HuskerNMO

Well, a current WR's brother has posted Gilmore is gone, people have hinted that Sanders has stepped down for personal reasons, and Watson appears to be out the door.

Exactly. What is Bo gonna do come out and deny it? This will be the first question asked in the teleconference. And I think Kevin Wilson has no reason to coordinate this with NU. He was probably asked the question and gave the answer. This is blowing up in Bo's face for staying so mum on the situation in my opinion. yes, that can be good during this huge day, but all recruits should know what the situation with the staff is. And I think they all do. Kinda like the saying karma can be a biatch I think that Kevin should be announcing his coach is gone, if it's the case, but he has no business telling the world what post he is taking at Nebraska. Save that announcement for us to make. At least, Bo could have made that request. In my opinion. Could be interesting in a few years if Wilson gets Indiana turned around, between the Big 12 OU\NU links, Ekeler and Raymond? Might be a fun game

It's crappy for the players, but an LOI is binding. I will put it this way, you haven't heard much about certain coaches being in homes recruiting lately, Stafford's last in homes were with Carl, then Bo and JP, not Marvin.

That he enjoyed the night life in Lincoln a little too much

Raymond is supposedly a very solid recruiter, and will open more doors in the SEC areas.

Kevin Wilson confirmed that Raymond will coach our entire secondary per Sean Callahan.

Signed with Arizona

Both Dish and Direct put up alternates when there are multiple games on.

Winner, winner chicken dinner.... Captain Arby's himself... i like mangino as a coach especially qb's... Mangino was an OL coach, he doesn't work with QB's.

Coming from a guy who thinks that Cody Green is a better QB based on blowing out a Colorado team that had just fired their head coach, and a close call with Iowa State, the above statement means absolutely nothing to me. If you've read, I've said Taylor was a better option when healthy talent wise. Roll 212: Of course you cut out the rest of the post where I said that was due to leadership and ability to run our offense. And that was an opinion, which is all you've posted in this thread. I've posted statistics to back up my claims, and you've used nothing. You said CU's coach was "just fired", and implied they were playing poorly. Yet I refuted that saying he'd been fired 2 1/2 weeks prior and they had won 2 straight after that, but you gloss over that. Obviously I can't change your opinion, but at least mine is based on something other than ignorance of statistics. Haha, so your argument is that CU hadn't fired their coach literally the day they played us, but an entire 2 1/2 weeks before? Gee, I wonder why I might have ignored that refutation... As far as statistics go, Texas A&M and OU both ranked about 30 slots ahead of Colorado and Iowa State in total defense. Also, who are you kidding, it's Colorado and Iowa State! Kody Spano would have had decent games against those guys. Western Kentucky's total defense finished ranked ahead of both Colorado and Iowa State. Does that mean Taylor deserves more credit for his performance in that game? Anyways, you want statistics, so here ya go: Completion % Martinez: 59.2% 2009 Lee: 58.6% Green: 55% Lee: 55% 2009 Green: 53.2% Efficiency Rating Martinez: 138.78 2009 Lee: 126.89 Green: 115.77 2009 Green: 100.37 Lee: 97.84 Yards per Carry Martinez: 6.0 2009 Green: 5.1 Green: 2.6 Lee: 3.8 2009 Lee: 1.7 Whaddya know. Martinez is tops in every category. This argument is played out, but great job ignorning KU and Washington in that comparison. It's already been established that Taylor got his runs against crappy run defenses, 87% of his yards were against teams in the bottom 25% of rushing defenses. 100% of his TD's were against that same bottom 25%, 90% of his passing TD's we're against teams ranked 70th or lower in total D. We played 5 games against defenses that were better than 86th against the run, in those games Taylor carried 69 times for 134 yards (1.94 per carry), and had 0 TD's. Basically what we've established it that Zac Lee was bad last year when not playing the Sun Belt, Cody Green has been mediocre the times he's played a full game, and Taylor struggled when playing any defense with a pulse throughout the year. Our offense sucks, and if it continues to do so next year, we're in for another let down of a season.

I ran into him outside of KU's stadium after the 07 debacle, he still smiled and said hello, but you could tell that he was very unhappy.

