presidentjlh

Well now that the Huskers have actually shown they can control a game and roundly beat a team with inferior talent, I am cautiously hopeful that the same can be done. They do throw a lot which is relatively a weaker area for our defense as opposed to our lockdown rushing defense, but I think a similar result to what we saw against Northern Illinois is very doable. Again, it's going to come down to basic fundamentals of holding onto the ball and playing disciplined, which of course has been our struggle for 20 years, so I'm not going to be super confident just yet. But I feel a little more comfortable than last week.

5 minutes ago, HuskerX said:

Starters should not lose their status due to injury. When Sims gets healthy, he should start again unless the coaches pull him for poor performance.

It is not because of his injury. It is because he turned the ball over more than anyone in the country when he was healthy.

All I have seen is that Sims has proven a complete inability to hold onto the ball in even the most basic of situations and Haarberg has not shown such. For me, there is no question unless and until Haarberg struggles himself.

Yes, it was Northern Illinois. Obviously that is a caveat. But right now, Haarberg should obviously be the starter until his play shows otherwise. Quite simply, he did not produce needless, unforced turnovers at the same rate as Sims. Yes, there was that one throw. I'm not going to say "MY GOSH THIS MAN'S A WORLDBEATER!" But, frankly, with him, we probably get the win over Minnesota because he turns it over at least one less time.

Again, I want to clarify, I am not saying he's the real deal. But, I think it'd be madness to go with Sims right now because Sims has done nothing but show an inability to maintain possession at a level I have never seen.

2 hours ago, TGHusker said:

Hey, I'd like to have that 2011 record:  9-4 ended up ranked # 24.  Beat Ohio State and PSU, Mini, and Iowa in the same year and lost to Michigan and Wiscy (both badly by almost the same exact score). Lost to NW closely (aren't they all) and SC in the bowl game.  

We didn't know how good we had it.  

I get you but to me it's not truly a great season unless you win the conference or finish with less than 4 losses.

30 minutes ago, HuskerInLostWages said:

At this point, I don't think we win anything until the game is played.  We can't take anything for granted as this team seems to always find ways to f up a wet dream.  It seems if it's impossible to screw up anymore of an unknown way, we go and find that way.  

We have the talent that the 75% chance would make sense, but yes, this team has been a mental case in the extreme for over 5 years now. I would never bet on them as a sure thing.

3 hours ago, Hagg said:

 

From 2011!

 

That post has been repeated almost word for word over a long time here at Husker Forums.  My bringing it up now is only for the purpose of reminding us just how long we've been saying these things (and how long the hope has been going on).

 

12 years of this or versions of this (probably more like 15 years, but our record was better slightly earlier on.. and gradually fading).

 

Ever do this?  Go down memory lane and see how long we've been saying the same things?  Coach after coach.  Good recruit after good recruit.  And a few AD changes as well.

 

It's been suggested that there's a "curse," having to do with removing Coach Solich after he faltered a bit then righted the ship and deserved to remain.  I don't believe in such things, but I do think there's something in the air so to speak in the Husker football program.  We're now a perennially losing school.  We're now not expected to become much better at all, for the near or far future (a review of the Minnesota game contained the phrase, "Nebraska was.. well, Nebraska").  It's being pointed out that all the money in the world can't fix it because there's an inertia "that we often see as natural part of things in the sports world."  We only hope now for an expected win here and there, and maybe 4,5, or 6 in a season (not this one of course). 

 

Husker fans are Husker fans, so we'll always hope for the very best.  But we keep looking for solutions "out there" in Coach & Great Player Land.  That can be helpful at some schools, but it has NOT worked here to go out and hire coaches and bring in recruits with proven abilities.  Gradually over time they have come here and stumbled then fallen.. and here we are.

 

I'd say more like 20 years at this point, with some glimpses of good things in the late 2000s-early 2010s.

1 hour ago, runningblind said:

No one wants to hear this, but our success for 30+ years was the epitome of lightning in a bottle.  The fact that we can't figure it out now is pretty much explained by the fact that we don't border, or are even near, one of the recruit hot spots (California, Florida/Georgia, Ohio/Pennsylvania).  We were ahead of the curve in being on TV, with inventing strength and conditioning, with the partial qualifiers and having extra scholarships to use.  That is all gone now and we aren't ever going to get back to that level again in all reality.  We are struggling to even win 6/7 games currently, and our realistic ceiling is Iowa/Wisconsin levels unless a recruiting miracle happened.  IMHO, that miracle was Dylan Raiola and the guys he could have brought with him in 2024, and we needed to throw anything and everything at him, but we didn't.  You have to capitalize on opportunities like that to get back, plain and simple.  We are never again going to have a legacy recruit who is the #1 ranked QB overall who has the potential to change the direction of a program. Here is an article from 2015, talking about states with schools that have won national championships, and the states they border. 

