husker98

On 9/30/2020 at 3:34 PM, Guy Chamberlin said:

 

I remember in-game announcers saying the same thing about Nebraska's refusal to make defensive adjustments. They seemed genuinely mystified and were trying to be diplomatic. Former Huskers  tweeted the same thing. Opposing players, too. One quarterback said it was like playing a high school team, the offense felt like it could do whatever it wanted. 

 

But for some reason we kept focusing our wrath on Tim Beck. 

To be fair that wrath was deserved also. But yes Pelini didn't change with the times on defense either. Pelini's tenure can be neatly summed up as missed opportunities and an unwillingness to change with a rapidly evolving game at the highest level. And it showed on the field.

The Democratic party has a bit of a communist problem, they agree and like a number of policies they implemented. The issue is that a fair number of people that live in this country had a number of their family members killed by communists, me included, although a ways back in my families history. So it ends up being inconsiderate and insensitive to those who have suffered because in their eyes Obama or Sanders Complimenting Castro is one in the same as those two idiots complimenting Hitler for anyone of his policy successes. 

Our modern politicians are increasingly history deaf, and it's becoming very alarming.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1iQUF1gQmI

Found a good video on american gun culture that was done by a pretty good historian who ive been watching more of recently. I'm interested to see what people think of it.

I think"long time worst official in the big ten names coach who road his butt hardest" is a more fitting title here.

On 1/28/2020 at 6:19 AM, funhusker said:

I have a love/hate going on with this post.  I can definitely see how the fall of the Soviet Union gave the US a green light to expand our interest and overextend our resources.

 

But...one could argue the two most violent wars fought in the last 75 years were because of the competition with the USSR: Korea and Vietnam.

Completely true. It wasn't perfect, however it seems to have been more 'Measured' for lack of a better term. I feel in the modern era decisions are made more hastily with fewer concrete facts and even fewer considerations for the consequences.

On 1/28/2020 at 3:23 PM, knapplc said:

 

People don't realize how much the Brits are responsible for the current Middle East disaster.

It's better known than you would think. By contrast however, even if they had stayed true to their agreements with the Arab revolt, (the one where the Arabs get most of the middle east) it almost certainly would have devolved into civil war anyway given the vast number of ethnic groups and minor religious sects that inhabit the region. So the alternative may not have been much better.

On 1/28/2020 at 3:28 PM, TGHusker said:

Not to mention what they (wt USA help) did in Iran.

People also forget that Iran bordered another country at that time, the Soviet Union, who had its influences in the country as well, and helped occupy Iran during WW II. To put it plainly the country is geopolitically strategic and oil rich, essentially guaranteeing foreign interference. The west did its part to keep it from falling to the commies but as we saw later on in history that it all came with a price. 

Frankly, the last four presidents have all been between bad too outright disasters in foreign policy. 

I guess perhaps we were a bit more thoughtful when had the evil empire in siberia to consider before we did things.

On 1/20/2020 at 6:34 PM, Wunderkind said:

Culture, Culture, culture, culture, culture, culture, culture, culture, culture, culture, culture, culture, culture, culture, culture. Is that enough yet . . . Culture

...... oh god stop!!!!

I'm currently letting Warthunder slowly devour whats left of my soul before bed. 

I'm all for it. If i recall correctly it is the lair of the sock, and his fabled wisdom.

Man, i drank a bunch of vodka, and suddenly this thread makes sense

in light of recent staff movement, this thread title has not aged well.

Gotta be happy for the Joe Burrow.

Still frustrating that we never seemed offer more than passing interest in the kid however. 

On 12/26/2019 at 10:25 AM, Guy Chamberlin said:

 

Well, yeah. It can. 

 

That's why I phrased it the way I did. The criticisms of Beck --- getting away from the run game when it was working, passing on third and one, passing when the team had the lead in the fourth quarter, cute plays, trick plays, not establishing bread and butter plays, questionable clock management, no offensive identity -- haven't really changed under Frost, have they? 

 

Scott came in with more of an Oregon offense than the Osborne offense, and that big playbook finesse offense is everything Beck haters hated about Beck. I think Scott will eventually pull it off and put his own stamp on things, but at the moment he's not even doing it as well as Beck. Stats don't tell us everything but, you know....

