This Season Seems Hollow . . .

[Enhance]

When did I cry because Callahan was gone? I thought he should be fired for retaining dud coaches. What I am saying is watch the Texas, Washington, Iowa state, OU, A&M, Wisconsin, Northwestern games and tell me Nebraska is improving

I'll raise you this year's games against PSU, MSU, '10 and '09 Missouri, '09 Arizona, and '09 Oklahoma. All wins, all good teams.

Let's just go ahead and put the clamps down on this "We are Nebraska" B.S. that you and so many others talk about these days. We are Nebraska, but that doesn't mean much of anything in the scope of college football today. Everybody has athletes now unlike two decades ago. Coaching is far more sophisticated. Game film review is far more advanced. Schools that didn't have money are making more of it. Furthermore, we're in the middle of the U.S., subjected to frigid winters and stifling summers. We're not going to ever be able to recruit like the LSU's and Florida's of the world. We're just not. And inadvertently demanding that we should be better than everybody else just because we're Nebraska is naive and unfocused.

Second of all, go back and look at T.O.'s first years, and recall the fact that he was almost fired after the first several years of his coaching tenure. He took over a championship winning team, had big wins, had bad foul ups and could never beat Oklahoma. I'm sure you're glad we held onto him, aren't you?

 

[knapplc]

Second of all, go back and look at T.O.'s first years, and recall the fact that he was almost fired after the first several years of his coaching tenure. He took over a championship winning team, had big wins, had bad foul ups and could never beat Oklahoma. I'm sure you're glad we held onto him, aren't you?

For that matter, look at the late 80s when we were ready to ride both TO and Charlie McBride out of here on a rail. Into the early 90s, like 90 and 91, people wanted McBride OUT. Today he's a legend, a cult hero.

It's foolish and myopic from someone who claims to be watching games for 50-ish years to not have learned the lessons those years taught us.

 

[Landomatic]

Well I didn't mean for my comments/concerns about the coaching staff and Martinez as to why the season seems hollow to turn into a Callahan vs. Bo thread. But welcome to Nebraska boards I guess.

I will say this...I've given the OP some more thought and I think this year's lack of energy or hollow feeling on my part maybe had more to do with circumstances than anything else. Although I stand by what I said about Bo and Martinez, I think that's only part of the problem. When I take that out of the equation, the reality is that I get up for the big games. In previous years it was Oklahoma, Texas and other teams that were rated. If we were still in the Big 12, I would have been up for Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas and that's probably about it. With the move to the B1G, I should be up for Wisconsin, OSU, Michigan St, Penn State and Michigan and that's about it. Really can't expect to get too excited for many of the other games.

So here's where the situational argument comes in. I was WAY up for Wisconsin and the week leading up to that game definitely did not feel "hollow". The a$$ whoopin' they gave us took the wind out of my sales enough and made it hard to get up for OSU. Had we both been undefeated, I'm sure I would have been as up for that game as any game. Can't explain why I wasn't into the Mich State game as much as I should have been. Maybe because they are Michigan State and I never really viewed them as a big time program to get too excited about, even though they clearly are (at least this year). Next came PSU and the loss from Northwestern combined with the unusual circumstances of that game made it one that was really hard to get too up for. Way too many off the field distractions.

And finally, the next team on the list I expect to be up for is Michigan and I can honestly say that I am!!! I think had the losses not come when they did and the Penn State scandal not happened when it did, the season would have been much more exciting overall.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

I don't have Knapplc's level of research to back me up on this but:

Almost every talented, well-coached Top 20 team will have at least one Northwestern kinda game each season.

So forget about it, Jake. It's Chinatown.

 

[Eagle1]

When did I cry because Callahan was gone? I thought he should be fired for retaining dud coaches. What I am saying is watch the Texas, Washington, Iowa state, OU, A&M, Wisconsin, Northwestern games and tell me Nebraska is improving

I'll raise you this year's games against PSU, MSU, '10 and '09 Missouri, '09 Arizona, and '09 Oklahoma. All wins, all good teams.

