cm husker

Which player?

This whole "buy in" thing is a freaking fabrication by some self promoting "insiders." Teams that don't buy in get blown off the field consistently. They don't continually battle back to be in a position to win at the end. The sad thing is, unlike some of those Bo teams (and even Callahan teams) that got toasted, this team really hasn't faced a great team yet. Heck, I'm not even sure that they've faced a good team yet (NW may qualify). I have some serious concerns about what will happen if NU faces a great team under Riley. Luckily, MSU is a bit overrated and athletically vulnerable. That's definitely a winnable game. The "youth movement" is an insult to some kids who have given 3 to 5 years of their lives to a program where some fans would throw them on the ash heap rather than admit that this coaching change was a colossal screw up.

Agreed. Hell, with the amount of money and accolades this system has caused to fall out of his pockets, I'd be pretty frustrated, too.

They didn't call the TO. Northwestern did. The PF was a awful call (or should have been offsetting). Personally, I like the fire from him to want to stay. If you watch the game, a LB tries to say something to him and he's pretty calm in replying "I'm fine." That penalty didn't remotely cost NU this game, but for some, it will be painted as another one of "The Play(s)" where the players caused this outstanding staff to lose.

I don't think you're wrong. I do think fans, and apparently even some ex players, see a lackluster performance and believe that "effort" is the issue. Teams don't "effort" their way to wins (almost ever). It's about execution. And execution is about coaches preparing players during the week and then running their system in a way that leads to a higher probability of success. "Effort" isn't really as big of a factor as many want it to be.

I'm looking at this still photograph and wondering what Benning is seeing there that's cause for so much consternation... is it that some back ups are sitting on the bench? Does he not believe players should sit on a bench during a game? I rewatched the game. I don't see a lack of effort, especially defensively. This team actually played pretty well defensively on Saturday. Benning has been a proponent of Riley for a long time, so he's making excuses now and throwing players under the bus as a result. Pretty sad.

It's funny. A few weeks ago, the Dolphins D looked like it was unmotivated, lacked effort and frankly didn't care. Suddenly a coaching change and things have sparked there. Too many fans confuse a lack of execution with a lack of effort. Execution is all about being put in a position to make plays with a relatively high % chance at success. That's what great coaches do. Anyone can draw up what "should work" on a chalk board, but football isn't that clean. Too many moving parts.

You can't possibly believe what you write here. Did you even bother to look at the total running plays in that game back in '11? It was 61. For 222 yards. Not even that amazing of a day running from a ypc, but it's a way to grind out an WIN a game. NU put it up 22 times in that game. Contrast that with the loss on Saturday. 38 runs. 48 passes. No, not entirely. I think I was drinking. I just found it funny that 38 was the record number of carries for Burkhead, and 38 was the number of carries we had in a game that people swore we "didn't run the ball enough". When you're averaging two yards a carry, how much should an offensive coordinator continue to call the run? 38 times seems like enough times to either find a rhythm and establish something, or give it the f#*k up. So when you can't run the ball, the only other way I know in this game that an offense can legally move the ball down the field is to throw it. So I'm assuming that's where the 49 passes comes from. It seems really logical to me, but very confusing for some others here. It's okay, it's not just you. The key isn't 38 times. It's timing, ball carriers and type of play. 16 total carries by the starting IB. He goes for 40 on 10 carries in the first half. Not a massive amount of yards, but 4 ypc and no negative plays (as usual in this offense, there weren't any real big plays either.. just steady 3 to 8 yard pick ups). During that time, NU threw it 27 times. 10 runs versus 27 passes. In a half. You can't get your RB or OL in rhythm when you're calling your play selection like that. I thought it came down to their defensive line beating the piss out of our offensive line. Especially on the one side. So if Tommy needs 10 passing plays to get into a rhythm, and the run game needs 15-20 consecutive or closely called together runs to find a rhythm, what the hell is Langsdorf supposed to do? Seriously, an offensive line needs a bunch of plays to get into a rhythm? Is this one of those things that just applies to Nebraska football? I think we're getting carried away with that. The RB maybe, the QB maybe but not all the time, but the offensive line needs to get in a rhythm now too? You're either physical or you're not. You're either powerful or you're not. You either know what you're doing or you don't. You can either beat the man across from you or you can't. Serious question, when is the last time you saw a Nebraska offensive linement just dominate the man across from them all game long. And don't name just one game and call it the overriding rule. I'd like to know the last linemen that consistently owned his gap. Spencer Long maybe the only one in a long time....? No, it applies everywhere. It helps to when OLs are running similar and complementary plays. Not a hodgepodge of grab and go. Your last "serious question" makes no sense. You ask for an example of a player dominating his guy over the course of a game, but then you don't want me to name a game? I can name guys who played well, but you'll just scoff (e.g., if I pointed out that much maligned Jake Cotton was HM from coaches and media last year and played much better than credited for or that Alex Lewis was a force last year, also earning honorable mention from coaches and media). You mentioned Spencer Long. That wasn't some sort of ancient history. He played in 2013. Pensick was 2nd team all conference that year. Siriles was too, the year before that. I won't bother going back much further.

