speedtoburn

Thanks for the tip! I'll be making the road trip with my two young boys and we'll definitely attend.

Bama played Nickel almost non stop and had their linebackers on top of the line of scrimmage. Here is a video that the above was taken from. I recommend hitting mute first thing to avoid listening to the crappy music. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H2KPw1fXykE When Bama is on defense you notice a lot of things. 1) They always matched personnel. 2) If blitzers did not get initial pressure, they would drop back into passing lanes, essentially turning into QB Spy's/short zone defenders. 3) They ran a bunch of delay blitzes right through the middle 4) They forced runs side to side extremely well 5) They overloaded one side of the line more often than not and then scissored the linebackers behind them to the other side. We could do this extremely well with our personnel, Suh lined up on the center and responsible for the A gaps, Crick lined up on the guard and Allen/Turner lined up on the tackle, all on one side with the other DE lined up inside of the tackle on the other side, with linebackers responsible for the gap between Suh and the solo DE and the contain outside of the tackle.

Yep, I'm with you. I think people are barking up the wrong tree about VT as a potential upset. I really like our chances at home against OU, in fact, I think we are going to win that game. Call me crazy but know this..I called our near upset of Texas back in '06 well before the season started. I felt like the pieces we had in place along with the atmosphere would give us the win and I came within an eyelash of being right. If Nunn had just held on to the the ball, then this post is about my prediction being right vs. wrong. In any case, I haven't called an upset since, because didn't see the qualities or pieces that I was looking for. I see them again now and because of that I am calling the OU game right now as an upset. We'll see what happens on November 7th, when I remind everyone about this post...

