zeWilbur

But at least we are right in the middle of it at this point

Buffet has come out and said the reason he doesn't write a T. Boone Pickens type check is that the football team is already profitable. There is no point in giving money to someone that did not need it. If they actually needed the money then he would. Until then he would primarily donate to the educational side of the house.

Is there a site that ranks 40 times? They could even have their own star system. Then we could have a 'speed star ranking' and end all of this pointless debating!

Why was he suspended last season? LINK If I heard, I can't remember.

He got popped last year for steroids.

I'm sure Riley is working lots of angles but I don't think this is one of them. The players voted for their captains. They just happen to have more underclassmen this year.

Why can't this say 10 or 1

Because you keep reading. Just stop a little sooner and life gets better

I recall that the B1G will also be scheduling games with better teams playing each other more often instead of a rotating schedule so the in conference games should be more appealing/difficult as well. I think this starts in 2017.

 

 

 

 

I hope for Maliek's sake he is right but what happened to the days that a player actually performed at a high level on the field BEFORE being touted as a first rounder? I realize it's the off season and this year's draft just finished, so there can be no more speculating on it, but come on. I think Collins could end up being a special player for us but I sure want to see that proved before we start treating him like a first round draft pick.

He was dominant last year. He had about 50 tackles and 4.5 sacks. All those sacks coming towards the end of the season. Pretty salty stat line for any DL, let alone one who was in his first year as a starter. He is a rare breed of strength and quickness.

I wouldn't call him dominant last year, but he came on pretty strong toward the latter part of the season.

When he was given the green light, he was pretty dominant. Not bad for a 3-star with only 7 other offers amiright?

 

They guy is good, urrite. But not dominant yet. Suh was dominant, i.e., could take over a game, but he couldn't do that until his senior season. Part of the problem w our DTs is they haven't had much back up, hence, play too many downs, hence, get tired. That should change this year some. MC could be Suh 2.0 in 2 years, IMO, and that's saying something. I doubt he cranks it up to that level this year.

 

BTW, whatever happened to Dwayne Johnson, the one that's on our team? Anybody?

 

Redshirted 2013. Played scout team last year. Don't remember hearing anything about him from the spring. Probably still a pup working his way towards playing time.

 

 

We may not be as deep at receiver as we thought although I believe in this staff and the ability to develop receivers.

 

Only looking at Oregon St as evidence

I have been saying this!!!

 

 

Was Osborne Hector?

 

I think the argument can be made that he didn't win it all until he abandoned the Hector identity. Not entirely, but just enough.

That's bullsh#t. I'm getting real tired of this revisionist history that wants to claim that Osborne went a little dirty to make it over the hump. And primarily because of the Lawrence Phillips thing. Read some of Tom's book on the subject and find out why he really gave LP too many chances. Spoiler alert- it wasn't to win a natty, it was to do all he could (yes, probably too much in hindsight) to help a young man who just couldn't be helped.

 

If you guys want to confuse the issue... Osborne would be more like King Priam than Hector/Achilles. Agamemnon would be the Switzer type. A coach can knowingly skirt the rules or live comfortably within them. Neither has any bearing on the roster makeup.

Osborne did not have LP on the roster because he was a charity case. He was there because he was a damn good football player who could help the team win. LP just happened to be an Achilles.

Mike Tyson is Achilles.

 

Evander Holyfield is Hector.

 

Hector defeats Achilles, even though Achilles was willing to bite his ear off.

 

Later, they become friends.

 

The End.

So let Achilles go to jail for a few years and lose the physical dominance,his strongest asset, and then be surprised when Hector beats him doing things the "right way"? Not sure that holds up in college football.

I would rather be an 8-win team with a nice guy representing the program the right way than a 12-win, national champion team full of cheating and scandal. It doesn't have to be that way though. There's also Tom Osborne.

It might not have to be that way but Tom Osborne may not be the card to play on this one.

Would Hector make changes to his scheme and come up with a different gameplan to defeat Achilles the next time they met? Or would he say, "I don't need to change anything, my sword just needs to execute better"?

 

But to answer your question, I would rather win the right way. I would rather win a couple championship and having them mean something, than winning multiple championships and getting some (or all) of them vacated (or even just the knowledge of shady things that happened during that time).

But the point is that you won't win championships with Hector. You can have very good teams but will fall short when you run into Achilles, regardless of scheme. Is that still good enough?

How is he a four star across the board, yet a five star on the 247 composite?

