74Hunter

I would take the money...in a heartbeat (isn't that a Kenny Loggins song?)

You may be thinking of Don Johnson, kimosabe.

Ouch - now I feel bad for making you write that man's name down.

Yea, thanks.......

No problems.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Get real guys, Langsdorf called a great game. We out yarded them by about 150 yards, held a big time of possession advantage, they did not convert a 3rd down. All the coaches did a great job of putting the players in position to win. We just needed to replace one guy and we win by 21 or more. The future has never been brighter in the last 15 years.

NU never led at one point in that game. For 26 of the 30 minutes of the 2nd half, Iowa led by 11 points. NU was not threatening to win that game. Did the cold weather make it look like you were watching a different game?

All due to mistakes by one player and the tossing of Gerry. The playcalling was pretty damn good all game long.

You go boy! Way to throw the players under the bus. God know the coaches weren't seeing the same thing and calling mostly passing plays... Definitely only one player that cost is the game. PASS PLAYS FOREVERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!

Pass plays beat Michigan St, brought us back against Miami, kept us in the game against Iowa. So we should ignor the strength of the team (our recievers) ranked as the best in the B10 and run the ball with our backs?????????? Really! I have no words for that.

If your QB cannot reliably get them the ball, then are they still a strength?

He can when he sets his feet, You should ask someone to tell you the story about the last drive against Michigan St. It will be a classic some day.

Yep, a true classic to turn a 4-8 season into 5-7. Hip hip...

We won that game, Really ! it was in all the papers.

Yep, it was a true classic!!! Just like losing to BYU, Miami, Illinois, Wisconsin, Northwestern, Purdue, and Iowa were true classics. Hip hip...

Those are just footnotes in history.

That's what Bill Callahan said after a losing season in his first year.

LINK?

"Just one game, just one season....."

 

All actual Husker fans know that line. No link needed.

As only a casual Husker fan for most of the year since I spend most of my time following Iowa - where is this quote from?

Bill Callahan said it in 2004 after he ended our streak of 35 straight bowl games.

"Wise men speak because they have something to say; fools speak because they have to say something."

I like that quote, quit a bit, actually.

 

 

Riley's agent is probably re-working the contract as we speak...planning for future 5-7 "bowl" seasons...I kid, I kid

What is the joke, the quote, says they might change the contract so next year he will get paid for his 5 win season...

I glossed over that, OMG, WTF?!?!

This is what we've been reduced to under Harv, Pederhorst, and Riley?!?!

That, my friends, is the epitome of pathetic.

That turned out to be an awful costly pass Armstrong threw on third down against Illinois...

Maybe that'll teach Langsahan to not call a pass play.

We can only hope.

 

Since our schedule has 9 wins built into it and a monkey could coach this team to 9 wins, I'll say .500 +/- 1 game.

Where are 9 wins built in? We have a very difficult schedule for next year. People said this even when Bo was here

IDK, ask those who used that narrative over the last 7 seasons in an attempt to discredit the previous staff.

That's a no brainer.

The previous staff earned the bowl bonuses via APR.

 

 

Mike Riley reminds me of Jeff Fisher. Everyone thinks they're amazing coaches yet there never seems to be any tangible results.

God, that is a great call!

Except that Fisher at least made it to a Super Bowl. Riley hasn't even won a division in the US game.

Serious question here. If he didn't grow up or play for NEB would anyone seriously want to hire him for the NEB job?? I guess the real question is would half of you even know who he was if he was just the Oregon OC

I'd bet that more knew him than knew Riley.

Sure, I'd take Frost, Herman, McElwain, Harbaugh, Wittingham, etc, etc, over Riley, NU ties or not.

Comes up blank.....prolly not a bad thing.

...

I have a theory that Radar is someone from the TnT show, they were discussing today that there show is actively trolling 'certain' husker boards for lolz, for a while it sounds like. They discuss a lot of our fan theories and make fun of us almost every morning. Not saying it is our board but def trolling some husker boards, they talked openly about doing it today, to get material for the show. I believe they stated been doing it sense earlier this year...

Huh......

Anywho, you listen to those Dbag burnouts?

Listening to that show drops your IQ about 40 points. I can't believe that the Husker sports network is affiliated with those two......ummm....."Eichorsts."

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I don't think they will have to use a scholarship on him. Im pretty sure employee family members go to school basically for free. I think technically it's a dollar per credit

False. Or the Cotton boys wouldn't have been on scholly.

