Elf

 

 

What's the point in bringing up Oregon State and San Diego? They have no impact on what he had to do at Nebraska. The simple fact that he was fired should be proof enough that he wasn't adequate at his job. And Riley pretty much said that in the most coach speak way he could. It's not like he's going to come out and say, 'Yea Banker was a bad coach.'

That isn't necessarily true. There can be many reasons someone gets fired.

 

Um but this is exactly why he was fired

 

Prove it.

What's the point in bringing up Oregon State and San Diego? They have no impact on what he had to do at Nebraska. The simple fact that he was fired should be proof enough that he wasn't adequate at his job. And Riley pretty much said that in the most coach speak way he could. It's not like he's going to come out and say, 'Yea Banker was a bad coach.'

That isn't necessarily true. There can be many reasons someone gets fired.

Banker was fired because he wasn't very good

But he said he had given him things that needed to improve and they weren't happening.

So which is it? Was he fired because he wasn't very good? (Even Riley doesn't believe that. If he did, Banker never would have been hired to begin with.) Or was it because Riley gave him things to improve on and he didn't improve?

I know which one is correct and which one is you making sh#t up.

 

But in this era of #AlternativeFacts and #FakeNews...you're free to believe whatever you wish

I definitely agree with this part of your post. It is astutely observed.

 

So you're going to take all the bad play over the last two (to five) years and pretty much blame Gerry for it. Or at least take it as evidence that no one on the team was even trying. That's quite a blanket to throw.

 

So despite playing half-speed, intentionally sabotaging the team and missing at least parts of several games, Gerry over the last two years was still only one tackle from leading the team over that time and and had 60% more interceptions than anyone else on the team?

 

Imagine how good of a player he'll be now that he isn't actually trying to be bad.

 

Ahh, you're trolling again. I'm not biting.

Why do we care what other schools pay their coaches? I surely don't.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sounds like they are predicting Riley to be fired.

I want to see Mike Riley succeed.

 

But if the Huskers do collapse and have another 5-7 regular season in 2017...it would be a difficult case to make justifying a 4th year.

 

My expectations for this team are 3 losses or less. Let's start by breaking the 4 loss "curse."

 

You're in for a big let down. New defense and a new QB. These aren't little things.

 

Kinda seems like this will be the first year that we have a QB - No let down from that standpoint

 

Do we? He wasn't recruited out of high school and didn't exactly light it up and lowly Tulane. These unrealistically high expectations are the reason why this board goes ape poop when we lose. Coach Osborne is gone and we're a middle of the road program. We haven't won a conference title since 2001. We are pretty good against Northwestern and Illinois. Not so much against Iowa or Wisconsin. Yes, not so good against Iowa or Wisconsin and last year's game against OSU was the most telling game about this program. Temper those expectations, fellow Husker fans. You'll feel better about the losses.

 

If Tanner Lee won the starting job at Iowa or Wisconsin we would be laughing about it

 

Possibly and 6 months from now we may be laughing at your post

 

Well....we already laugh at him, why not laugh at his post too?

Over. Over. Over. Under.

 

 

 

 

Wait...his wife went out to a place that has paint?!?!?! No way!

Not really finding humor in someone else's health problems.

 

Humor? I am happy for her that she is able to beat it.

Sounds like your mind is in the wrong place.

 

Nice try....

 

Interesting

 

Some things just aren't funny, sh#t like...poking fun at other peoples health issues for instance.

 

 

We have gone through a couple of coaches changes with Offensive scheme changes. We hear the excuse that it take time to put the scheme in place and to recruit the right players. How valid is this excuse? Tennessee went from Peyton Manning to T-Martin and won a MNC. TO switched from a pro passing O with Humm and Ferragamo to an option attack with no performance issues. Does changing offensive philosophy really take a couple of years with sub-par performance?

At the D1 level. Its not an issue. Fans like to claim it as one so they can have an excuse for when the team stinks.

 

It really isn't a huge issue, Coach is right. Yeah you have to learn some new verbage but these guys are not morons and they practice and rep a ton. Now...where the issues might be is with certain players "fitting" but really learning the new stuff is not as hard as some of the fans would like it to be.

 

Side note. I once "installed" a brand new defense for a high school (3-5-3) during pregame, about 5-10 minutes on a marker board. Then another 5 minutes on the field. We lost the game 14-6 in OT...on of the TD's the other team scored was on a punt return for a TD. It was the least amount of points we let up all year by far.

