Stop the nonsense

There is absolutely ZERO reason to keep Cosgrove unless you accept mediocre play and lack of wins.

ZERO reason. The numbers speak for themselves. It is brain numbing to me if anyone thinks differently. And please stop blaming the players. Yes, they are not playing well and yes they lack talent and speed but coaches are ultimately on the chopping block for that.

 
Let's keep things in perspective, this was the #1 in the country we were playing, not App St or Ball state, etc. If we perform like this the next couple weeks then I say, "Houston we have a problem." :angry: But, until then I don't think we need to abandon ship. Yes Coz is a moron for saying that adjustment's weren't necessary against the #1 team, but at the moment he's the DC. :angry: Adjustment's include but are not limited to, replacing ineffective players w/other's who may not have the experience, but have the basic fundamentals down. :-) GBR!!!

 
Da Man said:
Let's keep things in perspective, this was the #1 in the country we were playing, not App St or Ball state, etc. If we perform like this the next couple weeks then I say, "Houston we have a problem." :angry: But, until then I don't think we need to abandon ship. Yes Coz is a moron for saying that adjustment's weren't necessary against the #1 team, but at the moment he's the DC. :angry: Adjustment's include but are not limited to, replacing ineffective players w/other's who may not have the experience, but have the basic fundamentals down. :-) GBR!!!
Click to expand...
Please refer to the Wake Forrest game. Army held them to less total offense and 100 yds less rushing. This has been going on for 2 weeks, and all of last year.

 
Travis9 said:
This thread is the problem in husker nation. i dont care if Ruud and Mckeon have fought there asses off for this program or not. I dont care if they are legacy's or captains or whatever. When they are not playing well they DONT GET PASSES. Does working his a$$ of for 4 years award Ruud the right to start. In a real program the answer is HELL NO. the best players play, it happens all the time, incumbent starters get beat out. statement like "these guys have done nothing but fight there buts off for the huskers" are a Joke.

this post symbolizes our problems. in the real world if you cant cut it you get replaced. Well sorry to tell you but Ruud and McKeon are not cutting it. in fact they didnt cut it last year either. The joke is on us, coz slept well saturday night because he knows his job is safe, he knows that a majority of Husker Nation has grown to accept sub par. This post the original post makes me want to puke
Click to expand...
I don't disagree because I definitely think the best, hardest working players should be on the field. It shouldn't be a 'given' because you've been playing for years. Not sure if that is the case, and I think the schemes have alot to do with it too, but who knows.

And I agree that Cosgrove will never be fired because Callahan will never do that. If Callahan is at NU until 2012, so is Cosgrove. Simple as that.

 
HuskerExpat said:
DJR313 said:
Since points allowed/scored is the true measure in wins and losses, wouldn't points allowed be the stat that matters most for defense?
Click to expand...
Not at all. Too many unknown variables in the points allowed per game will skew the determination. For instance, suppose the offense had 10 turnovers on its own 15 yard line and the defense gave up 0 yards, and had two sacks, but the other team kicked 10 field goals, scoring 30 points. In that circumstance, you would probably say we had a pretty stout defense, but the points per game stat does not reflect that fact. Obviously that is an extreme example, but it explains why points allowed is not a very good stat for judging the defense.
Click to expand...
If you are keeping points off the board, something is working. Apply you're logic to that statement. Saturday night sucked, but if you want to take statistics into account, at least take into account stats that tell the whole story. USC only passed for 130 yards, does that mean that the pass defense shut down USC's receievers? Chew on that.

 
I Bleed RED said:
Da Man said:
Let's keep things in perspective, this was the #1 in the country we were playing, not App St or Ball state, etc. If we perform like this the next couple weeks then I say, "Houston we have a problem." :angry: But, until then I don't think we need to abandon ship. Yes Coz is a moron for saying that adjustment's weren't necessary against the #1 team, but at the moment he's the DC. :angry: Adjustment's include but are not limited to, replacing ineffective players w/other's who may not have the experience, but have the basic fundamentals down. :-) GBR!!!
Click to expand...
Please refer to the Wake Forrest game. Army held them to less total offense and 100 yds less rushing. This has been going on for 2 weeks, and all of last year.
Click to expand...
Exactly. Plus Appalachian State is a real football team. Michigan was (and is perpetually) over-rated to start the season but it was no fluke. Saying things like "this is not App St or Ball state" really doesn't hold any water because they, or at the very least the former, would put up numbers as well.

