Digg
Newsvine
del.icio.us
Reddit
Facebook
TwitterIt took Shawn Watson only 54 minutes and 36 seconds of futility to figure out how to beat Missouri.
The Huskers had just stymied Mizzou on fourth down with 5:24 left. They led 20-12. Watson's offense took the field.
Missouri knew Nebraska wanted to pound the ball and milk clock. But the Tigers, desperate to get Blaine Gabbert the ball again, couldn't stop Big Red.
Why?
Watson ran the football over and over and over. Eight times in a row.
With 4:15 to go, Nebraska sent three tight ends and a fullback to its huddle.
“Big third-and-2 here for Missouri's D,” ESPN analyst Jesse Palmer said.
“Ya think?” his partner, Craig James, replied.
Ten defenders crowded the box, but Roy Helu moved the chains.
Next play, with nine in the box, Rex Burkhead followed four blocking tight ends and gained 8 yards. Then Zac Lee picked up 3 on a quarterback sneak.
Another four-tight end formation invited Missouri's defensive backs to the line of scrimmage. This time, Helu pierced the line, made one tackler look silly and gained 41.
Was it really that hard to string together three first downs? Why did it take 3½ quarters? Did Watson not receive a weather report when he formulated the most important game plan of the season?
Ndamukong Suh, with a little help from his defensive cronies, toppled an old nemesis and bolstered Nebraska's chances for a Big 12 North title. But don't let a memorable fourth quarter cloud your perspective on one of NU's worst offensive performances in years.
At Virginia Tech, the problem was red-zone efficiency. At Missouri, it was simply efficiency.
Blame it on the rain if you wish, but Nebraska's offensive habits and philosophies demand attention, even in the wake of Bo Pelini's biggest W.
If you want to win a Big 12 championship in Middle America, where October and November throw every meteorological curveball in the book, it might be a good idea to build an offense capable of running the ball on Missouri, the nation's 61st-best rush defense.
Watson didn't try, at least not until the final drive, when burning clock became a priority.
In the first 55 minutes, just once did Nebraska give the ball to its I-backs on consecutive plays. When? The first two snaps of the game.
In the second quarter, during some of the hardest downpours of the night, Nebraska ran 22 plays; 17 were planned passes; 11 were incompletions.
Maybe the sling-it strategy works if water isn't falling in sheets.
Maybe it works if Zac Lee isn't throwing behind receivers, if Niles Paul isn't dropping balls, if offensive linemen aren't failing to block Sean Weatherspoon.
Power football won't always be the answer with this personnel. But circumstances Thursday necessitated dedication to the ground.
And Watson resisted. He has a tendency to fall in love with balance, even at the expense of success.
Case in point: Second quarter. Third-and-1 at the Missouri 44. Nebraska goes with three tight ends. Missouri loads the box with 10 defenders.
Burkhead, who ran hard all night behind an ailing Helu, bursts through a hole and nearly breaks free for a touchdown.
The play showed grit. The call from the press box showed determination.
What followed? Three pass plays. Three Lee incompletions. Another punt. Nebraska's first 10 drives consisted of nine punts and a fumble.
By half, Lee had thrown 22 passes, an appalling number on a night like Thursday.
Things got worse in the third quarter, as Watson stuck with finesse: shotgun formations with three and four wide receivers. From that look, NU couldn't throw or run.
Too many short passes to the sideline, where receivers have nowhere to turn but out of bounds — Curenski Gilleylen actually caught an out route and ran into the Missouri sideline for a 2-yard loss.
Too many quarterback keepers from a quarterback who hasn't proven himself a threat to run — Lee carried seven times for 14 yards, not counting a first-quarter sack.
Too few routes deep and over the middle — where were the tight ends?
Through three quarters, Nebraska took 51 offensive snaps.
Twenty-nine plays either lost yards or gained zero. The grand total for 51 snaps, including penalties, was 90 yards.
In those 51 snaps, Nebraska called pass 31 times, which netted 52 yards. That's 1.7 yards per pass play. Running plays averaged 2.4.
Did Mizzou occasionally bring an extra defender into the tackle box to pressure the Husker run game? Yes, but the Tigers were not cheating safeties all night. Their linebackers just made plays, so it seemed that way.
Lee eventually made a play, too, hooking up with Paul on a 56-yard score.
But Nebraska's offense didn't find a groove until it returned to power football on the final drive. (Remember, the defense set up the second and third touchdowns.)
