Huskers93-97
Well-known member
What stat matters more than points. You win with them and lose without them. It’s really all that matters
Should we fire Satterfield??
- Thread starter Huskerfollower4life
- Start date
Huskers93-97
Well-known member
I only repeat what you and others fail to ever respond to. I would love for someone to provide a logical and factual response showing Satt is a good OC, has been solid other places or at Nebraska to show me maybe he will work. But no one has had anything other than blaming injuries or players or lack of players for why he is not doing a good job.
So here is your chance big shot to actually respond with something meaningful other that be a Satt apologist with no stats to back up your opinion.
Last edited by a moderator:
gobiggergoredder
Well-known member
I'd probably say wins matter more.
Followed by turnovers and penalties.
I think those are fair markers for this program. We can't kick a field goal until yesterday. I'm sure you're taking that into consideration.
Last edited by a moderator:
Huskers93-97
Well-known member
Wins and Losses are not a stat. That is the result of the game. What I am saying is points scored and points allowed are the 2 stats that matter most.
Turnovers and Penalties are probably the 2 next most important for impacting wins I agree
lo country
Mods
This is the ultimate bottom line of success or failure as a HC. Analyzing statistics can show you progress, but the marker of stay or go, success vs failure is the win/loss column. It is the ultimate arbitrator. Currently we are 5-3. Potential to go 9-3 or 5-7. BUT, with Satt, even if we get to 6 or 6+, Rhule needs to seriously evaluate him and the rest of the offensive staff. He currently sits career 87 in offensive productivity. High of 40 at USC. How many points have we scored in the 2nd halves of games taking out Purdue? 18 points in 4 games. 46 in 5 games when Purdue is included. These are for conference games only. Add another 23 against non-conference so total in 8 games is 69 in 16 quarters of play. Or 4 points per quarter. That's horrible. Purdue is the outlier. Satt is unsat based upon his history, stats at NU and the eyeball test. A lot of the same old square peg round hole and calling plays for the guys you want vs the guys you have. The "need to run to win the B1G" etc...And calling running plays isn't the same as "running" the ball. But that's just my .02....Never liked the hire so biased from the jump.
Well, I would agree that the bottom line is wins and losses and that is determined by points on the scoreboard. Lets be honest. We have 5 wins against teams that are sub par except Colorado. IF we played Colorado now, I don't know if we win, because they have improved. I measure program success by improvement as the season goes. I don't see this team improving, but its hard to measure when our first few games were against suspect teams and frankly bottom feeders. I would rather play good teams in the non-con to see what you have, not wait until week 7 to find out your still the same program heading in the same direction. NO WHERE.
Satterfield is not the OC to move this program into the future. Its hard to make a judgment on this because we have suspect line play, suspect WR play and suspect run game. However, I think if we had a better play caller, some of these areas would be hidden more.
Satterfield is not the OC to move this program into the future. Its hard to make a judgment on this because we have suspect line play, suspect WR play and suspect run game. However, I think if we had a better play caller, some of these areas would be hidden more.
Satterfield is only part of the problem though. We have other issues. Special teams are terrible. Offensive line is terrible. Honestly I don't see this program moving forward in better shape than what it has been. We see the same results with every staff that comes here. We fired Pelini because he couldn't compete with the big boys. Riley couldn't compete with anyone. Frost could compete with most teams, just couldn't win. Now Rhule is the same as what we have had. So what is the answer going forward? I say quit hiring everyone else rejects and start with a fresh face to the game and to Power 5 football. Cignetti type, who has cut his teeth coaching nobodies for years. So again, is Satterfield the only problem, no at all, but he is part of the problem.
LP1
Well-known member
IDK, maybe some of you have different standards and goals than I do when it comes to this program. I'm not happy being 6-6 or 7-5 and struggling to make a bowl game every year. Well, that's pretty much the ceiling for Satterfield. If we want to return to championship-caliber program, it's obvious a change will have to be made. I can't believe there are actually people still defending him at this point.
Hagg
Well-known member
Our D is back on track.. or at least seemed to be in that game.
This thread's about that clueless goof running the O. What the &%#! is he even doing here?
Last edited by a moderator:
I wasn't the one who brought up Ohio State's yards per play. Maybe you should direct your angst at the person who did.
Undone
Well-known member
If we lose to UCLA something like 21-17 this week where the turnover margin is neutral and we had to punt a bunch and our rushing yards per carry was again relatively dismal, then for me Satterfield is on the hot seat. For sure.
If we put up something like 28 points of offense and we win, let's say, 28-21 then for me it's just on to the next game.
Satterfield is suspect, but he's got four more games to show he's got some smarts in that brain pan of his. If we do better on offense than we have in the last three games - like significantly better - it's fine.
If we put up something like 28 points of offense and we win, let's say, 28-21 then for me it's just on to the next game.
Satterfield is suspect, but he's got four more games to show he's got some smarts in that brain pan of his. If we do better on offense than we have in the last three games - like significantly better - it's fine.
lo country
Mods
The bolded concerns me for real. We have "one of the oldest most mature" OL in FBS. They are for all intents and purposes, a poor to very poor OL. How have no younger guys pushed for playing time? Wrong recruits? Poor development
? And most of this OL graduates.....So is next year an OL rebuild? 
YetiJR
Well-known member
Think I disagree with this, I've seen dramatic improvement on players we wanted out/off the team.The bolded concerns me for real. We have "one of the oldest most mature" OL in FBS. They are for all intents and purposes, a poor to very poor OL. How have no younger guys pushed for playing time? Wrong recruits? Poor development
Injuries have hurt what they planned to do with the OL at the start of the season. Lutovsky will be back as a senior, Evans is just a soph, Gunnar is just a freshmen and we have a ton of young talent on the 2-deep.
Ultimately, I'm not sure if Teddy will be back next year or will medically retire.
krc1995
Well-known member
This^
Not sure if Satt is the problem. I guess he’s the figure head of the most problematic area, so his system is suspect. However none of us know really what’s going on and why it looks bad, so I’ll leave the big hiring/firing decisions to Coach Rhule. If you trust him and think he’s the program rebuilder that he was advertised to be, why spend so much energy whining about his personnel choices mid-season?
I support Rhule’s refusal to fire coaches mid season. How would that get us anywhere? We have at least four games left. The season is afoot and we are right where we said we wanted to be. Consider that A) No one knows what the real issues are and B) Maybe Dylan has formed a bond with Satt?
Sorry everyone got their hopes unrealistically up, then had to sit through a a tough OT loss and a lopsided one and then tragically lost one that we should have lost anyway. CFB can be brutal