Let's just go ahead and put the clamps down on this "We are Nebraska" B.S. that you and so many others talk about these days. We are Nebraska, but that doesn't mean much of anything in the scope of college football today. Everybody has athletes now unlike two decades ago. Coaching is far more sophisticated. Game film review is far more advanced. Schools that didn't have money are making more of it. Furthermore, we're in the middle of the U.S., subjected to frigid winters and stifling summers. We're not going to ever be able to recruit like the LSU's and Florida's of the world. We're just not. And inadvertently demanding that we should be better than everybody else just because we're Nebraska is naive and unfocused.

Second of all, go back and look at T.O.'s first years, and recall the fact that he was almost fired after the first several years of his coaching tenure. He took over a championship winning team, had big wins, had bad foul ups and could never beat Oklahoma. I'm sure you're glad we held onto him, aren't you?

This says it all...no need for any further discussion on that part. Only a few people are able to look at the landscape objectively and come to this conclusion and it is dead on. Nice post.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

And just as a brainteaser:

Like a lot of teams, this Husker team seems to play according to expectations. Had Nebraska come off a win against Northwestern there's no guarantee their heads would have been in the right place to beat Penn State.

Assuming the correct answer is actually neither: which loss would you prefer, Northwestern or Penn State?

 

[Not since 97]

When did I cry because Callahan was gone? I thought he should be fired for retaining dud coaches. What I am saying is watch the Texas, Washington, Iowa state, OU, A&M, Wisconsin, Northwestern games and tell me Nebraska is improving

I'll raise you this year's games against PSU, MSU, '10 and '09 Missouri, '09 Arizona, and '09 Oklahoma. All wins, all good teams.

Let's just go ahead and put the clamps down on this "We are Nebraska" B.S. that you and so many others talk about these days. We are Nebraska, but that doesn't mean much of anything in the scope of college football today. Everybody has athletes now unlike two decades ago. Coaching is far more sophisticated. Game film review is far more advanced. Schools that didn't have money are making more of it. Furthermore, we're in the middle of the U.S., subjected to frigid winters and stifling summers. We're not going to ever be able to recruit like the LSU's and Florida's of the world. We're just not. And inadvertently demanding that we should be better than everybody else just because we're Nebraska is naive and unfocused.

Second of all, go back and look at T.O.'s first years, and recall the fact that he was almost fired after the first several years of his coaching tenure. He took over a championship winning team, had big wins, had bad foul ups and could never beat Oklahoma. I'm sure you're glad we held onto him, aren't you?

you will raise me PSU this year? Seriously? A team that not only lost their head coach and Programs 50 year mascot but played for a program most of the Nation saw as child raping enablers? I bet those practices were really focused and the preparation was top notch. It would be like being a boxer that KOed another boxer that just got hit by a truck. Zona? Really, as in the Mike Stoops was fired for being terrible Zona? I could possibly give you that weak OU team but thats digging. This years MSU is and always be MSU. Great win for sure but touting a win against Michigan state and using that as an argument to counter our completely horrid losses against Texas , Northwestern, Iowa State and other sludge teams AT Home come off WAY more ridiculous than stating " We are Nebraska"
Trust me I understand we aren't the Nebraska Brand we were in 97, not even close. I do doubt recruits are fighting to get here but if you can't build off of N'Suh and our amazing secondary and produce anything other than this years defense, there's issues. Being in the top 10 all-time wins does the same thing for recruiting it does for Michigan, tOSU, Notre Dame, that are in a lot colder regions than Lincoln will ever be. So you're say there is no "We are Nebraska" and basically the same as Hawaii as a brand except Hawaii gets better recruits because of the weather? There is a Brand and tradition that constitutes not having linemen on both sides of the ball not being manhandled by Div 2 teams IMHO

 

[idontknow]

http://www.firepelini.com/

Enough said.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

Know what has changed since '97?

