LaunchCode

Here's a problem I'm having. George O'leary's 2013 UCF team beat Penn State in Happy Valley, also beat #8 Louisville on the road, went undefeated in conference, won 12 games including 2014 Fiesta bowl over #6 Baylor. I think by anyone's standards we can safely say O'leary took UCF to the top of the college football mountain. So if we're going to blame MR the next 1-3 years for all SF's losses and failures then shouldn't the same standard apply to SF's successes at UCF? Shouldn't O'leary get the majority of the credit for SF's wins. Is it possible maybe he wasn't what we thought he was at UCF and benefited greatly from the culture and players O'leary handed him? Seems like a humongous double standard to credit him with full success for UCF after only two years while holding him completely blame free for the lack of success here and blaming it all on the last guy. If the reason were losing so bad is because there are players not "buying in" as SF has made a point suggesting more than once, then why doesn't he give them the boot? Why are they practicing with the team, playing, traveling, etc.... The coaches job is to get players to buy in, what's he going to do differently to accomplish that since apparently what he's done now hasn't worked?

I don't follow the recruiting as closely as you so surprised that Farniok (2016 recruiting class) was recruited by Pelini.

I don't disagree with a new coach coming in and running his system from day one at the expense of short term success in favor of the long term benefit and SF has just the contract to allow such a move. That said, when looking at all the seniors, size, and physical attributes of our O-line, what are your thoughts on the offense being the right fit for them this year. Seems to me this line is better suited for down hill run blocking than any line in the recent past. We average 322 lbs up front, and have 3 seniors in the middle. If there was ever a year to run downhill would seem to me this is the year and group to do it with. Should SF coach to the strength of his players this year over the long term goal of building his scheme and program success? Well when the wins don't come us fans are inpatient and say no. A few years from now when we're winning every game we'll have a different opinion. Anyhow just curious what your take on our current O-line is in regards to being better suited for smash ball.

Brunch Beer, I like it. If the other guy starts call it an A.M. Beer. Either way you're maintaining good hydration and that's the important thing this season.

So that's my problem.

Save him for Wisconsin game. Work on cleaning up all the stupid penalties and turnovers between now and then. We do that, we beat Purdue without A.M.. He comes back for Wisconsin fully healthy, boosts the team's confidence and ads a whole new dimension to our offense and makes it difficult for Badgers to prepare for us. Beat Purdue then Wiscy and 7 wins is alive and well, make that 8 with a bowl game.

Just one question. Was Husqvarna Wielding Husker taken when you came up with your screen name? ; )

Can we just kick the woolverine's ashes, man handle them like little goats, force Flint water down their throats for daring to play us, and cause Harbaugh to go into a sideline tirade that results in a broken clipboard and headset. Is that asking too much?

My apology, I was responding to the "claim" the QB position was razor thin when SF took over. I don't agree with that claim and was trying to point out to the person who made that claim, SF must not have believed it was that dire thin either, or else he would have gone out and signed a couple more.

You missed it then, scroll up.

If we were so depleted at QB then why didn't SF get several in the 2018 class? Shouldn't it have been a top priority if so thin? Wouldn't most QB prospects want to go to a program that's so thin on depth? I find it very amusing you call Gebbia's leaving a major blow to the program yet at same time say MR did terrible job in getting Gebbia to come to N. Well done.

By "this point in season" you mean 3 weeks into season and not 2 games? Lee had 4 total after 2 games: vs Arky St. 0 Ints @ Oregon 4 Ints (If I recall correctly the first INT came on our first offensive play on a perfectly thrown ball that went right off Morgan's hands.) 3 INT's is still less than 4 so that' is a positive !

Through two games we have 10 sacks. Gifford, Akinmalodun, and Khalil Davis all rank in conferences top 10 currently for sack totals and they've played one less game than most everyone else in the top ten.