At least it's signing day tomorrow, and it gives me something to do after a foot of snow got dumped on us today

They made some mistakes, I'm not convinced that Watson wanted Taylor to start the year, and I've been told that Watson wanted to put Cody in several times and was vetoed by Bo. But that's just rumor and speculation, I do know that Zac couldn't go vs Iowa State, and Cody wasn't supposed to play in the Kansas game. Beyond that I have no idea, but if I find out more I'll let you know. I may have a new "source"

Dorial tore an extensor tendon in his shooting hand, they thought he'd be out 6 weeks from basketball, but he's planning on playing in the state playoffs with a brace. His younger brother is a beast also as a freshman at 6'3" named Darnell that also plays WR.

Petrino's already way ahead of you.

You mean the stats where Cody was +8 against cellar-dwelling CU and mid-level ISU? Coulda swore I posted stats showing that even craptastic QBs from KSU and KU did better against the same competition. But if that's the only tune you know, I say play on. How do the other QB's relate to Taylor? How does that change the fact that Taylor did next to nothing while injured? All it does is show that some other quarterbacks performed better than Taylor once he was injured, which I agree with. Show me where I said Cody was a great quarterback, my only point is he was a better option than an injured Taylor Martinez. Cody in his 2 games was 3 TD's better against the other D's average than when Taylor was injured, the stats show that plainly. And you can say the competition that Taylor played was better, but KU, A&M, OU and Washington only combined to average a FG less than ISU and CU, the difference isn't that great, let alone 21 PPG different. They don't relate to Taylor. Follow along. They relate to CODY GREEN. You're posting stats which you think show that Cody coulda/shoulda/woulda done better had he been given command, and your stats don't support that. Your stats support the fact that Cody is comparable to average, middle-tier QBs in the Big XII like Mecham and Coffman - the kind who get annihilated by tough competition. With an injured Taylor Martinez we lost to A&M and OU by six combined points. There is NOTHING you've shown that shows Cody would have been the difference in those games. I've shown stats which show that against similar competition, a quarterback who compares to Cody Green got destroyed by A&M. Cody would have been demolished by OU and A&M. Cody Green could not have overcome the total team meltdown we experienced against Washington. Cody wasn't even good enough to get the "save us" duty when our WRs developed a case of the dropsies against Texas. He looked absolutely horrible against Washington in September. The best two things Cody Green has going for him right now are Potential and Backup Quarterback status. Everyone loves the backup - he's the best player on the team. There is NOTHING you have shown that says he wouldn't have been. Fact is, when Cody was given the week to practice with the 1's and have a game plan put in place for him, we scored 31 and 45 points. When Taylor was injured in the last 4 games, we scored 20 against a team worse than Colorado or Iowa State, 6 against A&M (a mediocre LSU O hung 41 on them), 20 against OU (which Taylor had little to do with), and 7 against Washington. Taylor was demolished by A&M and OU, there's nothing showing that Cody would have done worse. You don't think Cody could have managed to get sacked 7 times, throw a pick and fumble the ball 3 times against OU? Burkhead or 1/2 of our roster could have managed that. I guess I should clarify that this isn't as much about Cody being great, which I don't think I've claimed here, it's about an injured Taylor Martinez being essentially worthless after his injury. And showing that Taylor only produced against crap defenses, which is the same thing you're holding against Cody, and everyone holds against Zac Lee.

Bo has said so many different things about the offense, it's easy to pick a few. He's said many times how important it is to remain multiple. http://bigrednetwork...te_the_offense/ The word about the offense that we've heard the last few springs is "Multiple". It was a term thought of as a buzz word without substance. Nothing in 2009 appeared very multiple, as attempts to add variation in the offense often led to clear confusion, ineffective plays, short gains, or turnovers. That is until the Holiday bowl rolled around. After viewing Rex Burkhead in the wildcat against Arizona, as well as the precise, effective play of Zac Lee while running and passing, it gave me some hope. Coupled with the way the Spring Game turned out, and multiple doesn't seem like just a word anymore. It's a game plan. But outside of what we've seen on the field in a bowl game and a glorified scrimmage, other clues point to a true transition to a diversified offense. We kept hearing about the word on Taylor Martinez's speed, Mike McNeil's move to receiver, and the leadership by Niles Paul increasing during the off season. And when Bo's thoughts on the offensive line came out at the Big 12 Media Days, pulling off a multiple game plan doesn't seem so far out of the question this year. Are you sure you're quoting the correct thing? This does nothing to refute the quote of mine up there. This is the opinion of Tom Cudd, circa August, 2010. There isn't a quote from Bo refuting what I just said. It's some schmoe's opinion. With all due respect, this is the same Shawn Watson who's been shown the door the last two seasons. The same Shawn Watson who can't seem to score TDs in big games. Quoting Watson on the purpose and direction of this offense is like quoting a prostitute discussing abstinence. He's the root of the problem, not an explanation of the solution. The buzz word has been multiple, from Watson and Pelini. With all due respect, Shawn Watson is still in charge of the offense at this point, and it doesn't appear that will change. Unless he's fired before the start of the season, Bo thinks he's the right guy for the job. Even if the execution isn't there, Watson is the leader of the offense, he's the one with the playbook, he's the one scheming and calling the plays. I think I'll trust his quoted word over your recollection of what Bo said in the past, especially since you haven't managed to actually find a source.