More universities have committed to more competitive football programs, while the talent pool is being drained by sports with fewer injuries.

Also, you've lost a bunch of your hair, put on weight, and the college chicks in midriffs are calling you "sir."

Nostaligia is a killer. It also makes you remember things differently.

 

[Joe_5700]

Second of all, go back and look at T.O.'s first years, and recall the fact that he was almost fired after the first several years of his coaching tenure. He took over a championship winning team, had big wins, had bad foul ups and could never beat Oklahoma. I'm sure you're glad we held onto him, aren't you?

For that matter, look at the late 80s when we were ready to ride both TO and Charlie McBride out of here on a rail. Into the early 90s, like 90 and 91, people wanted McBride OUT. Today he's a legend, a cult hero.

It's foolish and myopic from someone who claims to be watching games for 50-ish years to not have learned the lessons those years taught us.

Exactly Knappl. People didn't lay off of McBride until 1993.

 

[Glendower]

Second of all, go back and look at T.O.'s first years, and recall the fact that he was almost fired after the first several years of his coaching tenure. He took over a championship winning team, had big wins, had bad foul ups and could never beat Oklahoma. I'm sure you're glad we held onto him, aren't you?

For that matter, look at the late 80s when we were ready to ride both TO and Charlie McBride out of here on a rail. Into the early 90s, like 90 and 91, people wanted McBride OUT. Today he's a legend, a cult hero.

It's foolish and myopic from someone who claims to be watching games for 50-ish years to not have learned the lessons those years taught us.

Exactly Knappl. People didn't lay off of McBride until 1993.

You say sooth. That was when i was becoming aware of football and one thing stands out-- hearing my dad and others talk about how terrible our D was (especially the secondary). Longer passes were essentially freebees from what I remember. It used to be horrible ot watch pass after pass after pass be completed for a quick march down the field.

 

[Mierin]

Wow. This joker makes me love Austn.

 

[Enhance]

When did I cry because Callahan was gone? I thought he should be fired for retaining dud coaches. What I am saying is watch the Texas, Washington, Iowa state, OU, A&M, Wisconsin, Northwestern games and tell me Nebraska is improving

I'll raise you this year's games against PSU, MSU, '10 and '09 Missouri, '09 Arizona, and '09 Oklahoma. All wins, all good teams.

Let's just go ahead and put the clamps down on this "We are Nebraska" B.S. that you and so many others talk about these days. We are Nebraska, but that doesn't mean much of anything in the scope of college football today. Everybody has athletes now unlike two decades ago. Coaching is far more sophisticated. Game film review is far more advanced. Schools that didn't have money are making more of it. Furthermore, we're in the middle of the U.S., subjected to frigid winters and stifling summers. We're not going to ever be able to recruit like the LSU's and Florida's of the world. We're just not. And inadvertently demanding that we should be better than everybody else just because we're Nebraska is naive and unfocused.

Second of all, go back and look at T.O.'s first years, and recall the fact that he was almost fired after the first several years of his coaching tenure. He took over a championship winning team, had big wins, had bad foul ups and could never beat Oklahoma. I'm sure you're glad we held onto him, aren't you?

you will raise me PSU this year? Seriously? A team that not only lost their head coach and Programs 50 year mascot but played for a program most of the Nation saw as child raping enablers? I bet those practices were really focused and the preparation was top notch. It would be like being a boxer that KOed another boxer that just got hit by a truck. Zona? Really, as in the Mike Stoops was fired for being terrible Zona? I could possibly give you that weak OU team but thats digging. This years MSU is and always be MSU. Great win for sure but touting a win against Michigan state and using that as an argument to counter our completely horrid losses against Texas , Northwestern, Iowa State and other sludge teams AT Home come off WAY more ridiculous than stating " We are Nebraska"
Trust me I understand we aren't the Nebraska Brand we were in 97, not even close. I do doubt recruits are fighting to get here but if you can't build off of N'Suh and our amazing secondary and produce anything other than this years defense, there's issues. Being in the top 10 all-time wins does the same thing for recruiting it does for Michigan, tOSU, Notre Dame, that are in a lot colder regions than Lincoln will ever be. So you're say there is no "We are Nebraska" and basically the same as Hawaii as a brand except Hawaii gets better recruits because of the weather? There is a Brand and tradition that constitutes not having linemen on both sides of the ball not being manhandled by Div 2 teams IMHO

This diatribe is becoming useless, but lets break this down into segments.