Average ranking across all sites by player overall rank. The number, out of 100, are how close they are to a concensus #1 overall recruit. "The 247Sports Composite Rating assigns stars based on an approximate average distribution of stars from the industry."

http://247sports.com/Article/247Rating-Explanation-81574

Am I missing something, but on the radio they said that there will be 30 to 40 top 2016/17 recruits here today. I am not seeing it on the listing in this post.

Are they going to say they have a couple of good ones and bunch of local kids that are barely rated if at all? Marketing is something that this staff knows how to do and the media is going to follow their lead ad long as they are winning.

 

Caption contest?

 

How old is the picture? He's probably already eaten the 6 by now as well...

There seem to be several misconceptions around the clothing.

First, the $500 annual voucher is not a voucher. You bring in receipts and the school cuts you a check. It is on the school to keep track. But you have to qualify for a pell grant to take advantage of the program.

Second, the clothing deal with adidas is only providing clothing for practice and competition. There is also some cold weather gear thrown in. There are not dozens of anything provided. A few shirts and shorts, a few pairs of socks, and some shoes are the lions share of what gets handed out. You could make nice with the equipment folk and score a few more small things when you needed them but that was about the only abuse you could get away with from my experience.

 

Neal said Michigan came in and said that if it wasn't for football, he wouldn't get into Michigan. Neal said it felt like they were calling him poor and dumb. That ended the wolverines chances. His dad said Michigan was basically escorted out of his home after that statement.

Wow....that is an impressive recruiting tactic.

 

It seems to me like he was trying to say that Michigan was a great academic school and Daishon's grades were not good enough to merit entry. Fortunately, through football, he could have access to that level of education. I understand it was not taken that way but I doubt that Mattison would shove his foot that far in his mouth. This is not his first rodeo.

edit: huskerhill beat me to it. Darn my slow fingers...

 

 

He stuck around for an entire year and did everything that was asked of him. If the university decides not to let him in an possibly stringing him along this whole time, really doesn't look that good.

Has he done anything wrong since then? He was banned from the University for one year. If they weren't going to allow him back, ban him for life. I find it hard to believe he would have stuck around, instead of attending school closer to home, without some kind of commitment from the school. Then again, we know how the Administration handles commitments.

Pretty sure he was banned for four years(or lifetime) with a possible appeal after one year.

The first picture posted of him and the girl. It appears that he could potentially be holding onto a Mic Ultra can. Not that I care as most kids that age do the same but could the NCAA come back against the university on that assuming that this was his official visit?

Look at the picture of him and Westerkamp. It's his watch.

So, let me get this straight. He cimmitted to nebraska. His coach didn't like that he did it do fast and told him to decommit and he would have a meeting with him to go over what's best.

 

Meanwhile, Hunter has decommitted but the coach won't take the time to meet with him.

 

Interesting.

Coach was out of town at a funeral

From what i have read, it seems like he still wants to go through the whole process of being "wined & Dined" but also seems weird that it seems like he just struck NE from consideration completely.

 

I wonder if he told Bo he wanted to hold off on committing and Bo just basically told him if he wasnt 100% in we'd move on?

 

 

Weird situation but not shocking when dealing with a 17 yr old who seems to love being a celebrity.

He did not eliminate us. He was telling everyone else that he was not actually committed.

 

 

Coach Becks concepts and philosophies are hard to understand, for me they are anyway. I don't quite understand what exactly he's trying to do. It seems there are so many variables. When I hear him speak, it's hard to follow the point he's trying to make. Often times I don't even believe he answers the question that was asked of him. I have hard enough time straining information when he speaks, but even when written out in print, in a long interview like this one, I still just come away from this wondering what in the heck Beck is trying to do.

 

I don't know how the players could learn from this guy. It seems like it would be difficult.

 

 

His verbiage certainly does not help but the concepts are not complicated. There are two driving principles: make the defense unable to disguise anything. And win with small battles rather than large ones.

 

Limiting the ability to disguise: By taking a legitimate receiving tight end and splitting him out wide you are able to force whoever is covering him to show their hand. This is even more visible when a linebacker is the one in coverage. It is hard enough to help in run support or cover a receiver so the defender will usually cheat towards their primary responsibility. Very few defenders are athletic enough to get away with not tipping their hand. Beck will use this information in his play calling to have more of an educated guess as to where weaknesses will be in the defense. It also allows for smaller battles by getting men out of the box.