Unless it's different for the coaching staff Huskerhead has it correct. Family of university emoployees can go to school at discounted rate.

It's totally different if the kid is going to be playing a sport. As pointed out elsewhere, student athletes could be recruited to schools simply by giving their parents a job. Not that it's not being done currently in the SEC.

Iirc, if the kid's parent is a coach and the kid is on the team, the kid HAS to count against scholarship limits, even with the staff/family member tuition rates.

 

If correct, just chalk another one up for Riley "getting good" for his boys.

Unless the rule has changed recently, Dan Hawkins kid at CU (Cody?) walked on to not take up at scholly. It was stated about 5 times during each CU game when they both were there.

Doug McDermott did it at Creighton for basketball his senior year, too. Not sure if the rules are the same but it's not uncommon, I guess.

True, I'm not sure how it works, just thought that I heard that about the Cottons, could be wrong about that.

 

 

 

 

I don't think they will have to use a scholarship on him. Im pretty sure employee family members go to school basically for free. I think technically it's a dollar per credit

False. Or the Cotton boys wouldn't have been on scholly.

Unless it's different for the coaching staff Huskerhead has it correct. Family of university emoployees can go to school at discounted rate.

It's totally different if the kid is going to be playing a sport. As pointed out elsewhere, student athletes could be recruited to schools simply by giving their parents a job. Not that it's not being done currently in the SEC.

Iirc, if the kid's parent is a coach and the kid is on the team, the kid HAS to count against scholarship limits, even with the staff/family member tuition rates.

If correct, just chalk another one up for Riley "getting good" for his boys.

Since our schedule has 9 wins built into it and a monkey could coach this team to 9 wins, I'll say .500 +/- 1 game.

 

 

I haven't lowered my expectations for the program, but I have put them on hold until a new coaching staff is brought to Lincoln.

 

Riley is what he is, I'll expect more of the same for the next 1 or 2 years.

I know what I expect and I kind of having a feeling what will really happen.

Care to share?

I agree with CM, we need to check ourselves.

 

 

If TA keeps this up, he won't and can't play. I can see a run-heavy offense designed around a runner who is capable of making good decisions, behind a stout OL with better RBs. Tommy is a big pass first kind of guy and this team needs that (see: the WRs, the TEs, the big comebacks and crunch time drives all year. That takes work and practice). Additionally, these are the coaches we have - and they should run something they're comfortable with. A 70% run attack may not even be on the table, and that seems fair.

 

There are criticisms to be levied here if you want (probably the first place to look is the RB usage), but as far as Tommy goes, if he cleans up this stuff, he'll be a star, but that's a huge if.

 

In my eyes, it's between that or losing his job. If he can't fix it, there is no plausible Nebraska 2016 offense that would suit his strength. Runner or passer, you have to be a QB still.

See, I don't think any of us would have a problem with that type of offense. But, that's obviously not what Riley and Langsahan want to do on offense. They want to pass the ball first. They want to pass to set up the run. That is their philosophy.

Yep, that whole line about game planning and play calling to fit the strengths of players was BS.

Sad to see.

This is where I feel somewhat at odds with people throwing heavy criticisms at Armstrong while seemingly ignoring the coaches. Armstrong unquestionably deserves blame for his erratic decisions that cost the team. But, the coaches call the plays, and they're supposed to know their players 12 games into the season. At this point, you should probably understand the type of QB TA is and his strengths. He's simply not comfortable, or good, throwing 45 times a game. I could be mistaken, but I don't think Nebraska's won a single game where TA throws more than 40 times. And if they have won, the ratio to losses has to be steep.

 

I have a hard time believing things were "hit and miss" in the run game when it wasn't even tested to its full potential. Jano, once again, had no carries. And if Ozigbo has trouble finishing runs he shouldn't feel too bad, because I've felt most of our backs have had trouble finishing runs at times this year.

 

This is easily one of my biggest concerns in 2016, if not the biggest. If POB can't beat TA for the job, they're going to have to a call run heavy offense that plays to TA's strengths. That means yes, even when times get tough, you have to run the freakin' ball and you have to do it well. The fact that TA threw all those passes to end the half when the game was still well within our capability of taking a lead tells me a lot.

Couldn't have said it better.

I haven't lowered my expectations for the program, but I have put them on hold until a new coaching staff is brought to Lincoln.

Riley is what he is, I'll expect more of the same for the next 1 or 2 years.

In a service or sales position, always a good idea to stay fairly neutral on a topic until you gauge how your customer feels about it.

