Tommie Frazier Twitter reaction

[It'sNotAFakeID]

I don't know. Don't you think that maybe, just maybe the offense not staying on the field for more than 3 plays and 45 seconds at a time might have just tired the defense out a little bit? That maybe, just maybe having UCLA start every one of their drives in the second half at around midfield combined with the defense being back on the field after just 45 seconds might have made it easier for the Bruins's offense to score 38 points? Here's what I saw from the first half. The offense sustained drives (more than they did in the second half), even if they didn't end in points. It allowed the defense to catch a breather and work through any possible adjustments. The defense played really well as a result. Because they played well, the offense wasn't forced to do things it wasn't comfortable in doing. It's a cycle. When the cycle goes wrong, you have to look where it went wrong, and I think it was on the offense. Not to say the defense wasn't at any fault, because their failings put the offense in a bad position.

So blame the Defense for not stopping they cycle. That makes as much sense. Or blame Special Teams. But to point the finger at the Offense, and say they were the ones to blame, makes absolutely zero sense. Is the Offense to blame? Yes, absolutely. Is the Defense to blame? Yes, absolutely Is Special Teams to blame? Yes, absolutely. Are the Coaches to blame? Yes, absolutely. But it is not the Offense's fault that the Defense couldn't stop Hundley & Co. any more than it is the Defense's fault that Special Teams had several crap plays any more than it is Special Teams' fault that the Offense failed to move the ball. You're not wrong in that the Offense screwed the pooch today. They certainly did. But you cannot blame the Offense's for the fact that the Defense suddenly stopped playing solid football. Ciante Evans, on the collapse: "I guess we just lost our step and our sense of urgency. Guys were unfocused." Stanley Jean-Baptiste on why the Defense collapsed: “I guess thinking that we've got the game won, thinking that they’re going to lay down.” This is a systemic issue with Bo Pelini's teams. We've seen this time and again, where our guys show up to win, not to play. They seem to think that teams are just going to roll over for them because they're so great - or something, I don't know what. But when their opponents don't respect them, and strive to come back on them, and give 110% effort in contrast to Nebraska's 50% effort, our guys too often look caught unawares, like they can't fathom a team not bowing to the greatness of Nebraska. And they don't, and they don't think we're great. Those quotes above should scare the crap out of anyone thinking we're getting back to playing solid defense. This is a defense that has surrendered 500 or more yards of offense in two of three games. Wearing a legacy that has has surrendered 500 yards in four of their last five games. And despite that, the best explanation one of our best senior players can come up with is that they think the opponent is "going to lay down." Sheesh. You cannot blame that on the Offense. That's solely on the Defense. Let the Offense own their own problems - many as they are. Let the Defense stand up and take responsibility for their own problems.

Never did I say that the defense didn't have their own responsibilities which they failed during the second half. Never. Read your PM I sent you. The defense did itself no favors in and of themselves. But they weren't put in a good position by the offense to have the chance to succeed. Yeah, that mindset is a shi**y one to have, and that's got to change. Yeah, the defense did let them score 41 points. But to ignore the offense's part in the defense not keeping UCLA out of the end zone is just as stupid as ignoring the defense's part in the offense not being able to get any momentum going.

 

[knapplc]

I've read several posts you've written tonight, all directing the Defense's woes back to the Offense. That's why we're talking about this.

I'm absolutely not ignoring the Offense. I'm simply saying they own their own problems, and the Defense owns theirs. Neither is to blame for the others' failure.

 

[Norhusker]

This being said, I appreciate what Tommie had to say. I am tired of status Quo. I dont put all blame on Bo.. but at the end of the day, he hires the OC/DC so blame falls to him.

Something needs to change or we are going to keep losing like we did today. We were up 21-3 and lost 41-21... THAT IS A PROBLEM.

I dont think Bo will like being told to fire his OC/DC and bringing in vets.. so then you fire him. Somehow get Scott Frost in here as our OC and bring in Bohl as our Head coach and a monty Kiffin type Def. coord.

That all sounds good on paper. IMHO I think the odds of us changing coaches and ending up better off are really slim.

