What players leave after the season? 2022/23 version

[runningblind]

36 minutes ago, funhusker said:

That uniform “droop” in the tape is on point though!

It definitely is. They're committed.

 

35 minutes ago, MyBloodIsRed16 said:

Stantions. Stantions is the word you are looking for. They are heavy and you have to store them.  You don't have to store people holding tape 

All good points.

 

[Wistrom Disciple]

7 hours ago, Decked said:

Farmer was just flat out not very good. I really don’t think this is much of a loss. In a spot where team depth is greatest this is the best case scenario. 

I will have to disagree, Farmer saved to us in a few instances over the past couple of years. Sure he got burned a couple times, but he is a decent player for us. I think we are a better team with him than we are without him. 
 

It really didn’t help that the defense was regularly facing 80+ plays a game because of the offensive play callers addiction to quick possessions. Not a coincidence that some of our best games defensively were ones where the offense controlled time of possession. 

[brophog]

3 hours ago, Wistrom Disciple said:

Not a coincidence that some of our best games defensively were ones where the offense controlled time of possession. 

 

First, Time of Possession (usually) does not lead to winning, winning leads to being in a position to lead in time of possession. Time in which you have the ball is time in which you are not scoring. Sometimes possession is more important and sometimes scoring is more important, but it's an alternate possession game and you can't do both at the same time.

 

If you have a big time of possession advantage and are successful in the game, then you more than likely have at least a pretty good defense that day. If you have a big time of possession advantage and your defense is doing poorly, then that likely means they're scoring very fast and (if) you're scoring it is very slow. That's usually not a relationship conducive to winning because long drives are harder to sustain obviously than quick ones. Teams that want to play a clock control game have to play decent defense because with the number of drives being low the clock quickly becomes their enemy if they get too far behind.

 

Second, I don't think I agree that there even is a relationship in terms of Nebraska's defense and time of possession. The three lowest scoring opponents after the coaching changes were Rutgers, Wisconsin, and Iowa.

 

Against Rutgers, Nebraska did have a TOP advantage but the number of plays were nearly identical (66 vs 68) and Nebraska only gained 4 first downs rushing. 29 rushes for 72 yards.

 

Wisconsin dominated both TOP and the stats. Nebraska only gained 171 total yards that day.

 

Iowa makes everyone's defense looked good. Note, though, this also wasn't a game in which Nebraska controlled the clock. Yes, they led in TOP, but only 3 rushing first downs and only 51 yards on 35 carries. Iowa ran more plays (65 vs 72) but Nebraska had the bigger plays.

 

Indiana is the closest I would say to this relationship holding true, but under closer examination it falls flat, too. The defense held a shutout the second half, but what did the offense do? First 4 possessions of the second half:

 

6 plays, 19 yards, 2:33 PUNT

1 play INT

5 plays, -2 yards, 2:29 PUNT

3 plays, -5 yards, 1:46 PUNT

 

Nebraska does break the 21 all tie with a 71 yard bomb to Palmer, and eventually has a 12 play TD drive, but that's the only drive of the half that is in any way a ball control drive. Meanwhile, Indiana went 3 and out on nearly every drive in the second half.

 

[Decked]

7 hours ago, Wistrom Disciple said:

I will have to disagree, Farmer saved to us in a few instances over the past couple of years. Sure he got burned a couple times, but he is a decent player for us. I think we are a better team with him than we are without him. 
 

It really didn’t help that the defense was regularly facing 80+ plays a game because of the offensive play callers addiction to quick possessions. Not a coincidence that some of our best games defensively were ones where the offense controlled time of possession. 

So good that was more than likely running with the twos. A lot of the team is below average and he is amongst them. Some of his open field tackles or lack thereof…wooof. Past that illusive NW game a few years ago he has regressed. Last year was not as bad but. Definitely replaceable within the room. 

[funhusker]

16 minutes ago, Decked said:

So good that was more than likely running with the twos. A lot of the team is below average and he is amongst them. Some of his open field tackles or lack thereof…wooof. Past that illusive NW game a few years ago he has regressed. Last year was not as bad but. Definitely replaceable within the room. 

Even if he’s second string, that means he’s probably better than the guy who will now be “second string”.  There are no replacements coming at this point.
 

I’ll never understand the thought process of being okay with experienced players leaving.  Unless they are a cancer in the locker room; which maybe he is/was.  

[lo country]

30 minutes ago, funhusker said:

Even if he’s second string, that means he’s probably better than the guy who will now be “second string”.  There are no replacements coming at this point.
 

I’ll never understand the thought process of being okay with experienced players leaving.  Unless they are a cancer in the locker room; which maybe he is/was.  

This is the key to success at NU.  Until we have little to no drop off between the 1's and 2's, we will continue to struggle.  Not rocket science or some amazing revelation, but we need to develop this depth.  Better recruitment will help, but a staff that can develop what they have will be key.  

[BigRedBuster]

26 minutes ago, lo country said:

This is the key to success at NU.  Until we have little to no drop off between the 1's and 2's, we will continue to struggle.  Not rocket science or some amazing revelation, but we need to develop this depth.  Better recruitment will help, but a staff that can develop what they have will be key.  

