What did we learn: Indiana

[ColoradoHusk]

3 minutes ago, StuckinCO said:

One of his returns was wide open to left but he took it right. Looked like the punter continually out kicked his coverage (down wind from the south). Palmer waited a couple of seconds to let the coverage angle in, then was able to skirt around the first man. I did notice they being in Olive Martin when it looks like it will be a fair catch situation (inside the 10 or so). I was just so pleased to see us fielding the punts, positive return yardage was a bonus. 

They definitely have used Martin this year as the fair catch guy inside the 10, which I don't have an issue with.  Palmer was used once in that situation against Indiana and he fielded a punt at the 5, which is a no-no.  I think Busch told the punt returners to not field anything inside the 8 yard line, but that rule of thumb can change if NU plays on a grass field which allows for punters to stick it inside the 5 easier.

[Undone]

ESPN's FPI rankings have Indiana at #79 and Georgia Southern at #87. How meaningful are the rankings? Not extremely meaningful, but they're at least something we can go off of.

 

So yeah I'm going to say Indiana is a relatively bad team, but this is the point for me: They're roughly where Georgia Southern is at & run very similar offensive schemes. We played them both at night at home.

 

Georgia Southern embarrassed our defense because our defensive coordinator was pretty much just a coffin stuffer. They put up 45 points on us and beat us 45-42 in a game where our offense actually played well.

 

Then against Indiana we made only minor personnel changes but huge scheme changes (playing more aggressively with linebackers to attack the QB, playing man coverage) and then we hold their offense to 14 points.

 

So the takeaways shouldn't be as much about whether it was a good win; all wins are good wins. The takeaway is how desperately our team needed better coaching to come anywhere close to playing to its potential.

[Mavric]

46 minutes ago, Undone said:

ESPN's FPI rankings have Indiana at #79 and Georgia Southern at #87. How meaningful are the rankings? Not extremely meaningful, but they're at least something we can go off of.

 

The other thing to remember is that these things aren't linear.

 

USC is #11 at a rating of 15.4.  Their rating is closer to #74 Nebraska (-1.4) than it is to #1 Alabama (31.2).

 

UCLA is #31 at a rating of 8.1.  Louisiana Tech is #100 at -7.9.  So there is nearly the same gap between #1 and #11 than there is between #31 and #100.

[Archy1221]

3 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

The other thing to remember is that these things aren't linear.

 

USC is #11 at a rating of 15.4.  Their rating is closer to #74 Nebraska (-1.4) than it is to #1 Alabama (31.2).

 

UCLA is #31 at a rating of 8.1.  Louisiana Tech is #100 at -7.9.  So there is nearly the same gap between #1 and #11 than there is between #31 and #100.

That’s a good catch and I guess I never looked at it that way before. 

[ladyhawke]

17 hours ago, olddominionhusker said:

Honestly, I want Joseph to get a chance. I think he can motivate players and I trust him to bring in the coordinators he needs to get the job done. Or, coordinator because Whipple is fine as OC. AND we know dude can recruit. 

Oh, I’m with you!  (For me that was a given! Lol) But if I had to pick someone else I would pick LL.

I really hope Coach Joseph gets the nod.   The guys respect him and now that they have a win under their belt that just makes it even better.  GBR!

[Guy Chamberlin]

7 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

The other thing to remember is that these things aren't linear.

 

USC is #11 at a rating of 15.4.  Their rating is closer to #74 Nebraska (-1.4) than it is to #1 Alabama (31.2).

 

UCLA is #31 at a rating of 8.1.  Louisiana Tech is #100 at -7.9.  So there is nearly the same gap between #1 and #11 than there is between #31 and #100.

 

Thanks. I've noticed this before when I've turned to statistics to make my point. I can point to my team or player being 30 places higher or lower in a ranking, but the difference in the actual metric being measured isn't that meaningful.

 

The fact that every Saturday teams line up against other teams with clear statistical advantages and things go completely differently suggests that football is a game with a lot of variables. 

[Undone]

14 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

The other thing to remember is that these things aren't linear.

 

USC is #11 at a rating of 15.4.  Their rating is closer to #74 Nebraska (-1.4) than it is to #1 Alabama (31.2).