It wasn't all Watson's fault, those three miserable quarters. And it wasn't all Lee's fault, either.
Nebraska's line played poorly. Helu wasn't full speed. And the starting wideouts, who just don't possess the explosiveness you expect from receivers on a Top 25 team, struggled so badly that Ted Gilmore temporarily benched them.
But how does this offense beat Oklahoma and Kansas without serious strides in the next month?
Lee hasn't demonstrated accuracy in big games. Penalties persistently interrupt drives. And Watson seems intent to lean on a passing game that doesn't pass very well.
Try to make sense of that.
Contact the writer:
679-9899, dirk.chatelain@owh.com
Copyright ©2010 Omaha World-Herald®. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, displayed or redistributed for any purpose without permission from the Omaha World-Herald.
RSS Feeds
50 Comments
Posted by: wiley.dude on 10/09/09 @ 10:52 pm:
I agree with your analysis, but you also have to remember that those three rushing first downs were in the fourth quarter, against a tired defense. Not sure we would have had such success earlier in the game.
Posted by: Leo on 10/09/09 @ 10:59 pm:
NU offence is suspect it has not preformed well in clutch games.
Posted by: fs290 on 10/09/09 @ 11:10 pm:
I joked to a friend during the game that both sides had a simple gameplan: throw the ball over and over and over, until a DB blew his coverage or a WR broke containment, and a pass went for six. All of us internet offensive coordinators figured going into this game that weather like this would favor the team with the stronger running game, and yet strangely neither side wanted to play along.
It was weird. Whatever Shawn Watson was thinking, David Yost was thinking the same thing.
Posted by: pillbox on 10/09/09 @ 11:13 pm:
I could not agree more. Its almost like Watson is going to stick to the game plan no matter what the outcome.
I thought for sure we would at least make this a back yard brawl and get physical and pound the ball. Instead we tried to play pitch and catch to the sideline in the middle of a monsoon !! I like Watson..but i thought he called a terrible game this time around. It seems to me there was to much over thinking and not enough old fashion football. Play to win...not play for the sake of a game plan that became obsolete due to conditions we could not control.
Posted by: thusker on 10/10/09 @ 12:02 am:
Great post.
I am happy the Huskers won. Great character and grit and class and fortitude. Love it.
But rather than celebrate on how great it was that Nebraska came back from a big deficit, I find myself concerned that they shouldn't have been in that deficit to begin with.
Same at VT. Forget the last drive defensive breakdown. WE SHOULDN'T HAVE EVER BEEN ON DEFENSE TO BEGIN WITH. 4th and 1 wins the game. 1 yard. At their 37 no less. And no faith in the running game.
First play of this game was a nice 10 yard run. Then it is abondened. Establishing the run eliminates the safety, the **** poor punting and essentially shuts MO down. Opens up the pass.
Yeah...no big headline about a miracle comeback, but I think this game created more questions and concerns than answers.
Posted by: thanksfornothin on 10/10/09 @ 3:08 am:
I read this article and I was like blah.
Why do we need this? Why is it necessary? It is not.
Great teams do not always put up amazing numbers, great teams win games. This is the fundamental statistic you left out: that Nebraska got a W. It didn't take 700 yards of total offense, or a 90% pass efficiency rating. (By the way Dick, did you see that rain!)
This game was won because one team willed itself to victory. Nebraska won because of the incredible character and poise that Bo Pelini has slapped on his players all year. Nebraska won because they scored more points than the other team.
Keep your statistics, and why you are making sense of them all, I will be re-watching the awesome, emotional comeback we made in the fourth quarter.
Posted by: paradox333 on 10/10/09 @ 5:30 am:
Could not agree more. We one this one in spite of ourselves.
Posted by: dlrn64 on 10/10/09 @ 6:13 am:
i was dumbfounded by all the pass attempts. i thought we would really try to run the ball in that kind of weather to try to minimize mistakes and set up play action passing. It was a bad offensive gameplan to throw that much. As the article states, once Lee was off-tarhet on a few and the WR's missed a few catchable balls, you should adapt and consider that the ball was tough to handle. Why not call some different run plays and see how that went for a few series?
Posted by: dlrn64 on 10/10/09 @ 6:15 am:
i was dumbfounded by all the pass attempts. i thought we would really try to run the ball in that kind of weather to try to minimize mistakes and set up play action passing. It was a bad offensive gameplan to throw that much. As the article states, once Lee was off-target on a few and the WR's missed a few catchable balls, you should adapt and consider that the ball was tough to handle. Why not call some different run plays and see how that went for a few series?