You mean the stats where Cody was +8 against cellar-dwelling CU and mid-level ISU? Coulda swore I posted stats showing that even craptastic QBs from KSU and KU did better against the same competition. But if that's the only tune you know, I say play on. How do the other QB's relate to Taylor? How does that change the fact that Taylor did next to nothing while injured? All it does is show that some other quarterbacks performed better than Taylor once he was injured, which I agree with. Show me where I said Cody was a great quarterback, my only point is he was a better option than an injured Taylor Martinez. Cody in his 2 games was 3 TD's better against the other D's average than when Taylor was injured, the stats show that plainly. And you can say the competition that Taylor played was better, but KU, A&M, OU and Washington only combined to average a FG less than ISU and CU, the difference isn't that great, let alone 21 PPG different.

Bo has said so many different things about the offense, it's easy to pick a few. He's said many times how important it is to remain multiple. http://bigrednetwork.com/story/can_bo_pelini_innovate_the_offense/ The word about the offense that we've heard the last few springs is "Multiple". It was a term thought of as a buzz word without substance. Nothing in 2009 appeared very multiple, as attempts to add variation in the offense often led to clear confusion, ineffective plays, short gains, or turnovers. That is until the Holiday bowl rolled around. After viewing Rex Burkhead in the wildcat against Arizona, as well as the precise, effective play of Zac Lee while running and passing, it gave me some hope. Coupled with the way the Spring Game turned out, and multiple doesn't seem like just a word anymore. It's a game plan. But outside of what we've seen on the field in a bowl game and a glorified scrimmage, other clues point to a true transition to a diversified offense. We kept hearing about the word on Taylor Martinez's speed, Mike McNeil's move to receiver, and the leadership by Niles Paul increasing during the off season. And when Bo's thoughts on the offensive line came out at the Big 12 Media Days, pulling off a multiple game plan doesn't seem so far out of the question this year. Shawn Watson last February, a summary of the column http://www.omaha.com/article/20100220/BIGRED/702209799 Q: I understand you and Bo met with Tom Osborne and Milt Tenopir recently to talk running offense. How was that? A: We just met for two days. Bo and I are so much alike in this way; we never, ever want to stay the same, always want to be evolving. Q: Bo has said he wants to be more physical on offense. What are you doing to get there? A: What we've talked about is we need to be more detailed. Physicality comes from running the football. But we have to do more with detail and assignment. Q: Does this mean you will be running more out of more power sets with two backs? Can you run the ball and be physical out of the shotgun? A: Absolutely. But here's the thing you have to know about us, we're not just a spread team or a gun team. That's not us. We want to be multiple, yet simple. Being beneath the center and in the gun is important because the game is evolving back a little bit. Everybody runs a shotgun offense. It's evolving. We want to be under the center, and we want to be in the gun. That gives us multiplicity.'' Q: Will we see more fullback next year? A: Yes. That's another part of our multiplicity. What you saw us do in the Holiday Bowl, that's what we're going to be doing. So you saw us under center, saw us in the shotgun and in multiple personnel groups and multiple formations. We're not changing much.

