To not start 7-0
Oregon isn't good, weak defense.
You have more talent, it's on your coaches
Oregon isn't good, weak defense.
You have more talent, it's on your coaches
Cool Story Bro!To not start 7-0
Oregon isn't good, weak defense.
You have more talent, it's on your coaches
Yes Riley and staff need to coach their collective rears off.
What goes on at press conferences is for Joe fan. What changes in coaching, teaching and preparing is what matters. Actions speak louder than words in these cases.
To not start 7-0
Oregon isn't good, weak defense.
You have more talent, it's on your coaches
To not start 7-0
Oregon isn't good, weak defense.
You have more talent, it's on your coaches
To not start 7-0
Oregon isn't good, weak defense.
You have more talent, it's on your coaches
Uh oh...here come lots of Husker fans to defend the team in case they are not 6-0 in the games you listed
We have to remember which games it is "okay" for the Huskers to lose:
Oregon
Northwestern
Wisconsin
Indiana*
Ohio State
Iowa
*"Trap game" and stuff...
I do not agree with this at all - Teams that are well coached do not fumble as much or turn the ball over as much - they also are very discipline and do not make mistakes - it is in my mind the difference between most teamsCoaches don't fumble or throw Ints. Coaches can only control so much...you can lead a horse to water but can't make him play with his rubber ducky....
it is not OK to lose any of those but simple math might argue we aren't going to be 7-0
if you give Nebraska a 60% chance of winning each of those individual games what would Nebraska's odds of being 7-0 after all those games?
I do not agree with this at all - Teams that are well coached do not fumble as much or turn the ball over as much - they also are very discipline and do not make mistakes - it is in my mind the difference between most teams
Yes we are and I love it - I especially loved that the staff put the game in the hands of the Oline and the running backs - I thought last year we lacked efficiency in scoring - meaning we would roll up 500 plus yards but only score around 30 points and then that included a couple of turnovers. This game we did not have huge yards, 400 or so but we scored 43 points - that I think is what can win us a lot of gamesAnd so far we are +2 in the turnover game. So far so good!
And we were 5/5 in the red zone!Yes we are and I love it - I especially loved that the staff put the game in the hands of the Oline and the running backs - I thought last year we lacked efficiency in scoring - meaning we would roll up 500 plus yards but only score around 30 points and then that included a couple of turnovers. This game we did not have huge yards, 400 or so but we scored 43 points - that I think is what can win us a lot of games
0.6 x 0.6 x 0.6 x 0.6 x 0.6 x 0.6 x 0.6 = .0279936
I know I have been very critical with this staff - But I do think Riley is a smart guy and a good offensive mind - This game plan had his prints all over it Langsford has always been more pass happy - I loved that they stuck with the run even when the score is close, yes this will not always be the case against better defenses but this represents change in thinking from last year.
Defense - still not sold on Banker we look good against the run but putting a freshman corner on an island makes me nervous. If he does that against better teams we are going to give up a lot of long ball touchdowns
Special teams - No excuse for what we saw in this first game - Read is paid big bucks and from what I saw we would have been better without a dedicated special teams coach
Riley - he was not happy and I take that as a very good sign - It is one thing to say you want to win titles it is another to act like - we must improve dramatically if we are even going to win the West - but as long as he is not accepting performance that will not get us there I am good with patience
How did you come up with 60% chance at each individual game? I'd have to believe Nebraska is more like 95% or higher to beat Wyoming, maybe 55% to beat Oregon, 50% (or lower) to beat Northwestern, 80% to beat Illinois, 70% to beat Indiana, and 90% to beat Purdue. I can't do your simple math because it starts with bad assumptions that every game should be 60%.it is not OK to lose any of those but simple math might argue we aren't going to be 7-0
even if you give Nebraska a 60% chance of winning each of those individual games what would Nebraska's odds of being 7-0 after all those games?? I will let you do the math.