Posted by: bchambers05 on 10/10/09 @ 7:21 am:
Ive had this strange feeling Watson has absolutly no idea wut he is doing as far as playcalling goes ever since the Callahan era....back then i said to myself dozens of times...we need to get rid of our offensive playcaller...who just so happened to be watson....maybe the guy does good things for the program, recruiting, coaching...but playcalling...ive questioned our playcalling in almost every single game in which Watson has been the OC in..i dont think that is just coincidence, and i know for a fact its not just me...
Posted by: AKHUSKER on 10/10/09 @ 8:00 am:
Nice article. Glad to see I am not the only one that was very perplexed by Watsons play calling. He seems to be afraid of running the ball. Maybe because of the poor O-line and figures he has to score fast or they will either hold or have 3 or 4 false starts. He sure wasn't afraid to run it down our fault in 2001 when he was OC for CU
Posted by: jd4nu on 10/10/09 @ 8:02 am:
I'm tired of all the Watson bashing. Everyone knew Mizzou needed to stop the run and were going to stack the box to do it. Watson did what any OC would do and passed to loosen it up. Who would have thought Lee would struggle like that......again. So when that wasn't working out, this article suggests we should have went back to run after the success they had in stopping it? What jacks a defense up and increases the volume of the crowd more.... some incomplete passes or stuffing the run for a loss?
That said, did anyone notice how often Zac checked out of plays throughout the night? I'm pretty sure there were more running plays called. The weather sucked, Lee struggled, receivers struggled, the line wasn't performing well and apparently Helu wasn't 100%. Watson had no choice but to stick with that plan and hope for a breakthrough, and we got it. Sure we ran the ball in the 4th like we should, against a demoralized defense and a quiet crowd. Watson is one of the best OC's in the country, had Lee been "on" and completed 60% of his passes in that 1st half the running game would have opened up and the articles would be calling Watson a genius. I think I trust Watson with our offense as much as I trust Bo with the defense.
Posted by: Leighton on 10/10/09 @ 8:30 am:
Great post. I was saying the same thing all game long. Stick a fullback in their and pound the football. We were supposed to be better in the trenches yet we wouldn't give ourselves a chance to prove it.
Posted by: Amen on 10/10/09 @ 8:32 am:
Amen, amen and amen!
Posted by: Jeff in KCMO on 10/10/09 @ 8:33 am:
Maybe instead of practicing indoors, Watson needs to have the offense practicing toss and catch inside a car wash. At least maybe then he can see the affect extreme wetness can have on an ill-conceived game plan. What is it about playing MU that makes the Husker coaching staff choke so bad? With Daniel and Maclin gone, MU is still good, but not great. For that matter, they weren't even "great" WITH those guys. But NU sure made them look great last year. This year, MU seemed altogether mortal. The only element missing from this game was a muddy field. Had NU lost, there would have been no end of crowing from the MU crowd, but now the world is again right side up. For this week, anyway.
Posted by: abc123 on 10/10/09 @ 8:33 am:
where is the fullback no power football without a fullback
Posted by: AZ Husker on 10/10/09 @ 8:49 am:
I agree Nebraska needs to run much more burkhead is a great talent use him what the heck happened to the fullback dive which was good for atleast 5 yards? If you run with three Tight ends and a Fullback no one in the country can stop you! This is how you wear down a defense this is how you win the big 12. If Watson can't understand this concept he needs to go. Sorry but the Huskers are a Running team they need to get back to that philosophy and design a passing game to keep defenses confused. If you have three tight ends in the game you can pass anytime you want especially when the Huskers have the 5 best in the country!
Posted by: daa on 10/10/09 @ 8:56 am:
I agree with the harsh but accurate article you wrote. During the game I thought the offensive play calling was predictable and that the offensive line did not pick up the line backers as they should.
Posted by: ThinAtRB on 10/10/09 @ 8:57 am:
The game plan should be no surprise as the Cornhuskers are thin at RB. With Castille gone, Helu weakened with flu and a true freshman to back him up they can't pound the ball every play in this situation. Hope Roy's shoulder is OK and Burkhead continues to mature. Coach Watson is much smarter than given credit for here.
