Putting Ourselves In Bad Situations/Tanner Lee

[seaofred92]

I just rewatched the game and wanted to bring this up, as I don't think there has been enough of an emphasis placed on this in the post game discussion I've seen on here.

One (four?) of the biggest things that influenced the outcome of this game were Tanner's interceptions, which wound up placing the much maligned defense in terrible positions. All 4 of the INT's by Oregon led to them starting drives in Nebraska territory: 

INT1-- Oregon drive starts on Neb 20

INT2-- Oregon drive starts on Neb 34

INT3-- Oregon drive starts on Neb 31

INT4-- Oregon drive starts on Neb 35

For the sake of this conversation we will discount the 4th INT which led to Oregon getting a first down and then running out the clock. 

The first INT was a decently well thrown ball that came off of a suspect bounce. You place the ball in a place where your #1 WR is able to get both hands on it like that and your #1 WR has to catch it. Simple as that. This led to Oregon punching it in on a 3rd down TD to Nelson in the corner and put Oregon up 14-0 less than 4 minutes into the game. Cannot happen.

The second INT was just brutal. Down 35-14 with 1:54 left until halftime and backed up on 3rd and 15, you need to ensure that you get out of the half down no more than 21. Lee throws outside of Morgan and Morgan breaks inside, leading to another quick Duck score before the half to put them up 42-14. This wound up being the game winning TD. 

The third INT comes as a result of basic quarterbacking, don't be late over the middle. Nebraska was at essentially midfield, down 14 to start the fourth quarter. This was a 3rd and 6, where if Nebraska doesn't convert we are able to bring out Lightbourn and play the field position game with a coffin corner punt. Instead, Lee throws the INT and kills any momentum for Nebraska after stopping Oregon on downs and allows Oregon to set up a drive on the Nebraska 31. The Blackshirts were able to hold and Oregon missed a 44 yard field goal. 

Oregon scored 21 points off of turnovers in this game and Nebraska had 7 for a +14 advantage in this category. Obviously you don't know how the results of the game change if you take away the interceptions but it is IMPERATIVE that while we continue to settle into this new defensive scheme and learn more about our players on the defensive side of the ball, that we are able to protect the ball on offense and put the defense on the field in situations where they can succeed. I completely agree with the notion that Nebraska on D looked extremely sloppy for most of the first half, but the interceptions are essentially throwing kerosine on a campfire. 

Moving forward, Tanner Lee is going to have to have better numbers than he did on Saturday. 19/41 with 4INTs and a QBR of 12 is for a lack of better words, debilitating. Nebraska for years has not had the ability to throw consistently in these primetime matchups at a rate that is over 55%, and most of the time has lost the turnover battle in these games in large part due to bad quarterbacking and INTs. This is something that I expected to change with Tanner behind center, and I can't say that it has after having one crack at it. Obviously this was the biggest start of Tanner's career, and I do believe that he will settle down as we move forward and he continues to become more comfortable, but if we don't get better quarterbacking in these games then I don't care who the defensive coordinator is, this team is going to struggle to stop opponents from scoring. 

 

[Landlord]

It's hard to put it on Tanner, at least for me personally, when this sort of thing just seems to be so common for Nebraska football regardless of quarterback, regardless of coaching staff, regardless of offensive scheme.

We're snakebit. We have been for a long time. 

 

[ColoradoHusk]

I think we just don't play with confidence yet.  I think that's a big piece of it.

And that comes from a coach who is going to come in and change the culture.  There were times when Pelini had the '09 and '10 teams playing with a ton of confidence, but that was mainly on defense.

I haven't seen anything from the Riley teams where the team is going out on the field confident and knowing they were going to dominate the opponent in a big game. It's more of a "hope" we can keep it close and pull out a win in the end. That was what last year's Wisconsin game was like for me. The team played relatively well, especially on D, but it didn't have the confidence to make the needed plays down the stretch to win. 

 

[Landlord]

I think we just don't play with confidence yet.  I think that's a big piece of it.

Sure, but that's a thing that transcends any circumstances.

