That’s why it wasn’t great. Too many lulls. It was good, but too many inconsistencies. 1997 was the last great one. 1999, 2000 were really good, but they had turnover issues, especially 1999. 1999 was, however, the best team in the country and should have won the NC. The fumbles in Austin were costly.
That offense was mostly a one man show. Average at RB. It was good, but not great imo.
Looks like +1 for the season. 25 giveaways 26 takeaways.
If 1300 yds, 5.6 avg, and 15 tds from our leading rusher is avg then sign me up.
Agreed, a great blend of rb/qb run where our qb handled it
For goodness sake don't be critical of 2AM because many on this board will attack you for an unfounded impossible to defend bias against the greatest QB in the history of Husker football!
this is one hell of an accurate statement. unless you praise 2am all the time certain people on this board get very...very...upset.
If you have bad tendencies, like fumbling, playmaker mode is win the game mode. If a play opens up in front of you, next thoughts are no turnovers, find ways to protect the ball in that mode.
Argue with yourself
Was it Diedrick, or Josh Davis and Thunder Collins? I don’t remember who carried the load exactly, but they weren’t vintage Nebraska backs. Like I said, it was a good offense, but not great.
NONE better than the 1983 scoring machine...they scored 35 or more by halftime 7 times and put up 48 against Colorado in the 3rd quarter. Put 84 on Michigan State.
Everyone has their own definition of a great offense, but for me being top 12 in yards and points, having a rb with 1300 yds and 15 td, and a having heisman winning qb is a great offense.
Days gone by
What are you, a Roman emperor?
