teachercd

He is an incoming sophmore? Can I ask, are they charging him to attend the camp?

Again, I say it a lot but it seems like NU coaches find talent or evaluate talent faster then many others. I think that this is one thing that Bo is very good at it, seeing kids that he wants early.

Anyone else get the feeling that this guy will end up with like 25 offers? I swear, it seems like the NU coaches offer kids first and then other teams find out about the kid. I am not saying that other teams just copy NU, but I think that Bo and his staff know talent quickly and know if they will be a good fit.

Didnt cottons offensive line produce a Husker single game record for rushing and did the Skers lead the Big 12 in rushing? I am not sure on the second one and I could be wayyyyyyy off but I thought I read that on another board.

Doubtful. I hope the Oregon Fans don't want him here. I also wonder a little about his character after not doing more to stop LP from dragging a mutual friend (and Nebraska's reputation) down a flight of stairs. I'm willing to chalk it up to lack of experience. I think most people do not assume that another person will grab a girl and drag her down some steps. My guess is that by the time he could have reacted at all that it would have been to late. The fact that you even think this is some kind of red flag is odd.

The only people that dont want him at NU are BCers

Nuance I have coached football for 10 years, if you dont think there is such a thing as garbage time then you are crazier then Ted Bundy. I am a DC and I can tell you right now that I call games totally differently when the 3rd or 4th quarter hits and we are up big. The players will change in and out more often, starters mix with backups all over the field, the play calls change, sometimes I want a backup to get a chance to blitz, knowing that I could give up a HUGE play. Sometimes we play a soft zone, 5-7 yards softer then normal, letting the other team get some yards to eat up the clock. Again, if you think the term garbage time was invented to make BC look bad, then you are nuts. BC made BC look bad. Also, if you think that DC's dont call a game differently when they are up big then you either love BC or hate reality.

"Will Watson be back next year?" "Yeah, back at Miami of Ohio"

Besides DJK and Robinson who were the other 28 players that Iowa had suspended? Iowa still had 9 of 11 offensive starters playing last night (Coker was the 2nd leading rusher who started 4 games as well and Sandeman, the guy that replaced DJK, was the #3 guy all year and will end up a 4 year letter guy). Also Nordman catching a pass is like Broekemeier catching passes because Paul was out. I guess I thought you knew I was being a bit over the top. Sorry The fact is, they have all this drama, no stud WR, a backup running back AND they still go for 250 yards on the ground and win. The skers had a dinged up QB and no Paul and the watsahaners were out in full force telling us how great watsahan would be if those guys werent hurt. You need to find ways to win.

Iowa last night, injuries and about 30 guys out cause of drugs and they managed to rush for about 250 yards with some freshmen running back and complete passes, one to some cat that only had one catch all year I think and still win the game (yes I know they had a defensive TD). Watsahan could never make that happen. Then the watsahan lovers would tell us the reason that the offense struggled was due to injuries and suspensions.

Thank you!!! Another sane poster that understands garbage time!

You win. You think Watson is very good and I think he is average at best.

If you don't care about stats that other teams put up, why are you basing your aguments on "top half defenses"? Those are mostly built on stats against other teams. 2 of the 3 we played a majority of the game with a gimpy quarterback that was forced into doing things that he doesn't do well at. In the Texas game the scheme and playcalling certainly wasn't the issue, it was the execution. I would also argue the same in the A&M game, Watson's play had Reed in position for a TD, but an awful throw by Martinez ended up as an interception. Even in the OU game, it was poor decision making by Taylor that cost us the game. I put the A&M and OU losses on the coach that wanted Martinez in the game, and that wasn't our OC. How very Callahan-esque. When the offense looks good (even if it's only against a bottom of the barrel defense) it's due to great coaches and the gameplans they designed. When it doesn't work, it's because of the players: injuries, lack of depth, lack of experience, execution, etc. Even when history dictates that our offensive coordinator has been mediocre at best, and other OCs seem to have better success with the same personnel issues. Talk to almost any coach, winning and losing almost always comes down to who executes better. Yes, sometimes the game plan is just crap and you get hammered, but 90% plus of losses come back to not executing the play the way it was supposed to be ran. See dropped TD passes, blown coverages, QB's that don't throw the ball away resulting in a sack and fumbles. Coaches can not go out of the field and execute for the players, we basically had the same offensive staff in the 80's when we could never win the big one as we did in the 90's when we won 3 titles. What was the difference? Talent and execution, you can't ignore the fact that up until the time that Martinez got hurt, we had a top 10 offense in the country with a freshman QB at the helm. You don't get there by pure luck, you get there by a good coaching staff and execution. When we had a gimpy QB, we lost the ability to execute our offense. The biggest mistake the coaching staff made this year, was not playing Cody Green in the A&M and OU games. Cody can't do what a healthy Martinez can do, but he is a better option than a gimpy Martinez. And the prodigal son is who made that call, not our maligned OC. Well you are guessing on the part about Cody doing a better job and you might be right but you could be wrong too. Cody, even when 100% healthy has never really shown anything that makes him better then average. Even that CU game, didnt he pass for like 100 yards? Its not like he was 20-22 for 300 yards and 3 TD's. The first part, Like I said, I have coached (and still do) for 10 years, when coaches say its all about excuting, its pretty much coach talk for "we sucked". The reason that plays are not run correctly, most of the time, is because the defense adjusted to it. That is why a good OC adjusts again and finds a new way to attack. See, the players are doing what they have been coached to do, its up to the coaches to prepare them, FOR EVERYTHING.

