Positives Going In...

I can see this game going either two ways:

1. Washngton 2011, we came out swinging (option pass on the first play to Kenny) and we traded punches with them for 2 quarters before finally put them away.

2. Texas Tech 2009, come out sluggish and not focused. Mental mistakes a plenty, and sputtering offense leads to short fields for the UCLA offense.

imo.

 
Landlord of Memorial Stadium said:
Ulty said:
Landlord of Memorial Stadium said:
This isn't really accurate, at least not by my estimation. Here's games since 2010 where we have gotten off to hot starts against decent teams:

2011 Wisconsin - scored first, then again to lead 14-7 early.

2011 Michigan State - had the first two scores of the game both in the first quarter

2011 South Carolina - Scored all of our points in the first quarter

2012 Ohio State - they scored first, but we responded with three unanswered scores to lead 17-7
Click to expand...
$h!t, forget I said anything then! This thread is supposed to be about positives; that's not the vibe a get when I look at that list of games.
Click to expand...
The thread is about positives, sure, but the specific question was games we started out well in. Sorry if I rained on the parade answering it properly
default_tongue.png
Click to expand...
Well, I almost started an argument regarding the definitions of "hot start" or "unanswered", but I'm not Devnet.
default_leghump.gif


I think the real positive is that last year's game was a night game on the road, with a ton of poor tackling and slow pursuit, tons of special teams mistakes, and poor play calling when we needed a good drive, yet we lost by only one score. We know that the speed on D is better and we have the home field, so I honestly think that if NU avoid too many mistakes, it's a victory. We don't necessarily need a perfect game, just not a bad one.

 
junior4949 said:
If we keep this game close and don't let UCLA get their ground game going, we win this game in the fourth quarter. If we let UCLA get their ground game going early, it will more than likely get out of hand with most of the stadium empty by the fourth quarter. A lot of this game hinges upon if our defense shows up and if our offense can keep from turning the ball over. Watching the Giants play Dallas last night was just agonizing. The Giants were clearly the better team, but six turnovers just can't be overcome.
Click to expand...
I will be there till the final snap...win or lose. Only go to one game per year and I like to get my money's worth. Besides..even on the long shot that we lose, you get to see the future in the last set of series.

GO BIG RED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 
Hooked on Huskers said:
Execution (mostly coaches) = UCLA advantage. Weak link: Pap

BTW, I don't really care about 0-13 Southern Miss game. Keep in mind, only one game. (grain of salt thing)
Click to expand...
Coaches plan and coach. Players execute. And Wyoming was only one game also, but it's not the score or yardage our defense gave up that will benefit us from that.....it's the experience against a quality opponent.
 
Positives?

Last year in Pasadena, Nebraska was its own worst enemy. As poorly as the Husker defense played, we probably win that game if Brett Maher doesn't have the worst game of his career both punting and kicking.

Nebraska should be slightly more improved than UCLA and playing at home.

The Husker Juniors and Seniors have had at least 2 years of wake-up calls, and this is now a legacy game. Freshmen and Sophomores are under a lot of pressure to prove themselves, and that's when the good ones do. Coaches are under the same pressure.

We have all the pieces and UCLA could be both as good and as vulnerable as we are. This is about who shows up mentally.

I say Huskers put all their eggs in this basket and win.

Then we space off completely and lose to Illinois.

 
For some reason, (don't ask me why as I'm a pessimist) I think we have a real good shot at this game. I don't think UCLA will put together a full four quarters and our offense will be enough to pull it out in the end.

 
I personally think that last year's game hinged on one player in particular, Franklin. Johnathon is now in the NFL, Green Bay? I think.

Anyway, he was a one man thrashing machine and tore our D apart. That individual effort seemed to open up UCLA's game plan very early and very wide. I am not sure we would have lost, if not for his huge production.

As long as UCLA doesn't have another NFL quality replacement for Franklin, I think we win. I do not know if it will be big or a squeaker, but I think it will be a tough game. I wouldn't be surprised by a loss, either. And I wouldn't even be disappointed with a loss, provided the Huskers play to their top potential in every phase of the game. If we do that, and UCLA STILL wins, well, they are just the better team.

I hate when I see our team playing below its potential.

 
What keeps me from thinking Illinois being a loss is the simple fact there is game and a bye week prior to the Illinois game. However Scheelhaase is a 4 year starter and is quite mobile.

 
robsker said:
tmfr15 said:
I am trying to think on the positives, but have to be really honest. I just don't think we win this game. Matter of fact, I am worried about it getting out of hand. We played really well against them in the first half on offense last year and I have not seen the offense clicking to the point that I am thinking we can have another fast start like that. Our defense struggled in both games so far this year. Think about how Southern Miss started...they got the ball, got a first down and had a good down and distance going when the pick 6 went down. Then then got the ball back and started moving it for first downs and what not. When we got it.... it was three and punt. We get that start on Saturday and I can almost guarantee that it will be 14-0 UCLA.

Check that... Southern Miss just had one first down on that opening poss.
Click to expand...
You might be quite correct. I am inclined to think that NU is not well coached nor is the team often focused or prepared. That said, the Huskers do have talent --- and the TMArt/RB/WR talent at NU is a force to be reckoned with... plus the other positives too.

And I agree... we have serious flaws as a team. But I am not sure UCLA is all that good. Are they really that much better?

I think w/ the home field and an offense that can score a great deal... well, we should have a shot... perhaps as good a shot as UCLA. Now... would I be surprised if UCLA thumped NU by 21 points? No... especially knowing that NU can --- and often has --- self destructed. But... if NU does not self destruct... I would also not be surprised if NU won this something like 38-35 or so.

Who knows? Still.. not convinced that UCLA is all that good.
Click to expand...
Wow, you two are probably a lot of fun to watch a game with. Why such "Debbie Downers"? UCLA is a good football team not Alabama or LSU or Oregon great. They are good, their QB is good and they have talent.

They have played one game this year against a decent but overmatched Nevada team that is working with a new HC. Chris Ault was/is one of the best coaches in the game right now and I am sure that Nevada will miss him. I would take Wyoming in the game vs. Nevada.

I watch UCLA several time last year, and I can safely say, they never played anywhere close to as well as they did against NU the whole rest of the year except for maybe the 2nd Stanford game. I mean they did lose what 4 games, or was it 5?

Your not giving your thought process an honest assessment. Nebraska has just as many and maybe more playmakers than they have on offense. Overall last year our defense was better than theirs statistically. They have just as many youngsters playing on defense as we do.

At worst this is a toss up game. With home field advantage and the early start time, I say NU by 12.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top