Remember the 2006 Big XII Championship game when Maurice Purify fumbled it on our own 9 yard line on our first offensive snap, and our conference offensive player of the year threw four interceptions?

Remember the 2008 Oklahoma game when Oklahoma scored fast, then we threw a pick six on our first offensive play to go down 14-0?

Remember 2012 Ohio State where the first score was OSU's off a pick six?

Remember 2012 Wisconsin where, again, they scored early, our first offensive play was a pick six to take a quick 10-0 lead?

2016 Ohio State, 3rd play of the game, pick six. 

It's something embedded into the fabric of our program. Seems to have very very little to do with individual coaches or players.

 

[BoNeyard]

So Oregon capitalized off Nebraska's mistakes. If Nebraska would have capitalized off of half of 70% Oregon's mistakes in the second half we win the game. Our offense got stuck when we needed them the most.

 

[Landlord]

I don't buy the snakebit thing as much that I just think virtually all those teams had far superior talent and coaching than Nebraska did.

1. That's certainly not every example of what I'm talking about, plenty of others against less talented teams (nevermind we beat 2012 Wisconsin earlier in the year, even though we started that game with the same sort of 'snakebit' mentality).

2. Teams with less talent or coaching talent beat, or at least play up to the competition of, teams better than them all the time. This has nothing to do with that, and everything to do with  mental fortitude. Our football program has, for well over a decade now, gone into big situations timid, shellshocked, nervous and mentally prepared to fail. You can't win big games if you can't believe that you can. I have no idea where that comes from, but it happens all the damn time and it's weird and it's a bummer.

 

[lo country]

1. That's certainly not every example of what I'm talking about, plenty of others against less talented teams (nevermind we beat 2012 Wisconsin earlier in the year, even though we started that game with the same sort of 'snakebit' mentality).

2. Teams with less talent or coaching talent beat, or at least play up to the competition of, teams better than them all the time. This has nothing to do with that, and everything to do with  mental fortitude. Our football program has, for well over a decade now, gone into big situations timid, shellshocked, nervous and mentally prepared to fail. You can't win big games if you can't believe that you can. I have no idea where that comes from, but it happens all the damn time and it's weird and it's a bummer.

Such much the above.  As you previously noted, you can name game after game with that "punch in the gut" that just breaks them. That mental fortitude if you will.  AA's fumble against UGA the first bowl game, the gamme against OU when we spotted them like 28 points in the first what seemed like 30 seconds.  UM and the roughing the punter.....The list goes on an all, but every game the team plays as though they are "waiting for the other shoe to drop".  This has gone on under Cally, Bo and Riley.  It's not a coaching thing. It's what you said IMHO.

 

[zoogs]

I think those middle two INTs in particular were costly. No bueno stuff that needs to be cleaned up.

 

[Mavric]

For some reason I don't think things that happened several years ago had any bearing on what went on Saturday.

 

[Red Five]

For some reason I don't think things that happened several years ago had any bearing on what went on Saturday.

Agree and disagree.  What happened under Solich, Callahan, and Pelini shouldn't have any impact on this year's team.  But to Landlord's point the same crap keeps happening.  Pelini seemed to have things on track over the 2nd half of 2009 and 1st half of 2010.  But then we reverted right back.

I don't know what the answer is.  I guess its a combination of better coaching, better players, better mental toughness, better luck, etc.

 

[Enhance]

I think it just speaks to a larger overall issue within the program that they can't get out of their own way. Previous years don't have any direct bearing on the present day, but it does shape a narrative, and it's a pretty cruddy narrative.

The truth of the matter is Nebraska has been an average to above average team in that time frame and that's ultimately why these types of things happen.

 

[BIG ERN]

When you get down 42-14 it takes a lot of what you can do as an offense. He was put into some bad spots, but at the end of the day throwing under 50% and 4 INTs just isn't a good football game. 2 of those picks weren't his fault. I love Stanley, but we went to him too much like he was Randy Moss. I didn't understand not getting DPE and Spielman more involved, even if it was just some quick screens. Tyjon will be a good player for us, but I saw some timidness Saturday. He isn't on the level yet of the previous 2 mentioned who are known play makers. 

