Banker = Cosgrove

[wanderful]

These 408 posts are getting real lame. We get it, Bo had some very bad games. Do we have to hear about it every time people try to make commentary about the CURRENT staff?

Well, some people need a schtick because they don't bring anything relevant to the conversation. Instead of trying to critically analyze, they'd rather bash the players, and not shift any of the blame to the guys getting paid millions of dollars.

How quaint.

I assume that you are singling me out, You try to dismiss what I bring to the table, which has included (facts, stats. and video) in the last few days to back up my points, just because you can't dispute it, you try to discredit and kill the messenger. As a poster, that is within bounds, as a mod. that is unprofessional. I will continue to bring facts to back up my solid points as needed.

Oh, you mean your anecdotes? We have the worst passing defense in the country. Tell me with a straight face that it's solely due to our lack of talent, and it's not due to scheme/coaching.

Also, I've done nothing other than point out you would rather trash our players, instead of holding the coaches (who make millions of dollars) accountable. Any perceived slights beyond that is on you.

Facts, stats, video, can not be refuted. You say I do not bring anything relevant to the conversation, my guess I that plenty on the board would disagree. I do not believe it is solely our lack of talent, just 85% of it. The men who make millions will do fine as the season and their careers progress. 408 stole millions without producing anything, we can give the current staff plenty of leeway before they ever get to his level.

I'm not sure it's 85%.

It's probably 50-50. We don't have the talent to work Bankers scheme. And Banker is using a scheme not conducive to the players talent.

Right, which is why I put it on the coaches to adjust the scheme. We heard all offseason how they were good at adapting to talent, and how they would mold the scheme to work with what we have.

Langsdorf and the offense has done it, quite efficiently.

Banker? Nope...

I kind of agree with this. I asked the same from Pelini too. I asked over and over for him to change his scheme because his players could not execute it.

Here's the thing though. Four games into the year, I'm not entirely sure Banker knows what he's got as far as talent goes. Between the injuries and plain unfamiliarity, I think they're trying to find the guys who can actually execute HIS scheme, and I don't blame him. A coach deserves the chance to utilize what he wants from his defense and his scheme.

No he doesn't deserve anything! What are you talking about? He deserves the criticism he receives because his defense, welp is awful right now. You know what he better do is figure it out and win some football games. I didn't mince words about the previous staff or the ones before it, I expect absolute effective coaching. It's not effective? Then he needs to get out of the press room and into the film room, and learn how big boy play football. This staff seems highly inexperienced at coaching with this much pressure, and frankly that scares me. And don't start freaking out about how many years they have coached at what level, that's not the point. I deserve to have a winning football team, because I pay for tickets and donation, blah blah ect. He deserves nothing but the expectation to win, and win now.

Being frustrated with the state of the defense so far this season is totally understandable, but let's not be rash in our denouncements. Neither of you are completely wrong in your arguments: Truet2RA is saying "Baker should be given a chance to implement his system" and you're saying, "but his system's not working right now so he needs to come up with a stop gap."

These are both reasonable positions and we're all Husker fans so let's not bite each other's heads off.

Anger is understandable, as we're all powerless in this situation. We can't do anything to make the team play better defense, so we come on message boards and rant.

That's good for relieving stress. But as this Athlon article talks about (other teams are showing these posts to recruits), it's not necessarily good for recruiting and, thus, might actually be doing harm to the team and making them harder to win.

I'm not saying we shouldn't be on here debating the pros and cons of a scheme, but excessive displays of seemingly irrational anger (as much as you may desire to win, literally the only thing you deserve from buying a ticket is to watch a football game happen) are pushing you further away from the thing you want, i.e. a dominant Husker team.

 

[TheSker]

I thought Riley was had this incredible eye for talent. Why would he even take this job if the talent level was so poor?

Seriously, "poor talent level" is not a good excuse for Riley's performance.

Just curious.
Who do you purpose, realistically, should be the coach right now for Nebraska that would have had more immediate success with the players that are on the team?

Mora or Kill. Or Patterson, but he would probably laugh at an offer from us.

