Mavric

This. In talking about the other three guys listed that needed experience I look at the second half of the OSU game as a huge example of bad management. Cav kept his starting five in for the whole thing. Decker, Barnett and Gaylord should have been inserted there. Going against OSU's twos and threes would have been far more of learning experience than mop up non conference snaps. I've been an advocate for rotating guys up front. At least you'll find out pretty fast with what ya got. Milt Tenopir never had a rotation for his linemen and we did pretty welll under his tutelage. I'm not saying Milt never substituted linemen, I'm just saying he never had a set rotation. So I don't think rotating the offensive linemen is a huge deal personally. i think some people quite often confuse substitution and in-game development with "set rotation". the idea is not necessarily to have every lineman play every other series, or some other predetermined schedule. The concept here is that if you are serious about having competent backup linemen, you MUST find meaningful snaps for your backup linemen in both games that matter and games that are less important in the grand scheme of things. doesn't have to be a predetermined order. it can be a "feel" type of thing, based on how the game is going (not just blowouts). some games they might play more snaps than other games. but to have it set in stone that you just don't rotate linemen in, unless the starters' legs are broken or something similar is pretty silly. that decker and barnett could not spell hobbled starters for any number of snaps at all should tell you something is wrong. That's easy to do if you are up by 30. We haven't had that luxury. Not sure what the issue was with Decker. But, the issues with Barnett are pretty well known and it's not a problem with the coaching staff. I'm not at all convinced that there is such a dropoff that you'd have to be up by 30 to play them. I don't see why you can't have 2-3 backups that get one series each per half. Give them a chance to get in there but still play the starters the vast majority of the time. But I'm not even so worried about the games. Speculation on my part but from the way Cav talks about it - and reading nothing to the contrary from practice reports - it's always just the starting group together in practice. I definitely think you need to be working some other guys in there. If Cav's big deal is "chemistry" then what happens when you're forced to play a backup due to injury or whatever? Now you have zero chemistry with that guy because you never gave him a chance. And it's pretty unlikely that you'll be able to go through the entire season with only five guys. We've proved that for years. Look, I do know a little about FB, coach at the A level for 15 years. You practice your O-line as a unit, First team, second team, etc. If you truly have someone that is close yeah our throw them in the mix. That is true when Milt was the coach or Cav was the coach. When some one is hurt you move the next guy up. Milt always wanted a swing guard and tackle if he had someone that was that good, but it doesn't always happen that way. When you are up 31-0 against Iowa St. with 6 minutes left in the 2nd quarter, yeah it is great to see the #2 unit in the game. That is what we all remember, and that is what happened. You didn't see that against Miami or FSU in a close game. When I coach HS the only ST unit any O-linemen were on was PAT/FG and that was practiced 1 day a week thursday for about 15 minutes. Otherwise we spend a good half hour on the other ST every practice. ST practice time was extra unit time for them. That is how important we thought it was for the O-line to function as a unit. I definitely think Cav could work a little harder to get some backups playing time. But, I don't think he is way off base the way he runs the O-line. So we pretty much agree on everything. Good.

This. In talking about the other three guys listed that needed experience I look at the second half of the OSU game as a huge example of bad management. Cav kept his starting five in for the whole thing. Decker, Barnett and Gaylord should have been inserted there. Going against OSU's twos and threes would have been far more of learning experience than mop up non conference snaps. I've been an advocate for rotating guys up front. At least you'll find out pretty fast with what ya got. Milt Tenopir never had a rotation for his linemen and we did pretty welll under his tutelage. I'm not saying Milt never substituted linemen, I'm just saying he never had a set rotation. So I don't think rotating the offensive linemen is a huge deal personally. i think some people quite often confuse substitution and in-game development with "set rotation". the idea is not necessarily to have every lineman play every other series, or some other predetermined schedule. The concept here is that if you are serious about having competent backup linemen, you MUST find meaningful snaps for your backup linemen in both games that matter and games that are less important in the grand scheme of things. doesn't have to be a predetermined order. it can be a "feel" type of thing, based on how the game is going (not just blowouts). some games they might play more snaps than other games. but to have it set in stone that you just don't rotate linemen in, unless the starters' legs are broken or something similar is pretty silly. that decker and barnett could not spell hobbled starters for any number of snaps at all should tell you something is wrong. That's easy to do if you are up by 30. We haven't had that luxury. Not sure what the issue was with Decker. But, the issues with Barnett are pretty well known and it's not a problem with the coaching staff. I'm not at all convinced that there is such a dropoff that you'd have to be up by 30 to play them. I don't see why you can't have 2-3 backups that get one series each per half. Give them a chance to get in there but still play the starters the vast majority of the time. But I'm not even so worried about the games. Speculation on my part but from the way Cav talks about it - and reading nothing to the contrary from practice reports - it's always just the starting group together in practice. I definitely think you need to be working some other guys in there. If Cav's big deal is "chemistry" then what happens when you're forced to play a backup due to injury or whatever? Now you have zero chemistry with that guy because you never gave him a chance. And it's pretty unlikely that you'll be able to go through the entire season with only five guys. We've proved that for years. I didn't say you needed to be up by 30. I said it's easier to do it if you're up by 30. Yes, I know. Make an argument without actually making an argument. That way you can argue against someone without them being able to argue back. Point is it's not that it can't be done. It's that it hasn't been done.