Posted by: stevestone on 10/10/09 @ 9:02 am:
Cheap shot from and amateur onlooker in the cheap seats.
The coaching staff knew the weather several days beforehand, so Bo, Watson, and the coaching staff schemed the game plan with it in mind. They figured that Helu, after having had the flu, could not be the workhorse he usually is and that Burkhead is still too young to carry that kind of load. So the plan from the get-go was to pass, pass, pass until late in the game to tire the Missouri defense which would then leave open some running lanes.
Guess what? It worked!
Posted by: DiegoSker on 10/10/09 @ 9:05 am:
It's nice to see writers playing offensive coordinator for entertainment value, but this was off the mark. Do you suspect the weather may be more nasty as we go deeper into fall? do you suspect that those upcoming opponents who pose greater threats, i.e. OU, KU, would love to have more film of our running game as they prepare? do you suspect that Watson keeping the opposing defense (as well as some fans and writers) guessing and uncomfortable will give the Huskers a greater chance to break open for a big one as the game goes on? On all three counts, I do. Watson knew exactly what he was doing, who his strongest available players were, and what three quarters of playing in a downpour would produce. all he needed was time, and he got it. And NU got the Win. Enough said.
Posted by: rlk on 10/10/09 @ 9:06 am:
cannot use the argument of a tired defense as Missoui had greater time of possesion and hadn't had to do a lot of running around due to the Huskers ineptness on moving the ball. Take away Helu's big run and Paul's big pass play and the yards gained speak for themselves on how much running around the Tigers defense had to do.
Posted by: George on 10/10/09 @ 9:20 am:
Why are we focusing on the final drives of the game. Although I was having a minor heart attack at the time I beleive the first 3 touchdowns were scored on passing plays. "thanksfonothin" you are absolutley right.
Posted by: redrover on 10/10/09 @ 9:25 am:
FULLBACK, FULLBACK, FULLBACK!!!! Bring back some power I, get the tailback running downhill.
Posted by: hskrscott on 10/10/09 @ 9:27 am:
Also thought Watson was out to lunch on this one.It would have got the O line more into the game if you were to let them get at Mizzou's D and smack them down,rather then dropping back in pass block mode.I would rather run block then pass block.Then put all those tightends in the formation and go play action and hit a wide open one after the safeties have cheated up to the line.But it is also easy to second guess the coach after the game.Watson is a good OC and I agree with his calls and game plans most of the time. G.B.R.
Posted by: Jim in LV on 10/10/09 @ 9:27 am:
What people tend to not think about is the fact that the Huskers were very, very lucky that Lee's off-target throws did not at some point end up in a Mizzou defender's hands for a pick-six the other way. Baffling seeing Lee throw behind receiver's on 5 yard sideline routes, and some throws he really laid out his WR's for big hits by safeties. Knowing Lee was having such a bad game, why would Watson not line up in a 2 back set now and then and allow for some power looks? You can still throw out of a 2 back formation Shawn.
Posted by: Jamo on 10/10/09 @ 9:29 am:
I honestly thought Callahan was up in the booth calling the plays! That was one of the most poorly called games I've ever seen by an Offensive Coordinator. Missouri's D isn't as bad as advertised (they're 21st in points allowed, which to me is how D's should be ranked), but there's no doubt this would have been a different game had the Huskers been able to pound the rock.
Does anyone think that QB's with NFL aspirations will want to run an offense out of the shotgun 98% of the time? Not that we should try to be an NFL QB factory, but it doesn't hurt to get those guys every once in a while. Also, how can you establish a power running game out of that formation? The back is starting at a standstill as opposed to getting a running start when the QB is under center. Thank you, I feel better now.
Posted by: sw7799 on 10/10/09 @ 9:45 am:
I agree with this article. Our perimeter runs were not working but we seldom tried any inside running for 3 quarters. We had a key 4 th down coversation, the box was stacked and Rex Burkhead took it for 8 yards. If we can move the ball on 4th and 2 for 8 yards, then we should have been able to move the ball on the ground all day. Very thankful for the win, but a ****** game for the offense. Nevada and Furman rushed better than us for 3 quarters. We need to get the O-line fixed and play Burkhead a little more. I was ready to bench Lee too as I think Green could of been just as ineffective in the passing game and a better runner. Give the defense 2 guys to key on and not just Roy. BTW 12 penalties for 108 yards is really bad. Good thing Mizzou had 100 yards in penalties or we would have lost this game.
