Against a team like IL with a weak Rush defense, it's a no brainer to keep pounding the ball. But each offensive game plan needs to be geared to the opponent, and against a top-tier opponent, I would expect our coaching staff to have an arsenal of plays to try if the bread and butter play (handoff to Ameer) is not working. I don't think fans are asking too much for Beck to gear his gameplan and playcalling to the opponent we are facing.
I'm finding it hard to think of any Husker game ever with worse O-Line play. I'm guessing they aren't feeling proud. I hope the issues they had are fixable, like effort vs an injury that was slowing down the tackles.
You don't know that. What if he comes out and throws a pick 6 on the very next play? Now they double the points they did manage to get.
Dunno. The coaches rightly (luckily) figured it would be a close game at the end. Would you rather have a 48 yard game winning or tying field goal with or againsts the wind?
I definitely won't argue that they are the better team, but if NEB gets another shot at them....they better be ready.
that's the over-obsession with planning ahead and all the thinking ahead this staff does that I'm sick of. Just play for now damnit. Jeebus. I've seen Bill Belichek defer choice in frickin overtime to take the wind.
Really? This game is close in the fourth quarter every year. You know that you physically match up with this team and that it's strength on strength, it's cold and rainy all night on a grass field, but you don't want the stiff wind at your back in the 4th. Really?
This. The run wasn't there. Pretty simple really. That's why Armstrong threw it 43 times so it's no shocker that we lost based on what we asked our QB to do. Personally I hope there isn't a rematch. While it's 'neat' in theory for some if MSU comes to play and moreover doesn't lay an egg in the 2nd half like they did on Saturday we're going to lose again and in much less dramatic fashion.
+1.
I was on the fence. The problem is the time left. If there was another 40-50 seconds, I'd definitely kick it deep.. If we were only down by three, I'd kick it deep. If we had at least one timeout, I'd kick it deep. But there was only 3:22 left and we were out of timeouts. That means, best case we could expect to get the ball back with about one minute to go and probably need 60-65 yards to get into the end zone. Not impossible but our offense wasn't exactly rolling and we we'd be in obvious passing situations and hadn't handled their pressure very well. And there's a chance that one first down could end it.
Uhhh, first It's only hindsight if my opinion was formed AFTER the game. But I'm glad you know so much about how and when I form my opinions. And no, it was not the right choice, as the events of the game proved out. Just because you can make a mathematical argument on how it MIGHT have worked doesn't make it the correct decision. The decision should be made based on the liklihood of the scenario playing out. It is just ridiculous to think that NU would score three TDs and successfully convert three consecutive two-point conversioins. The likelihood was greater (not great...just greater) that they would be able to play good defense, force three-and-outs, and get the ball back in order to score three times.
There are a lot of "ifs" in there but the fact is, the scenario of cutting it to a two score game only works if you make the tremendous leap-of-faith that NU would have been able to successfully convert THREE CONSECUTIVE two-point conversions. That just wasn't going to happen. When they scored the TD they had nearly a quarter of football left. A couple of three-and-outs and use of the time-outs and it was just a lot more likely to get the ball back, score two TDs and be set up for a field goal to tie the game.