• 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 .

The "biggest improvement is between games 1 and 2" myth

Huskerhunter

Huskerhunter

Red Shirt
10 Year Member
Going with my gut and memory vs. a more scientific analysis on this, but I don't think the adage has been true for the Huskers as of late.

It seems to me, the problems that have plagued us in first game(s) have been harbingers of season long issues. Porous secondary play, penalties, turnovers, etc.

Case in point, giving up 400+ passing yards to Arky St. last year first game. Granted, the INT bug didn't show up until game two....

Unfortunately this year it feels like the game 1 and 2 errors are similar enough to fall into the 'worrisome trend' category vs. 'stuff to get cleaned up before next week' variety.

Hope I'm wrong and trying to stay optimistic but my Red Kool-Aid cup is runnin' low.

What say you?
 

I think it's an old adage because it's kind of an accepted thought process amongst coaches. You'll usually see the most improvement in a team between the first and second games. Doesn't mean that's it or that it's all fixed, but a marked improvement in play is usually the case. I won't even speak to past Nebraska teams, but I'd have a hard time judging anything from game 1 to game 2 other than the defense and special teams. Defense (IMO) improved, special teams, not so much. Offense is way too different with Bunch-vs-Martinez, so comparison of the two games isn't really fair. I will say the O line looked like it took half a step back, but some of that was Troy's speed and scheme being difficult for them to handle. I don't think they'll see as fast a defense again this year until Ohio State.
 
CrabHusker said:
I think it's an old adage because it's kind of an accepted thought process amongst coaches. You'll usually see the most improvement in a team between the first and second games. Doesn't mean that's it or that it's all fixed, but a marked improvement in play is usually the case. I won't even speak to past Nebraska teams, but I'd have a hard time judging anything from game 1 to game 2 other than the defense and special teams. Defense (IMO) improved, special teams, not so much. Offense is way too different with Bunch-vs-Martinez, so comparison of the two games isn't really fair. I will say the O line looked like it took half a step back, but some of that was Troy's speed and scheme being difficult for them to handle. I don't think they'll see as fast a defense again this year until Ohio State.
Click to expand...
Apples and oranges Husker game #2 imo. We had dynamic super quick QB the first game which greatly expanded what the offense could do as opposed to the Troy. That's not a knock on Bunch but there was a reason he was 3rd string QB. I said from the get go so goes our QB so goes our season.... Even with all the mistakes and turnovers we still had a very good chance at winning both those games.

Just don't believe it's the same team without AM which also effects our D.........
 
Game 1 vs Game 2 is the biggest improvement every year. Way too many new players, and your body can’t prepare no matter what you do. Couldn’t be more correct.
 
Last edited:



ShortSideOption said:
Game 1 vs Game 2 is the biggest improvement every year. Way too many new players, and your body can’t prepare no matter what you do. Couldn’t be more correct.
Click to expand...
You really believe we improved in the Troy game over CU? Sure didn't look like it..........
 
CrabHusker said:
I don't think they'll (NU) see as fast a defense again this year until Ohio State.
Click to expand...

You don't think Michigan's D (gave up only 306 yards and 24 points vs AP #8 ranked Notre Dame) might, possibly, be as fast as Troy 's D (gave up 423 yards and 56 points vs non-P5, AP unranked Boise State, and gave up 365 yards to winless NU playing a walk-on QB who had played a total of about 10 minutes of college football, with a team playing just its second game in a brand new offense)?

:Confused:
 
Last edited:
ShortSideOption said:
Game 1 vs Game 2 is the biggest improvement every year. Way too many new players, and your body can’t prepare no matter what you do. Couldn’t be more correct.
Click to expand...

cthusker said:
You really believe we improved in the Troy game over CU? Sure didn't look like it..........
Click to expand...

What he said....if that's true, the improvement from game to game from now on will require an electron microscope to measure in nano-meters...
 
I don't think it's a myth. It's just that 90%+ of teams all have games 1 and 2 in the same weeks. The effect is likely only apparent when 1 team starts after another team. So even if you do see some of the same errors in games 1 and 2 that show the rest of the season, that doesn't mean you didn't actually improve. Those things are the errors that are characteristic of your team so they remain.
 




cthusker said:
You really believe we improved in the Troy game over CU? Sure didn't look like it..........
Click to expand...
I’m telling you every player in America improves from start 1 to start 2 of a season. You can not prepare in the weight room for the tax on your body, it’s an unreal feeling that can’t be replicated. Guess who hasn’t got that, Andrew Bunch. That’s the issue against Troy.
 
Last edited:
Cardinal said:
You don't think Michigan's D (gave up only 306 yards and 24 points vs AP #8 ranked Notre Dame) might, possibly, be as fast as Troy 's D (gave up 423 yards and 56 points vs non-P5, AP unranked Boise State, and gave up 365 yards to winless NU playing a walk-on QB who had played a total of about 10 minutes of college football, with a team playing just its second game in a brand new offense)?

:Confused:
Click to expand...

I'll give you that. Fast and good aren't necessarily mutually exclusive. Michigan's defense may be head and shoulders better than Troy, but Troy's front seven gave Nebraska's O line fits and I'd say it was primarily speed.
 
ShortSideOption said:
I’m telling you every player in America improves from start 1 to start 2 of a season. You can not prepare in the weight room for the tax on your body, it’s an unreal feeling that can’t be replicated. Guess who hasn’t got that, Andrew Bunch. That’s the issue against Troy.
Click to expand...
Well ok... players improve second game but not necessarily teams.....
 



ShortSideOption said:
I’m telling you every player in America improves from start 1 to start 2 of a season. You can not prepare in the weight room for the tax on your body, it’s an unreal feeling that can’t be replicated. Guess who hasn’t got that, Andrew Bunch. That’s the issue against Troy.
Click to expand...

I have to whole heartedly agree. My example is a bit different than football but it goes right along with what *** was saying. I remember that I used to train for the Army Physical Fitness Test quite a bit during my 22 years in. Never failed though. Even though I usually trained for over an hour a day (mandatory) and the test only lasted about 18 minutes (2min push ups, 2 minutes Situps, 14 min 2-mile run) I was pretty sore for a day or so after the PT Test. Same theory. Even though the actions are the same, the effort and intensity is incomparable.
 
ShortSideOption said:
No? Whatever makes you feel better. 7th grade midget teams improve the most game 1 to game 2.
Click to expand...
Not what makes me feel better. All I'm saying is the team looked liked it regressed from the CU game. However I'll take your expertise on this one....
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

GET TICKETS


Get 50% off on Omaha Steaks

Back
Top