• You do not need to register if you are not going to pay the yearly fee to post. If you register please click here or log in go to "settings" then "my account" then "User Upgrades" and you can renew.

HuskerMax readers can save 50% on  Omaha Steaks .

Penalties

There were a few roughing the passer calls that were real head scratchers.
I think we were able to avoid the dreaded targeting calls which is an improvement.
 

I think success for NU in 2019 hinges on improvement in 3 areas:

Fewer penalties
Better ST's
Better defense.

Penalties on ST's last year was murderous to NU, and directly contributed to long fields in the first 6 games. SF needs to put an emphasis on field position, and playing penalty-free, IMO.
 
Goal-line said:
Discipline is a component of talent, IMO.
Click to expand...

While I would certainly place a higher value on discipline than many other talent evaluators, they are not mutually exclusive. It does mean something to me to have a disciplined player, but the talent component is really independent. You get both talent and self motivated, disciplined players and you have something special.
 



CrabHusker said:
While I would certainly place a higher value on discipline than many other talent evaluators, they are not mutually exclusive. It does mean something to me to have a disciplined player, but the talent component is really independent. You get both talent and self motivated, disciplined players and you have something special.
Click to expand...
Agree. In past years that combination was lacking.
 
ShortSideOption said:
While I was told to let UCF go, I still think we can take a look at what happened there:

Nebraska 2018 119th 7.9 PPG
UCF 2017 127th 8.4 PPG
UCF 2016 105th 7.2 PPG

Interestingly, penalties actually got worse year 2 in their undefeated year. Kind of crazy to look at. I think with the fast-paced offense we run, holding, false starts, illegal formations are going to happen 3 or 4 times a game.

What's interesting, is Central Florida in 2016 actually ran 76.2 plays per game, for 38th in the country. The year after when they went undefeated, they actually slowed down a bit and had 72.4 plays per game for 58th in the country.

Now, that's just stats in a vacuum. Could they have scored quicker? Defense was possibly worse and on the field longer? Lots of factors lead to less plays. But I thought with them getting "worse" in the penalties per game category that we would see an uptick in how fast they went since people were more familiar with the offense. That proved wrong on my end. I wonder what will happen with Nebraska 2019, Nebraska was 36th in the country last year with 75.3 plays per game. Will we dial it down a bit? Will we score easier to take it down? Or will we legitimately go faster and get closer to 80 plays per game?

Long story short, I think penalties are a part of how we play. This isn't line up in iFormation and not commit a holding penalty ever like the 90s. When players get tired, their fundamentals go to poop. I think that's what happens a bit to us.
Click to expand...

Just a thought, i’ll turn into a question, as I have no idea... could the offense have run faster in 2017 yet have run less plays per game, because the defense stayed on the field longer or didn’t generate as many stops? Also, did the offense generate more quick strike scores/big plays?
I didn’t see any UCF 2016 games, but did watch a few in 2017, and it seemed like Frost had around 4 paces for his offense. The standard stall/run the clock out; a test or setup pace where they ran like a normal huddle team, usually seen before the gas was applied; then I guess the standard “Frost” pace, or maybe the norm for a no huddle spread team that’s quicker then most or your average O; then there was the “jugular” speed, this didn’t come out a lot but when it did it lightning fast and exciting and they usually scored or got into scoring position in 3-4 plays. I never seen that last pace deployed at N yet, obviously deployed when they have a series of plays so well setup by earlier actions or personnel mismatches they are fully able to take advantage of.
 




Huskermonsta said:
Just a thought, i’ll turn into a question, as I have no idea... could the offense have run faster in 2017 yet have run less plays per game, because the defense stayed on the field longer or didn’t generate as many stops? Also, did the offense generate more quick strike scores/big plays?
I didn’t see any UCF 2016 games, but did watch a few in 2017, and it seemed like Frost had around 4 paces for his offense. The standard stall/run the clock out; a test or setup pace where they ran like a normal huddle team, usually seen before the gas was applied; then I guess the standard “Frost” pace, or maybe the norm for a no huddle spread team that’s quicker then most or your average O; then there was the “jugular” speed, this didn’t come out a lot but when it did it lightning fast and exciting and they usually scored or got into scoring position in 3-4 plays. I never seen that last pace deployed at N yet, obviously deployed when they have a series of plays so well setup by earlier actions or personnel mismatches they are fully able to take advantage of.
Click to expand...
Yes... I went into that in the post. Lots of variables.
 