 
Cosgrove is going nowhere. I don't see why we have to give him added pressure. Some of us don't understand the parody in college football these days. App State was not a fluke! Anybody can beat anybody on any given day. This isn't twenty years ago when Nebraska would win everything easily until Oklahoma rolled into town and that would actually be a ball game. Every game presents a different challenge, and it's really hard for coaches to adapt to different game plans.

 
huskerpower_76 said:
Cosgrove is going nowhere. I don't see why we have to give him added pressure. Some of us don't understand the parody in college football these days. App State was not a fluke! Anybody can beat anybody on any given day. This isn't twenty years ago when Nebraska would win everything easily until Oklahoma rolled into town and that would actually be a ball game. Every game presents a different challenge, and it's really hard for coaches to adapt to different game plans.
Click to expand...
True, and yet the same top programs have dominated for the last decade. With parody you can lose on any given day, but with poor planning you will lose consistently. Somehow with all this parody WE never beat a good team....weird huh?

We have NEVER beaten a team that finished in the top 20 in 3.5 years. We are an exception to the parody rule.

 
DJR313 said:
HuskerExpat said:
DJR313 said:
Since points allowed/scored is the true measure in wins and losses, wouldn't points allowed be the stat that matters most for defense?
Click to expand...
Not at all. Too many unknown variables in the points allowed per game will skew the determination. For instance, suppose the offense had 10 turnovers on its own 15 yard line and the defense gave up 0 yards, and had two sacks, but the other team kicked 10 field goals, scoring 30 points. In that circumstance, you would probably say we had a pretty stout defense, but the points per game stat does not reflect that fact. Obviously that is an extreme example, but it explains why points allowed is not a very good stat for judging the defense.
Click to expand...
If you are keeping points off the board, something is working. Apply you're logic to that statement. Saturday night sucked, but if you want to take statistics into account, at least take into account stats that tell the whole story. USC only passed for 130 yards, does that mean that the pass defense shut down USC's receievers? Chew on that.
Click to expand...
Sure, I'll apply my logic to that statement. Maybe on a lot of drives, the other team's offense started on their own one yard line, drove down to our 5 yard line, and then had a turnover on a bad snap, or even missed a field goal. The defense just gave up 94 yards on one drive, but the other team didn't score any points. That does not mean the defense did well, even though there were 0 points allowed.

You are right, that looking purely at passing yardage is not necessarilly indicative of shutting down the other team's receivers. I agree with you, and I would not try and argue against that. My post was merely responding to the assertion that points allowed per game was the primary stat you needed to look at to determine if the defense is any good.

 
True, and yet the same top programs have dominated for the last decade. With parody you can lose on any given day, but with poor planning you will lose consistently. Somehow with all this parody WE never beat a good team....weird huh?

We have NEVER beaten a team that finished in the top 20 in 3.5 years. We are an exception to the parody rule.
Click to expand...
With parity, more and more you see that the weak cupcake opponents are non longer. Parity means that often times these teams will be just as physical, fast, and prepared as the mightier ones. You'll see a lot of games that once could be counted on as blowouts to become shootouts.

Parity does not affect Nebraska in a good way. It means when we travel to Wake Forest, we may have more trouble than we think because they're a rising program with a lot of talent in the area. It means Michigan will have difficulty handling a determined, feisty program like ASU if they overlook them.

It doesn't mean Nebraska can beat USC except on extremely lucky circumstance, because USC is on the top of the mountain. We should have expected more of a game though, that's true. But if you're saying we're an exception to the parity rule, then you're being hysterical.

