thatguy

1 hour ago, The Dude said:

 

So true, I just didn't want to be the one to say it.  Some of the best people I know lost parents at a young age.

Everyone who loses a parent early gets affected by that both mentally and emotionally. The environment and other adults can sometimes help with the damages, but the child at some point has to choose to find a reason to do better. Whether that is honoring the parent, proving something to everyone else around, choosing to become the lost parent for others, Jesus Christ, etc. 

if the child does not find it within to find that reason, it won’t be good for the child and everyone around. 
 

every child In that situation has to deal with that emotional/mental baggage somehow. It’s up to Maurice if he wants to. It’s still not too late, but he has to want to, even if he feels he can’t. 

13 minutes ago, Hayseed said:

I know some students on campus and none of us know anything about this.

Care to share more?

6 hours ago, Husker in WI said:

 

I'd have to see the numbers proving they are running at Jackson. They're absolutely running to the edges, but I think they're happy running left or right regardless of who we have on the edge. And running away from the dline does show it's a strength (or the rest of the D being a weakness), but stopping the run isn't everything. I haven't been impressed with our dline pass rushing for a while.

this isn’t about “numbers”. If you watch the tape, it’s clear as day.

about the d-lines pass rush, it’s a 3-4. You have to view their performance in light of what they are being asked to do. If you cannot objectively say that most of the dline players have played better than Lamar, you’re just not being objective.  
 

you don’t have to agree. You can like Lamar Jackson, and you are free to think that he is truly a first rounder. That’s fine too. But don’t be that person that just rejects the ability to be objective. It makes discussions worthless. 

1 hour ago, Husker in WI said:

 

There's argument for the dline, but I don't think it's a given. It's tough to compare different position groups - way easier to notice a DB's mistake than a dlineman, a lot of times we don't even know what the lineman's responsibilities are on a given play. The safeties are not playing better, they were both pretty bad against Minnesota overall.

 

 

I'd probably group them, like I said above it's tough to compare across postion groups. I think Darrion, Jojo, and Lamar have been our best 3 with Taylor-Britt and Stille/Davis twins not far behind. But I feel like Jojo has been disappearing a little bit, probably as teams adjust to how we're using him. And Khalil is probably on thin ice, a stupid personal foul your first game after being suspended is a bad look.

 

Jackson is not a good tackler, this is true. But I don't think he's any worse than our other corners for tackling, and his coverage has been by far the best this year. He's definitely blown a few, but so have the other guys.

again, i'd say when opponents are running away from an entire position group and running towards a specific player, and basing entire drives and concepts on said player, that's an objective indication that said player is an exploitable weakness for the team.

21 minutes ago, ActualCornHusker said:

 

I'd rank Cam Taylor-Britt as our best defender. Name another player who has performed better this year than Lamar

that's probably not as difficult as you might think.

he, #7, and #22 are constantly targeted in the run game with success. the entire d-line has played better, and the safeties have played better as well. 

51 minutes ago, ActualCornHusker said:

 

Let's not forget that Lamar was a terrible player until this staff got here and made him start playing with discipline. Now he's one of our best defensive players.

is he, really?

1 hour ago, TheSker said:

Ok....no idea what this means??

1 hour ago, C N Red said:

Just what he needs, another loonie trying to email him. Of course he needs to change things, but for crying out loud, give it some time. This place has been constantly broke for over 15 years, so its gonna take more than 2 years to fix. So many high and mighty cry baby husker fans. You all should find a better team to root for, and leave the rest of us sorry sacks.

Just so we’re clear, this is exactly what was said about Riley, and to some extent, bo pelini. So I suppose the question is, what exactly in the first 19 games can you point to as proof that somehow things will be better next year? 
I like frost. But it’s silly to act like anyone who has concerns about the product on the field is crazy. There are serious issues in Lincoln. They won’t magically get fixed just because the head coach is a former player, or because he had success elsewhere, or because you “believe”. He still has to make the right moves in all areas. So far, he hasn’t. That’s the issue here. 

21 hours ago, Husker in WI said:

 

I am weighing the recent turnovers more heavily because the team has made progress since the first games. Obviously not as much as we'd like. The "few low hanging apples" happen to be the only apples because we're talking about 5 turnovers, or if you are only talking about fumbles we're down to 2.

 

I've shifted my arguments because it went from "Martinez has the most turnovers" to "Martinez fumbles too much" to "I was speaking generally, you're missing the orchard for the apples. The "orchard" of fumbles in the past 4 games is literally 2 fumbles against Illinois. Not sure where else I'm supposed to focus. I will grant you against USA and Colorado Martinez was too fumble prone, I am and have been arguing he has fixed that for the most part.

