* Declining the penalty before the field goal was an ignorant or scared decision. Perhaps both. Scrutinizing that type of choice is prominent on NFL boards because so many games are razor tight. Joe Philbin made a similar bonehead move at the end of the first half against the Patriots, declining an offensive interference penalty with 10 seconds remaining. That allowed a 44 yard field goal instead of 54. I have no idea what he was afraid of. You have to play the percentages. Golden and Philbin did not. College strategy like that is seldom discussed because so many other variables are infuriating and the talent level is not as evenly distributed.
* Kaaya looks excellent. I'm amazed at how much better he looks than the debut at Louisville. He must have been petrified in that setting given how weak his arm looked. James Coley also hasn't received the credit for the improved game plan at Nebraska. It may not be perfect but we looked dangerous at every level and were using aggressive designs we hadn't shown in his tenure. I think it's true he is finally confident with the quarterback running the system he prefers. Even the first down interception down the left sideline was a solid aggressive call, IMO. I loved the way that play unfolded. Walford failed and the defensive back made a terrific play.
* Look, every offensive coordinator is in love with those worthless bubble screens. I'd be hard pressed to name a board I frequent where it isn't a topic. I worked in a sports stats office. Every play is charted. It was quickly apparent that screen passes and fade passes are worthless plays. The percentage of success, particularly against a top team, is incredibly low. It's always been that way, according to guys in that office who had charted the plays for more than a decade. The office literally would erupt in laughter when somebody tried a screen pass on 3rd down. Those screens and fades are bail out plays, basically a cop out when you are too lazy or scared to think of anything else. The coordinators aren't afraid of interceptions on those plays so they are willing to ignore the low percentages. In their minds it's a 1 on 1 or 2 on 1 scenario and they have overboard expectation on how often their guy will prevail. Then when it happens that way against a stiff, they fail to recognize the weakness of the opponent was the decisive factor, not the design or anything their guy did.
* The safety play is easily the biggest disappointment of the season. Dallas Crawford attacked in that spring game, racing forward on every running play and instantly heading to the collision point on pass plays. I was worried he'd be burned on double moves. I posted that several times. Now it doesn't look like the same player or same philosophy at all. In 40+ seasons following this program I can't remember many times being similarly stumped. If anything is an example of Lu's theme that we are playing scared, the safety play and particularly Crawford is an example. Somebody had to get in his ear and tell him to back off. Crawford's instinct covering kicks and while running the ball is pinball aggressive. I refuse to believe he wants to be standing back there flatfooted until a second or two after the snap.
* Nebraska is hardly mediocre. It's foolish to judge everything based on pro potential. In college football there is great benefit to having strong tough run oriented offensive linemen and using them to pound away at an opponent 45+ times per game. I've been betting those teams since I was early in college in 1980. The son of my bookmaker lived in the same complex as I did at USC. The son would literally call our apartment on Saturday nights and scream at me based on how well I was doing betting college football. "We'll get it all back tomorrow (NFL), and then some!" Unfortunately, he was often correct. My line of scrimmage angles worked great in college but not so well in NFL.
When the Canes had ultra special defensive linemen, particularly tackles, we were one of the very rare teams that could make Oklahoma or Nebraska look bad. They have weight room redshirted offensive linemen but generally not top end athletic ability. Barry Switzer won three national championships without a star offensive lineman of note. I think he had one 4th round choice and one 7th round pick. That's about it. One kid, Don Key, looked promising before his career was ended by a liver or kidney problem. But even Key was undersized and I'm not sure his NFL potential was as high as the estimates.
Anyway, somehow Canes fans concluded that our style was dictating those matchups instead of sheer difference in talent level. Nebraska under Osborne was incredibly astute not to overreact and change the offense. Who cares if one team has a trump card edge in athletic ability? It may not last. Osborne got better athletes in those spots, as he announced he would after the 1991 Orange Bowl. Once the athletic ability was closer to parallel, the run oriented team began to dictate. Not exactly complicated or surprising.
Right now Nebraska is not nearly at 1994 through 1998 level. But Miami is not close to our peak level, and at defensive tackle we are actually worse than where we were in the challenged 1970s. I was a kid in that era but I loved how aggressive and effective we were at defensive tackle, even if the rest of the unit was subpar. Check our results against Oklahoma and Nebraska in the mid '70s. Very competitive. The media was always shocked. We would be 25 to 36 point underdogs and hang right with them. A huge reason was our defensive interior disrupting their exchanges and not allowing the fullback to dictate the game, opening up the perimeter. Since I remember those '70s Canes interior linemen like Cristiani, Carter, Edwards and Latimer it's easy to look at the current guys and laugh at how far we've fallen.
Nebraska may have mediocre linemen but nowadays we are equally mediocre so their stylistic and physical advantage apply against us, just like the vast majority of teams. I'm confident we can hold up much better at home against them, just like the meetings against Ohio State in 2010 and 2011 were drastically different from road to home.