Practice in a way that the players other than just the starters are getting a lot of reps in practice.  We have had coaches that expected the players down the chart to learn by standing around watching.  That doesn't cut it.

[Decked]

1 hour ago, funhusker said:

Even if he’s second string, that means he’s probably better than the guy who will now be “second string”.  There are no replacements coming at this point.
 

I’ll never understand the thought process of being okay with experienced players leaving.  Unless they are a cancer in the locker room; which maybe he is/was.  

That’s the rumor. I suppose we will see today. Replacements came and he lost the spot.

[BigRedBuster]

1 minute ago, Decked said:

That’s the rumor. I suppose we will see today. Replacements came and he lost the spot.

If you don't want your coach replaced, play better.

 

If you don't want to be replaced, play better.

[funhusker]

36 minutes ago, Decked said:

That’s the rumor. I suppose we will see today. Replacements came and he lost the spot.

At this point, it’s just a rumor that he’s even suspended. Right?

 

He “might” be suspended for a skipping a summer class.  Not ideal, but not a cancer in the locker room.

 

Bottom line: unless Farmer is a distraction (which Cooper says he isn’t see edit) this team is better with him on it in some capacity.

 

edit: sorry! Got the quote mixed between Newsome and Farmer…

 

 

[Red Five]

On 7/29/2023 at 4:05 PM, Red Five said:

Internet rumblings of Myles Farmer not being around...

 

 

[Red Five]

20 hours ago, Red Five said:

 

 

[Wistrom Disciple]

9 hours ago, brophog said:

First, Time of Possession (usually) does not lead to winning, winning leads to being in a position to lead in time of possession. Time in which you have the ball is time in which you are not scoring. Sometimes possession is more important and sometimes scoring is more important, but it's an alternate possession game and you can't do both at the same time.

 

If you have a big time of possession advantage and are successful in the game, then you more than likely have at least a pretty good defense that day. If you have a big time of possession advantage and your defense is doing poorly, then that likely means they're scoring very fast and (if) you're scoring it is very slow. That's usually not a relationship conducive to winning because long drives are harder to sustain obviously than quick ones. Teams that want to play a clock control game have to play decent defense because with the number of drives being low the clock quickly becomes their enemy if they get too far behind.

 

Second, I don't think I agree that there even is a relationship in terms of Nebraska's defense and time of possession. The three lowest scoring opponents after the coaching changes were Rutgers, Wisconsin, and Iowa.

 

Against Rutgers, Nebraska did have a TOP advantage but the number of plays were nearly identical (66 vs 68) and Nebraska only gained 4 first downs rushing. 29 rushes for 72 yards.

 

Wisconsin dominated both TOP and the stats. Nebraska only gained 171 total yards that day.

 

Iowa makes everyone's defense looked good. Note, though, this also wasn't a game in which Nebraska controlled the clock. Yes, they led in TOP, but only 3 rushing first downs and only 51 yards on 35 carries. Iowa ran more plays (65 vs 72) but Nebraska had the bigger plays.

 

Indiana is the closest I would say to this relationship holding true, but under closer examination it falls flat, too. The defense held a shutout the second half, but what did the offense do? First 4 possessions of the second half:

 

6 plays, 19 yards, 2:33 PUNT

1 play INT

5 plays, -2 yards, 2:29 PUNT

3 plays, -5 yards, 1:46 PUNT

 

Nebraska does break the 21 all tie with a 71 yard bomb to Palmer, and eventually has a 12 play TD drive, but that's the only drive of the half that is in any way a ball control drive. Meanwhile, Indiana went 3 and out on nearly every drive in the second half.

I disagree with you. Minnesota is prime example of how time of possession (TOP) leads to winning more often than not. They are not exceptionally skilled offensively, nor splashy with big scoring plays. Instead they routinely sit on the ball for 60-70% of games and gives their defense a limited amount of plays to face. This limitation reduces the opportunities for your defense to get beat and shortens the game dramatically. It is not a coincidence that many of the top teams in the country also lead in TOP and I argue that TOP can be an indicator of success, not success being an indicator of TOP. Below are a couple peers and how the numbers break out from last season.

 

Despite playing three less games than National Champ Georgia, our defense faced only five less plays than them or country leading Air Force playing an extra game, but facing 250 plays less than our defense last season. The additional plays faced exposed our defenders more often as they had significantly more opportunities to be exposed compared to peers. Back to the point... Farmer is not a bad player and we are a better team with him than without him.

 

Team	Games	Plays faced	Avg. plays faced per game	TOP (minutes per game)	2022 Record
Air Force	13	657	50.54	36.54	10-3
Minnesota	13	772	59.38	34.46	9-4
Georgia	15	912	60.80	33.6	15-0
Michigan	14	879	62.79	33.79	13-1
Iowa	13	883	67.92	28.31	8-5
Nebraska	12	907	75.58	26.67	4-8
Oklahoma	13	1043	80.23	26.38	6-7

[Decked]

Unfortunate to hear about Brody. Hood just seems like a guy who may not be here next year. Take a chance and they don’t always work out. Fleeks is surprising. Thought he was the vet presence. 

[macroboy]

Was Fleeks not here for summer conditioning? Did he go home and get fat in just a couple weeks?I can't remember, was he a walk-on? or scholly?