 

I'm going to be a little pedantic here:

 

You cannot use an absolute (funnily enough the absolute you used "absolutely") if you're excluding specific cases. It is an absolute, by definition it encompasses all of the specific cases. "Absolutely nothing" does refer to every single individual fumble because it is an absolute, you've left no room to say "except for these ones." If you'd said "almost nothing to do with" I would have no issue with your argument, I would just disagree. But you can't argue an absolute and then claim it wasn't intended to refer to every case. I'm being pedantic sure, but words do matter.

well at least you admit to shifting the goalposts.

at this point you are only interested in being right as opposed to actually having a conversation. all of my posts to you have been consistent. they were me trying to explain my initial post. i can't help you if you can't or won't understand the simple things i wrote in english, especially if you are the only one seeing things that way.

here's the crux of what i'm saying: we have two quarterbacks who have seen significant playing time. both are dealing with poorly coached receivers, inconsistent snaps, bad playcalling, and poor o-line play. quarterback A is definitely more talented, but has made poor decisions, and has fumbled and turned the ball over more than every other FBS player in the time he has played. Quarterback B, in the 1.5 games he has played, has not fumbled, has not turned the ball over, and has been more decisive with the football than QB A.

those are facts. deal with it. or don't. your problem.

6 minutes ago, Husker in WI said:

You're right, your second post is specific to fumbles. Which he has done twice since Illinois, and one was on the line. 

 

Your initial post said:

Martinez has turned the ball overmore than any other Division 1 player this season. that has nothing to do with the o-line. 

 

Don't see anything eliminating the INTs there. 

 

I guess my point is he has largely cleaned up the carrying the ball loosely fumbles since Colorado. And I believe the line is partially responsible for a lot of his turnovers in general. We can disagree on how much. 

so your whole argument against my orchard argument is to point to a few low-hanging apples? 

ok. keep in mind, you have shifted the goalposts twice now in your responses to me. as is the case when talking about the program, no matter the coach, you will always find those who will defend anything and everything, no matter what facts may be available.

5 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

No....they said they do more correcting in the film room by showing them what they are doing wrong. 
 

This is not saying they don’t “rep” plays in practice. 

i can appreciate that... but if you are repping and not correcting players who seem to have always had issues with the culture of proper execution, that's a massive waste of time. that would explain the issues we are having with execution on gameday.

5 minutes ago, Husker in WI said:

 

 

 

 

I get your opinion, I just disagree. And there are inconsistencies in using phrases like "absolutely nothing to do with," and then saying only "most" of the issue aren't on the line. Is it absolutely nothing or is it some of the time, it can't be both.

 

And I just disagree in general, but that's subjective. He needs better ball security for sure, but several of the fumbles have been affected by the line. His turnovers since Illinois:

 

1) Illinois fumbled read option. Seems like he tried to give and the back had already given up. Hard to assign blame here, although the entire play was blown up -probably why the back assumed he wasn't getting the ball. He was the right read, but had no room anyway. Either way partially on Martinez and on the back, but I would argue the line is partially to blame as well.

2) Sack Fumble! Surprise!

3) INT #1 against OSU - heck of a play by the defender, and Wan'dale needed to stay flat to no be undercut. Partially Martinez, and since he was flushed from the pocket almost before he caught the snap I give some blame to the line.

4) INT #2 against OSU - not a good throw, but freakishly weird that it was picked anyway. Also had Farniok in his lap, so partially on the line. If he can step into that throw, it's a TD.

5) INT #3 - entirely on Martinez.

 

So at least 3 (and I would argue 4) of the last 5 had the line at least contributing.

put those phrases in context. they are only inconsistent if you are trying to make false arguments.

the first one, "absolutely nothing to do with..." is referring to the property of giving up the most fumbles, and not referring to every single individual fumble. "most" then points specifically to the individual fumbles. apples vs the orchard. forest vs trees. 

you can disagree all you want, but don't take my posts out of context. nowhere in my posts did i point to any interception. 

12 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

Wait....you don't think Nebraska practices plays over and over again repetitiously? 

that cannot possibly be the case, if they're not focusing on corrections during the practice. at the very least, they aren't repeating plays enough times to get proficient.