I agree, but not tipping is a total bag move. I start at 20% as a guide line, if service is subpar I'll lower it accordingly, if it's better than average I'll raise it accordingly.

I think I've not left a tip maybe twice in my life, and those were extreme circumstances, such as being personally insulted by the waiter. Hell, I've had service so bad that the manager comped the tab, yet I still tipped the server.

 

 

 

I didnt quite fully grasp where Nebraska was until I realized we need San Jose State, Buffalo, and Georgia State to lose....

Sobering.

 

We got Rileyed.

What are you talking about?, Riley's not used to having to worry about bowl bids. Golly shucks, jeepers, this is exciting.

You are correct, my apologies.

Hip, hip hooray.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Where do people place more of the blame on that 4th down - on Langsdorf or TA?

 

I noticed a lot of people on Twitter saying 'don't blame Langsdorf because he didn't throw the ball.' While true, it's also a coaches job to put a QB (and the team) in a position to win the game. Did Langsdorf and the coaches put TA and the team in the right spot there to convert, while understanding the limitations TA has?

totally TA. The wide open receiver proves that langsdorf put Tommy in a great position. People can claim that DL needs to know his qb's strengths and weaknesses so he should've justhe ran the ball, but a 3 year starting qb for a power 5 school should have enough common sense to know game situation and that 4th and 1 means you don't need to and shouldn't go for a home run shot, especially when you have a wide open receiver a couple yards past the 1st down. Obviously TA would've still had to get it to carter accurately enough to catch, and carter in turn would've had to make the catch, but the coaches still put them in a position to make the play. Tommy didn't even look at the check down and stared down the fly fade the whole way.

But here's the thing....TA has been a 3-year starter and in that time has shown no consistency in being able to make those throws. It's not like him missing that throw was an anomaly. It's what Tommy does, and DL should recognize that. Now if Tommy were a freshman and hadn't shown such inconsistently I would feel better with the call, but DL is not playing to Tommy's strengths.

I understand but the biggest thing is that TA didn't even bother looking down at the check down, he just went straight for the low percentage home run ball. It's not like throw was just that bad. It was a decent throw to give the WR an opportunity to either go for the catch or try to I draw a pass interference. The DB just made a better play defensively. My point is as a 3 year starter Tommy should have enough common sense to know he shouldn't throw the home run ball and that he still had over 4 minutes with 3 timeouts, on 4th down. Know the other routes for the play and find someone else that perhaps isn't being covered like a blanket. Maybe we should've just run it, though, since Tommy is barely even able to decipher when to bite the bullet and throw the ball away, let alone find an open check down reciever.

I see what you're saying, but at what point do you put more blame on the coaches?

 

TA has lost every single game, or at least the vast majority of games, where he has had to throw more than 40 times.

 

I don't think it's as simple as "Tommy should have enough common sense." It's a coach's job to put his players in the best position to win. By your same reasoning, you could argue that Tom Brady and Tyrod Taylor should always be coached and put in similar positions to convert 4th and 1 because they should just have enough common sense. However, I think we'd both agree how a team might approach a 4th and 1 with Brady is much different than how the Bills would approach 4th and 1 with Taylor.

 

The same principles apply, here, imho.

Put him in a position to win like against Illinois when he was told to run the ball and threw it anyway an lost the game? Sometimes you can't fix stupid and I think we found that out against Iowa.

You raise a great point I can't really argue with. But, those are two different situations - one was an obvious communication error and the other was TA not reading the defense and throwing a bad ball. TA shouldn't have been asked to throw that ball or put in a position to think that was OK. Is it on him for throwing it? Yes, but, I put blame on the coaches for giving him the choice.

Other than the fact that it was a pass play tagged no pass and the entire offense ran it as a pass play.

 

 

For reference, here are the current Huskers who made the lists last year (they added a third-team this year):

 

Coaches:

Collins - 2nd Team

Foltz - Honorable Mention

Gerry - Honorable Mention

Lewis - Honorable Mention

 

Media:

Gerry - 2nd Team

Collins - Honorable Mention

Lewis - Honorable Mention

So we have more talent this year than last. Interesting.

Funny how that works, sans the narratives.

I swore that someone posted a thread about him a few weeks back.

 

Iowa is 12-0 mainly because they play smart disciplined football.

Nebraska is 5-7 because they do not.

 

Key word right there. These are still Bo's players, and I have yet to see if any of the players brought in by the new staff have discipline.

Yea, it's not as if these things haven't plagued Riley teams before.

Oh wait...