hskrpwr13

I know the team requires some talent at the skill positions, but as long as we're solid/talented in the trenches, everthing else will work itself out.

So will any of these coaches get snatched up by South Florida or Texas Tech?

His offenses were good, but I believe that style of offense is half the reason that TT's defense was usually average at best. I'd much rather prefer a grind it out offense to help keep the other teams O on the sidelines.

Fun list. You have a better memory than I. I'd change: Worst D play against VTech: The O'Hanlon busted coverage to set up the winning TD. OU game: Henery actually had 2 kicks. One miss.

Perfect!!! Then we shouldn't have to worry about him leaving anytime soon.

That was hardly obvious to me. They could have just as well handed him the ball. I can buy being mulitple as an identity when the team can pull it off. Clearly this team couldn't. When they decided they were just going to run the ball, and all else be damned, they did okay (see ISU, OU, most of VT, and the 4th qrtr of KU, KSU, Mizzou) When they tried to get cute with some of the passing and sets, they couldn't put drives together or they stalled out in the redzone (see Texas and VT). I don't believe this new revelation of Lee injury excuses much of the play calling/execution.

My two cents: Like someone else earlier mentioned, the red zone seems to be his bugaboo. My only problem with the offense was the series where Lee had just run it to the 4 yard line for second and goal. We then run 2 pass plays that were poorly executed, well defended, or both, and we settle for another FG. Clearly the running game has been the better part of our valor this season (o-line probs or not), and it was during this game also. I think we easily score a TD if the ball is kept on the ground. Ultimately, I'd prefer we find an identity and stick with it. Being multiple is great when you have the coaching and talent combo to pull it off. I dont want to be average at multiple things. Lets be great at running the ball, contolling the line, and I'd live with only throwing when needed or as a novelty to catch the opposing D napping.

Here's an easy way to look at; best to worst: 1) good coaching and perceived good talent 2) good coaching and perceived mid level talent or worse 3) poorer coaching and perceived good talent 4) poorer coaching and perceived mid level latent or worse

"Osborne"; no "U". I get amazed at how many times I see his name spelled incorrectly by Husker fans considering he's been THE program for 35 of the past 40 years.

Ding! Ding! Ding! I've been touting this thought process for a while. I'm somewhat surprised Osborne doens't buy into this. Its neat playing the elite teams, but at the end of the season, the voters care mostly about wins and losses; not really the level of competition. Just like SEC fans like to spout, the Big12 has good enough teams that scheduling tough OOC is mostly unnecessary.

I realize Arizona's a good team, but I just can't see our defense losing to them.

I believe next year, though, that the Alamo and Holiday switch spots.

I noticed that ESPN seems to be on the Suh train. Schlabaugh (sp?) tweeted that he was changing his #1 to Suh as were others.

No kidding, sounds like a lose-lose situation. Oregon st, Arizona & Stanford all finished tied for 2nd in the pac-10 why Arizona? Well, Arizona did beat Stanford. They only lost to OSU by 5 and UO in OT. They'll probably be ranked..maybe even ahead of us.

Assuming the status quo, he'll win the Groza next year.

This. Judging Cody Green on whether he's the future or not right now is very shortsighted. I third the sentiment.

Agreed...between Spano, Green, and Gabbert. No way Lee starts next year. We've seen his stripes and they're not clean enough. I too don't understand the disappointment in Green. I guess some thought he was gonna show-up and immediately have the same type of freshman season that Tommy Frazier had. In my mind there's no question Green's more physically gifted than Lee both throwing and running. Against Baylor he had a good half and a bad half. Some games we got less than that out of Lee. I'm willing to wait and see what Green is like as a Soph and Junior before I declare that he doesn't have the ability to ever lead our offense.

Of what I've read so far, this is probably the closest to what I believe. I've been very critical of Watson until what I've read over the past couple of weeks. It actually sounds like Watson would prefer to open up the offense, but Bo is actually the one that is more concerned with the offense "managing" the game. I don't love Watson, but I think he is being hamstrung by Bo's attitude and that we don't have a QB they yet have faith in. Lee certainly hasn't earned any faith, apparantly Green is still too raw (is that a coaching problem?), and outside of a decent Niles Paul, our WRs are lacking. Since Texas Tech, outside of Roy and Rex, the O-line has been the best part of the offense as flawed as they may be. Bo and Wats need to ensure that they're on the same page, that they're recruiting the proper talent, and that said talent is being properly developed. If by the start of Big12 play next year these 3 points aren't worked out, its time for Bo to get "his guy".

I'm not saying that Cotton is an O-line God, but c'mon, we don't have the talent we had in the 90's, may never again, to push a top flight D-line around when they're stacking the box. Perhaps the scheme could be changed and the talent upgraded, but thats not going to happen over the course of two seasons. What if we had even average QB and WRs that Ds would have to account for? Wouldn't that make our O-line seem that much better?

That was a nice backward's pass for a TO. Took that right out of our playbook.

I'm still voting just to be safe. Suh 122273 CJ 108088

Im surprised by all the negative towards Green in regards to comparing him to Lee. What's Lee done thats so great? Lee's best offensive is when he hands off. Lets revisit some history: Lee was the guy who looked bad for 3 qrtrs against Mizzou, only to have a great 4th. He looked bad against TT. He wasn't the reason we lost to ISU, but he didnt bring anything to the table to win it either. Then Green had a good first half against Baylor, and an equally bad second. True, Green did nothing in his one qrtr of action against OU, but what did Lee do in 3 qrtrs? One FG drive? Hand-off succesfully? (Sorry, I'm not crediting him with the one-yard TD "drive".) Lee came back with a nice first 20 minutes against KU, and did nothing after that til, again, his fantastic handing-off in the 4th qrtr. Lee has a nice first 10 minutes against KSU, then is bad. Then he has a great first drive to start second half, then nothing. Other than the first TD drive against CU, what did he do that was so great? Cripes he even ran the wrong way on an option call! But again, redeamed himself with some great 4th qrtr hand-offs. Someone above actually said Green looked bad against CU? He's being judged off of 2 plays? Thats ridiculous. One was the exact same play that Lee ran earlier, and it had the same results. I'm not trying to bash Lee. But to say that someone he's been decent, good, whatever, and Lee has been crap? Hmm...I'm just not seeing it that way. Lee wins the job based on experience, but thats it. I would have no problem seeing Green gets some PT. He shouldve gotten some in the other games.

I dont know if too many people are drinking kool-aid. Most seem to know the limitations of this offense be it due to coaching, talent, play-calling, execution, etc. Many may just feel that its been discussed ad nauseum and there's no fix that we're going to see this yer. I too am sceptical that our O can score 20+, but you alluded to it yourself that scoring could come from other sources besides offense.

430