I think if we lose 4-5 more games Bo will be gone. At this point in time any team on our schedule with near or equal talent has a better than 50% chance of beating us. We simply lack the coaching to out play them especially if they have mobile QB's. Michigan,Wisconsin, Penn state, Illinois, Northwestern and Michigan state have very questionable outcomes. Combine that with our usual loss against a mediocre team and that coaching change could happen. Bo will never fire any staff to save his own hide. That could come into play as well.

 

[Count 'Bility]

If Bo doesnt get back to 9 wins at minimum, he's out. Even if he gets to 9, or even 10, and the style of losses are status quo as our losses have become, and we finish the reg season on a low note, I still wouldnt be sure. I've never disagreed with this line of thinking. Dont necessarily disagree with it, but today was certainly disturbing.

 

[It'sNotAFakeID]

I've read several posts you've written tonight, all directing the Defense's woes back to the Offense. That's why we're talking about this.

I'm absolutely not ignoring the Offense. I'm simply saying they own their own problems, and the Defense owns theirs. Neither is to blame for the others' failure.

So? Sorry for not being thorough in my thoughts that the defense had their own problems?

If football is a team game, how can you not put some of the blame of the failure of one unit on the failure of another unit? That ignores a substantial part of the story and is far too simplistic. I'm simply saying that it is more complicated than this.

 

[knapplc]

If football is a team game, how can you not put some of the blame of the failure of one unit on the failure of another unit?

Because when the Offense is out on the field the Defense isn't. What the Offense does out there is not the Defense's fault, unless the Defense is directly related to something like the field position of the Offense. Conversely, when the Defense is out on the field, that has nothing to do with the Offense, unless the Offense does something stupid like turning the ball over on our side of the field. That didn't happen today.

When the Offense is on the field, regardless of field position or situation, I expect the Offense to perform up to certain standards. That includes making blocks, catching the ball, moving the ball, and scoring more often than not. Those things have literally nothing whatsoever to do with the Defense, and the Defense is not to blame if the Offense fails to do these things.

When the Defense is on the field, regardless of situation, I expect them to stop the other team from moving the ball or scoring, more often than not. With the rare exception of a turnover in horrible field position, nothing the Defense is expected to do has anything whatsoever to do with the Offense. If the Offense has 10 yards and zero points in the fourth quarter, I expect - I demand - that the Defense is out there doing their job. Period.

 

[admo]

Offense + Defense + Coaching. Just thought I would point out that the fake punt call was Bo. 31-21 late in the third quarter on our own 44 yard line. Does it not make clear sense to punt the ball and pin UCLA inside their 20? Close game still. Lot's of time left. We gain field position by punting, lose it by not converting 4th down. Instead UCLA goes 3 plays for a touchdown. Then the defense failed to hold them. At best case the Bruins would have punted and pinned the Huskers. So the fake punt attempt was on Coach which quickly put the score at 38-21 and all momentum clearly gone. And as the Buckeye announcer kept repeating himself about no pressure from the D-Line while in man coverage was too difficult to defend the Bruins offense, well that's Bo's strategy and it's on him for not adjusting. Big combo of things out there today against a good team. Same end result.

 

[It'sNotAFakeID]

If football is a team game, how can you not put some of the blame of the failure of one unit on the failure of another unit?

Because when the Offense is out on the field the Defense isn't. What the Offense does out there is not the Defense's fault, unless the Defense is directly related to something like the field position of the Offense. Conversely, when the Defense is out on the field, that has nothing to do with the Offense, unless the Offense does something stupid like turning the ball over on our side of the field. That didn't happen today.

When the Offense is on the field, regardless of field position or situation, I expect the Offense to perform up to certain standards. That includes making blocks, catching the ball, moving the ball, and scoring more often than not. Those things have literally nothing whatsoever to do with the Defense, and the Defense is not to blame if the Offense fails to do these things.

When the Defense is on the field, regardless of situation, I expect them to stop the other team from moving the ball or scoring, more often than not. With the rare exception of a turnover in horrible field position, nothing the Defense is expected to do has anything whatsoever to do with the Offense. If the Offense has 10 yards and zero points in the fourth quarter, I expect - I demand - that the Defense is out there doing their job. Period.

Your rationalizations are different than mine. Not going to change mine, I'm not going to change yours. That's fine. Since you explained yours, I'll explain mine, using the context of today's game.