None of those 3 were realistic

If our realistic candidates were Bielema and Riley.........
And yes, two of the three were realistic.....though you are free to have your own definition of realistic.

Mora is not realistic. You don't have to be in the know to know that. I wouldn't have really wanted him anyway.

Kill is good, but the shelf life of the hire isn't any better than Riley. Plus he is happy at Minnesota.

Patterson shouldn't even be mentioned in a discussion about Nebraska. Never gonna happen.

Kyle Whittingham would be my choice. Probably could have got him if we had tried or if he had the same agent as Eichorst like MR does...

Mora leave LA for Lincoln? NopeKill wouldn't leave for a division rival. Among other reasons.

Patterson? Please.

Wittingham might have been more realistic.

Learning a lot about the Nebraska job, aren't we?

 

[JJ Husker]

These 408 posts are getting real lame. We get it, Bo had some very bad games. Do we have to hear about it every time people try to make commentary about the CURRENT staff?

Well, some people need a schtick because they don't bring anything relevant to the conversation. Instead of trying to critically analyze, they'd rather bash the players, and not shift any of the blame to the guys getting paid millions of dollars.
How quaint.

I assume that you are singling me out, You try to dismiss what I bring to the table, which has included (facts, stats. and video) in the last few days to back up my points, just because you can't dispute it, you try to discredit and kill the messenger. As a poster, that is within bounds, as a mod. that is unprofessional. I will continue to bring facts to back up my solid points as needed.

Oh, you mean your anecdotes? We have the worst passing defense in the country. Tell me with a straight face that it's solely due to our lack of talent, and it's not due to scheme/coaching.
Also, I've done nothing other than point out you would rather trash our players, instead of holding the coaches (who make millions of dollars) accountable. Any perceived slights beyond that is on you.

Facts, stats, video, can not be refuted. You say I do not bring anything relevant to the conversation, my guess I that plenty on the board would disagree. I do not believe it is solely our lack of talent, just 85% of it. The men who make millions will do fine as the season and their careers progress. 408 stole millions without producing anything, we can give the current staff plenty of leeway before they ever get to his level.

I'm not sure it's 85%.
It's probably 50-50. We don't have the talent to work Bankers scheme. And Banker is using a scheme not conducive to the players talent.

Right, which is why I put it on the coaches to adjust the scheme. We heard all offseason how they were good at adapting to talent, and how they would mold the scheme to work with what we have.
Langsdorf and the offense has done it, quite efficiently.

Banker? Nope...

I kind of agree with this. I asked the same from Pelini too. I asked over and over for him to change his scheme because his players could not execute it.
Here's the thing though. Four games into the year, I'm not entirely sure Banker knows what he's got as far as talent goes. Between the injuries and plain unfamiliarity, I think they're trying to find the guys who can actually execute HIS scheme, and I don't blame him. A coach deserves the chance to utilize what he wants from his defense and his scheme.

No he doesn't deserve anything! What are you talking about? He deserves the criticism he receives because his defense, welp is awful right now. You know what he better do is figure it out and win some football games. I didn't mince words about the previous staff or the ones before it, I expect absolute effective coaching. It's not effective? Then he needs to get out of the press room and into the film room, and learn how big boy play football. This staff seems highly inexperienced at coaching with this much pressure, and frankly that scares me. And don't start freaking out about how many years they have coached at what level, that's not the point. I deserve to have a winning football team, because I pay for tickets and donation, blah blah ect. He deserves nothing but the expectation to win, and win now.

Congratulations. You are officially the quickest ever to my ignore list. Believe me, that is saying something around here. Saw this one post and was pretty sure but checked your other last 4 contributions as well to make sure I wasn't jumping to the wrong conclusion. I wasn't, you're a DB. Buh bye.

 

[Kernal]

These 408 posts are getting real lame. We get it, Bo had some very bad games. Do we have to hear about it every time people try to make commentary about the CURRENT staff?

Well, some people need a schtick because they don't bring anything relevant to the conversation. Instead of trying to critically analyze, they'd rather bash the players, and not shift any of the blame to the guys getting paid millions of dollars.
How quaint.