Interesting two weeks to say the least in our world, no? What looked like a surefire top 20 class is now teetering on recruiting oblivion. Guess that's what goes down when you lose almost an entire coaching staff and come off a horrendous season. Here are a few random thoughts... 1) The formula for having a successful program is really quite simple and it goes something like this: good recruiting + good coaching = consistent 9+ win seasons. You show me a team that has both of the above and I'll show you a team that often finds itself in the top 10. Look no further than USC, LSU or Oklahoma for examples of this in play. Those teams have been elite for so long because they combine great coaching with great recruiting. Having one without the other may get you an occasional 10+ win season, but you won't find yourself there for too long. Even in the above programs, we saw that when Oklahoma had recruiting holes in their QB position and within the secondary, they became good, but not great in 2005 and 2006. They still had great coaching, but lacked the chess pieces to contend for the national title. Insert some timely recruiting and all of a sudden they're back among the elite. Don't kid yourselves folks, you need both coaching and recruiting to succeed in the long term and if we don't keep that up, we won't see much progress. 2) Anyone suggesting that Tom Osborne's classes weren't very talented and well thought of should take their head out of the sand and do a little research. Tom was a very good recruiter and while he rarely landed a top 5 class, they were constantly filled with skilled playmakers and ranked in the top 15. Steve Taylor, Broderick Thomas and LeRoy Ettienne were all ranked in the top 100 when they came here, Mickey Joseph was the #2 rated player in the country, Leodis Flowers was #12, Derek Brown was the #1 speed back in his class, Shevin Wiggins was the Florida Player of the Year, and Tony Ortiz was the #1 defensive player in the country his senior year. The list during Osborne's time goes on and on with SuperPrep All-Americans and Players of the Year for their respective states. The 1985 class was ranked #1 in the nation, and the 1987 class was ranked #6 by Max Emfinger. What Osborne did was recruit premier skill position players and linemen, and supplement them with "free labor" from the walk-on program. The end result was that we had a roster full of blue chip athletes and we were able to take advantage of two or three walk-ons each year who had developed into two-deep players. Also, don't buy the idea that TO took unranked Nebraska kids on scholarship and developed them into great stars; every single Nebraska kid we took on scholarship from 1985 on was at least 2nd team All-State and many of them were All-Americans. This idea that Tom won with a bunch of nobodies is a romanticized way of revising history to make us feel better about the current recruiting situation and it does us no good to continue mythologizing Osborne's legacy. You win when you couple great coaching with premier athletes and to say Tom didn't do that is simply false. 3) With regards to the current staff, I would strongly caution against indicting them based on 3 weeks of work. They were put in a tough spot and nothing about this recruiting cycle can be considered normal. One, the original core of our class had formed a deep and unusual bond as a group, and once the first one defected, we had peer momentum naturally pulling them other directions. Two, despite the swiftness of our coaching search, the previous staff had been on death row in the court of public opinion since October 15th when Pederson was canned and our recruits were left blowing in the wind for almost a month and a half as a result. Many started looking around way before the public reports surfaced and it's a lot to expect 100% retention from a group of coaches who are chasing another staff's recruits. Are there problems right now? Sure, I think it's fair to say that, but I think it's far too early and we're without enough evidence to put this staff on a trend. Yet. Recruits often commit to coaches and rarely commit to schools. A lot of what we're seeing now is the natural turnover from a jagged fracture of relationships and was bound to happen. The proof of success or failure will come with the class of 2009. Until then, as tough as it may be, let's try to refrain from throwing the staff out before they even coach a game. 4) Speaking of staffs, I think it's about time we start moving on from the old one. How about we just admit that the last staff was pretty damn good at recruiting and very average at coaching? It's almost as if we have to cover our asses for supporting them by tearing down everything they did and saying it was all a sham. I'll say it again, you reach the elite level by not only recruiting premier athletes, but also giving them great coaching. It's become en vogue to bash on the talented guys we have because we didn't get the results we expected, but that error of logic fails to recognize the very basic formula for success I put above. The 5-star recruits are not the problem; it was how those 5-star recruits were misused and not put into a position to succeed that killed us. But how about we give the past staff credit for bringing some talented athletes into the fold via recruiting and move on towards the future? 5) The moment I listened to Bo's press conference and heard we didn't have a signed contract I knew we were in trouble. In reality, it's probably nothing. Symbolically, it means everything. Recruiting is truly a world where perception is reality, and if I was an opposing coach, I'd be hammering Nebraska based on the ridiculous notion that our head coach of three weeks has yet to sign his contract. And no, "I'm busy recruiting" is not a good enough excuse. In a virtual world, contract issues can and often are hammered out over the course of a 48-72 hour period. Even more, it's more than likely that Bo's agent is handling many of the remaining details and that takes Bo off the hook for most of the time spent negotiating. The golden rule is get it in writing and get a signature on it. If it truly is a done deal, then slam the door on any perception of a problem and get this thing rolling, even if it means signing a temporary agreement until a permanent one can be reached. Until then, you've opened yourself up for other coaches and programs to fill in the blanks for you. Now is not the time to invent excuses and proffer false evidence for our current recruiting problems, nor to discount our past recruiting successes both under Osborne and Callahan. Let's realize that turnover in these situations is a naturally occurring phenomenon and much of what we're experiencing is the byproduct of a coaching change that came on the heels of a 5-7 season. Also, remember that while winning helps, there's no easier way to get recruiting results than to have great people doing the recruiting. But it's just as wise to remember that those recruits still need people to coach them once they get to campus. If you've only got one side of the coin, you have nothing but counterfeit money.

They finished 6-6 last year and dropped some bad games, yet they are managing to impress our recruits left and right. I would appreciate any insight. Please don't tell me the mountain either. He must be promising kids starting immediately. It must be good whatever they are selling over there.

I'm sorry, but this is the most ridiculous rumor I have heard yet. Why on earth woud BK whose main claim to fame is his offensive prowess hire TG (someone who has absolutely no clue about the mechanics of BK'soffense) as his OC?

Picked this up on another board... I just joined this site. Grew up an NU fan (still am) but went to UC and stayed here. My brother introduced me to this site and thought I should share some info. I work for UC and live in Hamilton not too far from Kelly. Everyone around here thought we were going to lose Kelly to UM because he was in Ann Arbor. My boss just told me that UM wants someone else and that Kelly is not in Ann Arbor, but was in Detroit recruiting. He also told me that he has been invited for an interview for the NU job. Apparently NU is paranoid over media outlets tracking planes, so they asked him to fly from Detroit. I looked at this website and see why now. At any rate, I understand that he is either en route to Lincoln or will be soon for an interview with Osborne. I am assuming it is a private plane, but it could be commercial- that I do not know. I have interacted with Kelly in my job and he is a first class guy. He is well respected by his team as well as in the community. I hoped we could hold on to him for a few more years to make up for losing Huggins, but it looks like we can't. If NU gets him you will not be disappointed.

