USC: What Did We Learn

TGHusker said:
There was a greater chance of getting that 1 yard with EJ than making that 52 yard kick.
Click to expand...

Yep, and looking at it from the perspective of percentages/odds has been my critique of Holgorsen; why did we call so many sideline throws on 1st down?

Over and over we had an incompletion on 1st down and then we ran it on 2nd.

Now Emmett bailed us out all night. So it’s a moot point, just to get ahead of that angle.

But our coaches have struggled with doing the high-percentage things this season, IMO. It was a-w-f-u-l against Minnesota.
 
Undone said:
Wasting the timeout was a really terrible mistake by Rhule, but I feel like that’s just something that feels good to complain about to add insult to injury.
Click to expand...

It was a horrible mistake in multiple ways. He wasted a timeout. Timeouts are one of your most valuable assets in a close game in the fourth quarter. It allows you to keep more options on the table.

You DO NOT try to get them to jump off sides and then tell a timeout just to try a 52 yard field goal. USC hadn’t shown much ability to drive 90 yards without making mistake that ended drives so either show confidence in your offense that you will get 1 yard or you punt. Off the three options he chose the one with least likely chance of success.
 
Archy1221 said:
Of the three options he chose the one with least likely chance of success.
Click to expand...

Yep, and this ties in with a post I just wrote about how our coaches seem to struggle at looking at things from the basic perspective of percentages.

We seem to prioritize tricking the other team (which is low percentage anyway) versus staying in our wheelhouse and maximizing what we’re good at.

Nevertheless, as far as Holgorsen is concerned last night, he did snap out of it and fed our best player the ball 29 times. We had no chance in the game without Emmett getting 29 carries.
 
Up 14-6... USC ball, 1st or 2nd play after half-time was a great pick by Marshall at USC 34 yard line. Instead of getting a TD or FG we gave it back to them with a sack fumble & lost our QB.

That was a big opportunity that turned into a major malfuction.
 
Last edited:
floridacorn said:
Not Much. This team has improved, but has a few very serious weaknesses holding it back. Pass blocking is poor, WR's can't get separation vs man, & the short yardage run game is an issue on offense. Defensively, this defense can't stop the run if the opponent is 2 dimensional or has a running QB and doesn't generate much of a pass rush. In other words, athleticism, and size at a few positions.

Maybe DH got a little bored trying to play like Iowa/Minnesota after 2 quarters last night. It was working to perfection up until the DR fumble however.

He's obviously not ready, but last night was a game this team really could have used the Carter Nelson that was recruited. I find it hard to believe Barney isn't more of a matchup problem in the slot, but their CB's put on a clinic of how to play man last night. If NU ever had a receiver even get half a step by them last night, I didn't see it. I know Coleman had injury & work ethic issues, but NU really could have used a physical WR capable of winning deep last night. The back shoulder moon ball fades just don't look like good football to me. Surprised Clark isn't a better option in those situations where the ball could at least be up and not behind.
Click to expand...
In 3 seasons under Rhule, we have seen improvement in the run game and this year special teams. Thats about it. The O line still stinks. The D still struggles to be a cohesive unit against the Run and Pass consistently.
 
Decked said:
We have to either let Dana run true air raid or change something entirely. This Rhule/satterfield/Dana blend isn’t working. The offense has been abysmal for weeks.
Click to expand...
Agreed.
SouthLincoln Husker said:
Im reading the same general complaint about play calling or operation of the plays. Until we start to hold our own in the trenches on both sides of the ball, it will be tough to win games. USC had 3 backups on the o-line last night that could be a starter for the Huskers.
Click to expand...

I believe there’s an argument to be made that offensive scheme is impeding the strength of the OL.
 
A sequence of 3 drives that ties into the offensive ineptitude.

Up 14-6, We get the ball back with 0:30 left in the half at the 20 and one timeout. Need about 45-50 yards to get into field goal range. Don't even attempt to throw the ball, run it, and go in to halftime.

We then get the ball to start the 2nd half. A TD would be huge, a FG would be great. Throw a stupid fade on 1st down, run for 8 yards on 2nd down, run for 1 yard on 3rd down and punt.

Then we get the ball back immediately on Marshall's pick at the 34. Run for 7, incomplete, run for 4 and a 1st down at the 23. Then try the play action for a home run (not a bad call imo), 2 man route and both covered, so Dylan needs to just throw it away but he holds it too long and breaks his ankle.
 
Savage Husker said:
Agreed.


I believe there’s an argument to be made that offensive scheme is impeding the strength of the OL.
Click to expand...
What is our strength? Our oline has no push & the odd of getting a yard on 4th & 1 is 25%, only because of EJ. He is breaking tackles at a high & has very few 100 yards games. Our tackles are getting beat on almost every pass play.
 
Red Five said:
The O line was actually pretty good last night. Especially considering we were playing with 3rd stringers at both OT spots for 1/2 the game. Gave up 1 sack in the passing game (and don't remember too many QB hurries).
Click to expand...
Not sure I totally agree. We had 89 yard passing & ran twice as much. Play calling changes when your personnel is weak. If it was not for EJ breaking tackles, we would have been under 200 yards of total offense.
 
I think we got one sack? It’s the lines on both sides of the ball. If we had just B- lines this team would look way better. We lose in the trenches. Can’t protect so the offense looks inconsistent. Can’t TFL or sack so the defense is always under duress.
 
chamrocck said:
I think we got one sack? It’s the lines on both sides of the ball. If we had just B- lines this team would look way better. We lose in the trenches. Can’t protect so the offense looks inconsistent. Can’t TFL or sack so the defense is always under duress.
Click to expand...
Can include 2 intentional groundings, which are basically sacks.
 
admo said:
Up 14-6... USC ball, 1st or 2nd play after half-time was a great pick by Marshall at USC 34 yard line. Instead of getting a TD or FG we gave it back to them with a sack fumble & lost our QB.

That was a big opportunity that turned into a major malfuction.
Click to expand...

For me, a 1st & 10 deep in their territory like that is 100% where you just hand it off to EJ.

It’s not about “run the damn ball.” It’s about putting the ball into the hands of the guy who is the best player on your team on both sides of the ball by a mile.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top