Masry fits the scheme better IMO. That's entirely possible. Definitely seems to be closer to the DT we need. Doesn't help the risk involved, though. The other possibility is Willaims might be able to play DE. Which would make it a little easier to take both but still tough with short numbers.

This. In talking about the other three guys listed that needed experience I look at the second half of the OSU game as a huge example of bad management. Cav kept his starting five in for the whole thing. Decker, Barnett and Gaylord should have been inserted there. Going against OSU's twos and threes would have been far more of learning experience than mop up non conference snaps. I've been an advocate for rotating guys up front. At least you'll find out pretty fast with what ya got. Milt Tenopir never had a rotation for his linemen and we did pretty welll under his tutelage. I'm not saying Milt never substituted linemen, I'm just saying he never had a set rotation. So I don't think rotating the offensive linemen is a huge deal personally. i think some people quite often confuse substitution and in-game development with "set rotation". the idea is not necessarily to have every lineman play every other series, or some other predetermined schedule. The concept here is that if you are serious about having competent backup linemen, you MUST find meaningful snaps for your backup linemen in both games that matter and games that are less important in the grand scheme of things. doesn't have to be a predetermined order. it can be a "feel" type of thing, based on how the game is going (not just blowouts). some games they might play more snaps than other games. but to have it set in stone that you just don't rotate linemen in, unless the starters' legs are broken or something similar is pretty silly. that decker and barnett could not spell hobbled starters for any number of snaps at all should tell you something is wrong. That's easy to do if you are up by 30. We haven't had that luxury. Not sure what the issue was with Decker. But, the issues with Barnett are pretty well known and it's not a problem with the coaching staff. I'm not at all convinced that there is such a dropoff that you'd have to be up by 30 to play them. I don't see why you can't have 2-3 backups that get one series each per half. Give them a chance to get in there but still play the starters the vast majority of the time. But I'm not even so worried about the games. Speculation on my part but from the way Cav talks about it - and reading nothing to the contrary from practice reports - it's always just the starting group together in practice. I definitely think you need to be working some other guys in there. If Cav's big deal is "chemistry" then what happens when you're forced to play a backup due to injury or whatever? Now you have zero chemistry with that guy because you never gave him a chance. And it's pretty unlikely that you'll be able to go through the entire season with only five guys. We've proved that for years.

Yeah, we may have worked ourselves into a tough spot here. Change of scheme put a crunch on the numbers and we may have jumped the gun a bit on Masry. Reports are Williams is the better player now and probably a safer bet while Masry may have a bit more upside but is more of a risk.

No it wasn't, I didn't expect a win. I was expecting MSU to come out on fire. They are playing for their tournament life right now and this was a game they just couldn't lose. Kind of like us.

Player: Aaron Young Hometown: Coatesville, Pennsylvania School: Coatesville Position: Running Back Height: 5-11 Weight: 185 40 time: Offers: Army, Nebraska, Rutgers Visits: Twitter 247 Composite: Rivals: 247: Scout: ESPN: Hudl

Player: Jaquayln Crawford Hometown: Rockdale, Texas School: Rockdale Position: Cornerback, Wide Receiver Height: 5-10 Weight: 170 40 time: Offers: Baylor, Colordao, Florida, Houston, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, Notre Dame, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, SMU, TCU, Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Tulsa, Vanderbilt Visits: Twitter 247 Composite: #172 Overall; #5 ATH; .9232; :star :star Rivals: #23 ATH; :star 247: #135 Overall; #3 ATH; :star :star Scout: #267 Overall; #51 WR; :star :star ESPN: #134 Overall; #14 ATH; :star :star Hudl

We had Blades as a silent commit so we told him we were good.

Had pretty much moved on from us by last fall because he didn't connect well with Stewart.

He wanted to commit after the spring game last year but he was down our list so we wouldn't take his commitment at that time.

Battle to stay out of the play-in on Sunday...

Congrats to seaofred92 for being the 2017 HuskerBoard Predictor Champion. Correctly picked 84 recruits. nphuskers12 was second with 79. huskerfan92 was third with 78. Apparently having a handle with the number 2 in it is the key to this contest. Results and Standings

Yes. Sorry for the delay. I tried to go through on NSD and check on all the signees but not everyone had signed yet. Then I forgot to get back to it. Done now.

Not a great showing on the heels of all the hot seat talk....