B1G bowl blowouts

[ColoradoHusk]

How many of us thought we would beat UCLA? Riley & Co. Studied the way Stanford beat UCLA and played likewise. Since Riley is known to win games he shouldn't perhaps we WOULD have beat Stanford. Alabama-no. They're just that good ( even though it's odd they keep getting beat by the same team two years in a row!?)

I thought we had a good chance of beating UCLA. I thought the fans who thought we would get blown out watched a different season than I did. I don't think Stanford would destroy us but Alabama/Clemson/Ohio State probably would.

I think those 3 you just listed are probably the best 3 teams this year. Stanford is probably 4, and a healthy Oregon is probably not very far behind (up for debate)

They aren't even in the top 30 in S&P ratings.

That's true, but you know as well as I, they are a top 15-20 team. When Oregon was healthy, they beat Washington, USC, and Stanford. Who are all in the top 25 of those ALL HOLY S&P ratings.
I don't expect you to be on the same team as I when arguing but everyone around the country that pays attention to college football as a whole (not just to the Huskers) knows that Oregon's QB broke his index finger on his throwing hand in the Eastern Washington game. Played through it at Michigan State and if you even have a clue to who Vernon Adams is, you know he was off and that over throw at the end of the game to Byron Marshall was due to that injury. That is common knowledge to those who follow the sport closely outside of their favorite teams.

Michigan State was also in the top 25 of those rankings.

I might have stretched it a little being the top 5 whatever, but if you look at how the season unfolded, and if Oregon was healthy. They beat MSU, and sure as heck don't lose to WSU in the last 3 mins. Finishing 11-1, beat USC again in the Pac12 title game, and a playoff berth.

I would say that injuries are part of the game, and it was Oregon's fault that they didn't have a reliable QB they could turn to when Adams was hurt.
Michigan State had the biggest win of their season over Ohio State when Connor Cook was out with an injury. The best teams are able to adapt and overcome injuries when they happen.

 

[MichiganDad3]

This has been the worst bowl season in a long time from an enjoyable game point of view. I cannot remember a year with this many blowout games. The BIG has been bad in the high profile games, but in the lower tire bowls the BIG is doing well. It looks like the BIG will be 5-5 this year in the bowls.

 

[lo country]

That turn over information is actually very in encouraging to me.

Clean that up and we might have something special. AND....when almost all of those were caused by one player....well....improve that position and.....

Trouble is, IIRC, Riley teams have been pretty bad in this regard. So I doubt they'll be willing as coaches to try to get help with solving the problem.

Since 2008, they were only (-) once. The other years they were in (+) for TO margin. It really is somehow in the DNA of the Huskers. Limiting/getting TO's should be the main focus moving forward.

IIRC NU from 1988-2000 was (+) every year save 2. Since then, we have only been (+) twice...... If we are looking for an identity, TO prone is it.....

 

[HollandHusker]

Zac Taylor was the only one that took care of the ball at QB in recent history. 21 TD to 3 INT's going into the OU championship game....then he threw 3 picks.

Zac Taylor didn't really make dumb decisions when he played...the past two Martinez and Armstrong both suffer from poor mechanics and dumb decision making. If you look at the schools that are in the big bowls the quarterbacks playing can manage the game and make smart decisions. Coker, Watson, Cook, Hogan and Barrett all can take over the game and very rarely make bonehead plays. Armstrong the past two seasons under two different staffs tries to be the hero to often which leads to his mechanics issues which leads to turnovers. If we can get a quarterback that can manage the game on offense I think you would see smarter play from the entire offense

 

[Scratchtown]

How many of us thought we would beat UCLA? Riley & Co. Studied the way Stanford beat UCLA and played likewise. Since Riley is known to win games he shouldn't perhaps we WOULD have beat Stanford. Alabama-no. They're just that good ( even though it's odd they keep getting beat by the same team two years in a row!?)