Most "great" backs are developed and/or a product of a system (like most of NU's were in the glory years). Ameer was a phenomenal player, but he was definitely developed. He didn't step onto the field as the most dynamic freshman or sophomore in NU history. I wish we could see what Cross and Newby would be doing under Brown's tutelage.

You can't possibly believe what you write here. Did you even bother to look at the total running plays in that game back in '11? It was 61. For 222 yards. Not even that amazing of a day running from a ypc, but it's a way to grind out an WIN a game. NU put it up 22 times in that game. Contrast that with the loss on Saturday. 38 runs. 48 passes. No, not entirely. I think I was drinking. I just found it funny that 38 was the record number of carries for Burkhead, and 38 was the number of carries we had in a game that people swore we "didn't run the ball enough". When you're averaging two yards a carry, how much should an offensive coordinator continue to call the run? 38 times seems like enough times to either find a rhythm and establish something, or give it the f#*k up. So when you can't run the ball, the only other way I know in this game that an offense can legally move the ball down the field is to throw it. So I'm assuming that's where the 49 passes comes from. It seems really logical to me, but very confusing for some others here. It's okay, it's not just you. The key isn't 38 times. It's timing, ball carriers and type of play. 16 total carries by the starting IB. He goes for 40 on 10 carries in the first half. Not a massive amount of yards, but 4 ypc and no negative plays (as usual in this offense, there weren't any real big plays either.. just steady 3 to 8 yard pick ups). During that time, NU threw it 27 times. 10 runs versus 27 passes. In a half. You can't get your RB or OL in rhythm when you're calling your play selection like that.

You guys have to make it about the last coaches. I get it. Because you definitely don't want to have the hard discussion about a sub .500 staff getting off to a sub .500 start.

I can not believe that I fell for the BS coach speak about "fitting the scheme to the guys", "really like the idea of a running QB"..... Should have known the truth with the comments "I think we ran well today" (38 carries for 82 yards), "I haven't ever had a running QB before", "we can use the pass to set up the run"..... A$$ clowns for coaches. Not all, but most. When Riley said he'd adjust to the talent on hand, I believed it too. But while every game and season is important to the fans, this staff just views it as part of the long term building process, as if this first season is just a minor bump in the road to long term success. I think "adjusting to the talent" really meant finding which plays in the Riley playbook that Tommy and crew can have success with. Not actually running the type of plays that they had success with in the past. Reminds me of Callahan's first year , going 5-7 and saying that it's "just one season". Zatechka made a similar point a few weeks ago, but with a twist. He basically said, as demented as it was, Callahan basically sacrificed the '04 season to put in his system. The scary thing to me is that I don't think Riley through his players on the ash heap; I think he has tried to adapt his system. The problem is, even adapted, it's just not a very good system.