 

Look at trick plays...you might practice those 5 times, total...and then you are good to go. The players get it.

 

If it's so easy to install a new offense, why did your team only score 6 points?

Sounds to me like the defense carried the team to OT that day while the offense didn't live up to its billing.

 

 

We have gone through a couple of changes with Offensive scheme changes. We hear the excuse that it take time to put the scheme in place and to recruit the right players. How valid is this excuse? Tennessee went from Peyton Manning to T-Martin and won a MNC. TO switched from a pro passing O with Humm and Ferragamo to an option attack with no performance issues. Does changing offensive philosophy really take a couple of years with sub-par performance?

It's not an excuse but you will continue to believe it is.

 

Every coaching change situation is different and each brings its own challenges. Osborne simply changed the offensive philosophy, he didn't change the entire coaching staff. He already had significant talent and depth on the team. Riley had some talent when he showed up, but very little of it in depth.

 

Riley is building for the long term, I get it, you don't like that because you wanted results last year. We all did, but it didn't happen. Most of us moved on.

 

We saw the same thing with Callahan. TO and Tennessee made changes in scheme without staff changes, perhaps that helps.

 

With both Callahan and Riley we saw complete coaching staff changes. Osborne never had to deal with that even when he was changing his offense or defense. And he never did both at the same time. We're still comparing apples to green beans here.

It still amazes me that Fullmer ran an offense with one of the greatest pro-passing QBs of all time (P. Manning), and won the MNC the next year with a running QB. Why would a coach recruit these two players? The same situation happened at Oklahoma. Troy Aikman is lighting up the field passing, gets hurt and Jamele Holliway ends up leading Oklahoma to the MNC. Both of these cases look like coaches getting the best available talent and morphing their system to fit the talent available.

Jamelle Hollieway would have most likely beaten out Aikman eventually even w/o Aikman's injury. His injury ensured Jamelle would get the job over him so he transferred to USC where he had an excellent career.

We have gone through a couple of changes with Offensive scheme changes. We hear the excuse that it take time to put the scheme in place and to recruit the right players. How valid is this excuse? Tennessee went from Peyton Manning to T-Martin and won a MNC. TO switched from a pro passing O with Humm and Ferragamo to an option attack with no performance issues. Does changing offensive philosophy really take a couple of years with sub-par performance?

It's not an excuse but you will continue to believe it is.

Every coaching change situation is different and each brings its own challenges. Osborne simply changed the offensive philosophy, he didn't change the entire coaching staff. He already had significant talent and depth on the team. Riley had some talent when he showed up, but very little of it in depth.

Riley is building for the long term, I get it, you don't like that because you wanted results last year. We all did, but it didn't happen. Most of us moved on.

 

'Terrible' is a bit hyperbolic, but is anyone really going to argue that we match up with Michigan/OSU/PSU in terms of talent and depth?

 

That's the whole point. The draft isn't the sole indicator of this, but it is one of many that show, accurately, that we are not where we need to be to be a bona fide championship caliber program. Nobody is saying there is a direct variation between number of players drafted and team talent, but there's also no use in arguing that it is a representative example of something true.

Apparently to some on this board, bemoaning our pitiful draft representation is the de-facto "see we have no talent at all" rallying cry.

 

You are correct, my earlier usage of "terrible" to describe Nebraska's talent level was over-stated.

 

In all my time here, lurking and otherwise, I've never seen someone make that argument. Ever.

How many players you get drafted to the NFL is but one indicator of the talent level of your team. No one here has claimed or implied that it is the end all/be all of a teams talent level.

 

 

I'd rank it like this:

 

1. Ohio St

2. Penn St

3. Wisconsin

4. Oregon

1. Ohio St

2. Ohio St (at Indianapolis )

3. Oregon

4. Alabama (NC game)

 

Why would the home game be tougher than the neutral site game against OSU.

 

Revenge can be a powerful motivator.

 

 

Drop kick was a whole lot easier back when the balls were rounder like rugby balls.

 

Are there any videos of this guy doing his trick shots?

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmG-OG1b0aM

 

There's one of him hitting from 80 yards, no drop kicks though.

 

Kid has a strong leg no question about it.

 

However, there's a huge difference between nailing a kick like that being held by a tee, versus having it snapped back to the holder, who then places the ball for him to kick it with a defense trying to block it.

