cm husker

 

Top 20 and top 25 or so.

With a high potential for improvement on both.

 

Why do you remain such a huge fan of Pelini? He is gone. And he's not coming back. He might not even be able to land a coaching job at any other decent FBS school. Maybe it's time for you to try to get over Pelini.

I remain a fan of reality.

I think the pillory of him and his players says more about certain Husker fans than about those guys.

25th best roster in the country.

Iowa is in the 50s.

This is turning into Callahan all over again - throw our kids under the bus to excuse poor coaching. Find out after 4 years that it was poor coaching all along. Rinse and repeat.

Like the article says, we're 1-6 in the last seven games. That is terrible. We are 3-1 in the previous four games. That's about where we should be.

 

3-1 in what previous four games?

Top 20 and top 25 or so.

With a high potential for improvement on both.

Canuck?

"They were kicking our ass... until we kicked theirs. "

Husker fans are the best at twisting.

There's scant indication that this coach recruits better than the last.

You're in for some hard realities that your hatred of Bo has blinded you to.

I don't mind Langs as a guy. He seems like a good guy in most pressers and thoughtful.

But, it's so clear that he wants to throw over anything else. Just because you're down 17 at half shouldn't mean you abandon the run "because it became that type of game."

If throwing the ball like we do led to more points, we should do it from down #1. Not just because we are down 20.

So, if you're down 20, stick with what scores you points. Don't go into panic mode. Especially when you aren't even going up tempo.

Bad coaching disguises good talent.

Far more than bad talent disguises good coaching.

Wake up.

Funny how all the optimism for the potential record going into the season - and all the bitching tonight when we actually came in pretty much right where you all thought we would.

Hoping a good night's sleep takes the edge off some people.

Choosing 9-3 because you don't trust the coaches to win tough games doesn't make 9-3 more palatable.

 

 

 

 

For those arguing that this is about talent.

 

 

Iowa starting OL (per this link):

 

LT - Walkon

LG - .82 3-star (P5 offers from Iowa and Iowa St)

C - .89 4-star (highly recruited)

RG - .87 3-star (no other offers)

LT - .85 3-start (handful of P5 offers, but none by the traditional B10 powers of Michigan, OSU, PSU, Wisconsin or Nebraska - best offer was probably from Miami)

 

3 of 5 of them from Iowa (the other two from Ohio). 3 of them are sophomores or younger. None are seniors.

 

 

They may be more productive, but I highly doubt they have more raw talent than our group.

All I needed to know about our line was Sophmore Jerald Foster coming back from a knee injury 3 games ago and starting after a week of practice since spring.

 

Our O-line could be 8th year seniors but they'll struggle to be starters next year. Good thing for graduation.

 

I agree completely. The change of a coaching staff is always a tough thing for players that were recruited by the discredited staff. They feel like there's an asterisk after their name, and it crashes down on them when the going gets tough. It's not unusual, especially when you consider the circumstances of Pelini's departure. NU sucked tonight but this season is a vast improvement over last year, and I expect we'll continue to see good improvement in the years ahead. Think of how different this season would have been with a decent OL and even an average passing QB . . .

 

 

 

Not true at all. Good coaches turn programs around very quickly.

 

If we didn't have Tommy Armstrong, we would have lost 3 or 4 more games.

 

I disagree. The best coaches in the world can't help players that aren't connected or lose confidence. The players should be mature enough to be responsible for their positions. The game of football is always about players, much more than about coaches. Coaches are just easier to blame.

 

Nah, it usually goes like this:

bad results during years 1-3 are blamed on the players (and a handful of assistants) - see, for example, 2004 to 2006 under Cally.

bad results in years 4+ are blamed on all coaches.

what people don't seem to get is that years 1-3 were on the coaches, too.

I'd love to see examples of good coaches who (1) took over programs from fired coaches, (2) did not improve in years 1 or 2 over the previous coach and (3) ended up being actually more successful than that fired coach.

I'd bet that list is quite short.

I think anybody that thought we'd be better than 9-3 this year set themselves up for disappointment. We're transitioning from a read option type of offense to a pro style offense and this may be the worst 2 deep roster in my lifetime. Very little to work with this year. I'm pleased they kept it together enough for 9 wins.

 

It's why guys like DiNardo said we should be happy with a bowl appearance this year because he didn't think much of the talent level. Brock Huard also came in and thought very little of the talent in Lincoln. Matt Millen the same. Some people just don't want to hear it, I get it.