I thought we had a good chance of beating UCLA. I thought the fans who thought we would get blown out watched a different season than I did. I don't think Stanford would destroy us but Alabama/Clemson/Ohio State probably would.

I think those 3 you just listed are probably the best 3 teams this year. Stanford is probably 4, and a healthy Oregon is probably not very far behind (up for debate)

They aren't even in the top 30 in S&P ratings.

That's true, but you know as well as I, they are a top 15-20 team. When Oregon was healthy, they beat Washington, USC, and Stanford. Who are all in the top 25 of those ALL HOLY S&P ratings.
I don't expect you to be on the same team as I when arguing but everyone around the country that pays attention to college football as a whole (not just to the Huskers) knows that Oregon's QB broke his index finger on his throwing hand in the Eastern Washington game. Played through it at Michigan State and if you even have a clue to who Vernon Adams is, you know he was off and that over throw at the end of the game to Byron Marshall was due to that injury. That is common knowledge to those who follow the sport closely outside of their favorite teams.

Michigan State was also in the top 25 of those rankings.

I might have stretched it a little being the top 5 whatever, but if you look at how the season unfolded, and if Oregon was healthy. They beat MSU, and sure as heck don't lose to WSU in the last 3 mins. Finishing 11-1, beat USC again in the Pac12 title game, and a playoff berth.

I would say that injuries are part of the game, and it was Oregon's fault that they didn't have a reliable QB they could turn to when Adams was hurt.
Michigan State had the biggest win of their season over Ohio State when Connor Cook was out with an injury. The best teams are able to adapt and overcome injuries when they happen.

I agree, that's mostly true. But FSU doesn't win the national title in 2013 without Winston. So just because they aren't the deepest team, does that mean they aren't the best?

I understand your point for sure, I just think there is a little too much weight saying that they are the best teams. I have always preferred the phrase "The best team at the end of the year may not be the best, but the healthiest".

Certainly the case last year. OSU had their 3rd string QB in but everyone else was healthy. Oregon nearly 8 starters out, and was forced to play a hurt TE

 

[olddominionhusker]

Zac Taylor was the only one that took care of the ball at QB in recent history. 21 TD to 3 INT's going into the OU championship game....then he threw 3 picks.

Zac Taylor didn't really make dumb decisions when he played...the past two Martinez and Armstrong both suffer from poor mechanics and dumb decision making. If you look at the schools that are in the big bowls the quarterbacks playing can manage the game and make smart decisions. Coker, Watson, Cook, Hogan and Barrett all can take over the game and very rarely make bonehead plays. Armstrong the past two seasons under two different staffs tries to be the hero to often which leads to his mechanics issues which leads to turnovers. If we can get a quarterback that can manage the game on offense I think you would see smarter play from the entire offense

I don't know. I feel like there were times where Tommy also put the team on his back as well like the end of the MSU game. As Guy said elsewhere he is a classic risk/reward guy.

I'm hopeful that he really is recommitted as he said after the Iowa game. Because the Tommy I saw against UCLA is exactly what this team needs to be successful. He was efficient and beat them with his arm and his feet when he needed to.

I'm choosing to be optimistic that he is going to learn from the meltdowns this year and play like he did in the bowl. If that is the case, we can beat anyone on the schedule next year

 

[Dagerow]

Nebraska - Pleasantly surprised at how physical they were on both sides of the ball which lead to a win no one saw coming.

MSU - I don't think MSU is quite as bad as they showed last night, nor is Alabama quite as good as they showed. MSU got waxed and one thing lead to another. That said, Alabama is just the better team. And NO ONE should want to play Nick Saban when he has a month to prepare.

NW - I have honestly struggled to find a reason why they have been ranked so high this year. The more I watched them the more I felt they weren't more than an average NW team and today, they go EXPOSED! It was too easy.