You can't possibly believe what you write here. Did you even bother to look at the total running plays in that game back in '11? It was 61. For 222 yards. Not even that amazing of a day running from a ypc, but it's a way to grind out an WIN a game. NU put it up 22 times in that game. Contrast that with the loss on Saturday. 38 runs. 48 passes. I keep hearing Riley talk this crap about "well, we thought we were moving toward a good balance, a good run to pass ratio." Are you kidding??? That's not the purpose of running an offense. Oh, and another interesting tidbit from that '11 game? Ameer had only 35 yards on 12 carries. Everyone wants to act like he was a superstar from day one, but reality is, great backs are developed. And the lack of production at RB today is a result of awful development. We miss Ron Brown badly.

No way. This game is still about the players, not the fans, and I don't want to see any group as talented and driven as these guys finish like that.

It's also quite comical how this only happens when we lose. If we win, there's far less criticism. Although in reality there are often many of the same problems. It just illustrates what motivates people, and it doesn't seem to be discovering the truth. You're right; the same problems are probably present in the few wins NU had this season. Even at Minny, there were issues if one looked. The issue I have is that people have no concept of perspective. I could go into almost ANY game and pick 6 to 10 plays to put on GIF and then say LOOK THESE PLAYER SUCK! The reality is, plays are going to break down. The key to winning is putting your kids in a position to have enough plays actually work. But a "ball control" offense with little or no homerun threat is an absolute recipe for disaster in CFB. Even the most talented teams in the country (e.g., USC and Bama) struggle with it. But then you look at "less talented" teams like Baylor, TCU and Oregon (yes, less talented... look at their draft history), and you see kids getting put in position to be free in space by creative design and play calling. Schematically, NU has one of the most mundane, disorganized offenses that I've ever seen.

What is your evidence for the above statement? Teams don't fight as hard as this team has fought to stay in and get back into games during this season if they lack effort and desire.

This is a silly statement. The margin of talent is not and never has been so great that NU could just line up and WWF style dominate another opponent. Even in the glory years, the play calling was the key to putting guys in a position to dominate. The same should be true today. But my biggest problem in the running game is that it's a hodgepodge. Langsdorf even said as much his post game. Is it any surprised that college football OL get confused and sometimes "tip toe around" guys when they probably aren't real sure of their assignments? I hate the "pick a play out of a bag" approach of this (and most) WCO guy.

What possibly makes you think new/different players will get things going in the right direction? This is a .500 staff producing about those types of results. This is not a player issue. Only at Nebraska would fans blame players for a poor start after an inept administration hired a truly average coach. This may be the most wasted group of talent in the history of Husker football.

You mean like this? Now this wasn't in the run game, but this was a heck of a play called back because of just plain laziness and a horrible effort. There's no reason this offensive linemen needed to go low. What was the purpose? This blocker could've easily kept his feet and drove his hands and body straight into the defender. With a full head of steam it should have easily been a devastating block. Now I believe #57 took the heat on this one? Maybe, maybe not? I know the cameras go straight to #57 following the play, but I think thats a #55. Again, really hard to see with these ridiculous jerseys that make us play so much better. That is exactly what an OL is coached to do there. The "drive block" isn't usually employed downfield. Even Weigert used to cut in space. I thought the penalty was weak, too. I don't think he violated the rule, but admittedly, they recently changed how guys are allowed to cut block.

Ah, the vaunted "eye ball test." That's fine if you want to use it, but let's be honest about the top 25 stats. NU has finished in the top 25 each of Bo's seasons, except his first (a season he finished 9-4 with a bowl win after taking over a 5-7 program). So, he hasn't been "continually out of the top 25." Ironically, if NU wins out and finishes 10-3, the Husker will likely achieve their highest rank under Bo except '09's. That's especially true of Minnesota, UCLA and Michigan State continue to win (all three would finish in the top 20, if that happens, as unlikely as it is).