 

Doesn't mean things are perfect with this staff either. Read gotta go. Cav and Banker need to show more next season. Langs is handcuffed with Armstrong much like Beck was. And the OL stunk. Trying to call plays with a bad OL and a QB that can't hit passes is a nightmare.

Based on what evidence?

Because unless you're 1 year old, you'd know this roster is pretty consistent with what has been at NU for over 10 years.

And, even if those people were really right with their predictions, how many of them would have guessed that Iowa would beat them down to the tune of 40-10 (let alone OSU loss)?

And let's not pretend that they don't factor in the coaching ability, too - their assessments aren't just based on perceived player talent.

some of you, including a lot of the OWH staff, clearly don't watch any games other than Husker games.

on average our players are no less disciplined than 95% of teams out there.

what we lack is innovation on the sideline, which causes common errors to seem that much more dire.

 

 

 

 

Don't think all of those bombs thrown today were on Langs. Cethan Carter and a few others were wide open on those third and medium calls. Tommy just decided to throw a YOLO down the field to a covered WR.

why is there even a receiver running a YOLO route on 3 and 4 then? Don't give him the opportunity to make those dumb decisions

It's called a route tree. Those are meant to occupy safeties and leave the underneath routes open.

is there some other branch in that route tree beside straight up the sidelines?

Yes the f'ing underneath route that was wide open all day and yet Tommy decided that throwing it 50 yards down the field was a better option.

 

Single coverage, no safety help dictates that read and throw.

That's the issue with this offense - sometimes the "right read" is still the "wrong read."

 

 

To be fair the other guy lost 1 or 2 games a year to teams he had no buisness losing to. At least we made some improvements there.

Like Purdue, Illinois, Iowa (x2), Northwestern, etc...

Like I said, this year... If we're honest, he actually did something our ex never managed to do in a season; Not lose to a team he was favored over.

 

Disclaimer for some out there: that doesn't mean we don't need some serious changes...

 

Of course that can be accomplished by performing in a way so as to reduce the games in which one is favored, even against inferior teams.

I'm having some trouble with that math...

If they didn't play POB only because he was saving a redshirt (and not because Fyfe was better), then the error wasn't today but rather during the whole season that they didn't have him backing him up and ready to step in as #2.

 

 

For those arguing that this is about talent.

 

 

Iowa starting OL (per this link):

 

LT - Walkon

LG - .82 3-star (P5 offers from Iowa and Iowa St)

C - .89 4-star (highly recruited)

RG - .87 3-star (no other offers)

LT - .85 3-start (handful of P5 offers, but none by the traditional B10 powers of Michigan, OSU, PSU, Wisconsin or Nebraska - best offer was probably from Miami)

 

3 of 5 of them from Iowa (the other two from Ohio). 3 of them are sophomores or younger. None are seniors.

 

 

They may be more productive, but I highly doubt they have more raw talent than our group.

All I needed to know about our line was Sophmore Jerald Foster coming back from a knee injury 3 games ago and starting after a week of practice since spring.

 

Our O-line could be 8th year seniors but they'll struggle to be starters next year. Good thing for graduation.

 

I agree completely. The change of a coaching staff is always a tough thing for players that were recruited by the discredited staff. They feel like there's an asterisk after their name, and it crashes down on them when the going gets tough. It's not unusual, especially when you consider the circumstances of Pelini's departure. NU sucked tonight but this season is a vast improvement over last year, and I expect we'll continue to see good improvement in the years ahead. Think of how different this season would have been with a decent OL and even an average passing QB . . .

 

Not true at all. Good coaches turn programs around very quickly.

If we didn't have Tommy Armstrong, we would have lost 3 or 4 more games.

 

For those arguing that this is about talent.

 

 

Iowa starting OL (per this link):

 

LT - Walkon

LG - .82 3-star (P5 offers from Iowa and Iowa St)

C - .89 4-star (highly recruited)

RG - .87 3-star (no other offers)

LT - .85 3-start (handful of P5 offers, but none by the traditional B10 powers of Michigan, OSU, PSU, Wisconsin or Nebraska - best offer was probably from Miami)

 

3 of 5 of them from Iowa (the other two from Ohio). 3 of them are sophomores or younger. None are seniors.

 

 

They may be more productive, but I highly doubt they have more raw talent than our group.

All I needed to know about our line was Sophmore Jerald Foster coming back from a knee injury 3 games ago and starting after a week of practice since spring.

 

Our O-line could be 8th year seniors but they'll struggle to be starters next year. Good thing for graduation.

 

So, NU is less talented than the FCS team that beat Iowa?