I assume that you are singling me out, You try to dismiss what I bring to the table, which has included (facts, stats. and video) in the last few days to back up my points, just because you can't dispute it, you try to discredit and kill the messenger. As a poster, that is within bounds, as a mod. that is unprofessional. I will continue to bring facts to back up my solid points as needed.

Oh, you mean your anecdotes? We have the worst passing defense in the country. Tell me with a straight face that it's solely due to our lack of talent, and it's not due to scheme/coaching.
Also, I've done nothing other than point out you would rather trash our players, instead of holding the coaches (who make millions of dollars) accountable. Any perceived slights beyond that is on you.

Facts, stats, video, can not be refuted. You say I do not bring anything relevant to the conversation, my guess I that plenty on the board would disagree. I do not believe it is solely our lack of talent, just 85% of it. The men who make millions will do fine as the season and their careers progress. 408 stole millions without producing anything, we can give the current staff plenty of leeway before they ever get to his level.

I'm not sure it's 85%.
It's probably 50-50. We don't have the talent to work Bankers scheme. And Banker is using a scheme not conducive to the players talent.

Right, which is why I put it on the coaches to adjust the scheme. We heard all offseason how they were good at adapting to talent, and how they would mold the scheme to work with what we have.
Langsdorf and the offense has done it, quite efficiently.

Banker? Nope...

I kind of agree with this. I asked the same from Pelini too. I asked over and over for him to change his scheme because his players could not execute it.
Here's the thing though. Four games into the year, I'm not entirely sure Banker knows what he's got as far as talent goes. Between the injuries and plain unfamiliarity, I think they're trying to find the guys who can actually execute HIS scheme, and I don't blame him. A coach deserves the chance to utilize what he wants from his defense and his scheme.

No he doesn't deserve anything! What are you talking about? He deserves the criticism he receives because his defense, welp is awful right now. You know what he better do is figure it out and win some football games. I didn't mince words about the previous staff or the ones before it, I expect absolute effective coaching. It's not effective? Then he needs to get out of the press room and into the film room, and learn how big boy play football. This staff seems highly inexperienced at coaching with this much pressure, and frankly that scares me. And don't start freaking out about how many years they have coached at what level, that's not the point. I deserve to have a winning football team, because I pay for tickets and donation, blah blah ect. He deserves nothing but the expectation to win, and win now.

Congratulations. You are officially the quickest ever to my ignore list. Believe me, that is saying something around here. Saw this one post and was pretty sure but checked your other last 4 contributions as well to make sure I wasn't jumping to the wrong conclusion. I wasn't, you're a DB. Buh bye.

A Defensive Back?

My ignore list has filled in quite a bit since game one. I wish we could also "ignore" threads. This thread is a DB.

 

[admo]

Mora or Kill. Or Patterson, but he would probably laugh at an offer from us.

None of those 3 were realistic

If our realistic candidates were Bielema and Riley.........

And yes, two of the three were realistic.....though you are free to have your own definition of realistic.

 

[Redux]

I thought Riley was had this incredible eye for talent. Why would he even take this job if the talent level was so poor?

Seriously, "poor talent level" is not a good excuse for Riley's performance.

Just curious.
Who do you purpose, realistically, should be the coach right now for Nebraska that would have had more immediate success with the players that are on the team?

Mora or Kill. Or Patterson, but he would probably laugh at an offer from us.

None of those 3 were realistic

If our realistic candidates were Bielema and Riley.........
And yes, two of the three were realistic.....though you are free to have your own definition of realistic.

Mora is not realistic. You don't have to be in the know to know that. I wouldn't have really wanted him anyway.

Kill is good, but the shelf life of the hire isn't any better than Riley. Plus he is happy at Minnesota.

Patterson shouldn't even be mentioned in a discussion about Nebraska. Never gonna happen.

Kyle Whittingham would be my choice. Probably could have got him if we had tried or if he had the same agent as Eichorst like MR does...

Mora leave LA for Lincoln? NopeKill wouldn't leave for a division rival. Among other reasons.

Patterson? Please.

Wittingham might have been more realistic.

Learning a lot about the Nebraska job, aren't we?

Dude, you are talking about Patterson who is turning TCU into the top program in the conference in only a few short years of being in the league.