Coming from a guy who thinks that Cody Green is a better QB based on blowing out a Colorado team that had just fired their head coach, and a close call with Iowa State, the above statement means absolutely nothing to me. If you've read, I've said Taylor was a better option when healthy talent wise. Roll 212: Of course you cut out the rest of the post where I said that was due to leadership and ability to run our offense. And that was an opinion, which is all you've posted in this thread. I've posted statistics to back up my claims, and you've used nothing. You said CU's coach was "just fired", and implied they were playing poorly. Yet I refuted that saying he'd been fired 2 1/2 weeks prior and they had won 2 straight after that, but you gloss over that. Obviously I can't change your opinion, but at least mine is based on something other than ignorance of statistics.

We aren't comparing Cody to other QB's from schools, just showing that a healthy Cody was more productive than an injured Taylor, but I would also take Mecham or Coffman over an injured Taylor Martinez also, or even Collin Klein for KSU who ran for 127 yards and 2 TD's against Texas, and 141 yards against MU (compared to Taylor's 21 and 16). In fact i'd take just about any scholarship QB in the Big 12 over an injured Taylor Martinez for what it's worth.

Coming from a guy who thinks that Cody Green is a better QB based on blowing out a Colorado team that had just fired their head coach, and a close call with Iowa State, the above statement means absolutely nothing to me. If you've read, I've said Taylor was a better option when healthy talent wise. However when injured, he was non-existant, I think i've proven that statistically. I think I've also shown that statistically, the offense did better under Cody than an injured Taylor. Cody, +8 PPG over what those defenses allowed on average, Taylor, -13 compared to what those defenses averaged. Cody was +21 in the average column compared to Taylor when he was injured. Colorado had fired their coach 2 1/2 weeks before our game, they then won 2 straight games and came into Lincoln hoping to become bowl eligible. And since I can't blame the CCG on Taylor according to Knapp, it's not right to blame Cody for Niles fumbling the ball and our D allowing 3 passing TD's to Iowa State. There is statistical evidence to back up that statement of Taylor being effective only against mediocre defenses. 87% of his rushing yards and 100% of his rushing TD's came against bottom 25% run defenses, 90% of his passing TD's came against defenses that were ranked 70th or lower in total defense. Even Zac Lee did great against the scrubs last year.

Reading comprehension my friend, the word outside excludes something. I was giving him credit for that performance, even if it was against the 88th ranked total defense. They took bad angles to Helu on a few runs that went to the house, those plays were a result of good blocking and poor play by the safeties, not 11 men watching Taylor and Helu sneaking out of the backfield. Yet Lee came in and managed to move the offense pretty well, it actually seemed like we had a chance with Zac in the game, with Taylor? It was over. He never lost a game he started, i've posted where the offense was better under Cody than Taylor once he was injured. If you choose to ignore clear statistical evidence that the offense was more productive in 2010 under Cody than under Taylor when injured, then I can't help you 14 in 13 games for Ganz in 2008 vs 12 in 12 games for Martinez, way more? Hardly. And Taylor was obscenely lucky that we recovered most of his fumbles, this number should have been far worse. Best option when healthy? Probably, yes. When injured? Definitely not. Taylor was only good against horrible defenses, period. Again, 87% of his rushing yards came against teams in the bottom quarter of the FCS in run defense or a FBS team, and 100% of his rushing touchdowns came against those teams. His 10 touchdown passes came like this, 5 against the 88th ranked defense, 2 against the 70th ranked defense, 1 against the 106th ranked defense, 1 against the 76th ranked defense in FBS and 1 against the 47th ranked defense. If you're scoring at home, 90% of his passing TD's came against teams ranked 70th or lower in the country in total D. I have little doubt that Cody could have posted impressive numbers against those teams also if given the chance. We went 1-3 with Taylor injured, with him on the field we literally had no shot to win when injured. Burkhead was a better option and more productive lining up behind center, Cody Green would have done better than an injured Taylor. Regardless of the skill level of teams, when Cody was the starting QB after Taylor was hurt we went 2-0 with +8 PPG over those teams defensive averages. With Taylor, we went 1-3 and were -13 PPG compared to those team averages. Those are facts, not opinions, facts. Cody led offenses put more points up against the competitions averages than Taylor's did after he got hurt.

