The Sky is Falling : Chicken Little, Andre Kostolany and Tales of Poor Coaching at USC and Husker Nebraska or How to Lose Football Games Ignominously

Psychological studies have shown that the difference between a champion and an equally talented non-champion in athletic competition is the absence of fear in the champion, who plays to WIN and is not afraid of losing, while the non-champion is afraid of losing and plays not to lose. Hence, more often than not, the champion WINS and the non-champion LOSES.

Which sort of coach a football coach is, is easy to see by the way he coaches the game. In a college football game played on September 19, 2009, the Nebraska Cornhuskers, having the stronger team most of the day, managed to lose to Virginia Tech 16-15 in the closing seconds because of the NU coaching staff's fear of losing, which led to totally false game strategy and tactics. The Virginia Tech head coach, Frank Beamer, on the other hand, who has a very successful career record of WINNING, did what he needed to do to WIN. That's coaching!

For this Husker fan, the totally inexcusable and ignominious Husker 16-15 loss to Virginia Tech in the closing minutes and seconds is the tale of Chicken Little, struggling mightily not to lose, but LOSING in the end. Whoever calls the offensive plays at Nebraska and determines the offensive game strategy for the Huskers is not the right fit for the Cornhuskers. It is a gut feeling.

Against Virginia Tech, the Huskers did not score a touchdown, played like eggshells on offense the closer that they got to the goal line and were lucky to have the nation's best kicker in Alex Henery, who kicked 5 field goals. The Huskers, having many bonafide scoring opportunities, were unable to punch the ball into the end zone due to a bland uninventive scheme of playcalling on offense. It was awful.

And the Husker problems are deeper than that. Typical for things that are not right at Nebraska offensively is this play-by-play of the Huskers at the end of the 3rd quarter, leading 12-10, with a 1st and goal at the Virginia Tech 6-yard line:

1st-6, VT6 1:55 Neb committed 10 yard penalty [offensive holding]
1st-16, VT16 1:55 Neb committed 5 yard penalty
1st-21, VT21 1:55 Z. Lee incomplete pass to the left
2nd-21, VT21 1:43 Neb committed 10 yard penalty [offensive holding]
2nd-31, VT31 1:43 Z. Lee incomplete pass to the right
3rd-31, VT31 1:14 Neb committed 5 yard penalty
3rd-36, VT36 1:14 Z. Lee rushed to the left for 1 yard loss
4th-37, VT37 0:35 A. Henery punt, touchback

Is that what one calls home-field advantage? Virginia Tech had no penalties at all called upon it in the 2nd half. Indeed, one would have to research hundreds of thousands of games to find four penalties for 30-yards against the offensive team in that part of the red zone in that manner. If the penalties were justified - which must be assumed - that is offensive coaching at its worst, with that many penalties then being a product of poor offensive coaching leadership and most likely questionable playcalling, which - if instinctively wrong - subconsciously unnerves the players into avoidable mistakes or actively puts them into game positions where they are prone to errors. Either that, or the Hokies have been taught how to draw offensive holding penalites in the red zone. You have to think of everything. NU has a history of losing to the Hokies because of penalties. A bad penalty call on Nebraska turf probably cost the Huskers the win last year. The coaches hold the players responsible for such penalties, but in reality, the ultimate cause is poor coaching in a given game situation.

Things like this do not happen to Urban Meyer.

Leading 15-10 with 2 minutes to play, here is the play-by play, Nebraska possession:

Nebraska - 2:07
1st-10, VT46 2:07 R. Helu rushed up the middle for 2 yard gain
2nd-8, VT44 2:03 Z. Lee rushed to the right for 3 yard gain
3rd-5, VT41 1:56 Z. Lee rushed to the right for 4 yard gain
4th-1, VT37 1:51 A. Henery punt, no return
Virginia Tech - 1:44
1st-10, VT12 1:44 Neb committed 5 yard penalty
1st-5, VT17 1:44 T. Taylor sacked by J. Crick
2nd-6, VT16 1:20 T. Taylor passed to D. Coale to the right for 81 yard gain
1st-3, Neb3 1:11 T. Taylor sacked by M. O'Hanlon
2nd-11, Neb11 0:35 T. Taylor incomplete pass to the right
3rd-11, Neb11 0:33 T. Taylor passed to D. Roberts to the right for 11 yard touchdown. 2pt attempt failed, T. Taylor pass to D. Roberts
Virginia Tech - 0:21
VT kicked off, R. Burkhead returned kickoff for 18 yards
Nebraska - 0:18
1st-10, Neb15 0:18 Neb committed 5 yard penalty
1st-15, Neb10 0:12 R. Carmichael intercepted Z. Lee for 6 yards

With 1:51 left in the game Nebraska had a clear chance to seal the game by going for 1st down on a 4th and 1 at the Virginia Tech 37-yard line or by trying to kick a field goal, within Henery's proven long-distance range. If the first down is made, the game is over - i.e. the WIN was a heartbeat away - for the courageous. The defense had been playing so well that even if either of these options had not been successful, little in terms of field position vs. a punt would have been lost, and the defense would surely have then been fired up enough to hold the Hokies back, who needed a touchdown to win and had to go the length of the field.

Instead, the Huskers played the coward's card and punted: 4th-1, VT37 1:51 A. Henery punt, no return, giving Virginia Tech the option to win -if they so desired, and they took it. The Hokies "smelled" the Husker fear of losing, for nothing else can explain what happened then, as the Hokie quarterback passed for 81 yards and then for 11 yards for the TD. The "fear of losing" Husker defense gave the Hokie quarterback NINE seconds to find a receiver on the touchdown pass. The offense is usually happy if the QB gets 3 seconds. Those are grievous coaching faults. Players have to know what to do and what not to do in critical game situations. That is the coaching staff responsibility.

Are the Huskers back? No, they are not, and their return is unlikely with the current offensive coaching coordination or the vulnerable strategy of a Chicken Little defense when the chips are down. Things like that do not happen to Urban Meyer. Nebraska deserved to lose because they did not play to WIN.

On a different note, by the way, a similar deserved fate befell the Trojans of USC as USC lost ignominiously to Washington 16-13, a team that went 0-11 in 2008.

Throughout the game, USC stuck with its opening - very ineffective - quarterback and an equally ineffective offensive game plan going nowhere, under the motto that a pre-game QB decision and game strategy would by followed, regardless of the actual game progress.

Why the USC offensive coordination did not at least try a different quarterback when clearly needed to shake up their own offense and opposing defense is anybody's guess. Apparently, they were hoping things would improve. They did not - and there is a reason for this.

Coaching football is like investing. The late great German investment guru André Kostolany wrote that there was one significant difference between a successful professional investor like himself and less successful other investors. Most investors, said Kostolany, too early sold their good investments for a profit to take their gains (for fear of losing them) whereas a professional investor like himself would hold on to such good investments for a much longer period of time and thus make a much greater profit.

Similarly, said Kostolany, a top investor like himself would get rid of a bad investment quickly, taking a loss soberly, whereas the average investor would stick to that bad investment (for fear of losing money) much longer in the foolish hope that the losses already incurred would be recovered, which they often are not. In fact, more losses often follow.

When things are not working, they should be changed immediately.

Hoping and waiting for improvement where there is no good reason to expect it is the fool's strategy. Sticking with a quarterback choice or a game strategy when it is not working is a cardinal error in coaching and top coaches can be spotted by their ability to stick with winning strategies and tactics when winning and their ability to QUICKLY change and adjust their strategies and tactics when losing. Right now, as far as offensive and defensive coordination at USC are concerned, the winners went to Washington.