Stickney

Any ideas on how to fix-it? Nope. Well, having an identity on offense would help a lot but it doesn't look like that's in the works at all. "Balance" has taken over Husker Nation (do everything but excel at nothing). Heck, I don't know. Maybe you have an idea? I know the old adage Defense wins championships, and that is true, to a certain degree, but football is a two sided coin and I have not been impressed with Bo's management of the Offense. As you said, identity would be nice. What made the Blackshirts so dominant in the 90s was half their skill and half the fact that the offense kept them off the field and gave them leads. Bo's offensive mantra is so conservative, so "play not to lose", that I think it manifests in an offense that lacks swagger and killer instinct (and then has a hard time overcoming adversity -- things just snowball). In Beck's defense, I will say that players missed FAR to many big play opportunities (drops, missed blocks, missed throws, missed wide open receivers). But, as you said, "heck, I don't know." And I concur with that.

The much maligned O-Line actually wasn't nearly as bad as anticipated. They performed quite well in the 1st half on Mon, and the 2nd half was a complete team melt-down. The D-Line is far more of an issue. Bo loves this "mush rush" for containing mobile QBs, but when the only person who can make a play on that QB is gone (David), there are issues looking forward. Perhaps there is wholesale improvement next year, who knows. I believe a new term was coined this year by this Dline -- what is the opposite of a "coverage sack"? A "no pressure completion."

Bo better be very good in house when explaining to parents why they should support their son going to NU and being the fodder for Bo's lunacy live on TV.

Has the culture changed? NU still seems remakably mistake-prone, penalty getting, undisciplined, and most problematic, unable to get out of its own way. When problems mount, they just keep mounting. That The OSU comeback is looking more and more like a complete aberration.

Any ideas on how to fix-it?

I don't know, I'd say those guys didn't play enough (Turner, Green, Heard, Bell . . . .) Well there's definitely an argument to be made there, I think. I see two sides - one telling me they weren't ready to play, the other saying to give em more of a chance. Agreed -- you just can't burn all 3 RB redshirts and then NOT use them as the season progresses. Lord knows Burkhead, superman status aside, could use a breather or 3 a game. Bell was excellent. Why Turner couldn't make the field is baffling (he was the leading receiver for the team at one point, after Wisky?). I would probably say that the Doghouse rumors regarding Turner and Moore were warranted, and that setting standards and maintaining discipline are solid goals. The problem with that is that I think we can all agree Bo's NU teams have been anything but disciplined & mistake free, so whatever they are trying doesn't translate onto the field.

Wow, well that is glass half full. I will agree, NU under Bo has proven time and again that it is a MNC contender in terms of beating itself with self-inflicted wounds.

Oh, I think Kelly gets plenty of press and hothead labeling. I would say it is a pretty large part of my perception of Kelly. And, in the same vein, Kelly hasn't exactly produced stellar results at ND either. Sorry, but Bo has brought this on himself. He got a horrible (perhaps not deserved) flag against VT in his first early National TV outing. And nearly each year he has provided another "highlight" moment of sideline antics. It was better this year, I guess (though that Chatelain nonsense after The OSU comeback was equally absurd), so hear's hoping progress continues.

Mich just went 11-2 and won the Sugar Bowl, in year one of Hoke. Think The OSU is going to take 5-10 yrs to rebuild under Meyer? And if NU isn't a tourist destination now, why and how did Devaney or Osborne ever get players here 20, 30, 40 years ago? If fans expectations aren't "unrealistic" then NU is just IA, 5 hours further west.

I don't know, I'd say those guys didn't play enough (Turner, Green, Heard, Bell . . . .)

He is absolutely right. Bo's demeanor has a serious negative effect on the players. One of the many negative effects would be losing focus. It affects their mindset. I'm sick of people defending him. Bo is the main problem. I understand wanting your coach to have that fire, but Bo does it in a toxic way. I'm telling you, look at a majority of successful coaches. NFL or college. They are calm, cool and collected and display the right amount of fire at the right time. Bo is toxic. Have you ever watched Nick Saban coach? If you haven't, you'd realize what you just said here is way off mark. As someone pointed out, however, the difference is that Saban is older and far more experienced, and has a championship tied to him. He gets away with it. Saban is even worse than Pelini at times, yet I don't see people calling him a toxin. Why? Because he wins, but he also has a lot more reason to win because of his experience, his experienced coaching staff and the wealth of talent he has. Pelini doesn't have any of those three things, so he's doing what he can. Bo isn't toxic, but he doesn't do himself or NU any favors in the PR department. For all the mocking of Mike "I'm a man" Gundy's infamous rant, his record and recruiting appears to have been positively effected since that event. It is very hard to say that Bo's fiery demeanor has benefitted NU on the recruiting front. There is a fine line between being "crazy" but positive looking to recruits and recruit's parents (Gundy), and just looking like a lout. Time will tell how it all works for Bo.

Agreed. I think the WRs don't trust where T-Mart will locate the ball and it means they are thinking "where is this ball gonna be" instead of just knowing it will be on target. So, even when the ball is on the numbers, so to speak, they are all mentally bollixed up and they drop the ball. I think we can all agree Kenny Bell is a gamer with good hands and has made some extraordinary catches, and even he had a long series of the dropsies at one point this season too.

