Papuchis: "I was stunned"

[It'sNotAFakeID]

Reality of what? Almost losing to some of the worst teams in FBS? Michigan looked impressive against ND until everyone figured out how overrated that team is, so now that win doesn't look as good. And they have looked like complete a$$ the last two weeks. If that is good to you, im glad I dont live in your "reality"

Because close games against crappy teams never happen? We have a handful of those.

Okay, so why are we pretending that Michigan is all of a sudden good. The fact that they have had two close games in a row against two crappy teams means they are just as "bad" as we are, does it not? They're just bad in a different way.

But I don't think either team is bad, just trying to figure out who they are.

 

[California Husker]

Those of you who know me from discussions here on HB, know that I never call out players. Like I always say...they don't make the roster and decide who is starting. These young men are living the dream; playing for the Nebraska Cornhuskers, and I envy them. I will not name names.

That said, there are players out starting (and seeing significant minutes) who just don't seem to be playing very well. It seems like the coaches would notice that there are times, when a few of the starters are on the sidelines, when the defense seems to be more aggressive and get after the ball a little more.

I know that the reason the starter is out on a particular play is situational and that they may not be playing the same base due to down-and-distance blah, blah, blah...I just think there are some of the young guys who are not getting the opportunity to start, who might make our defense a little better. What's the worse that could happen? We give up 400 yards and 200 yards to a FCS running back? Wait, that's what we are doing now.

 

[husker_99]

Reality of what? Almost losing to some of the worst teams in FBS? Michigan looked impressive against ND until everyone figured out how overrated that team is, so now that win doesn't look as good. And they have looked like complete a$$ the last two weeks. If that is good to you, im glad I dont live in your "reality"

Because close games against crappy teams never happen? We have a handful of those.

Okay, so why are we pretending that Michigan is all of a sudden good. The fact that they have had two close games in a row against two crappy teams means they are just as "bad" as we are, does it not? They're just bad in a different way.

But I don't think either team is bad, just trying to figure out who they are.

I think there was an expectation that they would be good on well they played and beat Notre Dame but most know that anything can happen. Personally i didn't think Michigan would be that much better than last year.

 

[Stumpy1]

Like I said in another thread, the object of the game is to score more points then the other team. It isn't who gets more yards or how they get the yards. Why everyone is so fixated on yardage is beyond me.

 

[husker_99]

Like I said in another thread, the object of the game is to score more points then the other team. It isn't who gets more yards or how they get the yards. Why everyone is so fixated on yardage is beyond me.

Because the better teams will finish those drives with touchdowns.

 

[Stumpy1]

Like I said in another thread, the object of the game is to score more points then the other team. It isn't who gets more yards or how they get the yards. Why everyone is so fixated on yardage is beyond me.

Because the better teams will finish those drives with touchdowns.

What drives? No where in my statement did I say anything about drives or how they get yardage because it doesn't matter at the end of the game. the only thing that matters is the score board.

 

[Ratt Mhule]

Reality of what? Almost losing to some of the worst teams in FBS? Michigan looked impressive against ND until everyone figured out how overrated that team is, so now that win doesn't look as good. And they have looked like complete a$$ the last two weeks. If that is good to you, im glad I dont live in your "reality"

Because close games against crappy teams never happen? We have a handful of those.

His argument is Michigan has a better defense bc they give up less YPG. YPG is not the be all, tell all stat. PPG matters way more and we gave up less points than Michigan yesterday.

And then he makes an excuse for them by saying they may have had a lot of turnovers and short fields when the same thing happened to Nebraska last week. Why wasn't he saying the same thing about Nebraska last week that he said about Michigan this week?

 

[Stumpy1]

Since yardage is more important then the score to some. Why did ASU (417 yrds) lose to Stanford (391 yrds), Maine (379) lose to NW (373), MSU ( 254) lose to ND (220) and San Jose (486) lose to Minn. (424)?

 

[husker_99]

Reality of what? Almost losing to some of the worst teams in FBS? Michigan looked impressive against ND until everyone figured out how overrated that team is, so now that win doesn't look as good. And they have looked like complete a$$ the last two weeks. If that is good to you, im glad I dont live in your "reality"

Because close games against crappy teams never happen? We have a handful of those.

His argument is Michigan has a better defense bc they give up less YPG. YPG is not the be all, tell all stat. PPG matters way more and we gave up less points than Michigan yesterday.

And then he makes an excuse for them by saying they may have had a lot of turnovers and short fields when the same thing happened to Nebraska last week. Why wasn't he saying the same thing about Nebraska last week that he said about Michigan this week?

seriously? if you are going to quote me and what you said at least keep it to that. don't start derailing. if not quote what stumpy 1 said.