You are talking about Kill. A guy who diring health concerns, Minnesota stood by him knowing what a good coach he is. If we went after him, we would have the same health concerns they do.

You are talking about Jim Mora who has been the first coach at UCLA in forever to field a competetive team. They werent letting him go.

You need to rethink realism.

 

[True2tRA]

Dude! You guys are talking about other coaches taking the Nebraska job for some reason............

​

 

[TheSker]

I thought Riley was had this incredible eye for talent. Why would he even take this job if the talent level was so poor?

Seriously, "poor talent level" is not a good excuse for Riley's performance.

Just curious.
Who do you purpose, realistically, should be the coach right now for Nebraska that would have had more immediate success with the players that are on the team?

Mora or Kill. Or Patterson, but he would probably laugh at an offer from us.

None of those 3 were realistic

If our realistic candidates were Bielema and Riley.........
And yes, two of the three were realistic.....though you are free to have your own definition of realistic.

Mora is not realistic. You don't have to be in the know to know that. I wouldn't have really wanted him anyway.

Kill is good, but the shelf life of the hire isn't any better than Riley. Plus he is happy at Minnesota.

Patterson shouldn't even be mentioned in a discussion about Nebraska. Never gonna happen.

Kyle Whittingham would be my choice. Probably could have got him if we had tried or if he had the same agent as Eichorst like MR does...

Mora leave LA for Lincoln? NopeKill wouldn't leave for a division rival. Among other reasons.

Patterson? Please.

Wittingham might have been more realistic.

Learning a lot about the Nebraska job, aren't we?

Dude, you are talking about Patterson who is turning TCU into the top program in the conference in only a few short years of being in the league.

You are talking about Kill. A guy who diring health concerns, Minnesota stood by him knowing what a good coach he is. If we went after him, we would have the same health concerns they do.

You are talking about Jim Mora who has been the first coach at UCLA in forever to field a competetive team. They werent letting him go.

You need to rethink realism.

Dude

Yes, I know what Patterson has done at TCU. And here's my point, since you're evidently not getting it......isn't that the kind of coach when we talk about all the resources, history, tradition that Nebraska has that we should be able to go after?

Kill's seizures haven't been an issue. And.....speaking of Kill......you want to talk about a guy who's ACTUALLY done more with less. It ain't Mike Riley........

UCLA has a pretty good football history.....minus Neuheisel.

Riley is not the best we could have done. Not even close.

 

[Redux]

The only person missing a point is you. The guys you are mentioning were not going to come here. Nebraska has been a shell of itself for the better part of two decades. Yet you act like we should be able to come in like Ron Jeremy at a Sexaholics meeting and have our pick of the litter.

Respect is earned and we haven't earned it in a long time.

Why did we hure Mike Riley? To build that respect back up. How are we going to do it? By winning back the fanbase, competing in big games, and recruiting recruiting recruiting. Mike Riley meets all those needs.

So please stop pretending we had a shot at Gary Patterson, we get it you wanted him and didn't want Mike Riley. Guess what, that is the hand we have all been dealt. You think I like being dead last on pass defense? Not even a little. But theres jack squat you or I can do about it. So nut up and get used to him cause he ain't going anywhere until he retires. Riley can get us back into respectability. A flash hire is never a garauntee fit, sometimes stability is better and the people who follow college football for a living think it's a good hire.

 

[True2tRA]

And.....speaking of Kill......you want to talk about a guy who's ACTUALLY done more with less. It ain't Mike Riley........

I like Jerry Kill (especially respect him for battling through epilepsy) but......

2011- 3-9 Big Ten 2-6 Lost to every ranked team they played including FCS ranked North Dakota State. Wins against Miami (OH) barely, Illinois and Iowa.

2012- 6-7 2-6 Beat Purdue and Illinois in conference that's it. All other wins were a very weak Non-conference schedule.

2013-8-5 4-4 Beat Northwestern, Nebraska, Indiana and Penn St. (sanctions?). Other wins were weak non- con.

2014-8-5 5-3 Beat Michigan, Purdue, Northwestern, Nebraska, Iowa in conference. Other wins vs very weak Non- Conference.

