brophog

They play a one handed linebacker, because he hits the s#!t out of people. It's not what you do, it's how you do it, and they do it with the heart we once did. There is a competitive fun about that team that we once had. There is an attitude in their program that we once had. They're fun to watch. Try it sometime.

This week's pregame press conference I started this thread with one of these because they give an insight on Frost, but I keep posting these because of how impressed I am in Frost's understanding of football. This week has some good snippets about Stanford/Nebraska, how all defensive football is "assignment football", and how score and time of possession interrelate (a topic I've commented on here many times over the years). I find these well worth watching.

A big deal was made of Jaimes starting as a true frosh because 20-25 years ago no offensive lineman at any school started at that age. Strength and conditioning has gotten so much better across the board, not just at the D1 level, but at the high school level. Offenses are more advanced at that level, mechanics are better. Kids coming in are simply much more ready to play all around now. If you don't have to redshirt them, why do it? There are benefits of experience and training at this level, but if you treat it like its the 90s and just automatically redshirt everyone then you're really missing out on talent that can infuse your program.

We need to recruit and develop at least one force multiplier in that front seven. Inside, edge rusher, hand in the dirt, blitzer....whatever, it can take a lot of forms...but someone you have to really plan around, someone that can really disrupt what an offense wants to do. There is nobody even close to this right now. Opposing teams can block and pass pro however they want because they have no worries. Secondly, when that play is identified; the RB hits his crease, the screen is set up, the pass has been thrown...defensive scheme no longer matters. At that point it's 11 people getting to the ball carrier. This is where your nastiness comes in. Whose gonna fight through blocks, jam up lanes, and make tackles.

This game made no sense to me. Playing for the present? Building for the future? Even trying to win? I don't know. People wouldn't like it, but I could at least understand if they felt they couldn't win so they used the game to develop youth or implement new ideas. Didn't do that, though. People wouldn't like it, but I could at least understand if they felt they couldn't win so they tried to limit the damage by playing passive and killing clock. Didn't do that, though. There was certainly no gameplan for how to win. Other than the continued slight increase in screens and other quick passes we've seen recently, we did nothing new offensively. This was a pure case of trying to run the same stuff, no matter how ineffective it has been, and no matter who the opponent was. The offense got some chunk plays in the passing game to make stats look good, but sadly that was in garbage time.....which was the entire second half. But defensively, I don't know. I haven't watched the game again, which I normally would have done by now, but even live it was hard to tell what the hell the point was most of the time. Just a wasted game all around, and even in defeat you should get something out of a game.

Any positions rotation has made zero sense on this team. I wish I could see practice, because some of the stories (like certain receivers only practicing certain plays) make no real sense to me. At times it almost seems like they write the depth chart backwards. Year 3 and we seem to "discover" so many players like its year 1. That's an issue somewhere in there on how you organize practice, and it's such an issue across all positions in all areas.

No, they really didn't. Thats saying something considering our offense was only on the field the first half.

I'll say the same thing I said the other day...we win these next three games if we want to.

I at least agree it's not terrible.

You have to be more specific.

This is possible. Purdue is more story than anything. They get a lot of mileage this year out of "not being Purdue". Wisconsin vastly outplays them, but messes up so much that the score looks close. Michigan and that terrible offense "only beats them by 18" and "Purdue led at halftime". They also had a net of 10 yards in the second half. Michigan has a good defense, maybe even a great one, but you don't hold someone to 10 yards, they have to help. I'm not saying Nebraska can't lose to Purdue, but Purdue has been put on such a pedestal of low expectations that their actual accomplishments don't match perception.

You lose credibility saying that. When you say that, you're really saying you don't have the ability to substantiate because if you did, you would have said something other than "trust me". The fear is Moos is familiar with Riley and may be persuaded. I get that. That's balanced by the firing of the AD, the hiring of a new AD, and the surrounding talk of the football team's woes. Not a high probability you do all of that if you're looking for the status quo. Even in the scenario that Riley could talk his way out, it has to be backed up with results on the field. You, like everyone else, can click my name, see my previous posts, and see why I don't think that's going to happen.

That guy is just screwed. They need Frost to win to generate fan support and revenue to improve their facilities, but every win, especially the way they're winning, just makes it more likely someone tries to poach him. That roster isn't the kind that just any replacement comes in and wins with. They get by because they're extracting pieces and parts of players and playing with a lot of heart. They don't have many "complete players". Their best defensive player only has one hand. He doesn't need two hands, his motor just don't quit. This is easily a roster that can go 2-10 next year without the right guy. That's a catch-22 for an AD.

We don't need to do any of that stuff. They can see the scoreboard as easy as we can, they know things aren't working. I don't understand why you think this goes on past this season.

In all seriousness, midseason coaching changes generally don't do much. You do see an initial positive bump, but it neutralizes as the season goes on. The net effect will usually be near zero change. Regardless of what Moos said, or does, you're waiting until next season anyhow. Sorry.

At the moment, yes, but the next three opponents are so close to us that it could shift very easily.

When you get a new coach you get all new players and your record reset.

No.

Frost wouldn't go 12-1 his first year, anyhow. There will be bumps in the road. There will be games you lose that make you scratch your head. It's all part of the process. Year 2, you expect a lot more. Year 3, you better be getting there. Year 4, you should know either way. With the Big Ten, who knows years ahead of time, Hawaii may have joined the conference and they've been swapped for Rutgers. Right now, that year 2 schedule, when you're expecting a bump, is about as favorable as we may see for awhile. Our future conference schedules aren't pretty, it's just how it is.

And in this case, it would be Scott Frost. That's the complete basis of that post's reasoning.

He's covered Nebraska football for nearly two decades now, mostly online. Not a fly by night kinda guy. If he heard it, he probably heard it, which is still hearsay and may not mean anything. Now, if he were to say the Nebraska admin wants Frost, I'll get interested, not before. I have an easier time believing Frost wants it than I do him being offered.

I'm glad we have a bye, that'll be the game of the weekend.

Contrast with Paul Johnson's system from this week vs Miami. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RdE2x3qQtcU They're both flexbone systems, but notice how many more formations your video has than mine. Paul Johnson's offense is a base flexbone with two split receivers, two slots (A backs) and a fullback (B back). Sometimes those receivers are lined up in twins, sometimes a jumbo. That's pretty much it, though. He has a handful of core plays they run very well. It has a deceptive ability to throw the ball because you can use those slots much the same as any 2x2 team would. I find it boring to watch because you're always seeing the same look. That's by design, of course. It's part of what makes it effective.

They used to say a lot that was wrong about Osborne.

Not only that, but it's so boring. It's like a broken video game where a guy finds an exploit involving standing in the corner and hitting one button for hours.