dylan

I feel this way too RedDenver. You hit the nail on the head. It is unrealistic and just not right to pin the future of Nebraska football and/or our offense on one kid. If he doesn't want to be a part of what we've got going on in Lincoln, he can hit the road. Also, for everyone complainin about how bad the O will be next year: things will change. It will pick up. Bo is just as percepctive to our offensive woes this year as any of us. He's not a moron. He knows something needs to change. I have a good feeling he will either shake up the staff if he deems it necessary, experiment with some play calling himself offensively ( ...not as horrifying as it sounds), or have Wats on an extremely short leash after all the crap we went through this year. I have a feeling he'll also push whoever is in charge of the O to define it's identity... WCO/Spread, Power O, whatever. We'll be fine. bo will definitely be involved in shaping the offensive identity and making sure we see improvement. the guy didn't get to be a defensive genius by knowing nothing about offense. i can't imagine him ever making play calls though (other than CEO decisions like 4th downs, trick plays or overall in-game strategy).

Our starting 4 may be a small step back, but we'll also have a better rotation especially if we can get some DT presence from a certain JUCO coming in. we should indeed have slightly better depth (four each at end and tackle instead of 3 each), but could lose it quickly with any injuries unless freshmen are ready to go (talking to you, owa). meredith, williams, ? crick, randle, ? steinkuhler, moore, ? allen, ankrah, ?

if he's visiting other people, he's not committed. there's nothing you can do to force a kid to keep his commitment. if it makes you feel better to have the kid pretend to be a soft commit (and oxymoron if i've ever heard one), that's great, but it's of no value to our recruiting. it's obvious he's moved on. should we still push for an in home to get him back? definitely, if we still want him and are OK with how he's handled things. but that doesn't mean we should let him be a placeholder. if you don't think that paul, swift, pederson, purify, nunn, and even (occasionally) gilleyen and franz freakin' hardy made plays for this offense in recent years, then i don't know what to tell you. it appears that kinnie is finally on his way as well. i also strongly disagree that we've been average at receiver the last few years. we've had an awful lot of production out of it. it remains though that the position was mostly disastrous this year and it's his job to fix it.

so...gilmore shouldn't have explained anything and just told him to hold out for the in home visit? what makes you think he didn't tell him we'd explain it more in person? all we really know is that this kid has been swayed by other recruiters, that he apparently has already had it explained how we'd use him and that gilmore clarified the definition of being committed. i'm failing to see how you can assume gilmore screwed this up.

yup, we should be comparable defensively. the safeties will be missed, but the new ones have potential. the real question is whether someone can fill dillard's shoes. i'm hoping martin can, and it was good to finally see him in on defense last game. we know that no one can fill suh's shoes, but, particularly if moore is finally healthy again, we should be pretty good across the board up front. we'll need ankrah and someone else to provide depth at end. i'm not convinced yet by williams.

brooks is constantly injured and bell needs to block to see the field. as to meno and gilleyen, there's a reason they were busted to scout team. some of the attitudes on this team still need to get in line with the new regime. and by the way, cammack rarely saw the field this year and kinnie actually seems to be developing into a weapon. that said, i agree that every single one of the offensive coaches still needs to prove they deserve their jobs. i just don't agree with firing after one bad year, particularly when we're just starting to reestablish the sort of culture that a winning program needs.

i agree about lee running the option. our coaches want to have a running quarterback component in the game plan, but it's clear lee isn't comfortable doing it. (though it is worth noting that he had a key run on what should have been the game winning drive against texas). i do wish we'd quit running the option with him and i think that's a valid criticism of watson. however, since watson wasn't in charge of the offense when they recruited lee, i'm not sure what that has to do with recruiting towards a specific system. so...your main concern is that we can't get well rounded offensive players? i'm not sure what your basis for thinking that is. i think we've actually recruited pretty darn well on offense the last couple of years, to the point that we have a numbers imbalance and we actually need to catch up on defensive recruiting. obviously our offense did suck this year (for various reasons), but recruits and fans need to look back into the distant past of, say, last season to see that we really can operate a balanced offense effective in the air and on the ground. would you be happier if we continued to air it out this season just so the recruits could see the offensive possibilities? we'd probably be playing in shreveport (or worse) if we'd gone that route, but hey, it's all about the recruiting baby. got to keep the teenagers happy.

i am disappointed with the receivers this year, but considering the success that others had under him, i'll give him a pass for a season. that said, what is wrong with what gilmore said to the kid? it needs to be clear to the kid and the school that he's either committed or he's not. and what makes you think we didn't explain anything to carter?