Are the recruiting rankings all wrong? Because this one says that our current roster is several spots better than Iowa's. 30 spots better actually. In other words, it's not even close.

This is an Iowa team that is 7-4 (sorry, 8-4) and lost to a FCS team at home. It had single score wins over Rutgers and Minnesota for f's sake. It scored less points against every other P5 opponent except Purdue (who it beat in a shootout where it gave up 35 to an awful Purdue team).

I don't mind people arguing to keep Riley. I"m not for firing him. But to ignore reality and bash our players' talent in defense of the indefensible? That's pathetic.

Still have Pelini's players, still getting Pelini results. Need a major talent upgrade if we want to get out of the 9-10 win rut. Also Bruce Read needs to be terminated ASAFP.

 

Virtually no difference makers and paper thin at a lot of spots. I thought we'd go 8-4 so 9-3 is fine for this year imo. Roster looked weak before the season, it still looks weak.

Based on what I've seen in examining his career, Riley could take the 2001 Miami roster and win 9 or 10 games with it.

 

 

 

time to fire another 9-3 coach? seems to be the prevailing attitude with Nebraska fans.

 

Yeah, that's the thing. You fire a coach, any coach, and it sets your program back a couple of years. At some point your need to pick a guy and stick with him. I think Riley gathered a pretty good staff around him. And recruiting seems to be going well. So there's that. :

 

Yep, not to mention he is still using a team full of Bo's players, it is hard to turn a culture around in two years without a team full of players that he recruited. So all of this doom and gloom is ridiculous at this point. With that said the only thing that is alarming on the season to me is the no show today by the defense. Our LB's have been overaggressive and bad for stretches this season especially MRI, but today it was like we didn't put any on the field.

 

Oh good, the "culture" excuse again.

 

Honestly, it's unflipping real how these excuses get trotted out.

I don't even think we should be firing coaches, but for the love of god I wish people would quit blaming these kids for a .500 staff doing what they've always done.

 

I was a little uneasy at the beginning of the season with all the skeptics doubting Nebraska's greatness. After our loss to Wisconsin I started to believe them.

 

I am fully convinced we have a tremendous amount of soul searching to do. Almost all 9 of our wins this season were barely won. We have talent but we have a severe deficiency in execution and consistency; I put quite a bit of that on coaching.

 

We are more of a bad football team than is Iowa a good football team.

 

This is just outright unacceptable.

 

You forgot to mention a lack of depth especially on the lines. The OL needs a huge talent upgrade as you see what walk on talent get you. The DL needs some depth with some guys who can put pressure on the QB without blitzing. That will make the rest of the defense look a lot better.

 

Pure bullsh#t unfounded in reality.

If people want to argue that Riley is updating the talent because of what the recruitniks say, then you can't argue that NU doesn't have enough talent when all of the recruitniks say NU was the most talented team in the West.

#quittheplayerblaming

#.500isstill.500

You know what would be awesome? If NU took 2 4 star players at every position every year. That'd be just dynamite. Why don't we do that?

 

No one is signing 2 4+ star QBs a year.

link?

 

If you need a link to know that no team is signing 2 four star QBs a year, I suggest you do your own research.

There may be an odd off year that a team does it, but for the most part, teams are taking 1 highly touted QB a year and maybe 1 other QB a year, at most.

Why would we really expect any difference when one looks at the totality of his career and staff.........We hired a .504 coach and staff and expected more. Much more. I think there are several things to consider:

1) I really think Riley was simply hired for PR for the University. The anti Bo. A friendly Mr Rogers who would heal the fan base, alumni and media... The potential to win? Sure. The expectation? No

2) Riley came with high marks and reputation. Riley. Just Riley. I don't remember a lot of "his guys" coming with the same praise i.e. Langs, Banker and Hughes.....In fact, lowly OSU, wanted Banker fired.....a team that had really accomplished nothing....

 

The demise of Riley will be what doomed Solich (Bohl), Cally (Cosgrove), Bo (Paps, Beck).... His buddies....

 

As far as hiring a new coach, Jimbo just balked at LSU's offer of 6.8 million/year...... We'd have to still pay Bo and then Riley. If I was SE, I'd call Riley in and let who know who would be gone next year. Fo fiddly for sure. Banker and Langs would be told what the specific expectations were to keep employed past 2017.....

 

This is what we have. Instead of dropping one to a FCS school like OSU, we get boat raced by OSU or Iowa.....

I don't think that Riley should be fired at this point for a number of reasons, but if he fires three coordinators, then no way in hell should he be the guy making the next hires.