** Scott Frost megathread all things SF***

[Mary Pats BOB]

4 hours ago, timmytbro said:

Congrats coach Frost on a fantastic win against Navy today! Scott has shown that his team can face adversity in a ball game and play hard until the very last second. Folks this man knows how to play a complete game, all four quarters! I cannot wait to see him turn this Nebraska football program around.

Fantastic? Most of you need to grab a gear. I love Scott but good grief, I'm not sure they would beat Riley's Huskers! They play hard and disciplined football but the talent is nowhere close. They remind me of N Dakota St.

[Xmas32]

7 minutes ago, JimmyBuckets said:

Only if he bring Montgomery with him. Beast mode.

 

I like Mike Warren quite a bit too.

[BIGREDIOWAN]

1 hour ago, Landlord said:

 

 

Nobody is sitting there telling you that. 

How did your post add to the conversation here? It didn't....... it's just you stirring the pot again. 

[Mary Pats BOB]

22 minutes ago, Football Guy Bob said:

Give me Matt Campbell over Frost.

I would have to agree with that. This hype train is getting worse than Tanner Lee's. Nebraska fans aren't always as smart as they get credit for. And I like Frost, I really really do! FIXING NU IS NOT THE SAME AS FIXING AN AAC TEAM THATS WON 4 CONFERENCE TITLES IN THE LAST TEN YEARS!

[BIGREDIOWAN]

1 hour ago, FTW said:

 

You never know. The PSU game could be the upset of the year. Are the odds in our favor? Of course not. Maybe a light comes on and the defense figures things out. It's why they play the games on the field and you take one game at a time. We'll find out what kind of resolve this team has, if any, by the time the Purdue game is over.

 

I think the Purdue game will define Riley's era but most will look back at Northern Illinois, Wisconsin, and Ohio State. You win against Purdue and you have momentum and could finish realistically at 4-1 for the remainder of the year. Where Callahan failed when he had 5 games left after the Okie St. loss, Riley might succeed. Either way, you've got to root for the team no matter the odds. What else have we got?

Now hold on, let's not pretend that I'm not rooting for the Huskers here, I want them to win every game from here on out. I'll be cheering my butt off the entire game, but realistically speaking I'm preparing for another major beat down by Penn State. Look what they did to Michigan tonight. 

[Dansker]

15 minutes ago, BIGREDIOWAN said:

Now hold on, let's not pretend that I'm not rooting for the Huskers here, I want them to win every game from here on out. I'll be cheering my butt off the entire game, but realistically speaking I'm preparing for another major beat down by Penn State. Look what they did to Michigan tonight. 

 

Gotta take care of Purdue first. One game at a time. If we can't bounce back with a resounding beat down on Purdue then there is major cause for concern for the rest of the schedule. Even though I don't like Riley as the coach, I still want the team to make it to a bowl game even if that includes a W over PSU. The PSU I saw tonight -- on paper, no chance Nebraska does better than Michigan.

 

Even though there'll be no championships, our players deserve to go to a bowl for a reward. That's all I'm expecting at this point. It irks me when people give up before a game even occurs, so I'm not questioning your loyalty as a fan. As long as a game has yet to be played, there's an opportunity to win. That's the point I was trying to make @BIGREDIOWAN

[Hayseed]

50 minutes ago, Mary Pats BOB said:

Fantastic? Most of you need to grab a gear. I love Scott but good grief, I'm not sure they would beat Riley's Huskers! They play hard and disciplined football but the talent is nowhere close. They remind me of N Dakota St.

I saw and heard the game between UCF and Navy. I think they would have beaten us by the score of around 50-20.... I think Navy would beat us by only about 10. Their ability to execute plays is miles ahead of ours.

[Stone Cold]

Frost is the guy who needs to come here, he just is.  If anything, you have a guy who was here during the really good days...someone who knows what it means to be there during that time.  What playing for something like that men't and what sacrafices needed to be done.  First day, first meeting in the locker room i would pull every god dam trophy out of all the cases and bring them all down there because none of them have ever earned there own.  Not a bowl trophy, not a division trophy, not a NC, nothing.  They need past players to show them what those trophys mean, what it meant to them back in the day.  I'm not saying matt campbell isnt a good coach and he wouldn't do good here.  But some of the things i see talked about here that fans want can only be brought by someone who has lived that culture and Scott Frost has.  

[gorp512]

1 hour ago, lo country said:

Upsetting PSU, whom ESPN gives us a 3.3% chance to win might be the biggest upset of the year....

 

 

Baylor seems to have the upset of the year each week

[JJ Husker]

2 hours ago, Landlord said:

 

Sorry JJ, but what the hell are you talking about? First of all, obviously, the rationale for Frost is that he's the best option when you combine the factors of potential, results, and the "realisticness" of coaches coming here. He's the best option by a long shot. Why? His resume is almost picture perfect w/ success and growth, he's young, would publicly get a ton of attention and praise, is a former player, and has the closest you can get to a "sure bet" as far as his resume goes.

