• 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 .

Be honest...

We did not deserve to win that game after the first drive. There was not much to feel good about after that.
 

Hville said:
I’m not as concerned with that call as I am the overall ability for SF to field teams that maximize our talent. Had they kicked all the way it’s very possible they still score on us only it takes up two more minutes that we wouldn’t have had for the final drive.

Quite frankly, given all the problems with our defense, our offensive line and our running backs I’m wondering why so much discussion on a single call.
Click to expand...
When a team is struggling to win games it makes no sense to play with an 11 point lead and letting the opponent back in the game. The call made no earthly sense and is an example of why Frost has struggled so bad in the Big 10. This league has great coaches who chew up risk takers like Frost.
 



The fact that one play made that much difference is one of the biggest problems with the Frost era. It shouldn't come down to one idiotic play call. But it predictably does.

Of Frost's 30 losses, 22 have been by single digits. That's not bad luck. That's a mentally weak team that crumbles when it matters most. That's the tone Frost sets. We lose like this to good teams, mediocre teams, and even bad teams. We have mastered the art of losing under Scott Frost.

It's the same song and dance Frost's peers have come to expect. Hang with Nebraska and wait for them to make a critical mistake -- then pounce.

And then there's Pat Fitzgerald. We destroyed that team last season. But Fitz is a coach that knows how to adjust -- with far less talent. Give that coach a bit of time to figure it out, and he'll create winners.
 




lincoln84 said:
That would not have solved our defensive woes. And I am not sure we score. SF put us in a very bad spot. No excuse for a mistake like that.
Click to expand...
You are right there. I think he did it because the D was sucking. They did better following that horrific call, but I think that was his rational
 
HuskerWeatherman said:
The fact that one play made that much difference is one of the biggest problems with the Frost era. It shouldn't come down to one idiotic play call. But it predictably does.

Of Frost's 30 losses, 22 have been by single digits. That's not bad luck. That's a mentally weak team that crumbles when it matters most. That's the tone Frost sets. We lose like this to good teams, mediocre teams, and even bad teams. We have mastered the art of losing under Scott Frost.

It's the same song and dance Frost's peers have come to expect. Hang with Nebraska and wait for them to make a critical mistake -- then pounce.

And then there's Pat Fitzgerald. We destroyed that team last season. But Fitz is a coach that knows how to adjust -- with far less talent. Give that coach a bit of time to figure it out, and he'll create winners.
Click to expand...
Ouch. Not used to that from the weatherman. But you are right. Announcer‘s even mentioned on the interception, how they watched and just waited for the same mistake to be made and capitalized
 
It would still have been a bad call. You don't judge things based on a one-off but whether the logic was sound and the percentages. Neither was correct in this case.
 



If it had worked, I would have had the same reaction as if one of my kids had successfully done something stupid high risk relative to the reward, like jumping off the roof onto a trampoline and bounced into the pool. Yeah, you did it, but that was a dumbass thing to do and could have gotten you killed. What the hell were you thinking?

I love HCSF and I really wanted it to work here. It yet may, though that seems light years beyond grasp now, but right now, in this case, HCSF hit the side of the trampoline, broke his leg, and then tumbled onto the pool deck headfirst and got a concussion too.

HCTO understood risk-reward when he went for 2. Fairly decent odds of getting the 2, but if he didn't get it, he knew he would come away from the result with not just a loss, but also honor and respect and prestige. He knew it would get talked about for years to come and be part of his legacy. In contrast, there were NO upsides to the way HCSF processed this risk-reward calculation, thus causing further harm to the team, the program, the school, his staff (especially those who just relocated for what looks to be a single-season gig)..... and that's a fundamental failure on him as a leader. And, as it turns out, this will also .... get talked about for years to come and be part of his legacy.

This all may yet miraculously work out for him and for us, but I can no longer visualize it happening.
 
Last edited:

It really sunk in during the post game presser that SF doesn't think he and the other coaches are the problem. He yet again said they are doing things "the right way", and he obviously thinks that taking risks will get the team over the hump in lieu of changing up their "right way" of how they coach, practice, and prepare for games.

Lose a couple 1 score games or have a couple gambles not pay off and you can say you are unlucky. Lose almost all of them and that ain't luck.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

GET TICKETS


Get 50% off on Omaha Steaks

Back
Top