what is to make up for? what did gilmore do wrong? i'm pretty sure it was mentioned at some point that we already explained exactly how carter would be used in our offense. his stated problem with this is that he didn't see it on the field. if the kid doesn't have the foresight to comprehend that the offensive strategy we employed towards the end of the year was a stop-gap measure, then there's not much we can do about it. obviously this distinction is flying over the heads of many of our fans as well, so i guess we shouldn't be too surprised that recruits are falling for it.

if you still don't know the reason for, or the effectiveness of, the midseason switch, i don't know what to tell you. as to the player profiles, i think it's obvious that many spread teams use tall receivers, including tech. please point me to the teams out there that are deliberately focusing on shorter linemen. taller linemen do have to work harder to get leverage, but they have an easier time with hand positioning, particularly in pass blocking, and we are still going to need pass blocking linemen. burkhead is not a question mark, he has shown to be effective in a power running game. also, i didn't see robinson avoid physicality. not sure what you're talking about. which game? helu might be better as a slasher on the outside zone, but since we apparently suck at blocking it and he wasn't recruited by this staff, i'm not sure what he has to do with their preferred offensive style. i agree that we lack an offensive identity and i'd like to see one established, but i'm much more interested in winning ball games and going to the turtle, just don't turn it over offense allowed that to happen. we need to worry about re-establishing a culture of winning before we worry about style points. lets see where we go from here. change is NOT going to happen, so all this constant criticism is doing is fueling the negative perception that the recruits are getting slammed with by opposing coaches.

Thing is, kid grew up an LSU fan. He wanted to go to LSU (probably still would if they'd offer), but they didn't offer. Even when LSU decided not to give him a scholarship, he took the high road and talked about how he still loved them and just felt he must not be what they're looking for. It was 100% class, then comes the explosion that Gilmore caused? Sorry, but Gilmore had to of seriously been a prick to piss Carter off so bad. I couldn't agree with you more. This kid has a lot of class, and in the end he has to do what's best for him. I wish it were Nebraska, but I can understand the kid not trusting his football career to Gilmore and Wats. Gilmore needs a taste of humble pie, and Wats needs to own up for his own offensive ineptitude (that really got me when he says the guys have a lot of maturing to do, and excluded himself from fault). The one shining light from is if we lose more offensive recruits, that would have to force Bo's hand to make some coaching changes. gilmore needs a taste of humble pie? because he clarified that a kid that is clearly not committed to us is, in fact, not committed to us? i agree that gilmore and watson have something to prove when it comes to coaching, but based upon the fact that they both looked a lot better last year, i'm willing to give them a pass on a year with a really strange run of luck on offensive personnel. further, if you think bo is going to make coaching changes based upon the whims of a few high school kids, i don't think you have any understanding of bo, or the direction this program is returning to. unless someone leaves voluntarily, there will be no coaching changes this off season. this program needs stability and a family atmosphere and bo and tom know that. it would help if fans (as well as the world herald) could appreciate the job they're doing rather than overreacting to everything and throwing stones at a program that is quickly awakening from its slumber. Watson and Gilmore looked good last year because you had three guys with amazing chemistry, that knew how to turn a broken play into something. As for Gilmore alone, he has had more WRs not pan out (Holt, Henry, Gillylen, Hardy, Brooks) than succeed. And you could even say that Paul has not been the model of consistency. The coaching changes would not be made on the whims of a few kids, but on the production of this offense. I cannot believe you honestly defend these guys. As for my understanding of Bo, I know he wants to win, and it is becoming more and more obvious that this offense is becoming a liability. If you want a family atmosphere I hear Disney World is the place to be. This is the Big 12! and if you can't produce you need to be cut. edit: to the above post I can name one game this year that offense won, and even in that game the defense held strong. In order, to have a culture you have to know who you are and be consistent with your model of who you are. Describe to me in one sentence, damnit i'll even let you write a book, on what our offense is. again, one year is not a firing offense. we have had above average wide receiver play every year gilmore has been here until this year. if you don't understand the importance that atmosphere has on the attitudes and effort of college age kids, just take a look at the difference in what we're seeing on the field under this regime. yes, the offense sucked this year, yes there were reasons for it, and yes, we still damn near won the league anyways. this is a team that is working their ass off for their coaching staff. firing people is hardly conducive to building on the amazing progress we've seen under pelini. now, if we see the same thing again next season, i might consider it reasonable to make the change, but i don't think that's a given. i just don't understand what more pelini can do to show fans that he deserves a little faith in his coaching ability. it's almost as if everyone immediately forgot what it was like when he got here. (please recall that before the season we lost the expected starter at quarterback in witt, a guy expected to compete for qb or be a top back-up in spano, an effective running back that was apparently outplaying helu pre-season in castille, our best lineman in burkes and a freshman that was pushing henry for starting guard in qvale. throw in the injuries that have plagued us through the season at RB and OL and it has been an unusual year on offense. i definitely still expected better deveopment out of lee and the receivers, but i'm willing to cut their coaches a break for one bad year, given the problems with the line and the running game.)

