Again, why Nebraska lost to VT ...

[HuskerChik]

... Pelini's decision to punt instead of going for it on 4th and 1. Why you would voluntarily give the ball back to a higher-ranked home team that is playing with a minute and a half left on the clock before a sold-out crowd, and which also is led by a dangerous QB who possesses last-second, game-wining abilities is beyond me. By punting, Pelini chose to play not to lose rather than playing to win. For crying out loud, coach, go for it, kick a FG, fake a field goal, fake the punt, do something to show you want win.

The following excerpt from today's article in the Omaha World Herald says it all.

• Late in the fourth quarter, Nebraska led 15-10 after stopping Virginia Tech on fourth down. NU got the ball with 2:07 to play. The Hokies burned all three timeouts as Nebraska kept it on the ground, trying to burn clock.

 

“You've got to get one first down. You have to,” Watson said. “Make them use those three timeouts and get the first down. Then you've got the game secured.”

 

On third and 5, Watson called the same QB draw that Lee used to gain 17 the last time it was called.

“We had a good call,” the coach said.

 

This time, Lee got 4. One more yard, Watson said, and the Huskers would've lined up in victory formation. Instead, Nebraska had to punt, and the Hokies had life.

It sure sounds like Watson was confident his offense could get the first down. Makes you wonder, did Watson recommend they go for it but got overruled?

 

[HuskerNMO]

It sure sounds like Watson was confident his offense could get the first down. Makes you wonder, did Watson recommend they go for it but got overruled?

The offense had proven it couldn't do anything. The defense had just gotten the ball back and only had to get 1 first down, and they couldn't even do that. Defense was LIGHTS out after the opening drive for the most part. Bo's offense had let him down all day, he trusted his defense would have a better chance to keep them from marching 90 yards than the offense getting 1.

Can't say as I blame him.

 

[Axl_sued_me]

Yes, but you have to understand why you would punt. The defense have been playing great all game. Hindsight is 20/20. Punting was also a good call.

 

[The Snork]

We lost because we had ZERO TOUCHDOWNS. Don't expect to beat a top 25 team with ZERO TOUCHDOWNS.

 

[HuskerNMO]

Yes, but you have to understand why you would punt. The defense have been playing great all game. Hindsight is 20/20. Punting was also a good call.

Exactly, the only way they could score on that drive is if they got 1 big chunk, and that's exactly what they did. I bet put in that situation they wouldn't score 9 out of 10 times, which is a better chance than getting that 1 yard 5/10 times.

 

[Huskers532]

I personally don't attribute the loss to just 1 thing. Sure if we went for it on 4th and 1 and converted it we win. Same goes if West/O'Hanlan were on the same page, and didn't get beat. If we had scored on our final drive when it was 1st and Goal from the 6 we would have won. If Prince's (I liked how the announcers called him 'The Prince' during the game lol) reach was 1/2 an inch longer the pass would've been knocked down. If Suh had gotten more of Taylor's jersey when he threw it.

The list goes on and on...

I'm happy that the game was as close as it was, I still get nervous in these big games because the 2007 season still looms in the back of my head. Just look how far we've come thus far, our defense is much better, and we can only improve from here. I think the game will help our team mature.

 

[clone]

We lost because we had ZERO TOUCHDOWNS. Don't expect to beat a top 25 team with ZERO TOUCHDOWNS.

good point. But 15 points was enough if things played out a little differently.

great effort on the road against a ranked opponent.

Lots of season left.

GO BO!!

 

[ticks]

I thought going for it was the obvious call. It was one yard for a victory. If you don't make it, the defense still has 63 yards to work with.

 

[ICT HSKR 10]

I personally don't attribute the loss to just 1 thing. Sure if we went for it on 4th and 1 and converted it we win. Same goes if West/O'Hanlan were on the same page, and didn't get beat. If we had scored on our final drive when it was 1st and Goal from the 6 we would have won. If Prince's (I liked how the announcers called him 'The Prince' during the game lol) reach was 1/2 an inch longer the pass would've been knocked down. If Suh had gotten more of Taylor's jersey when he threw it.

The list goes on and on...

I'm happy that the game was as close as it was, I still get nervous in these big games because the 2007 season still looms in the back of my head. Just look how far we've come thus far, our defense is much better, and we can only improve from here. I think the game will help our team mature.