Who's "we" is there a mouse in your pocket. He capped his first season with a bowl win in the most "Nebraska like" manner any of us have seen in....oh I don't even know since when. We crammed the ball down UCLA's throats(62 carriers for 326 yards). He started his second season with 7 straight wins. Lost to #2 and #8 in the country on the road, then won the next two for 9 wins. In the first two seasons he gave us an exhilarating win over a top 5 team, a bowl win in smash mouth fashion, and a 9 win season. He also never threw players under the bus and represented the program with the utmost class at all times even after his departure. Truth is, the rug was pulled out from underneath him after 2016 compared to SF who's been given every advantage possible to get off on the right foot. I'm not going to rehash that, but anyone who follows the program closely knows what I'm talking about. Some of you need to grasp the fact that you're not building SF up by tearing the last guy down. All you're doing is undermining the program which is bigger than any one man, even SF who's team is currently looking a long ways away from a win, let alone a win over a top 5 team or a 9 win season which were both accomplished by the last guy in first two seasons.

Whether you're a fan of cut blocking, or not, it's being taught by this staff. One problem with teaching it is, coaches almost never allow their O linemen to practice it against the D-line for fear of taking out your own teammates knee. That does make it more challenging to prefect in practice. Given the risk a lot of people are not a fan of cut blocking and question why it's allowed. It is legal by rule but when opposing players and coaches watch the film and see cut blocking they may feel justified in a little "special" treatment in response. You want to dive at our knees? Well two can play that game.

I read your post 5 times, not because it was confusing, but because you might be right and I didn't want to admit that's where we are right now. Groveling over the positives of possibly being less garbegey than the other garbage. Sad, but actual gives me hope.

I've learned: With good coaching you're supposed to play better after your tuneup game and clean up all the first game mistakes. We doubled down on first game mistake in game two. Thank goodness we didn't start with two road games. The O-line has regressed from last season I don't understand or like our play calling and personnel decisions, but opposing teams do. I'm calling BS on all the big talk in the off season on the intensity of the new conditioning regiment. In two games in not stretch of the imagination have we looked like the better conditioned team in the 4th quarter. Lastly I learned I should probably not post immediately following a loss especially at home to Troy.

He might start by refusing to accept another dime of his contract until the team wins.

Coaching wise?

It's what I learned from the CU game, new coaches yet exact same result as last coaches first game. A 28-33 home field loss. I'm an optimist, and I've also been taught those who don't study history, or conveniently choose to ignore it are bound to repeat the same mistakes over and over again. Since there are already some second guessing SF's clock management and undisciplined players after his f?irst game, just like they did with MR, I finished the first post with this: "Give Frost the time and support MR didn't get before raking him over the coals." Why? Because it's a lot easier to turn the wagon around when everyone is pulling in the same direction and singing the same song.

I DON"T. Like it or not, new coaches are always compared to the former's results for better or worse. Right now it feels like we're a long ways away from 19 wins. If mother nature cooperates we'll get our first of the SF era this week I hope.

I worded that in a way it doesn't read how I meant. One of SF's messages to the players as I've heard it, is about being loyal to the program and team. Since loyalty is a two way street, if a coach is asking for it, then the players will be looking for it from him as well. A message is only meaningful if the audience trusts the person giving the message. So in my way of thinking if someone is asking for loyalty and then taking action that can be perceived as disloyal then it undermines the strength of the message in the future. I totally agree if it's a matter of one player working harder, or being better then the other of course that player should rightfully earn and get the job. But if they're equal in talent and work effort and you hand it to the new less experienced guy over the veteran guy just because he's "your guy" then a lot of existing players are going to take issue and question the loyalty of the coach to the existing players who stuck with the program over the new ones.

Until the new AD forces a Diaco type hire on SF like the old did on MR, or overrides him on in state recruiting targets, I will stick to the opinion that MR had far less than full support to make N successful. Thankfully I don't see that happening under Moose.

I don't see any real similarity. If there was a returning veteran QB this year then I could see the similarity. I'm not certain Frost would kick a veteran QB who'd already won games to the curb in favor of a true freshman either. Would to some degree discredit his message of loyalty to the players if he did.

Yes 100% if given the choice I'll take the W every time without regard for what the rest of the stats say.