coaching is about more than recruiting, it's about winning games. part of winning games is building a culture and not firing coaches every time you have a tough year.

Thing is, kid grew up an LSU fan. He wanted to go to LSU (probably still would if they'd offer), but they didn't offer. Even when LSU decided not to give him a scholarship, he took the high road and talked about how he still loved them and just felt he must not be what they're looking for. It was 100% class, then comes the explosion that Gilmore caused? Sorry, but Gilmore had to of seriously been a prick to piss Carter off so bad. I couldn't agree with you more. This kid has a lot of class, and in the end he has to do what's best for him. I wish it were Nebraska, but I can understand the kid not trusting his football career to Gilmore and Wats. Gilmore needs a taste of humble pie, and Wats needs to own up for his own offensive ineptitude (that really got me when he says the guys have a lot of maturing to do, and excluded himself from fault). The one shining light from is if we lose more offensive recruits, that would have to force Bo's hand to make some coaching changes. gilmore needs a taste of humble pie? because he clarified that a kid that is clearly not committed to us is, in fact, not committed to us? i agree that gilmore and watson have something to prove when it comes to coaching, but based upon the fact that they both looked a lot better last year, i'm willing to give them a pass on a year with a really strange run of luck on offensive personnel. further, if you think bo is going to make coaching changes based upon the whims of a few high school kids, i don't think you have any understanding of bo, or the direction this program is returning to. unless someone leaves voluntarily, there will be no coaching changes this off season. this program needs stability and a family atmosphere and bo and tom know that. it would help if fans (as well as the world herald) could appreciate the job they're doing rather than overreacting to everything and throwing stones at a program that is quickly awakening from its slumber.

ding ding ding. our offense was crap this season, but there's a reason we pretty much shut down the passing game and that approach damn near won us the big 12 in a year no one expected it. hopefully we'll see better play and health on that side of the ball next year. if players can't see through the recruiting pitches to the fact our team is coached by winners that will find a way to push us to the top, style points be damned, then who needs them. it also wouldn't hurt if they understood that we had a great year on offense last year and a myriad of personnel issues this year, but i mostly want kids that focus on the wins. i think the coaches agree with that, based upon their attempt to get kids from winning high school programs.

i think your confusion might be based upon the fact that our coaches are making do with what they have rather than what they prefer to do offensively. this year, we have a stellar defense and all kinds of problems on offense, so we adapted to that. once we made the switch to a ball control offense that focused almost solely on not turning the ball over and letting defense and special teams take over, we won every game (with the exception of the one the refs had to steal). this approach may not have been sexy to recruits or media, but i'll take wins any day. as far as what we're going to be doing going forward, i think that's the big question. i think it's obvious we want a strong running game of some sort. i assume the preferred style was the one we started last year with, a WCO with a pro style power running game (see USC, stanford or half of the NFL) and some quarterback run mixed in. when it became obvious last year that we didn't have the blocking (particularly at FB and TE) to pull off such an approach, we adapted to the spread hybrid that gans ran so effectively. obviously the spread approach didn't work as well this year, but it seems like almost nothing we did worked this year. we obviously had problems at practically every offensive position. back to the question at hand though, i assumed we'd go with the WCO, pro style power running, but watson was quoted at some point this season saying he wants to go with the spread/WCO hybrid that worked so well last year. so, i guess i'd assume watson's telling the truth. as to the types of players recruited, i'm not certain that short receivers are necessary for a spread (and FWIW, i think niles paul quite often played like a big receiver). KU's star tandem aren't short. MU's receivers weren't short this year. most of TTech's receivers are pretty big. i also don't really see an advantage in recruiting shorter linemen for any style of offense. talent (not to mention attitude) is more important than height, but all else being equal, i'm guessing every OL coach in the country is going to take the kid with the longer reach that comes with height. i also question why you think our running backs aren't built for a power game. do running backs have to be bruisers to be effective in a power running attack? both helu and burkhead seem to be above average backs for a power attack, and robinson looked pretty decent at it as well. as to the fullback, i think it's obvious the coaches see the importance in having one, but that isn't necessarily a clue of which way they're going. even if you do go full time spread, it be nice to keep a FB around for the occasional short yardage play. as for QB's, there's obviously been an emphasis placed on mobility, so i'm glad to see the coaches recognize the advantage of having a running threat from the position.