 

Pretty sure you didn't watch all the videos. There is one kick where he drops the ball on the ground, making it spin like a top, and then kicks it into a pole...

And he can kick with either foot.

 

If we lose to them again....

They might be pretty beat up by the time we get to them, that schedule is frigging brutal...

Good for you Sam. I know many people could care less what happens to the Cottons but I remember how Barney stepped up to coach that last bowl game. Think what you like about the Cottons but they came to practice everyday and were ready to play for every day. While they might not have been the best players, they did have their moments and I wish Sam the best.

I'm betting the Cotton boys would never have played for NU if their dad hadn't been a coach here.

 

I think a lot of people (not just Husker fans) have a hard time separating themselves from their teams. They take any criticism or slight to their team as if you assaulted their mothers with a Louisville Slugger®

Why a Louisville Slugger? Are you dissing my brands like Mizuno and Easton and Rawlings? I'm offended. :-)

 

Because everyone knows what a Louisville Slugger is?

Another way to look at this low number of drafted players is that the number of seniors we had this year was pretty dang low.

I could be wrong on this, I mean...it wouldn't be the first time I was wrong...but I thought we had a fairly large senior class this time? I never went and counted so no need to crucify me for that one.

 

Another way to look at this is that Nebraska has been landing recruiting classes generally ranked #26 - #30, and finishing their seasons ranked roughly the same.

I've said that for years. Callahan could recruit, but couldn't coach guys up to their potential. Pelini, on the other hand, was just OK at recruiting. And overall, as you said, the performance of his teams matched the recruiting rankings. You wonder how Bo might have fared if he'd hired some serious recruiters, instead of filling his staff with inexperienced assistants.

 

He might still have a job at NU if he had done that.

 

 

 

 

At least he won't have any chronic health issues stemming from a long, high impact career.

Nope. He'll just have petrified lungs made of resin and be in an iron lung by the time he's 50.

 

Your propaganda is comically dated.

 

I've smoked cannabis for 25+ years and I'm over 50 with no iron lung action in sight.

 

 

 

Good luck with that. You burn things and inhale the smoke. Pretty sure that someone who doesn't inhale smoke of burning things has a leg up on you.

 

When I was younger I smoked it for recreation and then about a year before I quit smoking cigarettes, I quit smoking pot. Now that I'm older, I'm again using pot but now its for legitmate medical purposes. I'm pretty sure that my pot smoking self has a leg up on the poor bastard when he doesn't smoke.

I think the Todd Blackledge quote about Taylor Martinez -- which also worked for Tommy -- was that he had the unique ability to keep both teams in the game.

I'm trying to find fault with that and I'm coming up empty.

I eat my marijuana.

You just go out in the field and graze on the plants?

Just kidding ma'am!

The proper name is Cannabis, just saying.

 

 

At least he won't have any chronic health issues stemming from a long, high impact career.

Nope. He'll just have petrified lungs made of resin and be in an iron lung by the time he's 50.

 

Your propaganda is comically dated.

 

I've smoked cannabis for 25+ years and I'm over 50 with no iron lung action in sight.

 

 

 

He is absolutely powerless over his addictions. It will be a battle he must face for the rest of his life. I wish him, and all others who battle addictions, peace and personal acceptace.

Marijuana causes zero chemical dependency. It is not an addictive substance.

 

Maybe I should tell that to all the addicts that tell me marijuana is the one drug they have not been able to stop. I used to lead a addictions and mental health group as part of my job. Did it for about 9 years.

 

Cigarettes (nicotine) are traditionally the one drug that addicts don't stop -- they are legal, and according to the serious addicts I've known, even harder to quit than heroin. Addicts who've kicked heroin, cocaine or alcohol might still smoke pot because they crave something, and pot is far less destructive. So that's a psychological addiction, not physical. Doesn't mean it's not going to screw up your health or your family or your work life, but the need to constantly check out of your brain is the problem, not the drug itself.

 

I smoked cigarettes for 27 years. I was hopelessly addicted to them until I read this book. After reading the book, I put the smokes down and never looked back. That was 11 years ago. And, it was easy, peasy, no withdrawals, just no longer smoking.

http://www.theeasywaytostopsmoking.com/

You can get his books on Amazon and the last time I bought a used hardback for a friend, it cost me 8 bucks.

*Edit* https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_i_4_11?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=easy+way+to+quit+smoking+allen+carr&sprefix=easy+way+to%2Caps%2C164&crid=3P1AXT1WP5UDO