Search the Community

It's no secret that Nebraska isn't living up to the expectations that the fans have set for them. A loss to UCLA, while not good, wasn't exactly a shocking result. A loss to Minnesota, on the other hand, was very shocking and very sobering to those of us who thought the defense and offense were beginning to turn the corner. So who's to blame? Is it the coaches, the players, or a combination of both? It's the job of the coaches to put players in positions to succeed. Thus, the blame for the failings of the players should be on the coaches, right? I don't think that's a fair assessment to make. That takes too much responsibility off the shoulders of the players. If it's on the shoulders of the coaches to make their players look good, shouldn't it be on the shoulders of the players to make their coaches look good? Why can't this relationship be a two-way street? For example, we don't know what the offensive or defensive play call was. All we know is how the play turned out. What if Beck called a run play and Taylor made an audible to a pass play and then the pass is intercepted or incomplete. Can we really place that failure on Beck? No, I don't think we should. Or if Bo called a blitz, but the LBs couldn't get through the offensive line, is that the fault of the coach for trying to place his players in a position to be successful? Or is it the fault of the LBs who couldn't get through the offensive line? But, to contradict what I have said to this point (because my goal isn't to shift blame from one group to another, my goal is to better examine some of the factors which should influence blame), if a player isn't succeeding despite the play call, it is up to the coaches to make the necessary change. Then if nobody is succeeding, then it is up to the coaches to recruit players who can succeed. So, there's only so much coaches can do, so they can't be blamed outright. What's your opinion on this, and why do you have this opinion?