I get it. The Offense has their own set of responsibilities to fulfill, and I expect them to play up to those responsibilities. The Defense isn't on the field when the Offense is, so the Defense can't have a direct impact in the performance of the offense. But that is too simple of a way to look at it, in my opinion. There are certainly some things a defense can do that can make an offense look better or worse than it really is. For example, SJB intercepted a pass and took it to the UCLA 25-30 yard line. The offense, now having a shorter field to work with and a momentum boost, went in and scored. Another example, when the defense was letting UCLA score left and right, it put the offense in a hole where they had to go away from things they were comfortable with. It put the offense in an incredibly difficult position, which didn't help them play loose like they were in the first half.

The Defense has their own set of responsibilities to fulfill, and I expect them to play up to those responsibilities. The Offense isn't on the field when the Defense is, so the Offense can't have a direct impact in the performance of the Defense. But that is too simple of a way to look at it, in my opinion. There are certainly some things an Offense can do that can make the Defense look better or worse than it really is. For example, the Defense was able to play more loose because they were less tired because the Offense was sustaining drives. UCLA had 131 yards more than 2/3s of the way through the second quarter. That is phenomenal. Also, our offense had held the ball for about 75% of the game up to that point. Another example, when the Defense was letting UCLA score left and right, the Offense wasn't maintaining possession for any period of time. It was 3 plays and a punt, MULTIPLE TIMES. If that doesn't effect a Defense in some way, shape, or form, then I don't know what's right.

That being said, here are some things from today's game that don't follow that reasoning:

Not sacking Hundley on 3rd and whatever and then allowing the Bruins to score on the same drive.

The offense going 3 and out to start the 2nd half.

The defense allowing UCLA to just march down the field on the following drive.

The offense going 3 and out after that.

But that's really about it. Both sides played bad at the same time and that's the result we got.

 

[Chumpy34]

It's Tommie "Freaking" Frazier, in my mind he can say anything he wants and has earned that right. I can't believe some posters are apologizing for him or what he said...it's been 6 years of this! Every year games where we just fall apart and embarrass ourselves. I am tired of it as I know a lot of you are. And for Tommie, it's more personal and emotional as a former player than any of us can understand I am sure....

 

[The Dude]

I'm sure Tommie held back a bit here. I can imagine what he and a lot of former Huskers are saying behind closed doors.

 

[lo country]

Zoogies,

You are one of the most level headed posters on here.

But Tommy has earned the right to comment on this team, more so than anyone on this board. His voice will be heard, and things need to change.

I really do not know what needs to be done, but have been screaming for a real OC and DC since both hirings. I think Bo can get it done, but he has to take the Dabo path. Had he done that, I think we would be in much better shape. I think there is still time to do that. But stubbornness is one of Bo's strong suits. And that of never taking the blame. The first half showed we have some talent. It needs to be put in place by qualified Coordinators, let Bo manage the team as a head coach is supposed to do. Spend the money, bring in talent and reap the rewards. It has worked for Dabo, Saban does it. Why can't we.

This^ We are NU and like Tommie, we deserve a better product. This is not some FCS school where guys can learn on the fly. It is one of the winningest programs of all time. 5 NC's, 3 Heisman winners etc..... Dabo spent big bucks and to date, it is paying off. Same with Bama. Bo is in rare company with the whole 9 wins per year. Imagine if we had competent staff to support him?

<img class="UMSRatingIcon" id="ums_img_tooltip" />

In all sports, no one deserves anything more than anyone else. I get tired of people saying we deserve more than what we are getting.

Deserve might be a poor word choice. We can afford better, get better, hire better etc because of our storied history, name cache, facilities etc.... Hiring your HS buds is a dumb a$$ move. Something I would expect from a lower tier school with none of the above enticements we offer.

 

[lo country]

I don't know. Don't you think that maybe, just maybe the offense not staying on the field for more than 3 plays and 45 seconds at a time might have just tired the defense out a little bit? That maybe, just maybe having UCLA start every one of their drives in the second half at around midfield combined with the defense being back on the field after just 45 seconds might have made it easier for the Bruins's offense to score 38 points?

Here's what I saw from the first half.