 

[husker_99]

Like I said in another thread, the object of the game is to score more points then the other team. It isn't who gets more yards or how they get the yards. Why everyone is so fixated on yardage is beyond me.

Because the better teams will finish those drives with touchdowns.

What drives? No where in my statement did I say anything about drives or how they get yardage because it doesn't matter at the end of the game. the only thing that matters is the score board.

so how does a team gain yards if they have no drives?

 

[clyde40]

Pap and co are "stunned" because SDSU came out passing a little. And this coaching staff has a serious addiciton to game film. If it ain't on tape, they don't plan for it. And so when, say, Wisconsin comes out with jet sweeps, or SDSU starts passing, and, my Heavens, if a formation looks foreign, then pages get rifled through, players get torched, and off we go.

It's probably the same reason things are held back so much or seldom used on the offensive side of the ball. They don't want it on that precious game film, never mind other coaches aren't nearly as hooked as they are.

It started as a red flag a few years ago but in my opinion this is the biggest coaching flaw on the staff.

This is very true. They didn't expect them to come out and be in 4 WR sets the entire game either. Neb. wasn't able to run their base defense because they had to line up in nickel and dime the whole game.

 

[Enhance]

Like I said in another thread, the object of the game is to score more points then the other team. It isn't who gets more yards or how they get the yards. Why everyone is so fixated on yardage is beyond me.

Because the better teams will finish those drives with touchdowns.

What drives? No where in my statement did I say anything about drives or how they get yardage because it doesn't matter at the end of the game. the only thing that matters is the score board.

I don't think you're completely disregarding YPG, but it's still an important defensive measure. Yes, the scoreboard and PPG is the ultimate factor and matters more. But, if a team gives up 500+ yards and still wins, that says to me the opposing offense pretty much had their way with the defense, but the defense either tightened up in the red zone or the offense blew opportunities. You're leaving a lot in the hands of chance if you're banking defensive performance on those chances.

Yesterday is a really good example. SDSU pretty much had their way offensively, but we tightened up in certain situations or they blew opportunities. Not every team is going to blow those opportunities. So, if you can have a defense that limits opponent yards AND points, obviously, that's preferable. Because that says you're also limiting their effectiveness. It's definitely not a good thing if your defense is continually out on the field giving up huge chunks of yards.

 

[Hunter94]

Since yardage is more important then the score to some. Why did ASU (417 yrds) lose to Stanford (391 yrds), Maine (379) lose to NW (373), MSU ( 254) lose to ND (220) and San Jose (486) lose to Minn. (424)?

dude, there are exceptions to everything....come on, you are smarter than this analogy?....on average, when your defense is giving up 450 yards or more per game, you will likely lose a lot of those games.

 

[Stumpy1]

Like I said in another thread, the object of the game is to score more points then the other team. It isn't who gets more yards or how they get the yards. Why everyone is so fixated on yardage is beyond me.

Because the better teams will finish those drives with touchdowns.

What drives? No where in my statement did I say anything about drives or how they get yardage because it doesn't matter at the end of the game. the only thing that matters is the score board.

I don't think you're completely disregarding YPG, but it's still an important defensive measure. Yes, the scoreboard and PPG is the ultimate factor and matters more. But, if a team gives up 500+ yards and still wins, that says to me the opposing offense pretty much had their way with the defense, but the defense either tightened up in the red zone or the offense blew opportunities. You're leaving a lot in the hands of chance if you're banking defensive performance on those chances.

Yesterday is a really good example. SDSU pretty much had their way offensively, but we tightened up in certain situations or they blew opportunities. Not every team is going to blow those opportunities. So, if you can have a defense that limits opponent yards AND points, obviously, that's preferable. Because that says you're also limiting their effectiveness. It's definitely not a good thing if your defense is continually out on the field giving up huge chunks of yards.

I'm not totally disregarding YPG. It will always be a part of the measuring stick when it comes to defense but I think people put WAY to much stock into it. I will look at the PPG way before I will YPG when determining if a D is decent or not.

 

[Stumpy1]

Since yardage is more important then the score to some. Why did ASU (417 yrds) lose to Stanford (391 yrds), Maine (379) lose to NW (373), MSU ( 254) lose to ND (220) and San Jose (486) lose to Minn. (424)?

dude, there are exceptions to everything....come on, you are smarter than this analogy?....on average, when your defense is giving up 450 yards or more per game, you will likely lose a lot of those games.

But it happens every week? It has for a long time.