 
There is definitely more parity in college football than there was 20 years ago, but really there is still the top tier teams, middle tier teams, and bottom feeders. Look at the Big 12. IMO, we're not closer to the top than we were 4 years ago. We're still surrendering the Big 12 to Texas and Oklahoma. If the game Saturday proved nothing else, it just proved how far away we still are from the top tier teams. I don't know what it's going to take to get over the hump, but we're still climbing the hill.

The thing about Saturday that rubs me the wrong way is coaching does matter. Alabama has been horrible. It's been all but destroyed by probation. However, Nick Saban comes in and beats a ranked Arkansas team. Alabama doesn't have the athletes Arkansas has, yet they still won the game. They didn't let someone come into THEIR house and run all over top of them just because they were bigger and stronger.

You can have the best athletes in the World and still lose. Just look at how our basketball team performs in the Olympics.

 
HuskerExpat said:
DJR313 said:
HuskerExpat said:
DJR313 said:
Since points allowed/scored is the true measure in wins and losses, wouldn't points allowed be the stat that matters most for defense?
Click to expand...
Not at all. Too many unknown variables in the points allowed per game will skew the determination. For instance, suppose the offense had 10 turnovers on its own 15 yard line and the defense gave up 0 yards, and had two sacks, but the other team kicked 10 field goals, scoring 30 points. In that circumstance, you would probably say we had a pretty stout defense, but the points per game stat does not reflect that fact. Obviously that is an extreme example, but it explains why points allowed is not a very good stat for judging the defense.
Click to expand...
If you are keeping points off the board, something is working. Apply you're logic to that statement. Saturday night sucked, but if you want to take statistics into account, at least take into account stats that tell the whole story. USC only passed for 130 yards, does that mean that the pass defense shut down USC's receievers? Chew on that.
Click to expand...
Sure, I'll apply my logic to that statement. Maybe on a lot of drives, the other team's offense started on their own one yard line, drove down to our 5 yard line, and then had a turnover on a bad snap, or even missed a field goal. The defense just gave up 94 yards on one drive, but the other team didn't score any points. That does not mean the defense did well, even though there were 0 points allowed.

You are right, that looking purely at passing yardage is not necessarilly indicative of shutting down the other team's receivers. I agree with you, and I would not try and argue against that. My post was merely responding to the assertion that points allowed per game was the primary stat you needed to look at to determine if the defense is any good.
Click to expand...
How do you determine who wins or loses a game? The friggin SCORE! Points allowed and points scored are the 2 stats that matter the most in determining success or failure, it's pretty much black and white. The scenario that a team is going to go on a 15 play 98 yard drive then either fumble, throw an INT or miss a FG by pure impotence of the offense is not typical. If the defense was really inept, the offense would continue to do that and score the majority of the time throughout a game, showing up on the scoreboard. You raised a pretty weak point of contention. The stats that matter most are points for and points against, thats how W's and L's are determined, which decide conferences and national titles, not yards allowed or yards gained or passing efficiency defense or offense or anything of that nature.

 
junior4949 said:
The thing about Saturday that rubs me the wrong way is coaching does matter. Alabama has been horrible. It's been all but destroyed by probation. However, Nick Saban comes in and beats a ranked Arkansas team. Alabama doesn't have the athletes Arkansas has, yet they still won the game. They didn't let someone come into THEIR house and run all over top of them just because they were bigger and stronger.
Click to expand...

Per Rivals the last 4 years class rankings.

Alabama Arkansas

04 #15 #22

05 #18 #24

06 #11 #26

07 #10 #31

So one could say that per the rankings Alabama has more talent then Arkansas. Does it mean they do? Who knows but one could say it. I think I see what you are saying but try and make it out like Saban doesn't have talented kids. Coaching can make good kids better but you have to have talent to win games.

Is Charlie Weiss a worse coach this year then he was last year? Or does he not look as good because Brady Quinn isn't playing QB and 3 pretty good OL are gone as well? He is still the same Offense "Genuis" he was last year he just doesn't have the talent he did.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top