stoll had a staggering 89 yards and 2 TD. The two other tight ends are freshman who haven't seen the field yet. 

 

Defense: I had to group all the units into one since they were so bad last year. Gave up 36.4 ppg and ranked last in the B10 in rush defense and total defense. The defense created very few sacks, tackles for loss, or turnovers. The top 3/5 tacklers also graduated. Lets hope that this 3-4 is a lot better than what Diaco had to offer. 

 

K/P: We will call it a win if we don't have to use Lightbourn as much in the punt game. The shaky part is starting a true freshman kicker who may need to knock a few down to decide if we win or lose.  The failed XP in the spring game was not a good start. 

I remember dismissing all your concerns in my kool-aid induced haze. Clearly I should have payed attention as all of these have caused us issues in the first 3 games this year.

[84HuskerLaw]

Not wanting to be too critical but I believe we've all hashed and rehashed all of this throughout this board's many discussions.

 

I have warned numerous times since long before the season began that we were at grave risk in the QB position from injury disruption.   The offensive line has been poor on far too many plays and these two factors have contributed mightily to the team's failure to win.   We are NOT close to physically handling the Michigans and better teams apparently.  I had my doubts about whether the strength and conditioning could magically transform the team into a much better bunch.    I do think we are in better condition (fatigue wise) but we certainly don't look stronger or more powerful so to speak.   Speed seems unchanged.   The O line looks bigger but slower if anything.

 

I would have much higher expecations for next year at this time.  9 months is a lot different that 18 months in this regard.  I am not S&C expert but I have my own experience and have observed the dramatic changes that seem to occur between raw recruits and redshirt freshmen and sophomore.  

 

Effort is improved although there had to be some real let down naturally when Michigan got up on us by three or four TDs near the end of the first quarter.  That will take the starch out of most any team, much less one that is on a 7 or 8 game losing skid.  

 

I am much more positive that the team will play better Saturday and my hunch is we get our first win, although I don't expect some kind of magical transformation yet.  Just play more like we could have reasonably hoped.   The 'perfect storm' start of this season (freshmen mistakes, untimely penalties, turnovers, etc. couple with the loss of our two best QBs and all the timing and execution development that is critical to offensive success.  The offense will get better as they play together longer and things really gel.   

 

[Mavric]

5 hours ago, Moiraine said:

I think we’re better than our record but I fear the players don’t believe it and that will lead to more losses. 

 

This is what worries me as well.  We were significantly better than both Colorado and Troy.  But we made several big screw-ups in both games that turned the score in their favor.

 

Then we get to Michigan and turn into a pumpkin (or something).

 

I'm usually not a big one on saying players gave up but it's sure hard to find a better explanation for what happened Saturday.  It's pretty obvious that we had checked it in down the stretch last year.  Not that no one was trying but obviously some combination of preparation/desire/mental toughness was completely gone.  I think a lot of it was probably washed away during the off-season - especially with all the departures and new faces - and we seemed pretty hearty in both the first two games, fighting back after being down early.

 

But I can't help but wonder if two disheartening losses followed by a horrendous start against Michigan sent our mental state into the tank.  It sure seemed that way.

[TonyStalloni]

13 hours ago, wiuhusker said:

The article brings up a lot of really good points. I think it simply comes down to O-Line play and finding a way to get off the field on 3rd down. So far this year we have been very mediocre at both of those things. 

This is what I'm seeing.  The D many times does well on 1st and 2nd down then gives up a big play on 3rd and long.  The O line isn't giving the Qb and Rb's time to let the play develop.

[Nebhawk]

Ok, I keep reading that some think Frost needs to rethink his scheme, in other words we are not playing enough power football in some opinions.  I can agree with that assessment, but also disagree with it as well.  

 

In a nutshell, if Frost would change his scheme just because we are not seeing success yet, would be a sign of weakness.  Won't happen, nor should it.  Frost inherited a team at UCF who went winless in the year before.  They went 6-7 in that next season, and then 13-0.  Did he change his scheme from year one to year two, NO!  

 

We are young, and we are not experienced at winning.  That is a bad combo.  The last thing that our current players need to see is scheme changes.  Stay the course, and continue to improve.  Remember when Callahan took over and we were awful, but most fans expected  that and   were ok with that because we were changing schemes and systems.  Familiar!

[Moiraine]

I don’t think Frost is stupid enough to not change his scheme because it would be “seen as a sign of weakness.”

 

But it would be stupid of him to change his scheme. You don’t change who you are after 3 games in season 1. 

[MichiganDad3]

Does scheme matter when the opposition rushes two, and they both get to QB untouched? 

[Huskers93-97]

3 hours ago, Nebhawk said:

Ok, I keep reading that some think Frost needs to rethink his scheme, in other words we are not playing enough power football in some opinions.  I can agree with that assessment, but also disagree with it as well.  

 

In a nutshell, if Frost would change his scheme just because we are not seeing success yet, would be a sign of weakness.  Won't happen, nor should it.  Frost inherited a team at UCF who went winless in the year before.  They went 6-7 in that next season, and then 13-0.  Did he change his scheme from year one to year two, NO!  

 

We are young, and we are not experienced at winning.  That is a bad combo.  The last thing that our current players need to see is scheme changes.  Stay the course, and continue to improve.  Remember when Callahan took over and we were awful, but most fans expected  that and   were ok with that because we were changing schemes and systems.  Familiar!

Anyone out there who even has the thought cross their mind we should switch schemes because it doesnt work in the big ten when we have played 1 big ten game is insane. 

[GBRFAN]

SF played in the big8 and knows about power football.  While at Oregon he stated that their brand of football would be awesome if some power was added.  If you look at UCF the lines were pretty good.   He knows what scheme he needs and i'm sure he will always be learning and making "minor" tweaks to scheme just as TO did.

 

These kids worked really hard over the off season and probably expected a return on investment that was too high.  Right now they aren't getting that return on investment and it is only human nature for some to give up.  The younger ones that have more time should have a higher rate of not quitting -  there will always be a few that say they really want it but in the end they really didn't.

 

Most will stay and be Huskers - some will leave.  It's a process and i believe SF is far from lost and will handle each dip with a wise plan.