Why so much pessimism?

zoogies said:
From "nothing"?

I think the degree of change on the offense is being overblown.
Click to expand...
It wasn't "from nothing" but it is comparable to the defensive changes when the Pelini brothers arrived. It's by far the biggest change on offense since Callahan was hired.

 
Zaimejs said:
This is a good thread to read. My family and I watched the game and 70% of our comments were pessimistic and negative. It's nice to know that we're not alone. I can't remember when Husker football turned into this... but it's years and years of "once bitten twice shy" coming into play. We have seen this same team over and over and over again. Sketchy at best. A defense that bends but doesn't break with 1-2 meltdowns per game. A QB that is questionable and you are never comfortable watching... is this going to be a fumble? Interception? Bad decision? or a 60 yard touchdown run?

I think that our main concern is that we can't put together what looks like a well-planned disciplined drive. 3-4 yard plays. Move the chains. Mix up passing and running. This is why I hated Watson... and this is what I saw yesterday. At least, even if Oregon didn't execute last night, they still looked like they had a plan. The young QB had swagger. We never look like we have a plan on offense. It looks like sandlot. I rewinded and watched a few replays... our receivers just seem to be jogging out... no crisp routes. Martinez locks his eyes on one guy and then runs into people.

Sooo.... what does it mean? We won't really know for a few weeks, but it just feels like the same old same old. Uncertainty. If we can't dominate this kind of an opponent... then we are in trouble.
Click to expand...
+100

That's the reason for all the percieved "pessimism". We've seen this movie before, and the ending is usually bad.

 
Zaimejs said:
This is a good thread to read. My family and I watched the game and 70% of our comments were pessimistic and negative. It's nice to know that we're not alone. I can't remember when Husker football turned into this... but it's years and years of "once bitten twice shy" coming into play. We have seen this same team over and over and over again. Sketchy at best. A defense that bends but doesn't break with 1-2 meltdowns per game. A QB that is questionable and you are never comfortable watching... is this going to be a fumble? Interception? Bad decision? or a 60 yard touchdown run?

I think that our main concern is that we can't put together what looks like a well-planned disciplined drive. 3-4 yard plays. Move the chains. Mix up passing and running. This is why I hated Watson... and this is what I saw yesterday. At least, even if Oregon didn't execute last night, they still looked like they had a plan. The young QB had swagger. We never look like we have a plan on offense. It looks like sandlot. I rewinded and watched a few replays... our receivers just seem to be jogging out... no crisp routes. Martinez locks his eyes on one guy and then runs into people.

Sooo.... what does it mean? We won't really know for a few weeks, but it just feels like the same old same old. Uncertainty. If we can't dominate this kind of an opponent... then we are in trouble.
Click to expand...
This is your answer OP. I was going to write out a long response but it's not needed.

I can summarize it in one simple sentence: we have seen this same "movie" play out before and no one likes the ending.

 
carlfense said:
walksalone said:
It's not pessimism.

It's the fact that the offense we saw yesterday, wasn't that much difference from what we saw in the beginning of last year. Granted, it is the first game, and the whole offensive scheme is still a work in progress, due to the fact that yesterday was the first real practical application of what we've been hearing about.

So not pessimism, but more careful skepticism.
Click to expand...
+1.

Also, we have seen a trend over the last few years where our offense looks decent/good at the beginning of the year and steadily worsens over the course of the season. Hopefully that changes with a new offensive coordinator. If not . . . I shudder to think of what our offense will look like after it regresses from what we saw yesterday. :hmmph
Click to expand...
+10

what exacerbates this is the fact that the first half dozen games gets everyone amped up, and so when something bad happens, the problem is magnified that much more...

 
So I'm to gather from these comments that if the offense had hung 60 on UTC, we'd still be getting the same "pessimism"? How many games will it take before people start to relax? The offense looked amazing for about half a season last year, so does that mean everyone is going to spend half or 3/4s or the entire season waiting for the other shoe to drop?

That's no way to live, guys. :cheers

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Blaze1up said:
If it's not perfect people wanna b_tch about it. Heaven forbid you just win the game. Are we spoiled cry babies ? Yeah I care about the game and passionately love the Huskers but I have no complaints over a 40 to 7 ball game. I love it and wish every game would turn out that way, God bless the Big RED !
Click to expand...
Welcome to the world of football analysis. There's always something to critique.

