SI Mailbag: What Are Realistic Short-Term Expectations for Nebraska?

[RedSavage]

2 minutes ago, Enhance said:

I think that's two different conversations, though. Maybe I'm looking at this too deeply and my apologies if I am.

 

I should be clear, I think Nebraska's biggest problem last year was coaching and culture. No question in my mind. Could a different coach have done a better job? Quite possibly. But, I don't think that allows us the ability to say they were better than their record showed because I don't think they were. They were a bad team and it was evident in week one. I'm just always cautious about trying to make broad statements like that. If anything, I'd say their record looked better than they were.

 

I think what I'm ultimately trying to say is some of the problems that plagued them last year very well could plague them into 2018, especially if some of the bad apples aren't completely weeded out by September (which is a real possibility). Throw in a new QB, a new system, new coaches, new culture, etc., and there's just a lot of 'new.' Could it go very well in year one? Absolutely. Could it not? I think the answer to that is absolutely, as well.

I think for the most part we're in agreement.  I just think we underachieved relative to what we had on the team, talent wise.  That's not to say we were even close to talent rich last year but with better coaching, I don't think the following happen (or we have AT LEAST one more win):

 

We lose to Oregon

Lose at home to Northern Illinois

Lose at home to Northwestern

We get boat raced on the ground by the worst rushing team in the B1G

 

 

 

[Making Chimichangas]

On ‎2‎/‎12‎/‎2018 at 8:29 PM, skersfan said:

Realistic has never described a Nebraska fan.  Doubt it ever will.

 

Play hard, do your best is all I ever ask.  I seriously doubt Nebraska could have played with UCF this year.  It took two years, starting with a team that played in a  BCS bowl two years before.  Nebraska has not been near a major bowl in a long long time.

 

For me, just being happy we are on a path that I think is recovery.  Coach Frost has proven he can take what is considered lessor talent and make them winners.  I would love to see 10 wins next year, possible I think, but if we are in every game, don't get curb stomped by Wisconsin, or Ohio State we will have made dramatic improvement.

 

 

 

This ^^^ is exactly where I am at.  It's not that 6-6 is "acceptable" it's just based on how poorly the team played last year, how fat, weak, and out of shape the OL was, there's only so much improvement that a can naturally occur in one off-season without steroids or some other "supplement."

 

I think the team is capable of 12-0.  Will they achieve that?  Probably not, but for 2018 literally the ONLY thing I want to see is no more blow-out losses.  I want this team, and every Nebraska team going forward, to look like they belong on the same field as Ohio State, Alabama, Clemson, etc.  If HCSF can achieve that, I think everything else falls into place and takes care of itself.

Edited February 14, 2018 by Making Chimichangas

[HS_Coach_C]

A big part of the equation is how much the players buy in to Frost's system and philosophy.

 

It's easy to say all the players should because he's a great coach and person - but they lost coaches that they had relationships with, and things are going to be a lot harder for some of them in the weight room and on the field.  Some guys won't buy in, that's the way it goes.

 

It's likely going to be much better than the Pelini to Riley transition where they went from a fiery coach with a high winning percentage to Mr. Rogers with a .500 career record.  It didn't help that Pelini set fire to the place on the way out.  That's something Riley did do very well - he left on decent terms.

[Redux]

11 minutes ago, huskerfan333157 said:

Well Saban started off with a 7-6 record but by your logic that shouldn't have happened.  Same with Bob stoops and Pete Carroll.  By your logic their first year shouldn't have been bad and they should have competed for a conference title.  

 Please stop

[Guy Chamberlin]

15 minutes ago, TheSker said:

Mike Riley was allowed zero transition time because of the way his superiors "sold" his hiring.

 

Most are now aware of the political clown show that went on behind the scenes.  But the way it was sold was getting a coach who could take us to the next level.  

 

Immediately.

 

 

There is not an athletic department in the country who wouldn't sell their new hire as a coach who can take the team to the next level immediately. 

 

It's not even a "sell." It's standard operating procedure.

 

Pick any coach we could have hired not named Mike Riley. Imagine selling him as a guy who might take a couple steps back while transitioning from the Pelini years.

 

You would have s#!t bricks

[TheSker]

4 minutes ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

 

 

There is not an athletic department in the country who wouldn't sell their new hire as a coach who can take the team to the next level immediately. 

 

It's not even a "sell." It's standard operating procedure.

 

Pick any coach we could have hired not named Mike Riley. Imagine selling him as a guy who might take a couple steps back while transitioning from the Pelini years.

 

You would have s#!t bricks

Agreed.

 

The job of an AD is easier with a 4 win team than a 9 win team.

[HS_Coach_C]

4 minutes ago, TheSker said:

Agreed.

 

The job of an AD is easier with a 4 win team than a 9 win team.

Right.  All Eichorst had to say after firing Pelini was "I didn't like him. He's too mean. I want a nice coach that listens to me."

 

I fail to see how that would have received poor reactions.  

[TheSker]

4 minutes ago, HS_Coach_C said:

Right.  All Eichorst had to say after firing Pelini was "I didn't like him. He's too mean. I want a nice coach that listens to me."

 

I fail to see how that would have received poor reactions.  

Eichorst was "smarter" than that.....he referenced his evaluation of Iowa as a football program.....

[Guy Chamberlin]

2 hours ago, HS_Coach_C said:

.  