 

Nebraska Offense 2014

Team Offense: #12 in NCAA

37 points per game

27 passing attempts for 212 ypg

45 rushing attempts for 240 ypg

5.8 penalties/game

1.9 turnovers/game

9-4 record

 

Nebraska Offense 2019

Team Offense #58 in NCAA

28 points per game

27 passing attmpets for 212 ypg

45 rushing attmpets for 205 ypg

7.7 penalties/game

1.8 turnovers/game

5-7 record

I like your post it gives good insight into where your opinion derives from and give some numbers to make your point. 

However There are some Really critical flaws in the logic of this post.

You are comparing (in the 2014 team) a group who Beck had overseen for 4 years at that point, all kids he helped recruit and (develop?) and enjoyed a stable QB position in Tommy A.

And Failure was the Result, they only beat two winning teams that year (Iowa and Rutgers), played two other winning teams close, and got blown out by the rest. His patented no huddle, 3 and out offense was on full display that season against any decent team. A very average Iowa team took them to OT were they barely scrapped out a W. 

You then want to use those numbers and compare that to the SF UNL Cornhuskers who were using a roster still heavily dependent on talent recruited by the last regime with a revolving door of QB's thanks to injuries and inexperience and claim he isn't even doing as good as Beck?

You want to pass judgement, do it when SF hits year 4, the comparison will be an honest and reasonable, but more importantly, one that will hold water. 

We could get into a debate about play calling, and the offensive philosophy behind both teams. But again its hard to pass judgement on scott who is only in year two. But if what i have read is true, we haven't really seen much yet, much of this offense is placeholder at the moment till the kids they recruited develop some more. 

Tim Beck on the other hand we have a great recent history which only reaffirmed the many grievances our fans had about him as we have now watched him crash and burn a natty title caliber offense at TOSU, only team to get shut out in the play off lol.  Then turn around as if nothing bad happened and crash and burn a Big 12 title calibre (if not more) offense at Texas. This dude got demoted and booted minus the pink slip at TOSU (having connections sure is nice eh?), and has now gotten demoted again at Texas. The only thing saving him at this point is his considerable recruiting acumen, That's one firing, a demotion/quasi we still friends but you can't work here bro firing, and then a demotion over incompetence in all with in a 5 year span. 

Minus Tim Beck i enjoyed the Pelini era, Bo came close, he needed to make some changes on D, but he really needed to get rid of Beck and go find someone a bit more qualified to implement his vision of what he wanted on offense. 

On 12/21/2019 at 12:02 PM, Guy Chamberlin said:

I know we're celebrating both Jesus' birthday and a successful recruiting season right now, but this thread gives us pause to consider understanding and forgiveness.

 

Virtually every criticism of  Tim Beck's offense while he was at Nebraska could be leveled at Scott Frost. 

 

In fairness to both Beck and Frost, they run minor variations of  a modern college football offense practiced by more successful programs, and coaches who aren't accused of being "too cute" because they win. 

Lol, no. Cool opinion, but no. The hilarious circus of playing calling and game planning ineptitude Beck over saw at UNL can in no way be linked or compared to what frost is doing. 

On 12/19/2019 at 11:37 AM, desertshox said:

 

you only get an A+ if you land the trifecta; kicker, punter and long snapper.

The lack of a long snapper makes this class a complete failure. F grades all around

32 minutes ago, cornhuskers4ever said:

Have to admit, its prettier than the broken chair trophy

 

You take that back

On 11/20/2019 at 5:07 PM, BigPeterJ said:

Agree.  He is the winningest coach in the Mac , mostly because he has been there for so long.  The great coaches leave the Mac for a better job.

where the vast majority end up getting fired because they are actually crappy coaches who enjoyed one fluke season with the last guys talent, Brian Kelly with holding, still hasn't won a natty tho.

On 11/20/2019 at 5:24 PM, BigPeterJ said:

Im not sure he is in over his head, so much as he wasnt much into recruiting.  I was agreeing with the fact that he wasnt gonna get us (or keep us) where we wanted to be.  He is a solid coach, not great.

We can't make any assumptions about what he would have or not done for us. A lot was changing in CFB in 2003, Frank was beginning to make changes and modernizations...... just in time to get fired. So we will never know. Unless your a pretty good gypsie fortune teller its best to leave it at that.

On a side note I'll never understand the people in our fan base who still seem to think that firing winning head coaches was fine and defensible. Long story short, we are in this mess today thanks to this idiotic policy. And we are lucky we didn't end up like freaking Baylor, who had the same genius idea and killed their program until art briles came along and turned Waco into the sexual assault capital of Texas. If a school in freaking Texas can't weather the whirlwind of firing a winning head coach, how people ever thought we could is beyond me.

8 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

Your eligibility should be up. 