Look, you can mock the comment, but the fact is true, he is late on reads, and until you can watch end zone camera angles all game, it is not readily apparent.

You are pointing out 2 things -- the litany of mistakes from a fundamentally unsound football team and that stats never tell the entire story. I agree with both of those thoughts.

I like to reference Swift and Petersen as sure handed as well, but credit needs to go Ganz and Z Taylor for being pretty accurate as well. What is accuracy to you then? Is it completion percentage alone, the point the ball contacts the receiver alone, or both combined? It's ridiculous to deny that we have churned out receivers over the last three years that simply drop balls that are not only "catchable" but just ridiculous to have dropped in the first place. I actually think you make a valid point, (oops, sorry, you didn't make the point) Taylor, Ganz, and Lee all had receivers (#24, Nunn) who routinely didn't go and get the ##$%#% BALL. The ball was on target, but the wideout allowed the DB to get a hand on the ball because the WR didn't make a play on the ball. In that example, the WR is at fault (Gilmore was the coach during this time). However, currently, the drops aren't usually a function of a WR NOT going for the ball. Conversely, and again, this is easier to see live at a game, NU has had receivers running free and open all season long. They have dropped way to many balls certainly. However, T-Mart has also been way late, innaccurate, or otherwise made an easy catch far more difficult far to often as well. It's not all T-Mart and it's not all WRs.

I like to reference Swift and Petersen as sure handed as well, but credit needs to go Ganz and Z Taylor for being pretty accurate as well.

About 3/4 of the way through the season I shared this philosophy. Than I started to look at those records past and present and came to a different conclusion. Losses are NOT the issue. Non-competitive losses, mistake prone, embarrassing losses, mental miscues etc are an issue. How many times in your life have you seen teams get 4 penalties in drive. How many times have you seen that under Bo in the past 4 years? The Chiefs did it this year. And this number is impossible to predict and there is a lot of fabrication by those who don't approve of him as a coach--but I bet this number is a lot lower than you all want to believe. Bringing up the Chiefs to disprove my point, I think, proves my point. haha. I think it is very hard to state that Bo's teams have been "disciplined", unless of course you think that the ref's flagging them and the resulting yardage penalty results in them being "disciplined."

First, the receivers have ALL dropped balls. Many have also made some outstanding grabs. On television lots of throws that a receiver gets his hands on look catchable. You even hear announcers say "He's got to make that catch." Then the announcers see the end zone view and they realize it was a much, much harder catch than it looked from the sideline angle and they tone down the rhetoric. I only was able to see two games in person (WA and IA). In both games, T-Mart played ok. But, from my end zone seats, it is very apparent how late he is with reads, windows, and deliveries. In big games, against good teams, those little issues are magnified and become the difference between winning and losing. Believe me, I would LOVE for T-Mart to take a major step forward, but 2 seasons of game tape don't show it to me. Here's hoping I am wrong.

About 3/4 of the way through the season I shared this philosophy. Than I started to look at those records past and present and came to a different conclusion. Losses are NOT the issue. Non-competitive losses, mistake prone, embarrassing losses, mental miscues etc are an issue. How many times in your life have you seen teams get 4 penalties in drive. How many times have you seen that under Bo in the past 4 years?

Sure. I'm venting. But venting does not make me a "fair weathered fan." The entire idea that if a fan utters a single complaint/vent/critique of a team equates them to being fair weather fans is ludicrous.

Exactly, Bo appears to have gone ALL in with T-Mart. If I were him, with 2 years of game tape to review, I would be beating the bushes for a JC QB commit to go along with the frosh QB commit (assuming he is a QB commit). As far as faith in Bo on QB issues -- last year's big 12 championship game coupled with the previous year's game pretty much sums up how Bo has managed that position. Keeping a hobbled, ineffected and possibly pretty injured Frosh QB in a game, while you have 2 experienced QBs, both supposedly healthy on the sideline is baffling. The year before, going so conservative in a "play not to lose fashion" when you are a huge underdog but your D is TOTALLY dominating . . . .

This 9 win resume really isn't that impressive. People keep hanging their hats on it as if it is a badge of honor. If 9-4, in year 4, with a returning QB starter is satisfying, fine, I'm not going to sway your opinion.

He didn't win the game for NU either. Neither did the other 20 some guys that played major minutes yesterday. Go ahead a make a thread for each and every one of them now about how they should be replaced. Good point. Bo makes a big show of saying all positions are always open, the OP said it, open up the QB race. Open up the O-Line race. Open up ALL the positions. The point here is that the QB position is a dominant position. A difference maker at that position can change game outcomes like no other (ref Cam Newton and Auburn). Or look at Alabama or LSU, they each have 21 superior guys, but both teams have mediocre talent at QB and hence their first game was a 9-6 snooze fest and not many are really expecting much different in the rematch. T-Mart may be good for 9 wins a season. If that is satisfactory for Bo, fine. If it isn't, well then Bo needs to make changes. My screaming on a message board, I can assure you, will be meaningless in the end.

If you are satisfied with that so be it.

He didn't win the game for NU either. Look, go watch many of the other bowl games yesterday. Lots of teams suffered turnovers. Lots of teams faced "adversity." Several of them fought through, fought back, won. NU showed again that when the going gets rough, well, it will just get rougher. There is a trend there that is unmistakable.