Pelini, not Gill. Every credible source at Rivals has confirmed this. Sorry, but you are wrong.

LMAO, Good one Vegas...good one.

lol, that's was the first thing that crossed my mind as well.

Fwiw, I pulled this post from another board, it is a pretty interesting read...

lmao.. Thanks for the laugh. I hate to break it to you, but this isn't going to happen.

Gill's resume doesn't stack up to the likes of a Jim Grobe or a Gary Patterson or a Brian Kelly. Heck, on paper, Gill's resume doesn't even stack up to Craig Bohl's at this point is their careers. Gill may be successful as a head coach at NU, but the risk is MUCH HIGHER than those other guys simply because you don't have as many data points from which to draw conclusions. For me this whole issue is one of faith versus fact. Don't get me wrong, I like Gill and think he has done a good job. But most supporters seem to be of the mind that Gill "is the natural fit" or that he knows how to win "the Nebraska Way". They hold a deep faith that there is something near-magical about Nebraska football and if only we could get one of our own back we would rekindle our winning ways. I am on the other side of this issue. Nebraska football is not some mythical beast. There is no unique "Nebraska Way". The best thing to do is to look for someone who has a solid resume and has proven to be a great leader of men on the football field. It’s an empirical exercise (who has the best resume for the job) as opposed to some type of ephemeral thing (who has the best character to restore the Husker Way). To me, its like the second group is trying to appoint some type of wizard whereas the first group is looking for a qualified CEO.

One of the mods should sticky this. We need a high turnout.

The favorites for Head Coach at the University of Nebraska next year seem to be Turner Gill and Bo Pelini. Some have mentioned Cincinnati's Brian Kelly. After doing a little statistical work, he is the obvious choice. Turner Gill is the emotional favorite. He is a good man and a Husker through and through. But he only has two years coaching experience at a MAC school. Yeah, they have improved a great deal, but you know who else brought a MAC school from the bottom to the conference championship game in two years? Another guy who was a good man and a Husker through and through, Frank Solich. Maybe Gill would be a good hire. But not two years out. He hasn't done enough for me to risk the entire Husker program on him for the next four years. Bo Pelini looks to be a great defensive mind. But you only have to look as far as Mike Stoops and Bob Davie to find coaches with similar pedigrees that haven't done so well at the helm of major programs. Bo also may do well. I really wouldn't be upset with giving him a chance. But lets look further at Brian Kelly. We know recruiting is important. But we have also learned, painfully, that it is not the only thing. You have to coach players up, not simply expect them to perform. I did a little excercise to see who was the best at coaching their players up. First I found the average recruiting rank of all BCS schools over the last five years. (I used various scheme to weight each class, but the results didn't vary much.) Then I found the current Sagarin ratings for each BCS conference team. I then subtracted their Sagarin position from their recruiting position. If the resulting number was positive, the coaches were doing very well with the raw material they had. If the number was negative, the coaches were doing very poorly with that material. Based on that analysis, here at the best and worst coaches of 2007. Best 1. Cincinnati +57 2. South Florida +45 3. Kansas +45 4. Connecticut +44 5. West Virginia +39 Worst 62. Nebraska -34 63. Mississippi -35 64. Florida State -37 65. Notre Dame -45 66. Miami -50 Over the last 4/5 years Cincinnati ranked DEAD LAST in the BCS Conferences in recruiting according to Rivals. They are currently NINTH in the Sagarin ratings (PREDICTOR method). 66-9=57 Brian Kelly has come in and in ONE YEAR turned probably one of the least physically talented teams into one of the best teams in the nation. Plus he has won championships at other levels. This guy is GOOD!!! Turner Gill? Bo Pelini? Very risky relative to Brian Kelly. Lock him in today, Tom.

Is anyone on this board truly aware of what he is doing at UCONN? IMO If, it is FAR more impressive than anything Bryan Kelly has done. I am amazed at how little I have seen his name mentioned. Those of you not familiar with him should really take a long hard look at him, he is a diamond in the rough and if you like defense, you're going to like Edsall. What he has orchestrated at UCONN with little to no talent is nothing short of amazing. In fact, I would take him over any of the names which i continue to see thrown about (bp, tg, pf, jg, bk, etc.) I really hope TO interviews him.