Not so fast chief, this would explain a lot 

Big if true, wonder how this affects the traditional hug before they run out onto the field during senior day......

8 hours ago, TheSker said:

Based on our offensive inefficiency in the red zone?

we have a winner

12 hours ago, 10_point_buck said:

Maybe instead of chucking guys under the bus every press conference, maybe...just maybe.....he could point the thumb back at himself and his staff and how they are getting schooled week in and week out.  That would be refreshing and that is more reflective of a true leader.  Pass the popcorn

Intentional or no, this is a Bo Pelini reference, i am both impressed and offended.

31 minutes ago, BIG ERN said:

@husker98These weren't great defenses but he's had 3 good games this year. 3 not good...

Illinois: 328 pass yards 3 TD 0 INT (64%), 118 rush yards

N. Illinois: 257 pass yards 2 TD 0 INT (59%), 44 rush yards 1 TD

Colorado: 290 pass yards 2 TD 1 INT (61%) 66 rush yards 2 TD

5 minutes ago, Husker in WI said:

 

 

I'd throw in NW - he was 13-20 for 145 and had 4 or 5 drops, depending on who you ask. At least a couple of them were decent length, and one was a TD. We catch the easy ones - JD on an early third down, Allen on a check down when our shot play was covered, and Wan'Dale on a screen and it's something like 16-20 for 200 and a TD against a very good defense. And that's not giving him any credit for how the game would have changed with those or the chunk of the game Vedral played.

 

Statistically not great, but given the defense and the drops saying it was not good is just not accurate. Still definitely bad games against USA and OSU. And he hasn't been "playing scared" since Frost yelled at him to run, against Illinois or NIU I believe. He still has lapses where he doesn't run for the first on 3rd down when he can, but even that is the exception more than the rule anymore. Crack back blocks are illegal now, in case you missed that.

Its one thing dicing teams form Illinois and colorado, its another thing being largely ineffective against everyone else. The OSU game was a really look at how far he has come, and its not far enough, the line suffers some of the blame for that but not entirely, defenses have caught on to his tendancies and the whole offense is paying for it as a result.

@Husker in WI IF stats won game we would have beaten colorado and blown out North western. But we didn't. Referencing to what i typed above, against good teams he's got issues right now. And referring to the crack block thats my bad on terminology, i meant just a block in general, and in the atleast two instances on broken plays i saw, he just stood there. He is playing scared, barely getting to all his reads, this is evident by him missing wide open receivers and making terrible read option calls. Again the line takes some of the blame but like i wrote above, a lot of it is on him atm. He needs to get it figured out or else a bowl game is out of reach.

3 hours ago, BIG ERN said:

AM can make plays. TOs come with that but Vedral can't make this offense go like he can when clicking 

And the last time he was clicking was last year. The dude plays spooked and wont even throw a crack back block for teammates on broken plays. I agree he is a good player with all the talent in the world, but a lot of good that talent does when he is playing scared. 

5 minutes ago, BIG ERN said:

If AM is out for them then we won't be. 

lol, no. AM is only slightly better than vedral this year for mysterious reasons. We would still be underdogs.

59 minutes ago, Roundball Shaman said:

BigRedBuster: “I just have to roll my eyes at this conversation. Over the Riley years (and possibly more) I read posts where fans were upset that the players would show no emotion on the sidelines and didn't act like they were into the game. They then go out and win a hard fought (albeit sloppy) game with a third string walk-on and some fans say...."They should act like they've been there before or it proves their expectations have dropped so far".

 

Some fans choose to view the Husker program and games from the wide lens of a 20, 30, even 40 or 50 year wide lens field. They want to place everything into a wide historical context and then lay on top of that their own personal expectations for any event. That’s OK to do that as there are no holy rules about this kind of thing.

 

But we can be reminded from time to time that these young men - most of them being men much larger than most guys on the street - are young adults but they (like all of us) are also kids at heart. You feel the joy of winning, something working out well, being stunned by unexpected favor, or that fact that YOU did it, and you react just like a kid would because inside you are still partly a kid. Even if we make to 100 years old, we should never ever lose that feeling.

 

Plus the fact, you can’t expect another human being to react in any particular way or as you might think they should. You feel, you react, as an individual. If you are 20 years old today, everything (even making an "easy" field goal) is new to you.

 

Both points of view: that the Huskers should have high expectations - and the one that knows that celebrating something (even minor) can be a good thing - are valid. Both need be part of the Husker culture.

Huskerlaw, did you make a new account?