ShortSideOption said:
Yes... I went into that in the post. Lots of variables.
Click to expand...

Ha, yes you did, I must of skimmed over that beginning of your 3rd paragraph but the end of it stuck in my head. I think we will see a new pace this year with our offense that 4th gear one. Now they don’t run that pace often, and the few times I seen UCF run it there was no penalties - I think the pace of game was toofast for the officials to see any infractions, ha! But, I agree we will see some penalties because of our pace when we are in that 3rd gear, just the nature of it. Myself, I am hoping as the culture sets in and players get multiple years in the conditioning aspect of running Frost’s offense that will be able to get cleaned up a bit. Time will tell, as we only have a two year window to dissect at UCF, we don’t have a third or fourth year to se any examples or tendencies, but the fun aspect is we will get to see that unfold for Nebraska.
 
ShortSideOption said:
While I was told to let UCF go, I still think we can take a look at what happened there:

Nebraska 2018 119th 7.9 PPG
UCF 2017 127th 8.4 PPG
UCF 2016 105th 7.2 PPG

Interestingly, penalties actually got worse year 2 in their undefeated year. Kind of crazy to look at. I think with the fast-paced offense we run, holding, false starts, illegal formations are going to happen 3 or 4 times a game.

What's interesting, is Central Florida in 2016 actually ran 76.2 plays per game, for 38th in the country. The year after when they went undefeated, they actually slowed down a bit and had 72.4 plays per game for 58th in the country.

Now, that's just stats in a vacuum. Could they have scored quicker? Defense was possibly worse and on the field longer? Lots of factors lead to less plays. But I thought with them getting "worse" in the penalties per game category that we would see an uptick in how fast they went since people were more familiar with the offense. That proved wrong on my end. I wonder what will happen with Nebraska 2019, Nebraska was 36th in the country last year with 75.3 plays per game. Will we dial it down a bit? Will we score easier to take it down? Or will we legitimately go faster and get closer to 80 plays per game?

Long story short, I think penalties are a part of how we play. This isn't line up in iFormation and not commit a holding penalty ever like the 90s. When players get tired, their fundamentals go to poop. I think that's what happens a bit to us.
Click to expand...

The bolded is not mutually exclusive. A team could go with a faster tempo (run the next play sooner on the play clock) but run fewer plays because they score in 4 plays instead of 6. If there are 14 possessions/game and the team averages 5 plays = 70 plays. Averaging 6 plays = 84 plays. Neither is an indicator of pace of play or speeding up the tempo, just of the total plays it takes to complete 14 possessions.

NU could actually go faster (and maybe UCF did) in year two, but run fewer plays....have to factor in TOP to draw a conclusion.
 
Bleed Red said:
The bolded is not mutually exclusive. A team could go with a faster tempo (run the next play sooner on the play clock) but run fewer plays because they score in 4 plays instead of 6. If there are 14 possessions/game and the team averages 5 plays = 70 plays. Averaging 6 plays = 84 plays. Neither is an indicator of pace of play or speeding up the tempo, just of the total plays it takes to complete 14 possessions.

NU could actually go faster (and maybe UCF did) in year two, but run fewer plays....have to factor in TOP to draw a conclusion.
Click to expand...
Jesus.
 



I hope we can cut down on the stupid penalties like the personal foul for hitting the defenseless receiver at the end of the Colorado game that occurred right before they scored winning touchdown
 
ShortSideOption said:
Jesus.
Click to expand...
26379
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

GET TICKETS


Get 50% off on Omaha Steaks

Back
Top