Observations from the UCLA game and NU football as a whole

[gratefullred]

nebraska as a whole.....don,t seem to recurit well.. the new kids coming along today don,t look at nu as a top notch football program, at least the 5 star studs...i recently looked at 23 unsigned 5 star kids, and not one even had nebraska on there list.....recruiting is huge in college football,,,cannot recruit the good kids, you are just another iowa

Stop with this crap. NU has never recruited better than they have in the last 4 years. T.O. never had more than one top 10 class. Aside from one year due to a small class Bo has been top 15-20 the last 4 years. That is about on par with what T.O. did and better than Call "dumpster fire starter" ahan.

If your going to put this out there, give us some facts to back it up.

 

[admo]

I don't know if Tim Beck is the worst thing that ever happened to TM as OP mentioned. But that fake read option pass to Kenny Bell is stupid. Not only does the corner just stay his ground to make a tackle, but the play brings the defense to the sideline where they throw it. That play should never be called again. It's stupid.

 

[admo]

On the other hand, how hard is it to be multiple? Either complete a forward pass or run the ball. Different formations, same concept. Throw or Run. The head scratcher is passing on third and short following a couple of good runs. Or running on 3rd and long. Other than that, the fellas need to make some plays. It's just passing / blocking / running. These receivers are just waiting to make plays.

 

[Ric Flair]

Wow...a Nebraska fan admitting that the Bruins are a good team! (I won't call them great until after the Stanford and Oregon games.)

Almost all posters here believe, or at least write, that if Nebraska had only done things differently the outcome would have been different. I think Martinez should have run more and that the defense should have blitzed a little more. But I think that would have only narrowed the margin of defeat.

Nebraska up 21-3 has only to keep doing what it was doing to win that game. You sound as if this UCLA victory was inevitable at all times in the game - and it very clearly wasn't.

Down 18, UCLA needed Nebraska to collapse to win that game. Nebraska obliged.

This mantra you keep selling that UCLA's athletes were clearly superior to Nebraska's is false. The teams are pretty evenly matched athletically.

Exactly.

UCLA didnt and doesnt have superior athletes to NU. They are right about even across the board. UCLA is a good team but they aren't as superior as Bruins fans beleive them to be.

I wish your team luck the rest of the year but the arrogance is getting a bit old.

To go along with the OP, one area UCLA is obviously superior is coaching. I would trade Nebraska's entire staff for theirs.

If I took the time to look through the newspaper archives, I could find at minimum 3 times that Beck has apologized for not doing what he should have done during a game. Maybe he is Captain Hindsight, but it is getting old. Watson 2.0

Agree completely. I'm at a loss trying to understand why it isn't until after the games he realizes this...or how he can't seem to learn from his mistakes and thus keeps making the same ones in game after game.

 

[Bruleif]

I did not say that UCLA players were superior than Nebraska's - or at least I did not mean to. What I meant is that at the key positions I thought the UCLA players were faster than the Nebraska ones.

 

[WhatDoIKnow]

I did not say that UCLA players were superior than Nebraska's - or at least I did not mean to. What I meant is that at the key positions I thought the UCLA players were faster than the Nebraska ones.

Which would you rather have? Nebraska's players with the UCLA coaching staff, or the UCLA players with Nebraska's coaching staff?

It's really starting to hit home with me.

 

[Bruleif]

Wow...a Nebraska fan admitting that the Bruins are a good team! (I won't call them great until after the Stanford and Oregon games.)

Almost all posters here believe, or at least write, that if Nebraska had only done things differently the outcome would have been different. I think Martinez should have run more and that the defense should have blitzed a little more. But I think that would have only narrowed the margin of defeat.

Nebraska up 21-3 has only to keep doing what it was doing to win that game. You sound as if this UCLA victory was inevitable at all times in the game - and it very clearly wasn't.

Down 18, UCLA needed Nebraska to collapse to win that game. Nebraska obliged.

This mantra you keep selling that UCLA's athletes were clearly superior to Nebraska's is false. The teams are pretty evenly matched athletically.

Exactly.

UCLA didnt and doesnt have superior athletes to NU. They are right about even across the board. UCLA is a good team but they aren't as superior as Bruins fans beleive them to be.

I wish your team luck the rest of the year but the arrogance is getting a bit old.

Arrogance? If I say that I think the Bruins were faster than Nebraska, that's arrogance? Wow! Let's put it this way: if the Bruins were not faster how were they able to score 28 points in one quarter? Wasn't that due to the speed of both the Bruin defense and offense?

I stand by what I said - I think that the Bruins were faster than Nebraska.

 

[Haspula]

Wow...a Nebraska fan admitting that the Bruins are a good team! (I won't call them great until after the Stanford and Oregon games.)

Almost all posters here believe, or at least write, that if Nebraska had only done things differently the outcome would have been different. I think Martinez should have run more and that the defense should have blitzed a little more. But I think that would have only narrowed the margin of defeat.

Nebraska up 21-3 has only to keep doing what it was doing to win that game. You sound as if this UCLA victory was inevitable at all times in the game - and it very clearly wasn't.

Down 18, UCLA needed Nebraska to collapse to win that game. Nebraska obliged.

This mantra you keep selling that UCLA's athletes were clearly superior to Nebraska's is false. The teams are pretty evenly matched athletically.

Exactly.

UCLA didnt and doesnt have superior athletes to NU. They are right about even across the board. UCLA is a good team but they aren't as superior as Bruins fans beleive them to be.

I wish your team luck the rest of the year but the arrogance is getting a bit old.

I stand by what I said - I think that the Bruins were faster than Nebraska.

This

 

[It'sNotAFakeID]

Wow...a Nebraska fan admitting that the Bruins are a good team! (I won't call them great until after the Stanford and Oregon games.)

Almost all posters here believe, or at least write, that if Nebraska had only done things differently the outcome would have been different. I think Martinez should have run more and that the defense should have blitzed a little more. But I think that would have only narrowed the margin of defeat.

Nebraska up 21-3 has only to keep doing what it was doing to win that game. You sound as if this UCLA victory was inevitable at all times in the game - and it very clearly wasn't.

Down 18, UCLA needed Nebraska to collapse to win that game. Nebraska obliged.

This mantra you keep selling that UCLA's athletes were clearly superior to Nebraska's is false. The teams are pretty evenly matched athletically.

Exactly.

UCLA didnt and doesnt have superior athletes to NU. They are right about even across the board. UCLA is a good team but they aren't as superior as Bruins fans beleive them to be.

I wish your team luck the rest of the year but the arrogance is getting a bit old.

I stand by what I said - I think that the Bruins were faster than Nebraska.

This is absolutely false

Fixed it for you.

Anyways, no way did UCLA have the faster team. Why can I say this? We were up 21-3. If UCLA had superior athletes they would have came into Memorial Stadium and whooped us from the beginning. Instead, here is what happened:

Drive 1: 6 plays, 37 yards, 2:15 = PUNT

Drive 2: 3 plays, 8 yards, 0:56 = INTERCEPTION

Drive 3: 8 plays, 49 yards, 2:32 = FIELD GOAL

Drive 4: 4 plays, -4 yards, 1:33 = TURNOVER ON DOWNS

Drive 5: 8 plays, 36 yards, 2:33 = MISSED FIELD GOAL

Total: 29 plays, 127 yards, 9:49 = 3 POINTS

Those were your first 5 drives of the game, and they lasted until about halftime. Comparatively, Nebraska's first 5 drives:

Drive 1: 3 plays, 3 yards, 0:34 = PUNT

Drive 2: 4 plays, 28 yards, 1:30 = PASSING TOUCHDOWN

Drive 3: 17 plays, 92 yards, 6:42 = PASSING TOUCHDOWN

Drive 4: 10 plays, 36 yards, 5:27 = PUNT

Drive 5: 2 plays, 26 yards, 0:38 = PASSING TOUCHDOWN

Total: 36 plays, 175 yards, 14:51 = 21 POINTS

Nebraska was athletically equal to or better than UCLA on Saturday. Mentally though, when things started turning south, it seemed the whole team went into a shell and never came out. Last week could have turned ugly for the Bruins, it really could have and should have. But UCLA fought and fought and fought, and they deserved to win the game when it was all said and done.