The offense sustained drives (more than they did in the second half), even if they didn't end in points. It allowed the defense to catch a breather and work through any possible adjustments. The defense played really well as a result. Because they played well, the offense wasn't forced to do things it wasn't comfortable in doing.

It's a cycle. When the cycle goes wrong, you have to look where it went wrong, and I think it was on the offense. Not to say the defense wasn't at any fault, because their failings put the offense in a bad position.

So blame the Defense for not stopping they cycle. That makes as much sense. Or blame Special Teams. But to point the finger at the Offense, and say they were the ones to blame, makes absolutely zero sense.

Is the Offense to blame? Yes, absolutely.

Is the Defense to blame? Yes, absolutely

Is Special Teams to blame? Yes, absolutely.

Are the Coaches to blame? Yes, absolutely.

But it is not the Offense's fault that the Defense couldn't stop Hundley & Co. any more than it is the Defense's fault that Special Teams had several crap plays any more than it is Special Teams' fault that the Offense failed to move the ball.

You're not wrong in that the Offense screwed the pooch today. They certainly did. But you cannot blame the Offense's for the fact that the Defense suddenly stopped playing solid football.

Ciante Evans, on the collapse: "I guess we just lost our step and our sense of urgency. Guys were unfocused."

Stanley Jean-Baptiste on why the Defense collapsed: “I guess thinking that we've got the game won, thinking that they’re going to lay down.”

This is a systemic issue with Bo Pelini's teams. We've seen this time and again, where our guys show up to win, not to play. They seem to think that teams are just going to roll over for them because they're so great - or something, I don't know what. But when their opponents don't respect them, and strive to come back on them, and give 110% effort in contrast to Nebraska's 50% effort, our guys too often look caught unawares, like they can't fathom a team not bowing to the greatness of Nebraska. And they don't, and they don't think we're great.

Those quotes above should scare the crap out of anyone thinking we're getting back to playing solid defense. This is a defense that has surrendered 500 or more yards of offense in two of three games. Wearing a legacy that has has surrendered 500 yards in four of their last five games. And despite that, the best explanation one of our best senior players can come up with is that they think the opponent is "going to lay down."

Sheesh. You cannot blame that on the Offense. That's solely on the Defense. Let the Offense own their own problems - many as they are. Let the Defense stand up and take responsibility for their own problems.

If these were their comments after the game, every player who agreed with this would ride the pine. Complete BS. The Captains need to be all over this. I believe it was JJHusker in another thread who learned "he wanted it more than the staff or the team". I agree. Comments like this should alarm any fan out there. This is systemic of the stuff Bo and Co have put on the field the past few years.

 

[Count 'Bility]

I don't know. Don't you think that maybe, just maybe the offense not staying on the field for more than 3 plays and 45 seconds at a time might have just tired the defense out a little bit? That maybe, just maybe having UCLA start every one of their drives in the second half at around midfield combined with the defense being back on the field after just 45 seconds might have made it easier for the Bruins's offense to score 38 points?

Here's what I saw from the first half.

The offense sustained drives (more than they did in the second half), even if they didn't end in points. It allowed the defense to catch a breather and work through any possible adjustments. The defense played really well as a result. Because they played well, the offense wasn't forced to do things it wasn't comfortable in doing.

It's a cycle. When the cycle goes wrong, you have to look where it went wrong, and I think it was on the offense. Not to say the defense wasn't at any fault, because their failings put the offense in a bad position.

So blame the Defense for not stopping they cycle. That makes as much sense. Or blame Special Teams. But to point the finger at the Offense, and say they were the ones to blame, makes absolutely zero sense.

Is the Offense to blame? Yes, absolutely.

Is the Defense to blame? Yes, absolutely

Is Special Teams to blame? Yes, absolutely.

Are the Coaches to blame? Yes, absolutely.

But it is not the Offense's fault that the Defense couldn't stop Hundley & Co. any more than it is the Defense's fault that Special Teams had several crap plays any more than it is Special Teams' fault that the Offense failed to move the ball.

You're not wrong in that the Offense screwed the pooch today. They certainly did. But you cannot blame the Offense's for the fact that the Defense suddenly stopped playing solid football.

