Nice OWH Article on Watson

[suh_fan93]

suh_fan, I don't know have a link but I think there have been plenty of people saying that was the case, that Bo pulled the reins back last year. But, I don't think it's like Watson was dragged kicking and screaming and protesting "No! Let me open the O up!" I don't think the two coaches were at odds at all on that one, although someone can correct me if wrong. I think it was something where Bo made the call, "We can't keep trying and failing to execute, because it's going to cost us games. Turtle down and ride the D to the win."

That was absolutely the right call last year, IMO, and if fans have a problem with it they should really take it up to Bo.

Sorry, have a hard time believing that. Watson is the offensive coordinator and no one in their right mind would simply put everything on any defense regardless of how good they were and hope that defense alone would win games. A lot of Watson defenders (in this thread anyway) and by all means I'm open to hearing both sides. That's what makes this place so interesting and keeps things going. As for me Watson needs to go and it's over due. I wish the best for our team, I want us to win every game we play and am not immune to the fact that even the best teams lose. In the end it's still Watson calling the individual plays and our record and offensive output against teams with halfway good defenses speaks for itself. That's all I need.

If it helps, I'll throw my hat in that ring. I have no link, but this is what I heard, too. It was pretty commonly discussed this past offseason.

I can't accept that Bo said to 'tone things down' so that gives Sean Watson a 'pass' so to speak. Again I fully realize there are a lot of Watson fans out there apparently. For me he couldn't go soon enough.

 

[zoogs]

We didn't put everything on the defense because we wanted to, we did it because we had no choice. The offense was battered up in every which way and the OL and WRs were serious liabilities. We had to do what would allow the team to win, and taking risks with the ball wasn't the way to do that. See: Texas Tech, Iowa State. We go into last year's Oklahoma or Texas games with those gameplans, and we'd get beat, handily.

If you can't accept that Bo had a hand in making this (correct, IMO) call - I think that goes back to what I was saying earlier. Some are determined to find fault with Watson, even when there is none, and even when some of the things are things on which Bo and Watson are on the same page.

 

[suh_fan93]

We didn't put everything on the defense because we wanted to, we did it because we had no choice. The offense was battered up in every which way and the OL and WRs were serious liabilities. We had to do what would allow the team to win, and taking risks with the ball wasn't the way to do that. See: Texas Tech, Iowa State. We go into last year's Oklahoma or Texas games with those gameplans, and we'd get beat, handily.

That's my entire point. We did get beat in every game you listed except for Oklahoma which we managed to score 10 points. I'm not a Watson fan. Sorry. If other's are, more power to you. I would have gotten rid of him last year. I never would have dreamed in this day and age Nebraska would end the season ranked 99th in the nation offensively. 2 field goals against a 3 loss Texas team this year. Can't buy into Watson, sorry.

 

[knapplc]

I'm no Watson supporter. I haven't seen enough consistent evidence from this guy that proves he's the real deal. There have been plenty of stats posted in the past showing his sketchy record over the years.

One thing I will say is this - and it's not binding or prophetic by any means, I'm just sayin' - a lot of the stuff being said about Watson now was being said about Charlie McBride in the late 80s and early 90s. People wanted Charlie's head on a platter. They wanted to run him out of town something FIERCE.

Osborne was patient with him, let him learn from Florida State and Miami, and we ended the 90s with some ferociously good defenses.

One other thing I'll say is, we used to pride ourselves on the longevity of the coaches on our staff. That can still be a good thing.

 

[zoogs]

We didn't put everything on the defense because we wanted to, we did it because we had no choice. The offense was battered up in every which way and the OL and WRs were serious liabilities. We had to do what would allow the team to win, and taking risks with the ball wasn't the way to do that. See: Texas Tech, Iowa State. We go into last year's Oklahoma or Texas games with those gameplans, and we'd get beat, handily.