When I say weak non-conference, I mean weak. Not BYU or Miami level even.

13 wins in Big Ten divisional play. A record built on beating weak Big Ten teams. Hmm...sounds familiiar to Pelini fans doesn't it?

You want to laud Jerry Kill's accomplishments at Minnesota but trash Riley's career at Oregon St. all the damn time? You sir have just made a joke of your entire argument.

Riley has bigger wins, bigger upsets, and competed against a Pac-12 schedule that a lot of Big Ten teams are probably thankful they don't have to see on a yearly basis.

 

[Redux]

And.....speaking of Kill......you want to talk about a guy who's ACTUALLY done more with less. It ain't Mike Riley........

I like Jerry Kill (especially respect him for battling through epilepsy) but......

2011- 3-9 Big Ten 2-6 Lost to every ranked team they played including FCS ranked North Dakota State. Wins against Miami (OH) barely, Illinois and Iowa.

2012- 6-7 2-6 Beat Purdue and Illinois in conference that's it. All other wins were a very weak Non-conference schedule.

2013-8-5 4-4 Beat Northwestern, Nebraska, Indiana and Penn St. (sanctions?). Other wins were weak non- con.

2014-8-5 5-3 Beat Michigan, Purdue, Northwestern, Nebraska, Iowa in conference. Other wins vs very weak Non- Conference.

When I say weak non-conference, I mean weak. Not BYU or Miami level even.

13 wins in Big Ten divisional play. A record built on beating weak Big Ten teams. Hmm...sounds familiiar to Pelini fans doesn't it?

You want to laud Jerry Kill's accomplishments at Minnesota but trash Riley's career at Oregon St. all the damn time? You sir have just made a joke of your entire argument.

Riley has bigger wins, bigger upsets, and competed against a Pac-12 schedule that a lot of Big Ten teams are probably thankful they don't have to see on a yearly basis.

^That

 

[RADAR]

TheSker lives in a land of rainbows and puppydogs, devoid of reality. He could mature and learn a lot if he took your posts to heart.

 

[TheSker]

And.....speaking of Kill......you want to talk about a guy who's ACTUALLY done more with less. It ain't Mike Riley........

I like Jerry Kill (especially respect him for battling through epilepsy) but......

2011- 3-9 Big Ten 2-6 Lost to every ranked team they played including FCS ranked North Dakota State. Wins against Miami (OH) barely, Illinois and Iowa.

2012- 6-7 2-6 Beat Purdue and Illinois in conference that's it. All other wins were a very weak Non-conference schedule.

2013-8-5 4-4 Beat Northwestern, Nebraska, Indiana and Penn St. (sanctions?). Other wins were weak non- con.

2014-8-5 5-3 Beat Michigan, Purdue, Northwestern, Nebraska, Iowa in conference. Other wins vs very weak Non- Conference.

When I say weak non-conference, I mean weak. Not BYU or Miami level even.

13 wins in Big Ten divisional play. A record built on beating weak Big Ten teams. Hmm...sounds familiiar to Pelini fans doesn't it?

You want to laud Jerry Kill's accomplishments at Minnesota but trash Riley's career at Oregon St. all the damn time? You sir have just made a joke of your entire argument.

Riley has bigger wins, bigger upsets, and competed against a Pac-12 schedule that a lot of Big Ten teams are probably thankful they don't have to see on a yearly basis.

Kill was coaching long before the Minnesota job. He's done an excellent job at Minny, but turned around programs before then.

 

[TheSker]

How are we going to do it? By winning back the fanbase, competing in big games, and recruiting recruiting recruiting. Mike Riley meets all those needs.

If you don't think much of the "fanbase" is currently EXTREMELY uneasy about Mike Riley, you're fooling yourself.

 

[Redux]

How are we going to do it? By winning back the fanbase, competing in big games, and recruiting recruiting recruiting. Mike Riley meets all those needs.

If you don't think much of the "fanbase" is currently EXTREMELY uneasy about Mike Riley, you're fooling yourself.

Yeah one guy on a message board who thinks Patterson would have left TCU for Nebraska is a large portion of the fanbase.