Exaggerate much? All anyone is saying is that he's the best QB we had in 2011. Nothing more, nothing less. Nobody is making excuses for his poor play - and there was plenty of it. Why would you discount the Oklahoma State game? That's like saying, "Aside from all the games Tommie Frazier excelled in, he stunk." But to humor you, outside of the OSU game, I'll give you the Missouri game. You remember that game, right? Top 20 team, we kicked their ass, and there was much rejoicing. Taylor was the QB for all but one of our TDs. And you can't throw Taylor under the bus for Texas. It wasn't his fault we lost that game when he hit several receivers in the hands, only to have them drop the ball. Same goes for the CCG - Martinez didn't give up a 17-point lead (you may not know this, but he doesn't play defense). Nor can you lay the blame for the Bowl Game at Marty's feet - there are PLENTY of Seniors who had trouble looking in the mirror after that game, or at least they should have. Pop Quiz: Name the two Nebraska QBs who have beaten two top-20 teams in the last decade. I'll give you a hint - one was a Heisman Trophy winner, and the other was a first-team Freshman All-American. +1 to you if you can get both names. Nobody give him hints! Show me where I discounted the OSU game, I just pointed out that the layed eggs of those 6 other games outweigh that one very good performance. Taylor had little impact on the MU game, Roy and the O-Line won that. As far as the Texas game, I think Taylor got benched in that game didn't he? In the CCG Taylor took 7 sacks, threw a crucial pick, and put the ball on the turf 3 times. We would have been better off if he would have taken the snaps and took a knee in that game in any passing situation. What quarterback has been benched the most times in the last decade at NU? What quarterback has fumbled the most times in the last decade as a quarterback at NU? I love how you continue to gloss over the facts and statistics posted that show exactly how mediocre Taylor was against teams with a pulse that weren't OSU. And are blind to the fact that once injured, Taylor was a detriment to the team while he was on the field.

Herc really did a good job of laying these points to rest, but I wanted to comment on how much this is a stretch. I don't care if it was a National Championship game, CU was a terrible team that had already packed it in when we played. I have little doubt LaTravis Washington could have beaten Colorado. And Iowa State was hardly an example of Cody "beating" a team. More like, we won despite Cody. They had won their previous two games, and scored 45, 34 and 44 points in their prior games and were playing to be bowl eligible, please explain how that qualifies as "packing it in". Cody wasn't the problem in the ISU game, he played with a minor concussion and still played fairly well given the game plan, he was 5-9 in the second half throwing the ball, all 5 completions went for 1st downs, 4 of those were on 3rd down. By comparison, that running attack that was the key to the game only managed 3 second half first downs. But please, by all means, keep using generalizations and ignoring any actual statistics to back up your position. jliehr, you're trying to tell us that we should be impressed that a healthy Cody Green had success against Iowa State and Colorado, when Iowa State was a mediocre team at best, and when Colorado was flat out awful and in the midst of a coaching change. Not only are you saying we should be impressed with that, but you're telling us that it's fair to compare healthy Cody Green's performance in those games to an injured Taylor Martinez's performance against Texas A&M and Oklahoma, two of the best three teams we played all year. It's not about statistics at this point, it's about common sense. Forgive me for not buying in. It is about statistics, name one thing Taylor Martinez did in the last 4 games he played that showed any signs he really belonged on the field. We went 1-3, barely did anything against a putrid KU squad, did nothing against an A&M squad that got hammered by LSU who's OC was as popular as Watson, and our 2 TD's in the CCG were a long run by Helu and a TD setup by an interception. And I don't think we need to relive the Holiday Bowl do we? Really everyone is so impressed by Taylor for just a few games against mediocre defenses. Taylor rushed for 12 TD's this year, which seems pretty impressive. However, those came in 4 games, WKU (#86 Run D), Idaho (#95 Run D), Washington (#97 Run D), Kansas State (#119 Run D). We played 5 games against defenses that were better than 86th against the run, in those games Taylor carried 69 times for 134 yards (1.94 per carry), and 112 of those came against Oklahoma State, 0 TD's and fumbled the ball 7 times 86% of Taylor's 965 rushing yards came against defenses ranked #86 or lower, yet while you guys bash Cody for the competition he played, and people criticize Zac Lee for only showing against Sun Belt teams last year, Taylor is seen as the next coming by many that can do no wrong. And Knapp is talking about the promised land, what exactly, outside of the OSU game shows that Taylor is ready to lead this team anywhere? And how is that not balanced by the Texas, SD State, KU, A&M, CCG and Holiday Bowl games? But keep using that common sense by all means.