2 hours ago, HS_Coach_C said:

Right.  All Eichorst had to say after firing Pelini was "I didn't like him. He's too mean. I want a nice coach that listens to me."

 

I fail to see how that would have received poor reactions.  

 

 

If Shawn Eichorst fired Bo Pelini for petty personal reasons rather than football program reasons, one of the many Power 5 programs with a coaching vacancy the last three years surely would have swept in and taken advantage of Shawn's mistake. 

 

Think of all the ADs who could have told their fans they were hiring the coach with the most 9 win seasons outside of Nick Saban.

 

But that didn't happen. Bo Pelini can barely sniff a rumor. College football came to the same conclusion as Shawn Eichorst. 

 

The last three years haven't made anyone happy. But if you go back to the 2015 threads, the fantasy was for Mike Riley to keep the seat warm for Scott Frost to get up and running. That scenario required perfect timing, and that's how it worked out.

 

So I'm totally good with jacking the expectations up. Scott Frost is, too. That's why we wanted a Nebraska guy. Should be fun.

 

 

[TheSker]

10 minutes ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

 

 

If Shawn Eichorst fired Bo Pelini for petty personal reasons rather than football program reasons, one of the many Power 5 programs with a coaching vacancy the last three years surely would have swept in and taken advantage of Shawn's mistake. 

 

Think of all the ADs who could have told their fans they were hiring the coach with the most 9 win seasons outside of Nick Saban.

 

But that didn't happen. Bo Pelini can barely sniff a rumor. College football came to the same conclusion as Shawn Eichorst. 

 

 

Pelini, according to you, can't get a sniff.  Perlman retired, acknowledging how he will be remembered about Nebraska football.....and Eichorst got canned for his football related decisions.

 

I'm also on cloud 9 we got Frost.

 

I also know we would not have got Frost with the previous administration in place.  Frost and Davison are still mentioning that.

[Redux]

I guess I can understand people thinking .500 is a realistic ceiling if they actually believe last years 4-8 mark was their best effort from start to finish.

[TheSker]

21 minutes ago, Redux said:

I guess I can understand people thinking .500 is a realistic ceiling if they actually believe last years 4-8 mark was their best effort from start to finish.

No one, and I mean no one, thinks a .500 record is the ceiling.

[lo country]

Last year, I never thought 4-8.  Banker gone, Cav on the hot seat, Riley's QB, switch to the 3-4, so close the previous year....Then the whole sh!t show happened....Injuries, position switches, idiot calls on both sides of the fence and there we were....4-8.  I'm expecting a whole lot better performance in year 1 from Frost than Riley ever accomplished in 3.  Even though we start a new QB, completely new system, completely new staff etc......

 

In reality, I will never be "satisfied with nothing but the MNC.  I was spoiled growing up with some of the greatest Husker teams ever fielded......I will be happy with the "eye test" of improvement.  Are we more physical?  Do we play solid, sound 4 quarter football?  Do we quit, give up, forget to show up?  Can we start fast and get faster? Do other teams finally see the "strain"?  Are our guys leaner and in better shape?  Do we punish "lesser" teams etc?  If so, the record will workout self out.  

 

After the failed Riley experiment, I really expect us to win 7-8 games.  Frost just has "it".  The kids want "it".  The staff gets "it".  A team, staff, admn and fans pulling in the same direction covers up a multitude of issues.  Might be the first time this team is united since 1999.....

[dspanther05]

I think most years, 9 wins should be achievable at Nebraska due to schedule alone.  Most years is the key word.  Unfortunately this year we cross divisions are @Michigan, @Ohio State, Michigan State, mixed in with every tough conference opponent on the road.  That's probably the toughest draw we have had based on recent years.

 

Sept. 1, 2018		Akron	Home			WIN
Sept. 8, 2018		Colorado	Home			WIN
Sept. 15, 2018		Troy	Home			WIN
Sept. 22, 2018		Michigan	Away			LOSS
Sept. 29, 2018		Purdue	Home			WIN
Oct. 6, 2018		Wisconsin	Away			LOSS
Oct. 13, 2018		Northwestern	Away			TOSS UP
Oct. 20, 2018		Minnesota	Home			WIN
Nov. 3, 2018		Ohio State	Away			LOSS
Nov. 10, 2018		Illinois	Home			WIN
Nov. 17, 2018		Michigan State	Home			TOSS UP
Nov. 23, 2018		Iowa TOSS UP

 

So I'll give us 6 wins, I think that is generous based on last year.   I don't see how they win MICH, OSU, or WISC, and don't think you can put any of those as a toss up.  So really I think max ceiling this year is 9 wins.  And that is winning every "toss up" game and being generous with should win games.  That's max potential this year based on last year's results and this years schedule, and I would be pumped if we finished 9-3.  Is that apathy? Or is that just really taking a look at where we at as a program, our future schedule, a crap ton of unknowns, and being semi-realistic.  Doesn't mean I'm not excited for the season, just too many variables this year to really expect a championship caliber season.

 

 

[HS_Coach_C]

1 minute ago, TheSker said:

No one, and I mean no one, thinks a .500 record is the ceiling.

Agreed. I don't think too many people would be surprised with 8-4 next year, but I'm not expecting it. There are too many variables to expect a certain win total next year.

 

I expect Frost to win the West and the big ten and make the playoffs too... but not next year. This is about short-term expectations.