There seems to be a lot of deep seated anger on the board after the Cats’ loss to the Huskers, with almost universal vitriol around the OLine, quarterback development, offense coaching, and overall quality of the current roster. Had the Cats pulled the game out, I am pretty sure a number of the complaints being made would not be, except maybe the poor quality of the O Line.
My frustration is much less universal, and focused on an opportunity lost, and the disappointment that comes from that. What is frustrating to me is that the Cats went into a difficult place to play, with an O line that we knew, the coaches knew, the Husker coaches knew, and every sports commentator knew was overmatched, with a backup QB with limited experience and pedestrian skills who had to play behind that line, and amazingly, the coaches devised a game plan that put them in a position to win, but they lost for the most pedestrian reasons. The several plays on which the game was decided were not determined because of a difference of skill but by simple mental errors. On one play, a screen pass to Porter, the play failed because Tiernan didn’t position himself properly, despite having the time and opportunity to get there. If he’s is positioned properly, the play goes for at least 40 yards and possibly a TD. On the second down play after the long pass completion to Kirtz, Sullivan just didn’t pull the trigger. He throws the ball, and it’s a TD. After the long pass to Henning, Bajakian did not have the confidence to keep it simple, call a run at a reeling defense and settle for a FG if Nebraska responded, which I don’t think they could have. Instead, they go backward and come up empty. Execute all three, they win easily; execute 2, they win by a whisker. Execute one, and the game really does come down to a last possession. Simple errors, not cosmic ones, lost the game.
Neither team on the field was a world beater. The Cats, without their starting QB and playing an inexperienced one in a noisy venue, were facing a really difficult task. I really do have to tip my hat to the coaching staff: the Cats really were in a position to win. On the defensive side, they recognized how one dimensional the Huskers are, and exploited that limitation. I have little doubt that if Bryant had played, the Cats would have won by 2 scores or more: there were receivers open on a number of the sacks for someone quick enough to read and see them, and there were opportunities downfield Bryant would have exploited all day. It boggles my mind that even with the combination of a bad line, fast pass rush and slow reading QB that led to 8 sacks, had a few people just kept their wits about them, the Cats could have won.
In the end, give credit to the Huskers. They did what they had to, and recovered well enough from the mistakes they made to hold on and win. They had a handful of fine plays on offense that generated their 17 points. If the Cats had kept their wits about them when the game was on the line, though, I really think the game was theirs to win. That is why I am frustrated.
My frustration is much less universal, and focused on an opportunity lost, and the disappointment that comes from that. What is frustrating to me is that the Cats went into a difficult place to play, with an O line that we knew, the coaches knew, the Husker coaches knew, and every sports commentator knew was overmatched, with a backup QB with limited experience and pedestrian skills who had to play behind that line, and amazingly, the coaches devised a game plan that put them in a position to win, but they lost for the most pedestrian reasons. The several plays on which the game was decided were not determined because of a difference of skill but by simple mental errors. On one play, a screen pass to Porter, the play failed because Tiernan didn’t position himself properly, despite having the time and opportunity to get there. If he’s is positioned properly, the play goes for at least 40 yards and possibly a TD. On the second down play after the long pass completion to Kirtz, Sullivan just didn’t pull the trigger. He throws the ball, and it’s a TD. After the long pass to Henning, Bajakian did not have the confidence to keep it simple, call a run at a reeling defense and settle for a FG if Nebraska responded, which I don’t think they could have. Instead, they go backward and come up empty. Execute all three, they win easily; execute 2, they win by a whisker. Execute one, and the game really does come down to a last possession. Simple errors, not cosmic ones, lost the game.
Neither team on the field was a world beater. The Cats, without their starting QB and playing an inexperienced one in a noisy venue, were facing a really difficult task. I really do have to tip my hat to the coaching staff: the Cats really were in a position to win. On the defensive side, they recognized how one dimensional the Huskers are, and exploited that limitation. I have little doubt that if Bryant had played, the Cats would have won by 2 scores or more: there were receivers open on a number of the sacks for someone quick enough to read and see them, and there were opportunities downfield Bryant would have exploited all day. It boggles my mind that even with the combination of a bad line, fast pass rush and slow reading QB that led to 8 sacks, had a few people just kept their wits about them, the Cats could have won.
In the end, give credit to the Huskers. They did what they had to, and recovered well enough from the mistakes they made to hold on and win. They had a handful of fine plays on offense that generated their 17 points. If the Cats had kept their wits about them when the game was on the line, though, I really think the game was theirs to win. That is why I am frustrated.