That's my entire point. We did get beat in every game you listed except for Oklahoma which we managed to score 10 points. I'm not a Watson fan. Sorry. If other's are, more power to you. I would have gotten rid of him last year. I never would have dreamed in this day and age Nebraska would end the season ranked 99th in the nation offensively. 2 field goals against a 3 loss Texas team this year. Can't buy into Watson, sorry.

Doesn't matter how you win, matters whether you do or not (or whether you had a shot to). We could have gained more yards very likely, against OU or Texas, if we had a different game plan. The tradeoff is we would have not even come close to winning. And we could well have dropped some other games.

Last year the offense was a MASH unit with guys who couldn't get the job done. Basically, we relied on steady running to chew some clock and play field position, and the occasional big play from our RBs or a downfield strike to Paul (see Kansas) to put some points on the board. And once we got a lead, we worked to just keep it, and avoid turnovers. That was how we were able to win games with a unit as weak and depleted as it was.

It's what we had to do, and the guys who are at fault here are a) nature, for the injuries, B) Cotton, for the OL, c) Gilmore, for the WRs, not really in that order. Cotton has shaped up this year though by all accounts.

Really, I don't know why people just want to see style points from the O. We were extremely limited personnel wise, which is what happens when you lose so many guys, and end up with the best option at QB limited by a throwing arm injury. Taking risks and playing around when you have wins at stake isn't a smart thing to do, even if it's for some style points, and I guess Bo would have learned this lesson extremely well after CU '08 and his fake field goal call. Another thing I think Watson does is get more basic when guys are out there struggling. Which, isn't that what every OC should do? Get back to the basics when you struggle.

Anyway. Bottom line is the offense put us in a position to win last year when they easily, easily could have been the kind of liability that screwed us every game.

 

[JTrain]

I'm no Watson supporter. I haven't seen enough consistent evidence from this guy that proves he's the real deal. There have been plenty of stats posted in the past showing his sketchy record over the years.

One thing I will say is this - and it's not binding or prophetic by any means, I'm just sayin' - a lot of the stuff being said about Watson now was being said about Charlie McBride in the late 80s and early 90s. People wanted Charlie's head on a platter. They wanted to run him out of town something FIERCE.

Osborne was patient with him, let him learn from Florida State and Miami, and we ended the 90s with some ferociously good defenses.

One other thing I'll say is, we used to pride ourselves on the longevity of the coaches on our staff. That can still be a good thing.

If Watson wanted to be a 20+ year loyal assistant (like McBride), I'd be all for the patient route. But since he has openly stated his desire to be a head coach, I don't see the point in suffering his growing pains only to never see the reward.

 

[zoogs]

If Watson wanted to be a 20+ year loyal assistant (like McBride), I'd be all for the patient route. But since he has openly stated his desire to be a head coach, I don't see the point in suffering his growing pains only to never see the reward.

How exactly do you propose to skip growing pains with a coach? You can bring in some established veteran guru and there'd still be growing pains, and no guarantee of production living up to hype.

 

[bshirt]

SW has an at best "average" OC record at CU and it's the same here ay NU.

Sure, he steamrolls the creampuffs but get stuffed like sardines over & over vs the big boys.

Sure, a lot of that is because they're "big boys" but it's a problem when our offense gets stomped that badly in such a repeatable way. Even vs very, very marginal defenses we at times die a horrible death (SDSU....last year Iowa State, TT, etc...2008 Missou).

He's very, very lucky to have an outrageously talented qb now. For some reason Bo thinks he's great and that's easily the best asset about him.

 

[knapplc]

Aren't we going through growing pains with Bo right now? All those personal foul penalties he got his first year - he grew out of that, right? His craziness with the press is getting better, etc.

Every coach goes through a curve. Some take longer than others. Maybe Watson never finds his path and can't escape his cycle of good/bad. Hard to say.

 

[sd'sker]

i would not blame watson on this year's texas loss. unless his coaching is negatively influencing the players' ability to catch a ball.

 

[JTrain]

If Watson wanted to be a 20+ year loyal assistant (like McBride), I'd be all for the patient route. But since he has openly stated his desire to be a head coach, I don't see the point in suffering his growing pains only to never see the reward.