 

https://www.teamspeedkills.com/2015/2/10/8013855/college-football-recruiting-map-explained

 

We are the asterisk and outlier in the history of college football, and the reasons are what I explained before with our advantages. 

If the day comes where we accept this, I can finally stop being a fan and move on with my life.

2 hours ago, huskerfan702 said:

It’s funny that the last decade majority of the fan base has felt the sky isn’t falling and we will figure it out. Hindsight is 20/20 and now we know the talent and operational process hasn’t been close. I’m not rooting against Rhule but I’m not giving his “builder” label justification based on a few winning seasons. The most alarming to me is he seems to say what the fan base wants to hear and at this point of constant failure he isn’t getting the patience that frost got so he better show some life fast. Attaching this season to Sims and our other incapable QBs is baffling considering he literally said he wished he went after an elite QB sooner in Carolina. I do like the explosive athletes he has recruited and it’s nice to see D lineman who actually do something. The future still might be decent but can he find a real QB and can he actually coach well enough to justify that salary I’m not betting on it

I jumped off the Frost bandwagon about a couple years in, so I feel fair in saying that obviously it would be insane to even consider firing Rhule at this point. I think what a lot of this comes from for you and other fans is justified though in being concerned, because the fact is this:

For the past 20 years, we have watched other programs immediately jump from being garbage to excellent in the span of one or two seasons. Heck, even Pelini took us immediately to 9 wins his first season (his problem being that his floor and his ceiling were one in the same). Every year, we watch a program who has floundered suddenly put it together and succeed again. Look at Tennessee last year. Hell, look at Texas, who fell down and now is back up again.

The simple fact is, of all the blue bloods who had a tumble, outside of maybe Miami (which to me is inexplicable) we are the only one who has continued to struggle for so long. We haven't even gotten the joy of one truly great season. We have had to essentially eat s#!t for 20 years, with only two seasons even approaching what I'd consider great in 2009 and 2010, and even then they did not get there. I was 8 years old when we last even won a conference championship, and I am 32 now. That's absurd to me. Literally no one save a few non-traditional students in UNL's undergraduate program was alive when we were last good. None.

So, this fanbase is right to be absolutely frustrated, because frankly, it does seem like horses#!t that everyone else gets to actually bounce back, even if just for one season, but we don't.

46 minutes ago, corncraze said:

You’ve nailed it on the talent point. It’s not good enough. A development approach can get us to Iowa’s level if done right. I don’t think that’s acceptable. Our program was one of the few blue bloods in the sport. Accepting mediocrity is a slap in the face to decades of earned success. 

 

We were told we had one of the best NIL set-ups in the country - that it would be a real game-changer for us. Either we negligently aren’t using it to its full capability (if much at all) or we were lied to. I tend to think it’s the former given we can find $300-700m for stadium upgrades and $150m for new training facilities.

Well getting to Iowa's level at this point should be the goal, for now. I think that's fair enough to say that we need to get there first anyways before we can start worrying about becoming great again.

1 minute ago, gobiggergoredder said:

3 and out every series is probably worse.

 

Not sure what many of you think will happen when they put in a QB that can't throw and is not a run threat.  I can tell you.  They will load the box.

 

Since both options suck, you stick with Sims.  The coaches know it.  Some of the general pop can't figure out how obvious it is.

 

Option 1:  Move the ball, high chance of turnover

Option 2:  Don't move the ball at all

Well if that happens, sure, then we switch it up. My point isn't "Switch from Sims and never go back to him." My point is: At this point might as well try something else to see if it clicks.

2 minutes ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

I agree. Trev is a good AD, and is certainly much better than Bill Moos.

 

That being said, he hired a coach with the strategy that they would try and take players that aren't very talented or rated very highly and "develop" them into a good football product. It's a dangerous strategy - if it doesn't work, years of bad football players pile up and it becomes all that much more difficult to correct.

 

That being said, the reality of Nebraska is that they probably can't recruit enough talent no matter who they hire and they have no choice but to go the route of "development". Trev knows the recruiting limitations of Nebraska and the caliber of player they can realistically recruit. This is coming from probably the most negative poster in the recruiting forums who regularly complains about the quality of players Nebraska is bringing into the program. It just isn't good enough.

I agree, although I will note that winning is the best recruiting tool. So I can live with this system if we see improvement. I admit, I am more optimistic on recruiting. There are limits, but I think you can get talent anywhere. Yeah, a lot of guys won't go for the location, but not every guy is that way. Nebraska pulled star recruits when it was great. So I am not as worried about recruiting long term if you can show that you're building a program.