 

Winning with small battles: Nebraska purists love nothing more than to see a fullback and running the ball down the throat of the defense. There is nothing wrong with that. But trying to understand what Beck is doing from that mindset is not going to work. The classic running style is all about getting more bodies at the point of attack. However, due to the nature of a tighter formation there are more defenders able to help on a play. That is exactly what Beck is trying to avoid. The example below should show this more clearly.

 

Simple example demonstrating the differences assuming a running play from an I-formation and a defense in a base 4-3.

This scenario would give 7 blockers for 7 defenders and the running back does his best to find a hole in the crowd. Even if you pull a lineman and create a numerical advantage you still have 7 blockers for 6 defenders. The danger is that you have to have 6 successful blocks or risk the play being blown up. This is the key, for me at least.

Now, if you split out the tight end(and they actually have to honor him as a receiving threat) then you have removed 1 blocker and one defender from the equation. Everything else from above being the same, the net result is only needing 5 successful blocks. If you were to run a 4-wide set it lowers the number to only needing 4 successful blocks. Being able to effectively use a qb run game drops the number to 3. So, essentially, he would rather rely on 3/4 people being successful than 6.

 

This style is seen as gimmicky because it is not traditional and enables teams to neutralize talent deficiencies. It is all about finding what 3 or 4 guys on my team can compete with 3 or 4 of yours. Once you have that matchup figured out you just scheme it so the others players have as little impact on the play as possible.

 

Hope this helped.

 

 

 

 

He doesn't use a tight end in many of the plays already, he has the goofy double receiver set up like this.

 

x xxxxx x

x x x

x

 

It doesn't matter if it is a receiver or a tight end as long as it gets the defender out of the box.

Have Homer Simpson call me whatever you like. I am just trying to help the "3 yard and a cloud of dust" crowd understand what Beck is trying to do. The complaining about him won't stop, but hopefully be better informed.

Coach Becks concepts and philosophies are hard to understand, for me they are anyway. I don't quite understand what exactly he's trying to do. It seems there are so many variables. When I hear him speak, it's hard to follow the point he's trying to make. Often times I don't even believe he answers the question that was asked of him. I have hard enough time straining information when he speaks, but even when written out in print, in a long interview like this one, I still just come away from this wondering what in the heck Beck is trying to do.

 

I don't know how the players could learn from this guy. It seems like it would be difficult.

His verbiage certainly does not help but the concepts are not complicated. There are two driving principles: make the defense unable to disguise anything. And win with small battles rather than large ones.

Limiting the ability to disguise: By taking a legitimate receiving tight end and splitting him out wide you are able to force whoever is covering him to show their hand. This is even more visible when a linebacker is the one in coverage. It is hard enough to help in run support or cover a receiver so the defender will usually cheat towards their primary responsibility. Very few defenders are athletic enough to get away with not tipping their hand. Beck will use this information in his play calling to have more of an educated guess as to where weaknesses will be in the defense. It also allows for smaller battles by getting men out of the box.

Winning with small battles: Nebraska purists love nothing more than to see a fullback and running the ball down the throat of the defense. There is nothing wrong with that. But trying to understand what Beck is doing from that mindset is not going to work. The classic running style is all about getting more bodies at the point of attack. However, due to the nature of a tighter formation there are more defenders able to help on a play. That is exactly what Beck is trying to avoid. The example below should show this more clearly.

Simple example demonstrating the differences assuming a running play from an I-formation and a defense in a base 4-3.

This scenario would give 7 blockers for 7 defenders and the running back does his best to find a hole in the crowd. Even if you pull a lineman and create a numerical advantage you still have 7 blockers for 6 defenders. The danger is that you have to have 6 successful blocks or risk the play being blown up. This is the key, for me at least.

Now, if you split out the tight end(and they actually have to honor him as a receiving threat) then you have removed 1 blocker and one defender from the equation. Everything else from above being the same, the net result is only needing 5 successful blocks. If you were to run a 4-wide set it lowers the number to only needing 4 successful blocks. Being able to effectively use a qb run game drops the number to 3. So, essentially, he would rather rely on 3/4 people being successful than 6.

This style is seen as gimmicky because it is not traditional and enables teams to neutralize talent deficiencies. It is all about finding what 3 or 4 guys on my team can compete with 3 or 4 of yours. Once you have that matchup figured out you just scheme it so the others players have as little impact on the play as possible.

Hope this helped.

Some kids just love losing.

Things will always be different when they get there. Regardless, my money says he was promised to start from day one. Every kid likes to hear that.