Iowa - While big, disciplined, and make big plays at the right time, they played virtually no one. It took 4 bad ints and all that goes with it to beat a lowly Nebraska team. I an NOT surprised by this result either. Well, I didn't expect 35-0 in the 2nd quarter, but not surprised to see them exposed.

Michigan - I don't want to admit that this is the beginning of something big in Ann Arbor, but it is.

Unfortunately, the more I watch the more convinced that NU football is dead as we want to know it. We ARE a middle of the pack, fledgling program and I don't know if NU has the distinctive competencies to get back on top right now. I SOOOOOOOO want to be wrong!

Agree with everything except the last paragraph. Not saying they are great, but they are not that bad.

 

[Kernal]

Zac Taylor was the only one that took care of the ball at QB in recent history. 21 TD to 3 INT's going into the OU championship game....then he threw 3 picks.

Zac Taylor didn't really make dumb decisions when he played...the past two Martinez and Armstrong both suffer from poor mechanics and dumb decision making. If you look at the schools that are in the big bowls the quarterbacks playing can manage the game and make smart decisions. Coker, Watson, Cook, Hogan and Barrett all can take over the game and very rarely make bonehead plays. Armstrong the past two seasons under two different staffs tries to be the hero to often which leads to his mechanics issues which leads to turnovers. If we can get a quarterback that can manage the game on offense I think you would see smarter play from the entire offense

I don't think it's fair to say it's simply Tommy trying to be the hero and if he didn't everything would be better. I view it more as that is the role he had been asked/taught to perform under the last staff. Look at the chronology:

• 2009: We have an atrocious offense that spoils what could have been a great season. Everyone thinks more dynamic and better QB play will save us.
• 2010: Martinez to the rescue! He's the QB we needed in 2009 to win it all. Save us, Taylor!
• 2011-2013: Uugh, why aren't you saving us, Taylor?
• 2013-2014: Tommy Armstrong, you're our next savior. Now save us!
• 2015: Tommy, what the hell are you doing... just play within the system!!!

I think Tommy was doing what he'd been taught to do, and I don't put all that blame on him. I think it's what was previously expected of the QB- to make up for other deficiencies on the offense. In some ways I think this all came about because of Martinez's immense talent.

But we can't just say take out the turnovers without also saying take away the comeback against Miami, and probably the comeback vs. Michigan State. Those are just two different results of the same process: great success and great failure. Everybody needs to buy into a new way of doing things, one where people just do what is asked of them and trust that their teammates will do the same.

 

[lo country]

Zac Taylor was the only one that took care of the ball at QB in recent history. 21 TD to 3 INT's going into the OU championship game....then he threw 3 picks.

Zac Taylor didn't really make dumb decisions when he played...the past two Martinez and Armstrong both suffer from poor mechanics and dumb decision making. If you look at the schools that are in the big bowls the quarterbacks playing can manage the game and make smart decisions. Coker, Watson, Cook, Hogan and Barrett all can take over the game and very rarely make bonehead plays. Armstrong the past two seasons under two different staffs tries to be the hero to often which leads to his mechanics issues which leads to turnovers. If we can get a quarterback that can manage the game on offense I think you would see smarter play from the entire offense

I don't know. I feel like there were times where Tommy also put the team on his back as well like the end of the MSU game. As Guy said elsewhere he is a classic risk/reward guy.

I'm hopeful that he really is recommitted as he said after the Iowa game. Because the Tommy I saw against UCLA is exactly what this team needs to be successful. He was efficient and beat them with his arm and his feet when he needed to.

I'm choosing to be optimistic that he is going to learn from the meltdowns this year and play like he did in the bowl. If that is the case, we can beat anyone on the schedule next year

TA has been a product of Beck IMO and his offensive philosophy. Big or bust. Beck liked to go for the home run shots and it showed in his play calling and decision making boy TA. This season, IMO, he tried the same home run shots instead of trusting the check downs and dink and dunk game. After Iowa, he came to the realization (or after Rutgers) and realized that he has one last year to do something great at NU.