 

Second of all, when you're an AAC school with an AAC budget, history, facilities, and name recognition, then you compete on that level. He's dominating that level. Did anyone doubt Chris Petersen was an amazing coach because Boise wasn't the caliber of a traditional blue blood? He's currently maximizing the potential of that program, (thus far) more than anyone else in history ever has.

 

Third of all, what's the problem with his style of offense? I mean the results of his offense obviously work (#4, #4, #5 national ranks in PPG in his three years as Oregon's OC, #1 in the nation at UCF this year), and he runs a balanced, power spread. Again, even if you just happen to really personally enjoy the triple option or something, what's the issue when all of the data points say that Frost's offensive scheme is elite and incredibly successful?

 

The hell that I’m talking about is this attitude that he is the only option, our only hope. Yes the potential is there. Yes he is more realistic than my first choice, Shaw. Yes his resume is impressive. Yes I realize he is likely who we’ll end up with. I wouldn’t say he is the best option but rather is a very good option. Most of my problem stems from the attitude and approach of a handful of posters hereabouts. I will say that the more I watch UCF, the warmer I get to the idea.

 

The problem I have is maybe more my preconceived notions of what his offense is, maybe more so than what it actually is. I haven’t watched enough of his games to determine if it is in fact significantly different than Oregon was or if he employs enough power and rushing for my tastes. It’s simply my opinion and my preferences. Sorry if I’m not succumbing to the group think here. I need to arrive at my own conclusions. I’m not there...yet.

 

2 hours ago, FTW said:

 

I think it's because he has a vertical passing game and that scares the old ones. Anyone who wants to see their offense at their best should watch the 4th Quarter of that game. I really like how balanced they are. You need that in today's game.

 

You are mostly correct. The vertical passing game does concern me. As you say, I’m “old”, old enough to have watched Nebraska football since the very early 70’s. We have never been very good at the vertical passing game and it has never been a significant part of our offense when we were any good. It has been a big part of our offense when we’ve sucked for the last 20 years. So yeah, it concerns me. Call me old fashioned, I prefer having a run first identity. I prefer being the team that knows what to do and how to get that first down on 3rd and 3. I’m not opposed to having a viable passing game or a balanced offense. I would prefer it. I just have never seen a successful Nebraska offense predicated on throwing the ball in Memorial stadium in my 54 years on this earth. 

 

And Im a little pickier about what I consider “good” football than Landlord is. He has been content and satisfied most of the 2000’s. I haven’t been impressed at all, by anything, since about 2001. My only hope is that we get back to controlling the LOS (which we need to do to have success in the B1G) and that we get back to an aggressive, attacking form of defense (which I believe we need to ever win anything of substance). It wouldn’t hurt for some here to listen a little bit to a guy who has been watching the Huskers since before some of you were following your moms around the grocery store wearing three cornered britches. (I had to add that just because you called me old)

[Hayseed]

I'm old and I think vertical passing is fine if you have coaches and players who know what they're doing. Blocking ,running, tackling, covering.....ditto.

[Dansker]

9 minutes ago, El Diaco said:

 

The hell that I’m talking about is this attitude that he is the only option, our only hope. Yes the potential is there. Yes he is more realistic than my first choice, Shaw. Yes his resume is impressive. Yes I realize he is likely who we’ll end up with. I wouldn’t say he is the best option but rather is a very good option. Most of my problem stems from the attitude and approach of a handful of posters hereabouts. I will say that the more I watch UCF, the warmer I get to the idea.

 

The problem I have is maybe more my preconceived notions of what his offense is, maybe more so than what it actually is. I haven’t watched enough of his games to determine if it is in fact significantly different than Oregon was or if he employs enough power and rushing for my tastes. It’s simply my opinion and my preferences. Sorry if I’m not succumbing to the group think here. I need to arrive at my own conclusions. I’m not there...yet.

 

 

You are mostly correct. The vertical passing game does concern me. As you say, I’m “old”, old enough to have watched Nebraska football since the very early 70’s. We have never been very good at the vertical passing game and it has never been a significant part of our offense when we were any good. It has been a big part of our offense when we’ve sucked for the last 20 years. So yeah, it concerns me. Call me old fashioned, I prefer having a run first identity. I prefer being the team that knows what to do and how to get that first down on 3rd and 3. I’m not opposed to having a viable passing game or a balanced offense. I would prefer it. I just have never seen a successful Nebraska offense predicated on throwing the ball in Memorial stadium in my 54 years on this earth. 