Posted by: hokie1 on 10/10/09 @ 9:48 am:
helu not 100%, burkhead a true freshman, 8 9 10 men in the box, a fired up mizzou defense that hates the huskers and are defending their home turf, not to mention weatherspoon.....not a great scheme to run against downpour or not. Our running plays were as bad or worse than the passing game. I was at the Va tech game and it was penalties and mistakes that cost us that game not Watsons scheme. 160 yards rushing for Helu in that one. When it came to finally scoring and winning Thursday night it was three great passes and catches that won the game for Nebraska set up by incredible defense. works for me. grew up with osborne and mcbride, had to live through callihan and cosgrove, couldn't be happier with watson and pelini. can't wait to hear what everyone has to say when watsons name is thrown around for head coaching jobs this off season. great win huskers congrats.
Posted by: Donald James Parker on 10/10/09 @ 10:05 am:
I was thinking the same thing Thursday night. In fact I thought the same thing in the Virginia Tech game. Holly Rowe had reported that the VT defense was worn out. So we let them off the hook by throwing too much - especially when Lee was having trouble even getting the ball even close to his receivers. I was wondering why they burned Cody Green's redshirt if they aren't going to play him in a game where our quarterback is failing miserably. I understand the concept of building confidence, but that concept can be carried too far.
Donald James Parker
Posted by: oldfootballplayer on 10/10/09 @ 10:35 am:
Lets see, torrential rains, Lee has a broken thumb (everyone forget about that too, snaps under center may tend to aggravate that, I have played football with a broken thumb so speak from experience), now would you have picked Gabbert or Lee to be your quarterback at the end of this game?.......didn't we win with passing? Was it coincidence that Lee's passing improved as the rain let up also?....If you didn't think Missouri D. was not tired on those last couple of series you weren't watching the game, even the TV people have said as much. Do all the power running people forget the times when Solich would stubbornly and continually run against stacked defenses to no avail with our one dimensional offense?.....might be one of the reasons he isn't around anymore. If I read the stats correctly Helu only had 15 yds when he did rush in the first half....might indicate that Watson knew what he was talking about in that they were giving us the pass in the rain. It was an offensive play by VT against our D that ended up winning the game for them. A big win for NE lets enjoy it and hope the "boneheads" realize that we are lucky to have a coordinator who understands the value of a multi faceted offense, and realize that a lot of articles are written for entertainment value as someone posted above:) Controversy always sells, patting them on the back for a game well done does not:)
Posted by: huskerinaz on 10/10/09 @ 10:35 am:
Watson knows what he is doing. The article highlights a few running plays in the 4th quarter that of course worked when Mizzou had been completely demoralized by 3 passing TDs! For the first 3 quarters the running game was averaging maybe 3 yards per carry. Zac missed some throws and some were flat out dropped. Give Watson credit for trusting Zac to continue to try and take advantage of what the Tigers were daring him to do all night long. This game will be a cornerstone of confidence that Zac and the rest of the team will build on for the rest of the year. Look for Zac to have a great game against TTU and to become more consistent with each game. As for Watson, he is a master at developing an overall strategy that is adjusted by specific tactics in response to what the other team is giving him. As for all of you Friday morning internet QB's, lighten up and enjoy the rest of the season!
Posted by: treyball3 on 10/10/09 @ 10:37 am:
I heard some rumblings that Zac audibled a lot of runs into passes. Maybe Watson should've told him to stop. :)
Posted by: luvbigred on 10/10/09 @ 10:45 am:
All this angst about passing too much reminds me of a comment made by John Melton years ago about how he got tired of fans trying too tell him how too coach football when they couldn't even find their car in the parking lot after the game. I remember the time when all we did was run the football and we couldn't hardly ever beat the only other good team in the old Big Eight and then we would lose in the bowl game because we were up against another good team. We played 2 good teams a year and couldn't beat them. Back then the answer too everything was "running the football". We would run the football against teams that it was impossible to run against because we had no passing game too keep the defense honest. I can remember when TO himself said famously before a Miami-NU game, "they can't stand there and throw the ball all night and win". They did. Miami 23, NU 0. The very next time we played Miami, they beat us 20-3. After those 2 games we played Florida State in the Fiesta bowl and got beat 45-14. I prefer too think that you can win Championships no matter what offensive and defensive schemes you run if you have enough "difference makers" on both sides of the ball. I wonder what shape Helu would be in if Watson had "pounded" the ball all night and I wonder too if we would have won the game by pounding the ball. I doubt it. Missouri was determined too stop our running game and pressure Lee who is a young and inexperienced QB. The strategy worked well for 3 quarters. Our passing game opened things up and bailed us out in the 4th quarter. I believe the coaches did just fine and we won. Lets move on.