First, PSU has a Top 10 defense (scoring and total yards). Regardless of extenuating factors, they're a good defensive football team. Second, I'm failing to see your point about Stoops. Things didn't pan out for him, but that '09 Arizona squad came within a field goal in double overtime of defeating then #11 ranked Oregon. They also beat #18 ranked USC 21-17 before the Holiday Bowl, finishing the season at 8-5. Great football team? No. Good football team? Yes.

Your MSU comment is just as naive as your "We Are Nebraska" diatribe and the overtly/not-so-well-concealed pessimism in your name. MSU has a good squad that beat both Michigan (a team favored against us this weekend at home) and Wisconsin (a team we failed to beat). "This years MSU is and always be MSU." Really? It's quite obvious you're putting Nebraska on a pedestal here, yet you seem to be inadvertently saying that we're bad? Your clarity is poor here.

Your final paragraph perfectly exemplifies the issue many people on this board simply don't comprehend - football is different today than it was 20 years ago. You say you understand, yet you think we should be able to build off one of the best defenses in '09 two years later? Players leave and coaches leave. In today's game, it's near impossible to reload every year, especially with scholarship limits. You're going to have down years. Remember how everybody wanted to fire LSU's Les Miles a couple of years ago, and now all of a sudden he's God down there again? That was coming off of a championship season. This should be more than enough evidence to you that fans can be completely full of themselves and completely unrealistic about today's college football.

Lastly, ND and Michigan are more tradition rich programs than we. tOSU is almost geographically similar to Nebraska on a map - their winters are no different, but they're right in the middle of a fantastic recruiting hot bed and are one of "the" premiere programs in the country. Maybe not today, but they were the last several years. Nebraska hasn't been there since the late 90's and early 2000's. You misunderstand me. We're better than Hawaii and we do have a tradition of excellence here. However, recruits are going to a lot of different places now and recruiting is tougher today than it ever has been. As far as the lines are concerned, I'll be the first one to tell you I believe Cotton is the sole reason our offensive line isn't consistent. Defensively, we're undersized and undermanned right now. We're transitioning from a new conference where size wasn't as big of a deal. What more does your unrealistic and over-demanding world want from Nebraska?

 

[JJ Husker]

5099 > 11. Just sayin. h34r:

 

[tschu]

losing to an UNRANKED team at home because you didn't watch film or prepare reeks of coaching problems. And in year 4 we should be past those.

Oh wow, real real good post bro

Except that's not the reality of what happened. Yoshi's quote about not watching film referred to the "extra" film and individual is asked to do. Our coaches ask players to watch film study of the other team so we can learn tendencies of individuals during the game. Usually you're learning about the guy across from you. This is extra work and Is optional because as coaches you're only allowed so much practice time with your guys. But you'll find the team usually does it on their own. It just so happens that that week some of the older players didn't do the individual film study. Thank last years class for those good habits. The coaches and the team still went through its normal break downs of NW as position groups and they studied the scout team tape from practice which is where we see how guys are reacting to certain sets and plays.

If the coaches are to blame for anything it would be that a player might get the idea that its ok to not do the prep because of some of the things we did in the first 4 games of the year. We often didn't make adjustments based on the team we were playing but rather on what the coaches wanted to see on film during live game action. Its stretching it and nit picking some but I suppose it could come across that its not as important to prepare fully against teams that have athletes that we should be able man handle and allow only the schemes to help us win.

I was being sarcastic. Sorry I'll try to make it more obvious next time