1 hour ago, Husker in WI said:

 

 

 

 

It has a lot to do with the oline. I like how you insist Martinez's problems don't, but obviously Vedral was limited by the terrible line. Vedral wasn't the problem in this game, but I didn't see anything better than Martinez at any point. With the benefit of good snaps.

show me where i said martinez' problems have nothing to do with the o-line.

disagree all you want, but giving up the most fumbles in the FBS has absolutely nothing to do with the o-line. it takes one player to hold on to the ball. not 6. and most of the fumbles are NOT sack-fumbles either. both quarterbacks have issues being created for them by the o-line. one of them, who is definitely more talented, has compounded issues and made things worse with his decision making and how he handles the ball. the other quarterback hasn't.

that's fact.

8 hours ago, BartonHusker said:

 

That is what film time is for, to correct the mistakes and be able to show the player(s) then without wasting practice time. If you spent practice time correcting every little mistake done, you would never get any reps in or very limited. Not every mistake is seen during practice either. That is why they are filmed from different angles in the first place. Coaches break down the practice film after practice and make the cut-ups accordingly. The coaches are 100% doing it the right way.

 

i honestly hope so, because on the surface, it makes a ton of sense. but when you look deeper, and you see execution issues only getting worse, to the point where we can't get lined up right on offense, we keep overrunning plays on defense, we keep having execution errors, and worst of all, we keep getting destroyed against teams that go up-tempo. all the while, with all the plays they run in practice, they keep telling us the MAJORITY of players that have been here for almost 2 years just aren't ready yet. clearly something is getting lost in translation.

in my opinion, i think you can only do things that way when you  have established a culture and program foundation where the basics are not a concern, and you have your accountability perfected, where you just can't get away with poor execution. that's not the case here.

2 minutes ago, BIG ERN said:

Just because you hold onto the ball and don't turn it over doesn't mean you were 'making plays'. Noah didn't play bad tonight but if ppl really think he is better than AM, you're drunk. 

vedral played better than adrian martinez has all season. go watch the tape. his decision making was better. 

that's not the same as saying that he's better or more talented than martinez. that's been the issue all season: martinez is not playing anywhere near what he is capable of, for multiple reasons, both internal and external.

1 hour ago, Decked said:

Keep in mind Vedral actually had some decent snaps tonight. Adrian didn’t have that luxury. 

in games that martinez had decent snaps, he still made poor decisions. 

Martinez has turned the ball overmore than any other Division 1 player this season. that has nothing to do with the o-line. vedral in this game was definitely limited by the o-line. but when there were no penalties or whiffed blocks, he made plays. thats more than we can say for martinez.

let me start by saying I LIKE FROST. i want him to win here, and i think he will. but in my opinion, i think the issues with this team boil down to one thing: just being intentional about exactly what it is you want to see as a coach. that's what separates good/great coaches from the rest. i'm not sure we are being intentional about the simple things, and its showing.

- correction in practice. if practice is as high tempo as it supposedly is, how much time do they actually spend teaching and correcting? i'm pretty sure someone said last year that they actively do not spend time correcting, but rather, they focus on reps, and address corrections in the film room. maybe we need to adjust that a bit.

- player management. i don't think it's right for anyone to say they have no talent on this team. there is talent. but inexplicably, you only have wandale, spielman, and martinez, with a regressing washington and a limited mills. i find it hard to believe that those are the only guys we've been able to get ready, in spite of injuries. it's not right that you can't play other guys until someone gets hurt. that's just not going to work. there's no way in heck that guys will be ready when their number is called. 

- coaches keep talking about waiting for playmakers to make play. that just doesn't sound right to me. i submit that if you are "waiting" for these playmakers, then that means you are not actively preparing them mentally and physically to perform when the lights are brightest. that needs to change. i know players play, coaches coach, but ultimately, there is something to be said for making sure players are ready to be fundamentally football players. these players haven't looked ready to play in any game this season, except maybe south alabama.

- coaching leadership. every week this season, the head coach has mentioned one player, and in most cases, mentioned a specific point of emphasis, and then another coach has come out and said something opposite, or the things the head coach mentions just shown up on gameday. the staff can be as close knit and familial as they want, but ultimately, i still contend that they aren't all on the same page. something is going on that we won't hear about. i can cite examples, but my post is too long already.

- being too cute, outhinking yourself, making adjustments in game. nothing more needs to be said. sometimes you have to move away from part of your gameplan in game or in season, really. you have to be humble enough to do so sometimes.

- you can't always coach effort, but you definitely don't have to allow poor effort either. this head coach said last year that there was no difference between "you can't" and "you won't". well, time to field only players who are willing. at least, that means we will have one of those two.