TA did a great job against UCLA. Managed the game, minimized miscues and did what he was asked to do. Nothing more, nothing less. I think its hard for a competitor like TA to "throttle down" in games and not try to "win it". I would also think that being the acknowledged leader of the team made Riley and Langs take a less "demanding approach" to reeling him in. Again, IMO, don't alienate the leader, but get him on your side and then slowly try to shape/mold/ him into the guy they want.

 

[olddominionhusker]

Zac Taylor was the only one that took care of the ball at QB in recent history. 21 TD to 3 INT's going into the OU championship game....then he threw 3 picks.

Zac Taylor didn't really make dumb decisions when he played...the past two Martinez and Armstrong both suffer from poor mechanics and dumb decision making. If you look at the schools that are in the big bowls the quarterbacks playing can manage the game and make smart decisions. Coker, Watson, Cook, Hogan and Barrett all can take over the game and very rarely make bonehead plays. Armstrong the past two seasons under two different staffs tries to be the hero to often which leads to his mechanics issues which leads to turnovers. If we can get a quarterback that can manage the game on offense I think you would see smarter play from the entire offense

I don't know. I feel like there were times where Tommy also put the team on his back as well like the end of the MSU game. As Guy said elsewhere he is a classic risk/reward guy.I'm hopeful that he really is recommitted as he said after the Iowa game. Because the Tommy I saw against UCLA is exactly what this team needs to be successful. He was efficient and beat them with his arm and his feet when he needed to.

I'm choosing to be optimistic that he is going to learn from the meltdowns this year and play like he did in the bowl. If that is the case, we can beat anyone on the schedule next year

TA has been a product of Beck IMO and his offensive philosophy. Big or bust. Beck liked to go for the home run shots and it showed in his play calling and decision making boy TA. This season, IMO, he tried the same home run shots instead of trusting the check downs and dink and dunk game. After Iowa, he came to the realization (or after Rutgers) and realized that he has one last year to do something great at NU.
TA did a great job against UCLA. Managed the game, minimized miscues and did what he was asked to do. Nothing more, nothing less. I think its hard for a competitor like TA to "throttle down" in games and not try to "win it". I would also think that being the acknowledged leader of the team made Riley and Langs take a less "demanding approach" to reeling him in. Again, IMO, don't alienate the leader, but get him on your side and then slowly try to shape/mold/ him into the guy they want.

And if they can do that, the sky's the limit because Tommy has the tools to be a great CFB QB

 

[Tomhusker64]

Lets just all take a minute here to enjoy Iowa being slaughtered like the sow they are.

:woo

:woo

That feels better doesn't it?

Kinda what I was thinking. And it gets better when you figure in the a$$ whooping the frightened Irish took.

 

[lo country]

Zac Taylor was the only one that took care of the ball at QB in recent history. 21 TD to 3 INT's going into the OU championship game....then he threw 3 picks.

Zac Taylor didn't really make dumb decisions when he played...the past two Martinez and Armstrong both suffer from poor mechanics and dumb decision making. If you look at the schools that are in the big bowls the quarterbacks playing can manage the game and make smart decisions. Coker, Watson, Cook, Hogan and Barrett all can take over the game and very rarely make bonehead plays. Armstrong the past two seasons under two different staffs tries to be the hero to often which leads to his mechanics issues which leads to turnovers. If we can get a quarterback that can manage the game on offense I think you would see smarter play from the entire offense

I don't know. I feel like there were times where Tommy also put the team on his back as well like the end of the MSU game. As Guy said elsewhere he is a classic risk/reward guy.I'm hopeful that he really is recommitted as he said after the Iowa game. Because the Tommy I saw against UCLA is exactly what this team needs to be successful. He was efficient and beat them with his arm and his feet when he needed to.

