LaunchCode

1 hour ago, California Husker said:

Coach Frost told us that it would be a 2-3 year process to turn this around. Many of us (I am very guilty of this myself), thought he was just underselling. Keeping expectations low so that if (or when) we lost to some of the stronger teams in the conference, we wouldn't be disappointed. 

But he told us. He said it would take time. I trust him. He's been successful. He was a big reason why Oregon was so successful under Kelly. He took over an underperforming UCF team and a year later had an undefeated season. It is not as if we just hired a washed-up NFL head coach, or some guy with zero head coaching experience, or some guy who was a career .500 coach. Coach Frost has been a winner at the college level. 

Many people have said that you can't totally blame this on the previous coaching staff for this start. However, this team looks slow. Most of the players don't look very good. Frost has brought in 50 new players, but now you have a mix of players from a bad team, with inexperienced players. And I'm not sure what the lack of "buy-in" is exactly that Coach Frost keeps talking about, but we know Riley's team was completely undisciplined. So, can it be that the MOST talented players among Riley's recruits are also the ones that WON'T buy in? I don't know.

 

I realize there are people here on Huskerboard who are "in the know" (and love to tell us about it). But what I know for sure is that Coach Frost told us he was going to turn the program around and he told us it was going to take time. The admin hired him knowing that. So now he deserves time. Not saying we cannot critique the decisions he makes from time-to-time, but in my opinion, we finally have a coach in whom we can have faith. So this is a coach, at least this Husker fan, is willing to give that time. As frustrating as that waiting may be. 

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? 

43 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

I guess I don't really see it.  We haven't been much of a straight-ahead running team for some time.  Most of these guys - the interior guys anyway, plus Farniok - were recruited by Pelini when we ran an offense similar to what we run now.  But under Riley they spent most of their time working in Pro Style offense with a lot of pass blocking.  I don't think it's that they can't run block.  We ran the ball up and down the field on Colorado.  

 

People are taking too much about our offense from the Troy game where we were using an extremely limited playbook with a QB who was struggling to do much of anything.

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

49 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

Disagree.  We don't have an offense built to play traditional smash mouth.  We tried to go smash mouth after Troy fumbled the punt to us inside their 10.  Ozigbo got two yards total on two carries.  

 

Give me Bell or Washington who can make a guy miss.

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.

1 hour ago, runningblind said:

All I know is that if Bunch starts, I will probably crack a beer open at 1001 AM for the first time in about 10 years. 

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.

1 hour ago, Moiraine said:

I will post my theory again.

 

Leonardo DiCaprio took forever to win an Oscar because he was beautiful and the male voters couldn’t take a hot guy seriously as an actor. He didn’t win an Oscar until he got old, beardy, and dirty.

 

Herbstreit has the same problem. I had a huge crush on him as a teenager. He’s hot so men don’t like him. I’ve seen like 5 different fanbases hating on him and I really don’t visit many other fan message boards.

So that's my problem.  

40 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

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. 

51 minutes ago, husker_fan_from_sweden said:

Would like to see a gameplan in which our guys actually come more prepared than the other team and finally make less mistakes. Colorado and Troy seemed to have a lot of schemes that took advantage of our relative green offense and defense.

 

I wonder when the script flips.

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?

39 minutes ago, teachercd said:

I get what you are saying but it is really hard to snag to really good QB's in the same class...Frost COULD have snagged AM and then sort of a "athlete" type guy but with Gebbia leaving when he did it still made it really hard to get another QB ready if that potential QB had not been practicing the QB spot because he was a WR/DB or something.

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. 

39 minutes ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

Not sure if I’ve ever seen someone put so many words into someone else’s mouth. Unless I missed it, he didn’t say anything close to what you’re claiming. 

You missed it then, scroll up.

3 hours ago, jaws said:

 

Frost was handed a really thin QB room and when Gebbia left it was even worse . Sometimes it is lazy to pick on the last staff but sometimes it is the truth. Riley did a really bad job recruiting QBs. It is really hard to question Frost at this point as it relates to the QBs. 

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.

41 minutes ago, Army_Allen said:

At this point in the season last year Tanner Lee threw 4 more picks than both Bunch and Martinez have combined

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.

On 9/16/2018 at 10:30 AM, Making Chimichangas said:

 

To be fair, many of us NEVER wanted Riley hired in the first place.  We knew he was a failure from the outset.

 

 

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.

7 hours ago, lo country said:

This might explain part of our problems.....I'm pretty sure this wasn't taught by the staff.  Maybe a miscue?  Complete whiff?  Looks like the left side did the same, with better results....

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.  

49 minutes ago, LumberJackSker said:

This gives me hope that if Nebraska can just stop turning the ball over they might be able to best some of their west division opponents. Purdue, northwestern and Illinois are garbage, Nebraska has to just stink less than them and schedule an fcs team for dec1 and some how find 2 more win and they will make a bowl and get 15 very important extra practices

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. 

37 minutes ago, BoNeyard said:

If I am Frost I start pulling scholarships. Scholarships are only for D-1 athletes/players, and there are many on this team that are not at that caliber.

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

37 minutes ago, Jason Sitoke said:

Win or lose, we are not appreciably more talented than Troy. That should be evident 

Coaching wise?

1 hour ago, DrunkOffPunch said:

You said ‘MR’ 3 times and indirectly referenced him two times in your first post. There’s a difference between comparing coaches and trying to remind everyone on the board how upset you are/were that Riley got fired.

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.

3 hours ago, DrunkOffPunch said:

WHY DO YOU KEEP BRINGING UP MIKE RILEY THEN? 19-19 doesn’t scream WIN to me.

 

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. 

15 minutes ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

Frost has no message like that, therefore it would discredit nothing. In fact it would send a bad message to the rest of the team if he didn’t play a superior true freshman over an inferior senior. Frost has never said or implied that he would be “loyal” to a player over playing the best player. Because that would be stupid. 

 

Any coach who plays someone out of loyalty when there’s another better player at their position should not be coaching at the college level. That’s the kind of thing you see in middle school sports when a kid’s dad is coaching and the kid gets to play the whole game even if he sucks.

 

The main message all spring and summer and fall was that all starting spots are up for grabs, which is the opposite of what you’re saying.

 

 

That said I agree the situations are different, and at UCF in the first year Frost played a guy who was there already when he arrived. We don’t know what would have happened if Gebbia had been a returning starter. I feel confident Lee would have been the 4th or 5th string QB though.

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.  

6 minutes ago, Jeremy said:

I disagree that Riley didn't get support, at least at first. Along the way to 19-19, he proved to be what he always has and will be; a .500 coach, and no amount of support or whatever is going to change that.

 

Do you honestly think that Riley would've competed for B1G titles given a full recruiting cycle?

 

Did Moos jump the gun in firing a guy that got boat-raced by a HORRIBLE Purdue team, embarrassed by Iowa at home, and beaten by a MAC school on our own field, and was he premature in hiring Frost, who was the first coach in NCAA HISTORY to take a team from 0-12 to undefeated?

 

There was very little leadership, ownership, or culture, not to mention the fact that a Nebraska football team, for the first time in God knows how long, hadn't done much off-season lifting. For Bob Devaney's sake, we INVENTED college football lifting! And they didn't care enough to continue that tradition. Should we support that?

 

We show up, we sell out the stadium, and poor millions into this program. I'd say the fans are okay in support, whoever the coach is.

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.

Just now, PasstheDamnBallGuy said:

 

Frost also inherited QBs that didnt fit his system. The difference is that Frost went out and got a player that started day 1 and looked amazing in his system. Riley had every opportunity to do the same, and in 3 years never once did what Frost did in his first game.  I think TA was an amazing player but as a coach its your job to design an offense that works for him or get someone that can run your offense now. 

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.   

4 minutes ago, GBRFAN said:

 

Are you saying in the bold that you would prefer CU's "stat line"?  Call me confused..... Is "lesser" really better?

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