it will have been roughly two years since these guys played in high school, including about 14 months on campus. i'm willing to bet they've put on some muscle. it would be awesome if burkes came back, but i wouldn't hold your breath. we don't seem to have had much luck with OL health over the years.

That's suicide in today's recruiting world. How many of our commits once commited to a different program? You take the commit when you get it, you'll win some, and you'll lose some. To pretend that kids won't look around is crazy. I don't buy that. Once they are committed . . . they are committed. Do you think a guy like Rex Burkhead would shop around after committing? I sure don't think so. The Pelini's seem to want character guys. yup. don't have to necessarily stop recruiting a kid, depending upon how the kid handles the situation, but it's important to clarify that a recruit that is actively interested in other schools will not be considered a commit by the staff and may or may not have a scholarship is they decide to recommit later. this is so that both sides clearly know where they stand.

i cannot imagine arod starting at LT next year. hopefully better health will see a better year out of smith and williams. i do expect to see qvale be a serious contributor next year, though i'd be surprised to see him beat out henry at RG. sirles, coffey and ash will also be contributing. my biggest hope is that either marcel gets appreciably stronger and better or that sirles or coffey take RT from him. it would be great to see arod or moody arrive ready to compete, but it's very unusual for a true freshman to be decent on the line. they have to be ready physically and mentally, and very few are both. one thing is certain, it will be awfully nice to have some depth on the line. one of the problems this year is that our linemen rarely got a breather. the jones boys rotated at RT, meyer occasionally came in for henry and caputo played sparingly. hopefully the RSFRs are ready to play some minutes next year.

Wasn't Eric Crouch rated the number player/quarterback in the country his senior year of high school by Super Prep or one of those? I know Rivals star rankings are a relatively new standard for ranking recruits. not sure about crouch, but ahman green was a big time recruit, as was d'eangelo evans, the brown boys, turner gill, etc., etc. NU has had plenty of big time recruits over the years. the nonstop hype from the websites is the only thing new.

vestal could also be looked at for DT or even OG.

Yeah but he won't be a factor either his first year or the year after he gets back since he will have been out of the program for a full year, you lose 2 of the 5 years of eligibility. Another reason why I am not a big fan. If a player is a great talent and wants to do this then I think you take him, but if you have equal options that want to come on board also I think you stay away IMO. NU seems pretty set at DT right now, need a DE more at this stage. if you're assuming no first year player is a factor, then you expect to lose only one year of contribution as opposed to a high school recruit, and is basically the equivalent of a 4 to play 3 juco recruit. i agree that if you can get the same caliber player without the mission, go for it, but i wouldn't write anyone off solely because of it, particularly talented players at a position of need (and good DT's are always in need). maybe the kid doesn't take the mission. maybe if he doesn't impress in his first year, you encourage him to look elsewhere after his mission.

he will still have the same overall number of years spent in our program, and assuming he takes his mission after the first year, he will still have four straight years in our S&C program, as an older player. would you rather have a 24 year old DT or a 22 year old DT?

i would say o'hanlon is a play making safety. the improvement in both of our safeties over the last couple of years is breathtaking. god it's nice to once again have players getting better from real coaching. hopefully cooper takes notice.

I disagree. I would love for every player on our team to have God as their #1 priority. If it hurts the team then no I don't. I want quality citizens on the team and you don't have to believe in God to be one of those. being religious or putting god first in no way hurts the team. for that matter, taking a mission isn't that bad either. assuming the kid stays in shape while he's gone, it gives him a couple of extra years to mature and fill out.

wow think abotu that for a second... if true he was unsure about coming to NU because he was unsure that Watson might not be around!!!!! wow was Watson really under that kind of pressure or is thing whole thing blown up real big out of proportion??? most likely it's just due to mizzou telling him watson will be gone. an effective recruiting strategy. heck, it's probably what they used to get blaine, too.