1 hour ago, DefenderAO said:

Urban Meyer used to coach OSU's ST unit.  Day puts his best athletes there...

 

It's important.  

 

I think Greg Austin needs to go.  DeWitt in general needs to go.  Maybe Chinander.  I'm not sold on the QB Whisperer.

 

 

unfortunately, frost just doesn't really rate special teams. Dewitt needs to go. sorry for all he's been through, but there's nothing assigned to him that's doing well. OLB recruiting has even been the worst of the team. 

if chinander moves on, i'll be shocked. in a good way. but Frost isn't letting him go. greg austin performance, i just don't understand. he's supposedly is a great coach.

Just now, 3rd and long said:

That’s true, but if you think back, and look very objectively, I do believe things, silly penalties, technique, etc really are all getting better all the time. It’s taken longer than I thought it would, but it is getting better. Think back just a few short years and remember how ridiculously bad it was under Riley. 

I hope so. I actually agree with you About the development in many areas. 

23 minutes ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

That's weird logic. Most of those after the first 110 are walk ons who haven't been with the program for even 2 years yet. We can expect going forward to produce a really good walk on here and there, and to have better scout teams which will improve the rest of the team. Higher volume isn't going to produce a bunch of elite players overnight. I'm guessing we have a walk on who can snap the ball well, but is probably so deficient when it comes to talent and size that it offsets that ability.

We still need recruiting, for sure. Point is, lots of teams out there are rated much lower than us in recruiting, yet they show better technique, execution and organization. Proper technique will always give you a chance. Focus on that and you will see better success. 

17 minutes ago, WyoHusker56 said:

 

So the starters aren't executing the plays right, but you think the guys who can't pass them on the depth chart can. Usually there is a reason they're a backup and it's because they can't do what the starter is doing. Everyone is always enthralled with the backups. 

The starters not executing is a symptom of a larger coaching problem, imo. 

Again, the point of this thread in the first place was that backups should be developed to be able to step in when needed for any reason, such as last night. Starting wr got hurt, and backup didn’t seem like he could contribute much. 

This isn't about supplanting the starters, but about developing others on the roster. 

If you have a roster of over 140 people and you are waiting on recruiting to be able to execute simple plays well, you’re doing it wrong. 

6 hours ago, Nebfanatic said:

Woodyard was on the field a few plays and honestly I think one of the plays he was meant to be the target but early pressure got to am

So.. just the one possible target for a guy who the head coach openly said NEEDS to be more involved? 

On 9/24/2019 at 10:40 AM, WyoHusker56 said:

Most teams have 2-3 receivers that get the bulk of the work. Frost likes to use TEs and RBs in his passing game too so they eat up a chunk of the passes. We're averaging 17.5 completed passes per game on 28 attempts so there hasn't been a ton of passes to go around and some guys might be dropping their opportunities.

 

In the last couple weeks Mike Williams and Noa are seeing more opportunities and I imagine that'll continue, but that is already 4 receivers and that's a decent rotation. So, the other guys likely aren't seeing a ton of snaps.

As far as RB's go a lot of teams have maybe 2 guys get the bulk of the work and NU has basically had 3 with Wandale. So, there isn't a lot of time beyond those 3. I know people like Mazour and I think he continues to see spot work, but he averaged 3.0 YPC against USA and NIU. His two carries against Illinois looked good so he may see a bit more work. As far as Rahmir he has only played against NIU so far that I can remember so I am guessing a redshirt there. All of our RBs besides Mazour are back next year so we don't need him now unless he's far and away better in practice.

i think today's game shows that there needs to be some type of adjustment to the way wider receivers and running backs are prepared to play. in the past two weeks, frost mentioned woodyard, rahmir johnson, and mcquitty.

then they all come on the field for ome play eash, where they are used as decoys, then sent back to the sideline.

and then JD got hurt. there's officially something wrong somewhere.

1 hour ago, Undone said:

This topic is good bulletin board material but in my opinion, the only things that matter (in this order) are:

 

1. What are your team's passing yard numbers?

2. Are the guys that are primarily on the field in shape enough to handle all of the snaps?

 

That's it. There really isn't much more of a discussion. If they're in shape and you're racking up a lot of passing yards, that's all that matters.

those are the two central questions, but its a long season man. it would be a hard to look back and see that the reason why the offense sputtered out at some points (if it does), is because backups were not prepared in live moments. it's all about preparation and hedging your bets.