If you don't care about stats that other teams put up, why are you basing your aguments on "top half defenses"? Those are mostly built on stats against other teams. 2 of the 3 we played a majority of the game with a gimpy quarterback that was forced into doing things that he doesn't do well at. In the Texas game the scheme and playcalling certainly wasn't the issue, it was the execution. I would also argue the same in the A&M game, Watson's play had Reed in position for a TD, but an awful throw by Martinez ended up as an interception. Even in the OU game, it was poor decision making by Taylor that cost us the game. I put the A&M and OU losses on the coach that wanted Martinez in the game, and that wasn't our OC. I am basing it on top half defenes because I thought that was a fair starting point to use. Dont you? I get what your saying about the plays "being there", I have coached for 10 years and with the exception of the QB sneak, spike and kneel, I have NEVER seen an offensive play that was drawn up that was not "there" or was not designed to score a TD. They all are, the thing is, you have to know what to call, when to call and how to play to your players strongest points. That goes for defense too, you probably wont see Bo having a DE cover a WR. Sure, it's a fair starting point. But you said what other teams do against the same teams we played don't matter, yet that's exactly what stats are. You're argument just doesn't make sense, you're basically saying that because you don't like the stats I used, which show that Watson's horrible offense had the best performance against some teams that had faced some very explosive offenses, they aren't valid. Yet somehow, magically, we can use stats against top 50 defenses to show that Watson sucks. Point 2, i'm a bit confused, are you admitting that Watson may have called the correct plays that just weren't executed? Taylor probably had at least 5-6 touchdowns dropped this year, many in big games that cost us. Taylor also missed receivers that cost us points or made bad throws, that's execution, not the play calling. Point 3, I've certainly seen Bo drop DE's into short zones where receivers are running Okay, I am not sure if perhaps I am not explaining myself right or if you are not understanding it, I do not mean for that to sound like I am a jerk. Let me try again, to your first point: When you play a crappy defense the offense should, in theory, put up good stats. When they play a great defense they should, in theory, struggle, and when they play an average defense they should probably have some good games and some bad ones. Now, Watsons bad games, the ones that NU gets beat in, he averages WAY below what could be seen as effective. The stats show that. I said that I didnt care what OTHER teams do vs a team. Not the overall stats just I dont care what Stanford did vs UW. Point 2, I am sure that Watson has called the "correct" play lots of times, like I said, with the exception of 3 plays that I know of, all plays are designed to score a TD, so yeah, he has called the "correct" play lots of times, the problem is that he calls the correct play without taking into consideration what the defense will do and how they will defend it, remember, the defense is trying to. That is the adjustment phase of the game. The part that Watson is just terrible at. Point 3, well you made my point, you have seen the DE's drop into ZONE COVERAGE, they are not covering a WR, they are covering space. HUGE HUGE HUGE difference. Bo is not putting a DE out wide to cover a WR man-man. Sounds stupid right? Well, thats how Watsons offense is. You have a QB that is not a great passer so you make him pass with a lot, you give him tough routes to throw/complete. It makes little or no sense. Again, I am not a total Watson hater, I just think he is at best, average. That is not a bad thing but I think there are better guys out there for the job. I see other teams that have hurt guys (the ducks this year) and dont miss a beat, or that have new QB's, Cam Newton, and dont miss a beat. Why is it that its always a fair excuse for Watson? Bo lost TWO starting linebackers and turned the 3rd one into an ALL FREAKING AMERICAN. The offense gets a guy dinged up and it looks like the special olympics out there! Bo yanks guys on defense when they screw up, ALL THE TIME, yet, Watson continues to use the same players over and over even when they are not doing a good job.

