Husker in WI
All-Conference
I think last year's numbers look worse than they are. Fewer games, and most of the differnce was OSU (-25 in the second half) and Penn State (-14). OSU is just what happens when you're trying to stick with a far superior team - eventually it breaks and they run away. 2019 we were only -3 against OSU in the 2nd half, which is what happens when you're getting blown out 38-0 at the half. We definitely need to improve in the second half, especially based on the claims from the weight room we should be wearing teams out. But I don't think it's gotten much worse despite the number.
Game by game:
OSU 17-52, -25 2nd half differential - again, stuck close at half to a team way better than us. It was going to break at some point
NW 13-21, -14 2nd half. Fits the narrative, but we moved the ball and stopped them at similar rates - 3 2nd half drives made it to scoring range, 0 points
PSU 30-23, -14 2nd half. We switched to grind it out/prevent mode which almost lost us the game. IMO that decision had a lot to do with not trusting LMC to throw.
Illinois 23-41, even 2nd half. Game was a disaster, not much to see.
Iowa 20-26, -6 2nd half. This one was tough. We struggled moving the ball but that was a great defense - a (BS) holding call and a sack fumble ruined our best offensive chances. On D, the field goals we gave up were after a short punt and a fumbled punt return.
Purdue 37-27, -4 second half. Gave up a somewhat fluky 89 yard TD, otherwise pretty much the same as the first half
Minnesota 17-24, -4 2nd half. Martinez couldn't throw with his shoulder and LMC wasted his chance. We were still in a good spot until we fumbled and they turned it into a TD
Rutgers, 28-21, +14 2nd half. We stopped turning it over and started winning.
So I guess I'm jumping to the assumption that the concern is specifically poor 2nd half coaching adjustments, and I don't buy that really. I am way too optimistic in general, but I don't have to squint to see reasons other than coaching that we faltered. Bad matchup (OSU), Turnovers (NW, Iowa, Minnesota), Penalties (Iowa) are all much bigger concerns to me than 2nd half gameplans. The one I do put squarely on the coaching adjustments is Penn State, and I don't think they'll make the call to try and sit on a lead again.
Game by game:
OSU 17-52, -25 2nd half differential - again, stuck close at half to a team way better than us. It was going to break at some point
NW 13-21, -14 2nd half. Fits the narrative, but we moved the ball and stopped them at similar rates - 3 2nd half drives made it to scoring range, 0 points
PSU 30-23, -14 2nd half. We switched to grind it out/prevent mode which almost lost us the game. IMO that decision had a lot to do with not trusting LMC to throw.
Illinois 23-41, even 2nd half. Game was a disaster, not much to see.
Iowa 20-26, -6 2nd half. This one was tough. We struggled moving the ball but that was a great defense - a (BS) holding call and a sack fumble ruined our best offensive chances. On D, the field goals we gave up were after a short punt and a fumbled punt return.
Purdue 37-27, -4 second half. Gave up a somewhat fluky 89 yard TD, otherwise pretty much the same as the first half
Minnesota 17-24, -4 2nd half. Martinez couldn't throw with his shoulder and LMC wasted his chance. We were still in a good spot until we fumbled and they turned it into a TD
Rutgers, 28-21, +14 2nd half. We stopped turning it over and started winning.
So I guess I'm jumping to the assumption that the concern is specifically poor 2nd half coaching adjustments, and I don't buy that really. I am way too optimistic in general, but I don't have to squint to see reasons other than coaching that we faltered. Bad matchup (OSU), Turnovers (NW, Iowa, Minnesota), Penalties (Iowa) are all much bigger concerns to me than 2nd half gameplans. The one I do put squarely on the coaching adjustments is Penn State, and I don't think they'll make the call to try and sit on a lead again.
Last edited by a moderator:
