Wistrom Disciple

Great point! I hadn't considered that but it makes a lot of sense on that front.

I agree but I don't think I can point directly at the DC as him not thinking that. Seems that it should be more on the players need to have that fire themselves.

I see that you're hung up on the take points line. Please understand the point --- winning programs are willing to get points however they might come whether three or six. Getting three points is not the end of the world. I misspoke on the Indiana part, I thought Vedral's fumble was on a fourth down play. This is the exact point. Assuming failure of kicking and therefore don't even try it. I don't think you understand that the statistics on fourth down haven't been in our favor this season either.

It's a two way street... Think about how many three and outs or turnovers the offense has put up this season. Add in up tempo play calling to get to punt quicker and it's a bad recipe. I remember reading that through four games, our defense had been on the field something like 80 more plays than Iowa's defense had been through their first four games. In essence, our defense had already played an extra game than an average Big Ten team one month into the season. That 80 extra hits, tackles, twists and turns. It's not a surprise that we're getting more injuries and bumps with that kind of wear and tear.

Odd timing for sure but the sentiment remains, Moos and the administrations have correctly hitched the wagon to Frost being a success. It will come, we need to be patient and trust that he and his staff will figure it out.

We had opportunities we opted for to go for it on fourth downs against Illinois, Minnesota (2x), Indiana, Purdue and today. I like being aggressive but I also think sometimes the staff needs to think less with emotions. If we had a power team or more reliability with our skill guys I really like the aggression but with our shortages there, we may need to be more willing to try the kicks. Wisconsin didn't lose because they took six points, they lost because of two late turnovers and assuming they could beat Illinois without much resistance.

I understand what you're saying but avoiding the opportunity consistently will need to change if we are to be a winning program in the future. As I said, I know we have had kicker issues all year but either we must start becoming an excellent fourth down converting team or we need to adjust and attempt the kicks when we are within a reasonable range. I approve the decision making today with the conditions. That said, I noticed that Wisconsin did not get discouraged when they went out, made their kicks and took their three points each time. I'd like to see us get back to that point.

Fair point though my statement was meant to be more in general for the season with Frost. I get that we've had kicker issues all year but a mark of a winning program is a willingness to take points. I like the aggressiveness but given our shortcomings on playmakers, I think taking points is crucial whenever we have an opportunity.

Correct. However, we skipped the chance early in the game at 4th & 3 in the first quarter. The miss clearly hurt but as we proved, we struggle to convert on fourth downs. Would rather have taken an opportunity for points than get stuffed on fourth down twice. Those seem to be more deflating or at least helps opponent's confidence more.

Last thing we need right now is inconsistency with our coaching staff.

I think point #2 is key here. One big difference I noticed today was that Wisconsin would take the points when they got into our territory. FGs aren't sexy and don't inspire too much confidence but they are not nearly as deflating as getting stopped on fourth down. Instead of trying for the flashy plays, we need to not think of 3 points as a failure every time. I think too much emphasis is harped on #3 with defensive coaching. Sure sometimes the play calling is frustrating but I think Chins has done an admirable job this year. With how many different times our offense would turn the ball over or go three and out consistently, our defense (most notably the d-line) has done fairly well all things considered. Some bonehead mistakes but with the format SF has established of quick tempo play calling, first downs and continuous possessions are required if the defense is to stand a chance. When the offense fails to do so (all of October), the defense is left out to dry.

Like it or not... Scott Frost will remain head coach for as long as Scott Frost wants to stay. Full confidence that he will figure it out with time as he and the staff acclimate to the conference and work through things together.

Very unfortunate for sure, the guy was a stud coming in.

According to members of the team and assistants to the staff. It was a well known secret that the staff was high on Taylor becoming a factor in the offense.

Rumor has it Adam Taylor was actually in line to be the starter after Ameer and would have complimented Imani & Newby rather well. Ozigbo was a Riley recruit if I remember right. They didn't know what to do with him though as he was fourth on the depth chart as a Junior before Tre Bryant got hurt. Wasn't star studded but it would have worked well. Had Bo's job security not been in question in the prior year or two, we don't know what kind of talent would be in the program. Long game of what ifs though.

True on both accounts. It could be argued that Collins & Valentine would have stayed had Bo & Kaz been kept as neither were a 1st or 2nd round draft pick and Hughes was fired after 2015. It would have also given the twins and Mick more time to develop and add considerable depth along the d-line. Can't change the past unfortunately.

I thought we were primed for a run in '15 &'16 with Armstong/Westy/Collins/Valentine as Juniors then Seniors. It's all speculative now but I believe that we had a great chance to jump up. I understand your point that nowadays programs/fans/boosters are less patient to wait for development. Given the money involved, I get the impatience to an extent. I just hope the fans/media can give Frost and his staff enough time to get the program on the right track and get back to competing again with limited embarrassment.

Bill Snyder took until year 15 until he won his conference outright, Alvarez took until year 10 to win his and Fulmer won his only two in '96 & '97 during his 6th & 7th years. Bo and his teams made the title game in three of the seven years while switching conferences in the middle of his tenure. To me that is "championship play" but that term is ambiguous.

It took Osborne nine years to win an outright conference title and he inherited a team coming off back to back National Championships. Remember that was in the cakewalk of the Big 8 of the 1970s and it still took nine years to win outright. < I'm not suggesting Bo was equivalent to TO, just providing context that it is possible to elevate the program. Let's face it, you cannot win the conference title game if you're not playing in it. Bo took us to three in seven seasons (spanning two different conferences). The team was arguably the frontrunner to win the division in either '14 and/or '15 had we not canned him. I'm not suggesting he had the formula to make us division winners every year but he had things down to the point where we were competing for it every year at the very least. Unfortunately, we haven't been truly close since then.

I'm not looking to be the celebration czar. I was simply pointing out that when your team is getting embarrassed and trailing by three or four scores, it may not be the best idea to do too much flaunting. This is part of what SF was talking about last year when he mentioned that it seemed as though some of the team "looks like they enjoy losing."

Thank you, celebrating individually when getting blown out is different than when you're winning or being competitive. Sadly, the current seniors haven't had the same level of winning or being competitive that we have previously enjoyed. Therefore when they draw individual attention to themselves, my perception changes to assume that they are okay with losing so long as they make the highlight reels.

It's my perception, not a measurable statistic. To that point, do you think Jason Peter would be throwing the bones if he were down by 28 to Miami? Or Suh would flex after being ran over by Ohio State's line all night but sneaks in a sack? I don't believe that either of them would be celebrating individual accomplishments if the team were getting embarrassed.

Expressing emotion can be good and encouraged but when you're down 14-20+ points, flexing and waiving your arms in the face of your opponent is pretty dumb. I'm all for encouraging their teammates but (at least to me) it seems like a handful of the current guys would rather make the highlight reel than play in the postseason. I can't say that would be the case for the players in the 90s.

Please don't misunderstand that Frost has made his own mistakes and the talent excuse does wear thin. However, it should be apparent that Riley & staff were poor developers of talent and overall average coaches. It wasn't so much that RIley was a negative influence, but a complacent one. When complacency hits, you find players caring more about their own stats, highlights, etc. and less about team success. This is still an issue with some of the upperclassmen as seen in Mo Berry flexing after nearly every hit (despite the scoreboard) and Lamar being Lamar. Thankfully, most of the underclassmen appear less focused on individual attention and care more about team wins so I do think we will be good soon.

False. Riley walked into a winning team with experienced upperclassmen that found ways to win, expected to win. Frost walked into the opposite culture with a general sense of accepting losses.