Ciante Evans, on the collapse: "I guess we just lost our step and our sense of urgency. Guys were unfocused."

Stanley Jean-Baptiste on why the Defense collapsed: “I guess thinking that we've got the game won, thinking that they’re going to lay down.”

This is a systemic issue with Bo Pelini's teams. We've seen this time and again, where our guys show up to win, not to play. They seem to think that teams are just going to roll over for them because they're so great - or something, I don't know what. But when their opponents don't respect them, and strive to come back on them, and give 110% effort in contrast to Nebraska's 50% effort, our guys too often look caught unawares, like they can't fathom a team not bowing to the greatness of Nebraska. And they don't, and they don't think we're great.

Those quotes above should scare the crap out of anyone thinking we're getting back to playing solid defense. This is a defense that has surrendered 500 or more yards of offense in two of three games. Wearing a legacy that has has surrendered 500 yards in four of their last five games. And despite that, the best explanation one of our best senior players can come up with is that they think the opponent is "going to lay down."

Sheesh. You cannot blame that on the Offense. That's solely on the Defense. Let the Offense own their own problems - many as they are. Let the Defense stand up and take responsibility for their own problems.

If these were their comments after the game, every player who agreed with this would ride the pine. Complete BS. The Captains need to be all over this. I believe it was JJHusker in another thread who learned "he wanted it more than the staff or the team". I agree. Comments like this should alarm any fan out there. This is systemic of the stuff Bo and Co have put on the field the past few years.

I've been saying this all day. This is much more of a mental/psychological issue than it is scheme and/or talent. Not just players, but all across the board throughout the North stadium

 

[huskerinAZ]

Did any of you posting in this thread listen and/or watch the post game interviews with players?

Ill just say this.........if the world was full of internet and interviews with players back when Tommie Frazier played, you would have had a much different reaction from him than what we saw on the interviews by the players today......and to Tommies credit......that is exactly what makes him GREAT and a HALL OF FAME college player. All of the player interviews today.....everyone one of them sounded the same......"so what happened.....what was the problem"........the players responses.....ALL of them...... "well......I don't know;;;;;;I can't say........Ill have to watch the film........I don't quite know".............DO YOU THINK TOMMIE FRAZIER WOULD HAVE HAD THAT RESPONSE TO A LOSS BACK IN HIS DAY? Heck no he would have......and he probably would have ticked alot of his team mates off for calling them out and saying what he thought (which is why he never got voted a captain)........but GEE, look what he did on the field........that is the difference between a GREAT PLAYER and a mediocre player!!!!!! Step up.......put the team on your shoulders all be damned.....and make it happen......and that is what Tommie Frazier ALWAYS did......and what Nebraska is desperately missing now

 

[Hercules]

As far as the Offense vs. Defense debate...

Of course both units are to blame for the collapse, along with the special teams. Every phase of the game was bad.

However, the offense had a significantly worse game considering the expectations of them. They have 9 returning starters. The best WR corps in the Big Ten. A four year starter at QB. An experienced offensive line. A deep group of running backs. With all of that, they couldn't do ANYTHING in the second half. And in the first half, they managed a TD off of SJB's interception (short field), off of a UCLA special teams blunder (short field), and one long drive (which was extended by a penalty and a fourth down conversion that should have been negated by a false start - Jake Long is the new Andrew Rodriguez).

All things considered, I thought the defense played reasonably well in the first half. They didn't play as well as they looked, because I think UCLA was hurting themselves quite a bit. But they still put together a number of quality series, and were far more consistent than the offense was.

Of course none of this matters on the bottom line. Neither unit was good enough to overcome the other and win the game. But my expectation was for the more experienced and improved offense to carry the team while the defense figured things out. What UCLA exposed today, however, is that somehow, despite all our returning experience - the offense is not even as good as it was last year. And that is far more upsetting to me than the fact that our extremely young defense gave up 41 points (which is roughly the same as last year).

As far as Frazier goes - he can say what he wants. He's one of the best players ever to play at Nebraska. You can listen to him or not, and the University can get mad it him for saying it or not. But he's not going to change. He was a jerk as a player and he's a jerk now, but he is highly competitive and has high standards, and that's what made him so great, as a player and as a leader.