Posted by: crazyfans on 10/10/09 @ 10:52 am:
Get over it everybody...i'm sure they realize they needed to run more...the elements sucked that night...bottom line is we won the game...and we were able to do that with character and determination...not runs and passes. Its good to see that again. I will take 11 ugly wins in a season rather than 6 losses where we play well!
Posted by: VAPOR on 10/10/09 @ 11:43 am:
Roy Helu had 88 yards on 18 carries. T.Rex had 34 yards on 6 carries. ( If I remember right). If Roy has been sick and throwing up, why not play Rex Burkhead more?? I'll almost bet my paycheck that if you had given Rex 18 carries, he would have had more than 88 yards. I am totally o.k. with Rex being the feature back when Roy was sick. Rex has that extra something. Maybe if Rex would have had 10 carries at VT, we may be talking about an undefeated Nebraska......
Posted by: Scott on 10/10/09 @ 11:45 am:
Just let it go. We won the game, and yet people are still complaining. How about we pay attention to the character our team showed? The no quit attitude they have now that was lost during the Callahan era. I don't care if we finish a game with only 5 yards rushing, the most important thing is winning the game. Quit splitting hairs and just be happy with how far we have come in a year and a half.
Posted by: old cat 45 on 10/10/09 @ 11:57 am:
any of you ever play in the rain? quit complaining about the offense and give the defense their due!
Posted by: GreatDBadO on 10/10/09 @ 12:50 pm:
Couldn't agree more! Defense won this game with virtually no help form offense or special teams. Watson is a pas-first finesse guy and sprinkle in some run to keep em honest. Our best runs were with TEs and/or FB in there but they were rarely used as we were always in the shotgun. The only time we committed to the run was trying to run out the clock. I think Watson is a great guy but have never liked the offense much. What happened to Husker POWER!
Posted by: mad10 on 10/10/09 @ 1:12 pm:
great read. so true. i thought i was going to have a stroke with the way that game was called for the first 3.5 quarters. i thought bill.c was back calling plays again. i've never seen nu play that much from the shotgun.not even on a sunny/dry day. why do it while 3" of rain is falling on you? and to say nu doesn't have a running game like i've read on some of these comments, what are you talking about. helu is good. although it seemed he was not 100% thursday night. burkhead is amazing for a freshmen. he's not 6'2" 230lbs. but that kid picks up positive yardage just about every time he touches the ball. he is fun to watch. thank god for MR. SUH. he should get the heismen and maybe even the NOBEL PEACE PRIZE.
Posted by: JYD on 10/10/09 @ 1:17 pm:
I love how all the fans who think they can call a better game than Watson. NU won the game because those kids all believe in the system, the coaches, the other players, and most important themselves. Of course its easy for all of us to sit here on the couch and say they should run the ball. In those conditions, with Mizzou stacked in the box, and the health of Helu a question, you go with some short pass plays to losen the D up. Yes Lee, could have maybe passed better, but I question the people on here who have ever played in those conditions: the ball moves different, the ball is slick, pouring rain in your face. Zac Lee did a great job. NU's offense has evolved and this is the system, learn to live with it.
Posted by: theyallcount on 10/10/09 @ 3:14 pm:
Yes, playing the snow and rain on fields so wet from moisture and slippery from the mud that you can't barely get a block. Those were the days. I miss them. All this fancy turf. You don't even see mud on a jersey.
Leave these guys alone. I agree, a Win is a 'W'. Be thankful and we all hope Roy is well.
Posted by: Poundtherock on 10/10/09 @ 4:57 pm:
I totally agree with this article.
Our inability to run the ball early on still leaves me uncomfortable with our offense, and Watson as our OC. I have no problem with a balanced attack, but it was painfully obvious we needed to try a power running attack earlier in the game. If you want to win, and win championships, you must be able to grind it out via some sort of strong running attack (you can look at any level of football). Missouri is a tough place to play and the weather conditions were not desireable for any sort of offense, but logic tells you to try and pound the ball. Yes, we did try and run the ball, but it was slow developing and outside the tackles. We never tried a power running set like we saw at the end of the game with the full sets and straight at 'em approach. I would have loved to at least see what would have happened. Instead of the dink and dunk passes we were trying with our average receiving corps and inexperienced QB. GBR!