 

[BigRedBuster]

I just rewatched the game and wanted to bring this up, as I don't think there has been enough of an emphasis placed on this in the post game discussion I've seen on here.

One (four?) of the biggest things that influenced the outcome of this game were Tanner's interceptions, which wound up placing the much maligned defense in terrible positions. All 4 of the INT's by Oregon led to them starting drives in Nebraska territory: 

INT1-- Oregon drive starts on Neb 20

INT2-- Oregon drive starts on Neb 34

INT3-- Oregon drive starts on Neb 31

INT4-- Oregon drive starts on Neb 35

For the sake of this conversation we will discount the 4th INT which led to Oregon getting a first down and then running out the clock. 

The first INT was a decently well thrown ball that came off of a suspect bounce. You place the ball in a place where your #1 WR is able to get both hands on it like that and your #1 WR has to catch it. Simple as that. This led to Oregon punching it in on a 3rd down TD to Nelson in the corner and put Oregon up 14-0 less than 4 minutes into the game. Cannot happen.

The second INT was just brutal. Down 35-14 with 1:54 left until halftime and backed up on 3rd and 15, you need to ensure that you get out of the half down no more than 21. Lee throws outside of Morgan and Morgan breaks inside, leading to another quick Duck score before the half to put them up 42-14. This wound up being the game winning TD. 

The third INT comes as a result of basic quarterbacking, don't be late over the middle. Nebraska was at essentially midfield, down 14 to start the fourth quarter. This was a 3rd and 6, where if Nebraska doesn't convert we are able to bring out Lightbourn and play the field position game with a coffin corner punt. Instead, Lee throws the INT and kills any momentum for Nebraska after stopping Oregon on downs and allows Oregon to set up a drive on the Nebraska 31. The Blackshirts were able to hold and Oregon missed a 44 yard field goal. 

Oregon scored 21 points off of turnovers in this game and Nebraska had 7 for a +14 advantage in this category. Obviously you don't know how the results of the game change if you take away the interceptions but it is IMPERATIVE that while we continue to settle into this new defensive scheme and learn more about our players on the defensive side of the ball, that we are able to protect the ball on offense and put the defense on the field in situations where they can succeed. I completely agree with the notion that Nebraska on D looked extremely sloppy for most of the first half, but the interceptions are essentially throwing kerosine on a campfire. 

Moving forward, Tanner Lee is going to have to have better numbers than he did on Saturday. 19/41 with 4INTs and a QBR of 12 is for a lack of better words, debilitating. Nebraska for years has not had the ability to throw consistently in these primetime matchups at a rate that is over 55%, and most of the time has lost the turnover battle in these games in large part due to bad quarterbacking and INTs. This is something that I expected to change with Tanner behind center, and I can't say that it has after having one crack at it. Obviously this was the biggest start of Tanner's career, and I do believe that he will settle down as we move forward and he continues to become more comfortable, but if we don't get better quarterbacking in these games then I don't care who the defensive coordinator is, this team is going to struggle to stop opponents from scoring. 

I agree with pretty much everything you said.  It's pretty hard for me to blame two of those TDs on Lee.  But, the other two are on him.  They were just bad decisions/QB play.  

I will say this about probably the last two INTs.  If we weren't in such a hole, we probably aren't pressing so much in the second half with the passing game.  If we aren't down that much, we probably would have been running the ball more and the defense wouldn't have been able to step back and play pass D as easily.  

It's a team game.  Lee (and Morgan on the first INT) put the entire team in a hole that was very difficult to dig itself out of.  

If I had to blame anyone for this loss, I would have to put it on Lee and the entire Defensive game plan in the first half.  Yes, the offense put the D in bad situations, but.....you have to step up and play better than they did.

Lee had a bad game.  No question about it.  I believe he will get better.

 

[bugeater17]

I just rewatched the game and wanted to bring this up, as I don't think there has been enough of an emphasis placed on this in the post game discussion I've seen on here.

