What did we learn? Purdue

[Mavric]

We turned their walk-on, fourth-string RB into a Player of the Week.

 

 

[ColoradoHusk]

1 minute ago, Born N Bled Red said:

 

Man up and stack the box, make them beat you in the air. Put Hill back at Corner/ safety man up with their best receiver if he's really that great an athlete, now that he has practiced as a receiver maybe he steals an interception or two. Hurry the QB into errant throws by rushing with overwhelming numbers. 

Taking a guy who struggled at CB the first 4 games, to the point he was benched and moved to WR, and then moving him back to DB, might be one of the worst recommendations I have seen out there.

[Born N Bled Red]

22 minutes ago, ColoradoHusk said:

Taking a guy who struggled at CB the first 4 games, to the point he was benched and moved to WR, and then moving him back to DB, might be one of the worst recommendations I have seen out there.

 

He didn't understand the assignment. Man coverage is much different than zone.

 

In addition, going man is risk/ reward. You recognize you will probably give up a big play or two, you also hope that it will earn you more than you give up. Unfortunately, with this defense we can't play a complete game. So you need to choose what you're going to stop. Against Illinois, Wisconsin, and Iowa, you sell out to stop the run and try to create errors in the passing game. 

[MyBloodIsRed16]

I just learned there was an 80yr old woman who fell down the stairs at the game and was rushed to the hospital.  She died from her injuries.

[teachercd]

30 minutes ago, MyBloodIsRed16 said:

I just learned there was an 80yr old woman who fell down the stairs at the game and was rushed to the hospital.  She died from her injuries.

Yikes.  

[ColoradoHusk]

32 minutes ago, MyBloodIsRed16 said:

I just learned there was an 80yr old woman who fell down the stairs at the game and was rushed to the hospital.  She died from her injuries.

As my mom got into her 70s and not exactly doing great, we were very worried about something like this happening the last couple of years that she went to games at NU.

[teachercd]

4 minutes ago, ColoradoHusk said:

As my mom got into her 70s and not exactly doing great, we were very worried about something like this happening the last couple of years that she went to games at NU.

I am worried about it too...after the bars, tailgating and sneaking in shooters it can be rough getting out safely. 

[Red Five]

17 hours ago, Undone said:

Here are several reasons why this game was such a mind-f***:

We had a 60% post game win expectancy.

 

 

[BigRedBuster]

7 minutes ago, Red Five said:

We had a 60% post game win expectancy.

 

 

 

I honestly don't understand "postgame win expectancy" is.  Post game.......you can be pretty sure who is going to win.

[cheekygeek]

I learned that no quarterback in his right mind will want to come to Nebraska until we get a functional offensive line. The fact that Thompson is still standing and able to have the passing success that he HAS had really makes one wonder about the "might have been" if Nouili had not gotten himself suspended for the year and Frost would have made an O-Line coach one of his priorities, rather than an afterthought. 

 

I learned that if MJ had not been hired and brought Trey Palmer and (now interim DC) Bill Busch with him... well I don't want to even imagine what this season would look like.

[Guy Chamberlin]

If I can step out of my bias a moment, that was an entertaining football game.

 

No opponent will want to underestimate Nebraska, although Michigan could totally get away with it.

 

That game was like a lot of last years' losses under Scott Frost. I want to believe something's different this year under Mickey, so I will continue to do so. 

 

I want to say the defense totally sucked, but I honestly thought the tackling was solid and they we mostly out-schemed by a really smart play caller (although Husker fans would have s#!t bricks had Whipple made some of Brohm's calls)

 

If you watched much college football Saturday, you'll notice defense went missing in a lot of games. Even elite defenses were getting rolled. 

 

Say what you will about the OL, Casey Thompson had time to make deep throws that were instant game changers. Casey definitely missed some wide open guys and threw a couple balls he'd like to have back, but I still think we're lucky to have him. 

 

 

[presidentjlh]

2 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

 

I honestly don't understand "postgame win expectancy" is.  Post game.......you can be pretty sure who is going to win.

It's a lot like Corsi if you follow hockey, it basically looks at various analytical considerations and says "the stats suggest this team would win this percent of the time if you played the game all over again and they put up similar stats."

 

Basically, Nebraska had a better game analytically but lost due to other factors. I reckon we have a lot of games like this the past few years.

[Undone]

I'm sure a lot of people would focus a lot on the blown throw where Alante was wide open in the end zone in the 3rd quarter when it was 20-27.

 

But also like...it was originally 1st & goal from their 4 and we go with three straight passing plays. I think it's very fair criticism to ask why we didn't try the power run on 1st & 2nd downs there. It's four down territory at that stage in the game anyway.

 

So damn frustrating. Now we lost by 6 and not 4 or less...so maybe it wasn't a huge deal. But felt like flashbacks to Frost completely screwing up inside the opponents' 5 yards line like years past.

 

Scott probably stuffed another wad of Copenhagen into his jaw from his tropical beach location and said "damn those were great play calls."     

[krc1995]

1 hour ago, presidentjlh said:

It's a lot like Corsi if you follow hockey, it basically looks at various analytical considerations and says "the stats suggest this team would win this percent of the time if you played the game all over again and they put up similar stats."

 

Basically, Nebraska had a better game analytically but lost due to other factors. I reckon we have a lot of games like this the past few years.

Well metrics does it think will win games? Time of possession, offensive yardage, turnovers, sacks?  What metric did we actually win? 

[Husker in WI]

2 minutes ago, krc1995 said:

Well metrics does it think will win games? Time of possession, offensive yardage, turnovers, sacks?  What metric did we actually win? 

 

Yards per play and explosive plays. If you outgain your opponents by over 3 yards per play (9.2 to 6.0) you will win more often than not - the fact that we "lost" most other metrics explains why it was only a 60% chance. And I get it, the only stat that ends up mattering is points scored versus points allowed. But you can give up sacks, lose the TO battle, and give up a lot of yardage and still win averaging 9 yards per play. We did just enough to lose in spite of that.