How exactly do you propose to skip growing pains with a coach? You can bring in some established veteran guru and there'd still be growing pains, and no guarantee of production living up to hype.

Huh? I said, if I expected him to be around a while, I'd be all for sticking out the growing pains. But I fully expect him to get a head coaching offer in the next 2-3 years. So we will get the average offenses while he matures as a playcaller, and then get none of the reward. Let's get a guy who is prepared to be here long-term, then we will at least have the chance to be rewarded for patience and longevity down the road.

 

[suh_fan93]

I'm no Watson supporter. I haven't seen enough consistent evidence from this guy that proves he's the real deal. There have been plenty of stats posted in the past showing his sketchy record over the years.

One thing I will say is this - and it's not binding or prophetic by any means, I'm just sayin' - a lot of the stuff being said about Watson now was being said about Charlie McBride in the late 80s and early 90s. People wanted Charlie's head on a platter. They wanted to run him out of town something FIERCE.

Osborne was patient with him, let him learn from Florida State and Miami, and we ended the 90s with some ferociously good defenses.

One other thing I'll say is, we used to pride ourselves on the longevity of the coaches on our staff. That can still be a good thing.

I should probably say this is nothing personal against Sean Watson. He seems like a nice guy and you are right. Nebraska has never been a spit 'em up and chew 'em out kind of program as far as coaches. (Callahan was justified however!)

My biggest problem hasn't been the losing. I went through the Callahan/Solich years just like the rest of us and we've been spoiled to be honest. We've been a winning program ever since I've been alive.

I have just had a huge, huge problem with how we've lost games under Watson.

You make a good point knapple. I'm going to let my anti-Watson rants have a much needed rest. Sorry if I ruffled any feathers of any Watson supporters. While I feel the way I do, I value all of your opinions too.

 

[sd'sker]

If Watson wanted to be a 20+ year loyal assistant (like McBride), I'd be all for the patient route. But since he has openly stated his desire to be a head coach, I don't see the point in suffering his growing pains only to never see the reward.

How exactly do you propose to skip growing pains with a coach? You can bring in some established veteran guru and there'd still be growing pains, and no guarantee of production living up to hype.

Huh? I said, if I expected him to be around a while, I'd be all for sticking out the growing pains. But I fully expect him to get a head coaching offer in the next 2-3 years. So we will get the average offenses while he matures as a playcaller, and then get none of the reward. Let's get a guy who is prepared to be here long-term, then we will at least have the chance to be rewarded for patience and longevity down the road.

it is near impossible nowadays to get a quality coach to come as a coordinator that you expect to stay for the long haul.

 

[zoogs]

^ I guess that was my point. Won't really get someone who is gonna sign up to be OC for twenty years, anymore. If they have success, at a school like Nebraska, other options are going to open up.

 

[JTrain]

If Watson wanted to be a 20+ year loyal assistant (like McBride), I'd be all for the patient route. But since he has openly stated his desire to be a head coach, I don't see the point in suffering his growing pains only to never see the reward.

How exactly do you propose to skip growing pains with a coach? You can bring in some established veteran guru and there'd still be growing pains, and no guarantee of production living up to hype.

Huh? I said, if I expected him to be around a while, I'd be all for sticking out the growing pains. But I fully expect him to get a head coaching offer in the next 2-3 years. So we will get the average offenses while he matures as a playcaller, and then get none of the reward. Let's get a guy who is prepared to be here long-term, then we will at least have the chance to be rewarded for patience and longevity down the road.

it is near impossible nowadays to get a quality coach to come as a coordinator that you expect to stay for the long haul.

Maybe so, but if that's the case then patience and coaching longevity no longer has its place. Personally I think it's rare but still possible to find a loyal assistant coach.

My only point in all this was, if Watson needs another 5 years to become a great coordinator, that probably doesn't do Nebraska any good, since he will probably be somewhere else in 5 years.