"If you argue with math you will lose"
How did you come up with 60% chance at each individual game? I'd have to believe Nebraska is more like 95% or higher to beat Wyoming, maybe 55% to beat Oregon, 50% (or lower) to beat Northwestern, 80% to beat Illinois, 70% to beat Indiana, and 90% to beat Purdue. I can't do your simple math because it starts with bad assumptions that every game should be 60%.
To not start 7-0
Oregon isn't good, weak defense.
You have more talent, it's on your coaches
50% or lower to beat Northwestern? Why should we take you seriously again?How did you come up with 60% chance at each individual game? I'd have to believe Nebraska is more like 95% or higher to beat Wyoming, maybe 55% to beat Oregon, 50% (or lower) to beat Northwestern, 80% to beat Illinois, 70% to beat Indiana, and 90% to beat Purdue. I can't do your simple math because it starts with bad assumptions that every game should be 60%.
I don't know what the point spread will be, but I imagine it will be close to pick'em. Yes, Northwestern lost their first game at home, but they have more talent than they've had in the recent past and they will be playing at home. When I see that spread, I will adjust the percentages, but until then, I have to think it will be near pick, maybe Nebraska by 3.50% or lower to beat Northwestern? Why should we take you seriously again?
How did you come up with 60% chance at each individual game? I'd have to believe Nebraska is more like 95% or higher to beat Wyoming, maybe 55% to beat Oregon, 50% (or lower) to beat Northwestern, 80% to beat Illinois, 70% to beat Indiana, and 90% to beat Purdue. I can't do your simple math because it starts with bad assumptions that every game should be 60%.
You know he might be closer then you think??? That's why I'm so interested in this year. After last year would you of thought Wisconsin was going to beat LSU??? Simply put we lost a lot of games without our head on straight. So I can't wait for our games with Wisconsin, Northwestern, Illinois and Iowa.50% or lower to beat Northwestern? Why should we take you seriously again?
read the post I was replying to -- 6 games were listed .. Wyoming wasn't one of them, neither was Purdue (of course it is 90% + we beat Wyoming)
Oregon, NW, Wisconsin, Indiana, OSU, Iowa were listed
the 60% was arbitrary as an aggregrate of those 6 games .. you can assign a realistic probability however you like ... the point is even if you think you are going to win every one of those 6 games the odds still favor an outcome other than six and zero
Of course we might lose to them. I was responding to the fact that he thinks our odds of beating them are less than just about everyone else on our schedule. Ha. No.You know he might be closer then you think??? That's why I'm so interested in this year. After last year would you of thought Wisconsin was going to beat LSU??? Simply put we lost a lot of games without our head on straight. So I can't wait for our games with Wisconsin, Northwestern, Illinois and Iowa.
Just a thought: I'm attending Oregon game, from Tigard. Haven't seen a game since 1980's. I won't be wearing green either.If we beat Oregon we WILL go 7-0. Ironclad prediction. But that is IF we beat Oregon. They are still a dangerous team.
But I think we will beat them. It is my one game a year annual trip to Lincoln. And with the exception of Iowa last year, a game we should have won, I am "undefeated" in my last 20 trips home to Lincoln.
Phil Steele ain't got nothin' on my predictive powers. Lol
I'm still trying to figure out this one important question....why do I still laugh every single time someone posts this silly reference? Every. Single. Time.
Sorry. I misunderstood your point. My bad.Of course we might lose to them. I was responding to the fact that he thinks our odds of beating them are less than just about everyone else on our schedule. Ha. No.
Why would those games be selected when original poster talked about starting 7-0 which would be the first 7 games?read the post I was replying to -- 6 games were listed .. Wyoming wasn't one of them, neither was Purdue (of course it is 90% + we beat Wyoming)
Oregon, NW, Wisconsin, Indiana, OSU, Iowa were listed
the 60% was arbitrary as an aggregrate of those 6 games .. you can assign a realistic probability however you like ... the point is even if you think you are going to win every one of those games individually the odds still favor an outcome other than six and zero
Why would those games be selected when original poster talked about starting 7-0 which would be the first 7 games?
I'm not to be taken seriously, so don't read this. But my quick take is as follows:Of the next 6 teams,
- which has the best passing offense?
- which has the best rushing defense?