I'm choosing to be optimistic that he is going to learn from the meltdowns this year and play like he did in the bowl. If that is the case, we can beat anyone on the schedule next year

TA has been a product of Beck IMO and his offensive philosophy. Big or bust. Beck liked to go for the home run shots and it showed in his play calling and decision making boy TA. This season, IMO, he tried the same home run shots instead of trusting the check downs and dink and dunk game. After Iowa, he came to the realization (or after Rutgers) and realized that he has one last year to do something great at NU.
TA did a great job against UCLA. Managed the game, minimized miscues and did what he was asked to do. Nothing more, nothing less. I think its hard for a competitor like TA to "throttle down" in games and not try to "win it". I would also think that being the acknowledged leader of the team made Riley and Langs take a less "demanding approach" to reeling him in. Again, IMO, don't alienate the leader, but get him on your side and then slowly try to shape/mold/ him into the guy they want.

And if they can do that, the sky's the limit because Tommy has the tools to be a great CFB QB

Agree. As much as I disliked the "scheme" on O, our D cost us the games. The O carried the team IMO.

 

[Saunders]

How many of us thought we would beat UCLA? Riley & Co. Studied the way Stanford beat UCLA and played likewise. Since Riley is known to win games he shouldn't perhaps we WOULD have beat Stanford. Alabama-no. They're just that good ( even though it's odd they keep getting beat by the same team two years in a row!?)

I thought we had a good chance of beating UCLA. I thought the fans who thought we would get blown out watched a different season than I did. I don't think Stanford would destroy us but Alabama/Clemson/Ohio State probably would.

I think those 3 you just listed are probably the best 3 teams this year. Stanford is probably 4, and a healthy Oregon is probably not very far behind (up for debate)

They aren't even in the top 30 in S&P ratings.

That's true, but you know as well as I, they are a top 15-20 team. When Oregon was healthy, they beat Washington, USC, and Stanford. Who are all in the top 25 of those ALL HOLY S&P ratings.

I don't expect you to be on the same team as I when arguing but everyone around the country that pays attention to college football as a whole (not just to the Huskers) knows that Oregon's QB broke his index finger on his throwing hand in the Eastern Washington game. Played through it at Michigan State and if you even have a clue to who Vernon Adams is, you know he was off and that over throw at the end of the game to Byron Marshall was due to that injury. That is common knowledge to those who follow the sport closely outside of their favorite teams.

Michigan State was also in the top 25 of those rankings.

I might have stretched it a little being the top 5 whatever, but if you look at how the season unfolded, and if Oregon was healthy. They beat MSU, and sure as heck don't lose to WSU in the last 3 mins. Finishing 11-1, beat USC again in the Pac12 title game, and a playoff berth.

Oregon has one of the best teams that money can buy, but they didn't play defense this year even when healthy.

I follow cfb more than most, so don't start that game.

Edit: and with that, I'm done with Phil Knight U. This is a thread on the B1G.

 

[Mavric]

To add, Stanford has run 25 SNAPS and has 35 points! Thats an offense to strive for. 2nd most points in the half in Rose Bowl history.

in recent years, no good teams lose to Purdue

Except Ohio State.

Obviously it's an exaggeration.

But there would seem to be some difference between a 7-6 Purdue team that won a bowl game and a 2-10 team that didn't beat any other FBS school.

And there's always the "recent" semantic.

 

[Elf]

Didn't all of Solich's teams have the fumble bug too?

I swear NU has always been a team that turns the ball over, a lot.

I'd be curious to see those stats as well. The only stats I could find were TO margin from 2008 to present. NU has been on the negative side of TO margin every year with the exception of 2009 (probably not a shocker there). I'll see if I can find some older stats. I seem to remember one year when NU had Alexander and Dahrran Diedrick @ RBs that every other carry seemed to turn into a fumble...especially with Alexander. I just figured it was because the dude's biceps were too big.

Osborne's teams seemed to fumble a lot iirc, but many times we recovered our own fumbles. When you run it 50+ times a game you're probably going to see a few more fumbles than a team runs it 30 times a game.