Posted by: 5xnc on 10/10/09 @ 6:08 pm:
One of the reasons that OC's coach from the press box is to see what the defense alignment is and how they disguise their blitzs, etc... And from the consistant message that we continually get from Bo & company, is that we take what the defense gives us. What would some of you arm chair experts call if you had the cat bird seat that Wat's has. Let's see, 7, 8, 9, 10 men in the box..... not many successful OC's would try to make a living with the ground game. It seems to me that MU's DC had a good game plan knowing that he had a suspect rushing defense and did enough covering it up by disguising what they were really trying to protect, and by relying on the **** poor weather conditions to help his game plan. On the other hand, our Huskers DC game plan was pretty plain and simple, beat the **** out of MU's suspect offenseive line with primarily a 4 man rush and defend the pass with 7 and the rain. Seems to me that the DC's were both smart in this game. Great win!!!!!!! Go Huskers!!!!!!! I can't wait to see us win the rest of our schedule and then give the Schlongwhorns a little taste of revenge in the Big 12 title game.
Posted by: (Anonymous) on 10/11/09 @ 12:11 am:
Maybe it's just me.....but it seems Lee gets happy feet in road games. Looks like he just can't settle down.
4 quarters at VaTech then 3 more in Columbia. Settle down son.....settle down !!
Posted by: Shawn from Mars on 10/11/09 @ 1:08 am:
Ugh. I must have watched a different game. Missou's linebacker [can't remember his name--Witherspoon maybe] and others stuffed our running game in the first half. Our ability run in the 4th quarter was because their defense was played out. It was plain to see NU had the better conditioning. Additionally, it was not the offense that played badly, it was our special teams that put us in a very bad position for the first hald. The same thing happened against VTech. Zach's passing was off and our receivers dropped balls, but in the end it was all Nebraska and that's all that counts. I believe we beat Missou in the last few seconds a few years ago with a "miracle" play, and that team was pretty good as I remember.
Posted by: OldFootballPlayer on 10/11/09 @ 8:52 am:
Anyone watch LSU "run" the option to a loss? Their offensive line isn't quite there and neither is Nebraskas yet. Watson has "run" the ball successfully at Colorado before. You coach to the talent you have......Precisely why he is the OC and will be highly sought after for head coaching jobs in the near future and the armchair QB's and the journalistic sportswriter gurus will not be:) Good offensive lines make quarterbacks look good. Oklahomas offensive line is suspect this year and will increase our chances of a W. Va Tech may be one of the better teams in the country and Nebraska is an extremely young and inexperienced team.......I kinda think the players and coaches deserve a little more credit than they are receiving.
Posted by: I Dont Know on 10/11/09 @ 10:43 am:
I agree with your opinion. I thought VT defense was a whole lot stronger than the Mizzou D, and we had no problem running the ball on them.
I am very perplexed by the decision to leave Lee out there to struggle......game after game. Don't give the the statistics to back up what a great player this kid is. We have played 2 real games this year, and he has really struggled in both of them.
These 2 yard gains that Lee was coming up with on the scrambling, broken plays would have been 8 yard gains if Green were in the game. I am sorry if I am being too cruel, but you don't burn a redshirt off a kid like Cody Green, and then not use him when your number 1 is having trouble.
Yea yea...the defense is really good. But as we saw Thursday, it almost does not matter!!
Posted by: gypsyhusker on 10/11/09 @ 12:17 pm:
I agree that this article was blah. The lack of over the top coaching is trumped buy the lesson of adversity that should pay big dividends later in the season in a close game. There was nothing to overcome in the VT game. This win not only draws the team together, it hardens thier resolve by accomplishing what was missing in the VT game. Finishing the fourth quarter. Bet Mizzou wishes it knew how.
Posted by: Jon on 10/11/09 @ 6:51 pm:
I completely agree. All I kept saying the entire game, I-Formation 3 straight plays, that's all I wanted to see. I hope Wats makes some better choices in future games like this. It's a good win on the road, give the W to our defense who was fantastic. I was there, I was cold, I was wet, and I couldn't have been happier leaving Columbia with a Win. Good luck to the Huskers next week against Tech, they will need a lot more offensive production to win that game.