Just now, niu007 said:

NIU fan here

 

...

 

(and we rarely force turnovers)

 

... 

Oh trust me, your boys won't need to do a thing to get those turnovers.

8 minutes ago, unl7fan said:

You guys are all proving my point. Locked in the bubble of Nebraska. Instead of coming up with open minded responses you disregard what you don’t want to hear. 

Question: What do you propose I do about it?

8 minutes ago, suh_fan93 said:

 

That's insanity, I do not care that the other options might be worse, because frankly, how? How could they be worse? How could it really get any worse than 7 turnovers in two games? I suppose 8 turnovers or more, but hell, at that point, what's the difference?

21 minutes ago, TGHusker said:

I don't think I've ever recalled as much hype for a team on what should be a neutral sports cast as I saw wt Fox and all things Sanders.  Aflac commercials, other commercials, pre-game, post-game and all throughout the game.  It was nauseating to watch a network 'prostitute' themselves like that.  You think it was the 2nd Coming of Jesus.  It sure would have been nice to have forced some humble pie on both Sanders, the team and the network.  I thought we had a great opportunity to do so until Sims started being 'sims'.  Lost opportunity and we wasted a wonderful effort by the Blackshirts.  The open field tackling is 100% improved over last year.  If the O can learn to be disciplined and pound the rock, we may win a few games with our D playing at the level they are capable of.  

Oh it was totally a tongue bath, but I figure there's nothing that we can control about that. I was hoping the same, to come out and make them eat it a bit. What is most frustrating is that on defense, until they were gassed by the offense failing so badly, they absolutely were hitting them in the mouth.

5 minutes ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

There's no reason to believe we can't lose any game. There's also no reason to believe we can't win any game (except Michigan. No way.) Adjustments will be made, enough to win a few games, and that includes rebooting the QB position. 

 

In fact, I'll bet we cut turnovers in half this week. Only two! Put a pin in it. 

 

Two turnovers shouldn't be enough to cost us the game, sure. But at this point, I'm still very skeptical from what I've seen, because most of the turnovers have been unforced. I can live with the occasional forced turnover, I don't expect ball carriers to be superhuman or for QBs to thread the needle perfectly where there's no other option. It's the unforced stuff that I know drives us nuts.

Even if Rhule doesn't work out, this absolutely is not on Trev, who has done everything on his end so far exactly as I would want a good athletic director to do. He doesn't take bs, he is all business, he doesn't care if its his buddy that has a position, either put up results or get lost. It's been a while since we had such an AD.

And if you see my other posts, you know I'm very much not an understanding type, so take what I say seriously here: Trev is not the problem. Not one bit. Can that change in the future? Sure. But right now, I don't see anything that has concerned me, nothing where I'm like "What the hell was that?"

I see zero reason to believe we win this game or any other at this point. You don't win any games when you turn the ball over on average 4 times a game.

1 minute ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

Obvious the turnovers are the biggest knock on Sims, but what really sealed the deal for me was watching him run out of bounds on third down near the end of the first half.

 

Stay in bounds, run the clock. Takes no skill, it's just situational awareness. Everyone with their head in the game knew the situation. A stupid play on top of baffling plays that may have handed CU a field goal. Sims level of failure was complete.

 

So now that Ervin has has many fourth quarter fumbles as Grant, is Grant going to be allowed back on the field? 

This is exactly what drives me nuts. Multiple decades of the team doing stupid s#!t like this. It shouldn’t ever be a problem. Ever.

It’s completely reasonable to say the honeymoon is over. It’d be one thing if the team got beat by just being outtalented, frankly the last quarter was that and I could have lived with that.

The issue is that for 20 years we’ve been dealing with the absolute garbage mental stuff. Turnovers, penalties. When is the last time this team had a game where you could say they were clutch? Michigan State like 7-8 years ago?

The mental stuff should be fixed like day one. Talent is one thing. But to see the same bonehead stuff, and worse to keep a QB in who clearly needs benched (and frankly just cut) is inexcusable, at any season.

1 hour ago, Lunchbucket said:

Like the announcers said Sanders if rebuilding from outside in which is quick. Rhule is rebuilding from the inside out which takes longer. Sanders brought in a ton of people to play now. Rhule brought in a lot of freshman to grow. 

 

We weren't picked to win over MN, we didn't but gave it a shot

We weren't picked to win over CU, we didnt. We need to slow the roll. We weren't good and this isn't gonna happen overnight. It pains me to say that

 

Sims needs to figure his s#!t out.  Sadly we don't have a lot of backups that can play better. 

 

Still painful 

We’ve been waiting 20 years for the rebuild to be finished. Pelini won 9 his first season.

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

I guess pleased so far but until we actually play games, there's nothing to really say.