One (four?) of the biggest things that influenced the outcome of this game were Tanner's interceptions, which wound up placing the much maligned defense in terrible positions. All 4 of the INT's by Oregon led to them starting drives in Nebraska territory: 

INT1-- Oregon drive starts on Neb 20

INT2-- Oregon drive starts on Neb 34

INT3-- Oregon drive starts on Neb 31

INT4-- Oregon drive starts on Neb 35

For the sake of this conversation we will discount the 4th INT which led to Oregon getting a first down and then running out the clock. 

The first INT was a decently well thrown ball that came off of a suspect bounce. You place the ball in a place where your #1 WR is able to get both hands on it like that and your #1 WR has to catch it. Simple as that. This led to Oregon punching it in on a 3rd down TD to Nelson in the corner and put Oregon up 14-0 less than 4 minutes into the game. Cannot happen.

The second INT was just brutal. Down 35-14 with 1:54 left until halftime and backed up on 3rd and 15, you need to ensure that you get out of the half down no more than 21. Lee throws outside of Morgan and Morgan breaks inside, leading to another quick Duck score before the half to put them up 42-14. This wound up being the game winning TD. 

The third INT comes as a result of basic quarterbacking, don't be late over the middle. Nebraska was at essentially midfield, down 14 to start the fourth quarter. This was a 3rd and 6, where if Nebraska doesn't convert we are able to bring out Lightbourn and play the field position game with a coffin corner punt. Instead, Lee throws the INT and kills any momentum for Nebraska after stopping Oregon on downs and allows Oregon to set up a drive on the Nebraska 31. The Blackshirts were able to hold and Oregon missed a 44 yard field goal. 

Oregon scored 21 points off of turnovers in this game and Nebraska had 7 for a +14 advantage in this category. Obviously you don't know how the results of the game change if you take away the interceptions but it is IMPERATIVE that while we continue to settle into this new defensive scheme and learn more about our players on the defensive side of the ball, that we are able to protect the ball on offense and put the defense on the field in situations where they can succeed. I completely agree with the notion that Nebraska on D looked extremely sloppy for most of the first half, but the interceptions are essentially throwing kerosine on a campfire. 

Moving forward, Tanner Lee is going to have to have better numbers than he did on Saturday. 19/41 with 4INTs and a QBR of 12 is for a lack of better words, debilitating. Nebraska for years has not had the ability to throw consistently in these primetime matchups at a rate that is over 55%, and most of the time has lost the turnover battle in these games in large part due to bad quarterbacking and INTs. This is something that I expected to change with Tanner behind center, and I can't say that it has after having one crack at it. Obviously this was the biggest start of Tanner's career, and I do believe that he will settle down as we move forward and he continues to become more comfortable, but if we don't get better quarterbacking in these games then I don't care who the defensive coordinator is, this team is going to struggle to stop opponents from scoring. 

Good analysis. Tough game for Lee. As some other posters stated, we just don't seem to play with confidence. I think Lee was a little rattled after the first pass/int. HIs lack of mobility didn't give him an outlet to avoid an aggressive D. Langs did him no favors as it didn't seem there were many plays called with check downs to the back available. Going forward Langs needs to incorporate the rb into the passing game to take advantage of the aggressive LB play.

 

[TGHusker]

When you get down 42-14 it takes a lot of what you can do as an offense. He was put into some bad spots, but at the end of the day throwing under 50% and 4 INTs just isn't a good football game. 2 of those picks weren't his fault. I love Stanley, but we went to him too much like he was Randy Moss. I didn't understand not getting DPE and Spielman more involved, even if it was just some quick screens. Tyjon will be a good player for us, but I saw some timidness Saturday. He isn't on the level yet of the previous 2 mentioned who are known play makers. 

Agree 100%.  I didn't understand the lack of spreading the ball around in the 2nd half esp - crunch time.  Stanley was double covered, --surely DPE,  Spielman, or Tyjon were open at times but it seems like Lee didn't check down to those quys and was looking almost exclusively for Stanley.