 
It's not really bitching about it, either. Always something to talk about. Areas of improvement happen to be one of the more interesting things to talk about. We rock...yeah, we know. We're a very solid team :)

But when we have a bumpy (even if it's expected) opener, what else do you expect to dominate discussion, other than the areas that we think need most cleaning up?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
So essentially, what I gather from this is, virtually everyone had way too high of expectations for a first year offense under a first year offensive coordinator.

If you thought we were gonna come out of the gates like Oregon, I can see where you're disappointed. For me, I figured our first game we would have around high 20's or 30's trying to work out the kinks of the offense.

And some of you have proven your points, and I understand that. I completely misunderstood some peoples basis, and I'll eat my crow for that.

But saying "we suck, nothing changes, blah blah" isn't much to discuss.

 
OregonHuskerMan said:
So essentially, what I gather from this is, virtually everyone had way too high of expectations for a first year offense under a first year offensive coordinator.

If you thought we were gonna come out of the gates like Oregon, I can see where you're disappointed. For me, I figured our first game we would have around high 20's or 30's trying to work out the kinks of the offense.

And some of you have proven your points, and I understand that. I completely misunderstood some peoples basis, and I'll eat my crow for that.

But saying "we suck, nothing changes, blah blah" isn't much to discuss.
Click to expand...
To me, it wasn't the points, or racking up yards, but so much the continuity. The ability to adapt to when things weren't working, that's what was important to me.

 
A national perspective from Stewart Mandel's College Football Overtime.

• Nebraska unveiled its secrecy-cloaked new offense against Chattanooga, and it included elements both new and retro. The Huskers went no huddle virtually the entire game, a legacy of new coordinator Tim Beck's days at Kansas. But they also broke out the old Tom Osborne triple option, complete with a fullback belly dive on the opening play. The Huskers looked sloppy, but the possibilities are intriguing with a healthy Taylor Martinez, who had gains of 43 and 47 yards.
Click to expand...
In the article, he also projects Nebraska to play Stanford in the Rose Bowl. I'd love to see that.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
walksalone said:
OregonHuskerMan said:
So essentially, what I gather from this is, virtually everyone had way too high of expectations for a first year offense under a first year offensive coordinator.

If you thought we were gonna come out of the gates like Oregon, I can see where you're disappointed. For me, I figured our first game we would have around high 20's or 30's trying to work out the kinks of the offense.

And some of you have proven your points, and I understand that. I completely misunderstood some peoples basis, and I'll eat my crow for that.

But saying "we suck, nothing changes, blah blah" isn't much to discuss.
Click to expand...
To me, it wasn't the points, or racking up yards, but so much the continuity. The ability to adapt to when things weren't working, that's what was important to me.
Click to expand...
Makes sense. I completely understand that. How does Beck's quote about him [idiotically] running the same play until it worked, factor into that?

Honestly, when I read that, I was relieved to know he wasn't just running the same play because it was our only hope, but because it appeared they wanted to work on that play. that's how I took it, and that was relieving for me.

But... I will say, we will have to rely on the big play, more than we should, probably.

 
OregonHuskerMan said:
walksalone said:
OregonHuskerMan said:
So essentially, what I gather from this is, virtually everyone had way too high of expectations for a first year offense under a first year offensive coordinator.

If you thought we were gonna come out of the gates like Oregon, I can see where you're disappointed. For me, I figured our first game we would have around high 20's or 30's trying to work out the kinks of the offense.

And some of you have proven your points, and I understand that. I completely misunderstood some peoples basis, and I'll eat my crow for that.

But saying "we suck, nothing changes, blah blah" isn't much to discuss.
Click to expand...
To me, it wasn't the points, or racking up yards, but so much the continuity. The ability to adapt to when things weren't working, that's what was important to me.
Click to expand...
Makes sense. I completely understand that. How does Beck's quote about him [idiotically] running the same play until it worked, factor into that?

Honestly, when I read that, I was relieved to know he wasn't just running the same play because it was our only hope, but because it appeared they wanted to work on that play. that's how I took it, and that was relieving for me.

But... I will say, we will have to rely on the big play, more than we should, probably.
Click to expand...
See, that I understand. If you were using Chattanooga, for lack of a better term, a guinea pig, then yeah, makes sense.

Side note, was it just me, or after the first play, the give to Legate, the only time he got the rock?

 
I believe that was the only time he got it, actually. A little false hope!

I refuse to believe that we weren't using them as a guinea pig, as I said earlier, I believe they were treating this as a glorified scrimmage.

They knew they would win, so they chose to work on specific things that needed to be worked on. There really isn't a better time to do it than against live competition!

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