Dan Lanning taking 3 timeouts on that Nebraska's drive at the end of the first half was ridiculous. I understand he had good reason to believe we would be able to stop them, but what reason did he have to believe we would be able to do anything with the ball with 1 minute left? We had less than 40 yards at that point.

Without spotting them that extra time the drive likely would have gone like the final drive of the game did, with he clock restricting the play calling giving our D the advantage.

That touchdown call was ridiculous too. The ref called it a touchdown on the field because he didn't see the receiver's backside was on the line, not that his right toe clipped some blades of grass, yet in review it was the right toe that "could not be indisputably rules as not touching the ground" meant they couldn't overturn the call. Really. That a flaw in the logical process of reviews.

As someone else mentioned at the time, it felt like that score would be enough for Nebraska to win.

I had the same thought as he was calling those time outs. Did he really expect that they would be able to move the ball after NE punted? I know he's big on the whole middle 8 thing, but that was not the time.

After the Ify pick deep in NE territory I was yelling for them to just kick the FG on 1st down. I was 90% joking...but then they fumbled on the next play.

It's incredible to see an offense that's mostly been so good for a long time be reduced to this level so quickly. I can't help but think other teams simply have them figured out.

It only takes one play, one missed assignment. Why not try and get the ball back? There was no reason to believe that the D couldn't get a stop. Nebraska got lucky. But I think everyone in Lannings position would try and get the ball back.

I generally like trying to create one more opportunity for the offense like that. But when we've had more negative or zero yard plays than positive plays, and only 50 yards of offense in the entire first half, I think the odds are more likely that the one play or one missed assignment would have gone against OBD than for them at that point. I tend to agree with Zachary Neal's take. Let the half die and try to regroup.

But, obviously, hindsight is 20/20.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/football/5-takeaways-from-oregon-s-17-14-comeback-win-over-nebraska/ar-AA2etTee?cvid=6ad4fb993dd74dacad05c271f6481668&ocid=hpmsn

How many of those 50 yards of first half offense were 5 yard passes on 3rd and 9? In that context, the offense was even worse than the abysmal stats.

Dose Sabine or Smart call those timeouts when their team was struggling like that? The answer is NO they just try to get out of the half and make adjustments at halftime.

Lanning still needs to improve on his situational awareness. Got to know when to fold them and get ready for the next hand.

1 minute ago, The Kamikaze Kid said:

How many of those 50 yards of first half offense were 5 yard passes on 3rd and 9? In that context, the offense was even worse than the abysmal stats.

Or worse 5 yards behind the line of scrimmage. I know those plays have a place but they don't work unless there's a deep threat.

I much prefer throwing pass the first down marker.

Edited 2 hours ago2 hr by Dave23

2 hours ago, Log Haulin said:

It only takes one play, one missed assignment. Why not try and get the ball back? There was no reason to believe that the D couldn't get a stop. Nebraska got lucky. But I think everyone in Lannings position would try and get the ball back.

Why? Because we gave them time and flexibility of play calling to score. Risk Reward was not in our favor. Get out of the half alive.