God the worst thing about the BC lovers was when they stopped believing in "garbage time stats", so NU is down by 40 and they complete 10 passes in a row and rack up 200 more yards of offense and lose by 45, yeah, those were not garbage time stats. Sorry to take this off topic, I just remember all the fights I had with BCers about this.

If you don't care about stats that other teams put up, why are you basing your aguments on "top half defenses"? Those are mostly built on stats against other teams. 2 of the 3 we played a majority of the game with a gimpy quarterback that was forced into doing things that he doesn't do well at. In the Texas game the scheme and playcalling certainly wasn't the issue, it was the execution. I would also argue the same in the A&M game, Watson's play had Reed in position for a TD, but an awful throw by Martinez ended up as an interception. Even in the OU game, it was poor decision making by Taylor that cost us the game. I put the A&M and OU losses on the coach that wanted Martinez in the game, and that wasn't our OC. I am basing it on top half defenes because I thought that was a fair starting point to use. Dont you? I get what your saying about the plays "being there", I have coached for 10 years and with the exception of the QB sneak, spike and kneel, I have NEVER seen an offensive play that was drawn up that was not "there" or was not designed to score a TD. They all are, the thing is, you have to know what to call, when to call and how to play to your players strongest points. That goes for defense too, you probably wont see Bo having a DE cover a WR.

I appreciate the stats you laid out but I dont care about what other teams did or didnt do against the same team. I care about what NU did vs those teams. Watson has shown, time and time again that vs top half defenses, he basically poops his pants. This year we saw it again UT AM OU How many TOTAL points did he offense score in those 3 games? Was it 6, 6, 20? So, yeah, 32 points, so less then 11 points per game. The defense in those games let up, 20, 9, 23 (I think), so 52 points or about 17.5 points per game. Now, you can say what you want but I think that a good team should be able to let up 17-20 points per game and still win.

I thought OU's defense was in the mid 60's, I could be wrong. I guess I would say this, How many times has the defense held opposing teams under their average point and yardage totals since Bo has been here? Then I would say, how many times has Watsons offense been held under its point and yardage average when they play what is considered to be an average defense. I would say even a top half defense, in the nation, so what is that, about 1-64? My thinking is that Bo's defense has done much better in this area then has Watsons offense. Even in the championship games the last two years. What did UT and OU average per game, about 35 points? Bo held them way under those totals.

I guess my question, for the fans that want Watson around, would be this. What has he done to make you want him around? I am not a Watson hater but I do think he is average at best, especially when he plays a defense with a pulse.

Well, UNL might be closed to the general student/public but probably not to the coaching staff and profs, if they need something done. I don't know that for a fact but its just a guess. I mean, my school is closed right now but if I did need to go there and get something done, even if it was the admission of a new students, I could go an do it. The NCAA part on the other hand, sure that could take longer.

Not to sound like a jerk but getting papers in order (such as crazy transcripts from weird schools and classes taken on the interweb) are what the NCAA and really all colleges as well have a hard time with. Not ACT scores.

Transcripts will not be an issue unless he changed schools a few times or went to a charter school, which as far as I know he did not. I mean, unless there is something super weird. I dont mean to sound like a know it all but I am just talking from experiences with kids coming into K-12 schools. The only issues are lots of transfers and weird charter schools.

Decent defenses just eat the guy up, they always have. It is just a terrible combo. Bo eats up good offenses and Watson gets eaten up by good defenses. It is no way to win big games.

I'm not defending him, I think there are definite reasons to want a change. However, if you are going to have an opinion get an informed one. Too many good coaches have lost their jobs because a fan that doesn't know sh#t but has money ran their mouth about wanting a change when a good candidate wasn't readily available. Frank Solich comes to mind... I actually didnt mean you(I think its just that my post came right after yours) I meant anyone defending him. I do have an informed opinion though, just like you, with lots of stats to back up what Wats does when he plays a team that has a defense in the top 75. I also agree with you on Frank

If you want to defend Watson and read about how great he is just go to HI. The Mega-V's there defend him all day.