 

UCLA is #31 at a rating of 8.1.  Louisiana Tech is #100 at -7.9.  So there is nearly the same gap between #1 and #11 than there is between #31 and #100.

 

I completely agree. Just think about how hard it is to actually tangibly rank 130ish Division I teams - no doubt it's hard and there's going to be a ton of fudging stuff between numbers 26 - 131, etc.

 

For me, both the eyeball test and their schedule results to-date tell me that Georgia Southern & Indiana are roughly on the same level. I'm happy to hear some disagreement on that, but I think "roughly" is a safe bet.

 

And again my main takeaway is just to look at how completely s***ty our defense was against Georgia Southern in the soft zone, no blitz scheme versus the tight coverage, some blitz scheme we played against Indiana.

 

For me it was practically like watching a different team play the Indiana game on defense.

[cheekygeek]

On 10/3/2022 at 7:39 AM, Red Five said:

 

They went 2-10 last year and 0-9 in the B1G.  They are a bad team.  They are 83rd in total offense and 107th in total defense.  There is a decent chance they don't win another game this year.

 

This just in: Nebraska hasn't been beating most of the teams they beat on paper, for years now. That they did so this week, with a whole new DC and an Interim Head Coach given the freedom to make needed changes, is NOT as insignificant as you are trying to make it, Debbie Downer.

[Red Five]

5 minutes ago, cheekygeek said:

 

This just in: Nebraska hasn't been beating most of the teams they beat on paper, for years now. That they did so this week, with a whole new DC and an Interim Head Coach given the freedom to make needed changes, is NOT as insignificant as you are trying to make it, Debbie Downer.

 

18 hours ago, Red Five said:

Saying Illinois is bad doesn't take away from the win.  Nebraska has struggled vs bad teams for many years.  Its good that we did what we are supposed to do.  Beating bad teams is step 1 in this whole "get back to being good" process

[The Dude]

56 minutes ago, Undone said:

For me, both the eyeball test and their schedule results to-date tell me that Georgia Southern & Indiana are roughly on the same level

 

Georgia Southern looked tiny.  I know it's been a little while now since they were in the FCS, but they didn't look much different than North Dakota's guys.  They looked like a bottom-half Sun Belt team.

 

Indiana also has a win against Illinois that's looking like a pretty good win as of right now.

[cheekygeek]

What did we learn against Indiana?
That we've been hearing from Frost's staff (over and over for years) that the "kids have bought in". But this past Saturday, under MJ and Busch we learned what "kids buying in" really LOOKS LIKE. 

 

We also learned what it looks like when coaches actually hold players accountable and their backups will get a chance in the game if the players underperform on the field. Frost was stupidly loyal to his "1st string" guys - regardless of what their play/effort looked like.

[Undone]

4 minutes ago, The Dude said:

 

Georgia Southern looked tiny.  I know it's been a little while now since they were in the FCS, but they didn't look much different than North Dakota's guys.  They looked light a bottom-half Sun Belt team.

 

Indiana also has a win against Illinois that's looking like a pretty good win as of right now.

 

So I think that's reinforcing the point about how big of a deal our defensive adjustments were against Indiana.

 

I think it also underscores just how inept Frost was as an overall leader of the team. Anybody could see how the soft zone was crappy against Northwestern; they put up over 500 yards on us in that game.

 

It really sucks that having lost to Georgia Southern makes getting to bowl eligibility so hard for this year but it had to happen to get rid of Frost & Chinander. I hate saying that because I still wanted Frost to stay on for next year even if we only wound up winning 6 games...but he just wasn't guiding the ship at all.

[thexyz]

9 minutes ago, Undone said:

 

So I think that's reinforcing the point about how big of a deal our defensive adjustments were against Indiana.

 

I think it also underscores just how inept Frost was as an overall leader of the team. Anybody could see how the soft zone was crappy against Northwestern; they put up over 500 yards on us in that game.

 

It really sucks that having lost to Georgia Southern makes getting to bowl eligibility so hard for this year but it had to happen to get rid of Frost & Chinander. I hate saying that because I still wanted Frost to stay on for next year even if we only wound up winning 6 games...but he just wasn't guiding the ship at all.

He was guiding the ship all right. As Sailor Jerry or Capt. Morgan!

[walksalone]

it's nice to win

[Mavric]

Our offense was definitely the problem last year.