The Danger of Hype

[Moiraine]

Once we stop hyping players up, it means the fanbase has stopped caring.

[beorach]

I think the real problem is people thinking that "N" on the helmet is magical (when it comes to the issue of people having to recognize there are kids with limits wearing them).

 

Haven't you heard things like, "We should be destroying <insert team with comparable talent here>!"?   It might be fair to add, "Just run the damn ball!"  Once we can see we have the ability, thanks to a lot of ingredients we write about all the time, these statements will hopefully be realistic again.

[NUance]

44 minutes ago, Nebfanatic said:

How bout all that Diaco hype?? Man he was terrible at coaching defense here. Its beyond explination.

 

Ha ha!  The Diaco hype machine last season may have produced the biggest expectations for the smallest results evar!  OUCH! 

[4skers89]

41 minutes ago, teachercd said:

I agree with that...I feel like Banker was a scapegoat.  At least he had a clear plan STOP THE RUN...Coach Bobby was sort of exposed.

I agree that Banker was probably scapegoated and it was probably to buy more time. He was neither a terrible DC or a great DC. I don’t think our players ever achieved defensive stats as good as the less talented beavers under Banker. The buyin excuse was believable since it seemed obvious that something (wrong) was going on.

[Redux]

48 minutes ago, ladyhawke said:

If there had been no hype for Lee or Diaco do you think last year would’ve been easier to swallow?

 

Maybe.  But that first game deflated any hope I had regardless of hype.  But i was really excited for the defense only to be let down, and Lee was far from what he was billed as.

[The Dude]

The only real danger with hype is players/coaches might not live up to the hype.

 

So not very dangerous at all, as far as dangerous things go.

[4skers89]

36 minutes ago, NUinID said:

 

Very true, and I bought the hype.  I thought our defense was going to look like something we see out of Wisconsin.  Our defense this year will resemble more what they do at Wisconsin than what Diaco put out there.  He didn't put the defense into any type of a position to be successful.  

When Wiscy switched to 3-4 their defense improved year 1. Ours fell off a cliff. I’m cautiously optimistic about Chinander.

[Hunter94]

5 hours ago, The Dude said:

The only real danger with hype is players/coaches might not live up to the hype.

 

So not very dangerous at all, as far as dangerous things go.

Lee wasn't very good at Tulane, suddenly coming to NU,  i saw no hype.....only hope.

[Enhance]

20 hours ago, ladyhawke said:

If there had been no hype for Lee or Diaco do you think last year would’ve been easier to swallow?

It's possible, however I think an equally significant problem wasn't so much the hype but the colossal failure of a result. People would've expected some struggles from the defense, and perhaps even some struggles from Tanner Lee. The fact that Diaco's defense was so bad and Lee struggled so much at times is what makes it so baffling.

[Dansker]

22 hours ago, knapplc said:

The OP is about an interview of Tanner Lee's mother where she talks about how dangerous hype can be in relation to the preseason hype surrounding the guy. It's not an attempt to derail the thread... it's what the thread is about.

 

 

---

 

I thought using Nebraska as the subject for the dangers of hype was odd.  Yes, there were a few boos directed at Lee, specifically at the Northern Illinois game when he was so obviously not ready to compete, but Riley kept putting him out there.  The fans around us (us included) just wanted him benched for a series or two if for no other reason than to clear his head, but whatever.  Yeah, I'm sure it's hard for a mom to hear boos directed at her kid, but if I'm writing an article about how bad fans can be toward their own players, Nebraska isn't the place I'm starting. 

 

 

 

Yeah, I realized that once I saw "Tanner Lee," I had flashbacks of pick sixes and drifted off to another thread, lol. I simply blame MR and his staff and the media for hyping the kid up before he ever took a snap in uniform for us. It was completely unfair to him. 

[knapplc]

44 minutes ago, FTW said:

 

Yeah, I realized that once I saw "Tanner Lee," I had flashbacks of pick sixes and drifted off to another thread, lol. I simply blame MR and his staff and the media for hyping the kid up before he ever took a snap in uniform for us. It was completely unfair to him. 

 

Agreed.  The media were watching practice and all up in his jock about every throw. They were the major fuel for that fire, and I recall just before the season started that Langsdorf said like a week before the first game that they needed to ramp down the crazy expectations. 

 

The fans don't watch practice, they only go off what the media tells them, and I think it was McKewon from the OWH who chastised the fans/media for that Tanner Lee hype - in that order. 

[NUinID]

21 hours ago, 4skers89 said:

When Wiscy switched to 3-4 their defense improved year 1. Ours fell off a cliff. I’m cautiously optimistic about Chinander.

 

Yeah, I am not expecting miracles, but I would rather see a defense attack, make plays and be disruptive even though they most likely will get burnt a few times a game for it.  That is much better than the passive keep everything in front and let them take 10 plays and score.   

[Saunders]

14 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

Agreed.  The media were watching practice and all up in his jock about every throw. They were the major fuel for that fire, and I recall just before the season started that Langsdorf said like a week before the first game that they needed to ramp down the crazy expectations. 

 

The fans don't watch practice, they only go off what the media tells them, and I think it was McKewon from the OWH who chastised the fans/media for that Tanner Lee hype - in that order. 

And it didn't help that Billy Devaney said he was a first round pick before Spring ball even started...

[knapplc]

7 minutes ago, NUinID said:

 

Yeah, I am not expecting miracles, but I would rather see a defense attack, make plays and be disruptive even though they most likely will get burnt a few times a game for it.  That is much better than the passive keep everything in front and let them take 10 plays and score.   

 

 

 

Yes. A thousand times yes.  Go hit somebody for the love of Bob Devaney's Ghost.

 

[NUinID]

12 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

 

 

Yes. A thousand times yes.  Go hit somebody for the love of Bob Devaney's Ghost.

 

 

It sounds simple, but I love the way Frost and his staff preach about not being afraid to fail, because that has got to be the mindset.  The players have to feel it is ok to make a mistake, learn from it and move on.  I always said if you mess up that is fine just do it fast, which is what they are saying.  Diaco and his players were afraid to make a mistake and they played like it.  BP defenses played the same way.   It can't just be about scheme, sometimes you have to trust your players to make a play.  Heck we saw more blitzing in the spring game than we saw in 6 games last year.