 

And Im a little pickier about what I consider “good” football than Landlord is. He has been content and satisfied most of the 2000’s. I haven’t been impressed at all, by anything, since about 2001. My only hope is that we get back to controlling the LOS (which we need to do to have success in the B1G) and that we get back to an aggressive, attacking form of defense (which I believe we need to ever win anything of substance). It wouldn’t hurt for some here to listen a little bit to a guy who has been watching the Huskers since before some of you were following your moms around the grocery store wearing three cornered britches. (I had to add that just because you called me old)

 

Great post! I think our offense can be more like Alabama's. I prefer a smash mouth offense that is predicated on the run, too but has playmakers at wide receiver and can score in a heartbeat. They have a dual threat QB which I think is another plus. I do think with the right coach, we can lineup in an I-Formation like we used to and run the ball better and still have a downfield vertical passing threat. We have to have that because the game has changed quite a lot.

 

I'm only in my 30's but I've researched Cornhusker football history. So, I'm well aware of what we were like in the 70's and 80's and especially the 90's since that is when I really grew fond of Nebraska football. I know Tom Osborne loved to throw the ball a lot at first. He was a perfect coach that could adapt and change. Even on defense.

 

I recall an interview before the 1995 OB vs. Miami where he said something about our climate not being favorable for an offense that likes to throw the ball a lot. This is true and to this day, it still holds true and we have nearly 20 years documented of it not being so successful. I just think the days of running for 300 yards every game, every week and passing for 120-150 are over. 

 

Today's defenses and game present different challenges as opposed to the 90's. It's more about finesse and speed than it is strength and power. I like coaches that can put all that together and present a balanced approach while still maintaining a level of physicality on both offense and defense.

 

We lost our mystique over the years of being the most physical football team in the country. Teams hurt after they played us. With the right coach and staff, we can bring it back. I think toughness and physicality is something you can teach rather quickly if it comes from a coach that preaches it.

[Hayseed]

1 minute ago, FTW said:

 

Great post! I think our offense can be more like Alabama's. I prefer a smash mouth offense that is predicated on the run, too but has playmakers at wide receiver and can score in a heartbeat. They have a dual threat QB which I think is another plus. I do think with the right coach, we can lineup in an I-Formation like we used to and run the ball better and still have a downfield vertical passing threat. We have to have that because the game has changed quite a lot.

 

I'm only in my 30's but I've researched Cornhusker football history. So, I'm well aware of what we were like in the 70's and 80's and especially the 90's since that is when I really grew fond of Nebraska football. I know Tom Osborne loved to throw the ball a lot at first. He was a perfect coach that could adapt and change. Even on defense.

 

I recall an interview before the 1995 OB vs. Miami where he said something about our climate not being favorable for an offense that likes to throw the ball a lot. This is true and to this day, it still holds true and we have nearly 20 years documented of it not being so successful. I just think the days of running for 300 yards every game, every week and passing for 120-150 are over. 

 

Today's defenses and game present different challenges as opposed to the 90's. It's more about finesse and speed than it is strength and power. I like coaches that can put all that together and present a balanced approach while still maintaining a level of physicality on both offense and defense.

 

We lost our mystique over the years of being the most physical football team in the country. Teams hurt after they played us. With the right coach and staff, we can bring it back. I think toughness and physicality is something you can teach rather quickly if it comes from a coach that preaches it.

You can have all that and still suck because the coaches and players don't know what they're doing.

[Dansker]

Just now, Hayseed said:

You can have all that and still suck because the coaches and players don't know what they're doing.

 

I mentioned about having the right coach and staff in place. Do you read posts entirely or just nitpick at a few sentences? You end up taking things out of context, usually 

[JJ Husker]

8 minutes ago, FTW said:

 

Great post! I think our offense can be more like Alabama's. I prefer a smash mouth offense that is predicated on the run, too but has playmakers at wide receiver and can score in a heartbeat. They have a dual threat QB which I think is another plus. I do think with the right coach, we can lineup in an I-Formation like we used to and run the ball better and still have a downfield vertical passing threat. We have to have that because the game has changed quite a lot.

 

I'm only in my 30's but I've researched Cornhusker football history. So, I'm well aware of what we were like in the 70's and 80's and especially the 90's since that is when I really grew fond of Nebraska football. I know Tom Osborne loved to throw the ball a lot at first. He was a perfect coach that could adapt and change. Even on defense.

 

I recall an interview before the 1995 OB vs. Miami where he said something about our climate not being favorable for an offense that likes to throw the ball a lot. This is true and to this day, it still holds true and we have nearly 20 years documented of it not being so successful. I just think the days of running for 300 yards every game, every week and passing for 120-150 are over. 

 

Today's defenses and game present different challenges as opposed to the 90's. It's more about finesse and speed than it is strength and power. I like coaches that can put all that together and present a balanced approach while still maintaining a level of physicality on both offense and defense.

 

We lost our mystique over the years of being the most physical football team in the country. Teams hurt after they played us. With the right coach and staff, we can bring it back. I think toughness and physicality is something you can teach rather quickly if it comes from a coach that preaches it.

 

Also a great post 

Good response to Hayseed also. I didn’t say I’m opposed to having a vertical passing game. I just said we have struggled with it almost always, seemingly forever, so it concerns me. Of course with the right coach, personnel, attitude and culture anything is possible.