The sad part is it shouldn't have even come down to this. 6 times we hit the red zone, and came out with 5 field goals and a punt after a 1st and goal from the 6. If we get more on 1 of those 6 possesions, the game is out of reach for VT. VTech's defense did what it needed to the entire game, kept us out of the end zone. Minus the first and last possesion, our D played decent. I would have said the D played great but VTech's ineptitude had quite a bit to do with our success on D.

 

[Glendower]

It sure sounds like Watson was confident his offense could get the first down. Makes you wonder, did Watson recommend they go for it but got overruled?

The offense had proven it couldn't do anything. The defense had just gotten the ball back and only had to get 1 first down, and they couldn't even do that. Defense was LIGHTS out after the opening drive for the most part. Bo's offense had let him down all day, he trusted his defense would have a better chance to keep them from marching 90 yards than the offense getting 1.

Can't say as I blame him.

I could have sworn we had a running back who was making big runs all day. Weird.

 

[VA Husker Fan]

Oh good, we need a new thread for this. :nanalama

... Pelini's decision to punt instead of going for it on 4th and 1. Why you would voluntarily give the ball back to a higher-ranked home team that is playing with a minute and a half left on the clock before a sold-out crowd, and which also is led by a dangerous QB who possesses last-second, game-wining abilities is beyond me. By punting, Pelini chose to play not to lose rather than playing to win. For crying out loud, coach, go for it, kick a FG, fake a field goal, fake the punt, do something to show you want win.

Uh, who is this QB? Probably the biggest reason for punting is that we had totally shut Taylor down ever since the first drive. Had he ever won a game like this before? I just read that VT hadn't had a last second win since Mike Vick.

 

[J_2_THA_BONE]

We lost because we had ZERO TOUCHDOWNS. Don't expect to beat a top 25 team with ZERO TOUCHDOWNS.

EXACTLY. Easily could've had 2 or 3 TD's but wound up with 0.

 

[Fuzzy]

You know i re-watched the scramble on the last play where VaTech scored, and Taylor kept running around.

The entire time i kept thinking Micheal Vick, yelling "dont scramble, throw it!"

Then of course Taylor throws it and they score. "hmm, maybe he should have kept scrambling..."

 

[EbylHusker]

... Pelini's decision to punt instead of going for it on 4th and 1. Why you would voluntarily give the ball back to a higher-ranked home team that is playing with a minute and a half left on the clock before a sold-out crowd, and which also is led by a dangerous QB who possesses last-second, game-wining abilities is beyond me. By punting, Pelini chose to play not to lose rather than playing to win. For crying out loud, coach, go for it, kick a FG, fake a field goal, fake the punt, do something to show you want win.

The following excerpt from today's article in the Omaha World Herald says it all.

• Late in the fourth quarter, Nebraska led 15-10 after stopping Virginia Tech on fourth down. NU got the ball with 2:07 to play. The Hokies burned all three timeouts as Nebraska kept it on the ground, trying to burn clock.

 

“You've got to get one first down. You have to,” Watson said. “Make them use those three timeouts and get the first down. Then you've got the game secured.”

 

On third and 5, Watson called the same QB draw that Lee used to gain 17 the last time it was called.

“We had a good call,” the coach said.

 

This time, Lee got 4. One more yard, Watson said, and the Huskers would've lined up in victory formation. Instead, Nebraska had to punt, and the Hokies had life.

It sure sounds like Watson was confident his offense could get the first down. Makes you wonder, did Watson recommend they go for it but got overruled?

Punting was the right call. You don't give a team that has gotten just over 50 yards of offense in the second half (50 total yards people) a short field with 2:00 remaining. It's just that simple.

 

[macroboy]

We lost cause we had to punt on 4th and goal bc/ of endless penalties....

and we started throwing on 2nd and goal from the 3 instead of Burkhead up the gut

and bc/ Holt dropped a TD

and bc/ after Lee threw a pick he couldn't seem to find his targets

and bc/ when he hit Gillelyn all alone he threw it out of bounds

and bc/ of the opening kick off

and bc/ on 3rd and 1 we ran a pitch sweep instead of the shotgun zone read

and bc/ we kicked 5 feold goals and scored no touchdowns

and bc/ O'Hanlon blew a coverage

and bc/ we gave Taylor too much time to throw

and bc/ we didn't go for it on 4th and 1

There's lots of reasons.

Some people seem obsessed with their favorite reason.