roundegotrip Posted October 16, 2007 Share Posted October 16, 2007 Same coaches. For the most part, same players. A nearly identical schedule. Under those conditions, how do you go from being a competitive 9-3 team to a nearly unwatchable potential 6-6 or 5-7 (or maybe even 4-8...) team? This is not a rhetorical question... I'm actually wondering what is so different about this team less than a year after finishing 9-3 in the regular season. Are guys like Moore, Carriker, Bradley, Jackson, and Taylor really that hard to replace? I mean, not to take anything away from any of them, but I wouldn't have thought so, except for Carriker and maybe Taylor... Anyone want to jump in on this one? Please, just spare me the stuff about guts and a desire to win. I have no doubt that, at least before the train derailed, this team had plenty of both. They displayed it last year, and there wasn't too much turnover this offseason. So step back for a minute from the wild emotional rollercoaster ride that is the 2007 season so far, and tell me: what is so different this year? Quote Link to comment
junior4949 Posted October 16, 2007 Share Posted October 16, 2007 IMO, Taylor was the glue that held this team together the last 2 years. We don't have anyone on the team showing the kind of leadership and guidance he did the last 2 years. We have a bunch of players playing as individuals this year rather than a team. Athletically speaking, I think this group of players is superior to any team thus far put on the field by BC. Part of the game is athletic while the other part is mental. It's the mental part that we're having the most trouble with. IMO, these players feel like they're in quicksand, and they're falling fast. No matter what you do in life, you have to have the confidence that you can get it done. Just hoping good things happen will end in failure! Quote Link to comment
HuskerMav11 Posted October 16, 2007 Share Posted October 16, 2007 Taylor did Callahan's part of motivating the players last year...no one this year to step up? Just a speculation Quote Link to comment
roundegotrip Posted October 16, 2007 Author Share Posted October 16, 2007 Taylor did Callahan's part of motivating the players last year...no one this year to step up? Just a speculation You guys just got me thinking... Year 1: No Zac. BC's Husker's go 5-6 Year 2: Zac arrives, Skers go 8-4 Year 3: Zac = B12 off. player of the year, NU 9-3 Year 4: Zac is a grad assistant, NU goes 3-1, offense looks great vs. Nev, SC, and Ball St. Zac gets signed by Winnipeg, and BC's Huskers promptly go 1-2 and the wheels come off the offense vs. Mizzou and OSU.... Coincidence?!?!?!? NU w/ Zac: 20-8. NU w/o Zac: 6-8. EDIT: I guess technically it'd be NU w/ Zac: 20-10 once you include the B12 championship and Auburn games, but still... Quote Link to comment
Glendower Posted October 16, 2007 Share Posted October 16, 2007 Same coaches. For the most part, same players. A nearly identical schedule. Under those conditions, how do you go from being a competitive 9-3 team to a nearly unwatchable potential 6-6 or 5-7 (or maybe even 4-8...) team? This is not a rhetorical question... I'm actually wondering what is so different about this team less than a year after finishing 9-3 in the regular season. Are guys like Moore, Carriker, Bradley, Jackson, and Taylor really that hard to replace? I mean, not to take anything away from any of them, but I wouldn't have thought so, except for Carriker and maybe Taylor... Anyone want to jump in on this one? Please, just spare me the stuff about guts and a desire to win. I have no doubt that, at least before the train derailed, this team had plenty of both. They displayed it last year, and there wasn't too much turnover this offseason. So step back for a minute from the wild emotional rollercoaster ride that is the 2007 season so far, and tell me: what is so different this year? I think the Big 12 North is improving. Quote Link to comment
Glendower Posted October 16, 2007 Share Posted October 16, 2007 Taylor did Callahan's part of motivating the players last year...no one this year to step up? Just a speculation You just got me thinking... Year 1: No Zac. BC's Husker's go 5-6 Year 2: Zac arrives, Skers go 8-4 Year 3: Zac = B12 off. player of the year, NU 9-3 Year 4: Zac is a grad assistant, NU goes 3-1, offense looks great vs. Nev, SC, and Ball St. Zac gets signed by Winnipeg, and BC's Huskers promptly go 1-2 and the wheels come off the offense vs. Mizzou and OSU.... Coincidence?!?!?!? NU w/ Zac: 20-8. NU w/o Zac: 6-8. EDIT: I guess technically it'd be NU w/ Zac: 20-10 once you include the B12 championship and Auburn games, but still... Interesting. .667 isn't ideal, but it looks better than 45-14. Quote Link to comment
husker_fan Posted October 16, 2007 Share Posted October 16, 2007 Same coaches. For the most part, same players. A nearly identical schedule. Under those conditions, how do you go from being a competitive 9-3 team to a nearly unwatchable potential 6-6 or 5-7 (or maybe even 4-8...) team? This is not a rhetorical question... I'm actually wondering what is so different about this team less than a year after finishing 9-3 in the regular season. Are guys like Moore, Carriker, Bradley, Jackson, and Taylor really that hard to replace? I mean, not to take anything away from any of them, but I wouldn't have thought so, except for Carriker and maybe Taylor... Anyone want to jump in on this one? Please, just spare me the stuff about guts and a desire to win. I have no doubt that, at least before the train derailed, this team had plenty of both. They displayed it last year, and there wasn't too much turnover this offseason. So step back for a minute from the wild emotional rollercoaster ride that is the 2007 season so far, and tell me: what is so different this year? I think the Big 12 North is improving. I think that it is good that the big 12 north is improving. the better the north is, the better and more respect the cornhuskers get. There are just not motivated to go out there and play....which is something you would think a competent head coach would do....but i guess bc doesn't give a sh#t so we got our asses handed to us. Quote Link to comment
roundegotrip Posted October 16, 2007 Author Share Posted October 16, 2007 Same coaches. For the most part, same players. A nearly identical schedule. Under those conditions, how do you go from being a competitive 9-3 team to a nearly unwatchable potential 6-6 or 5-7 (or maybe even 4-8...) team? This is not a rhetorical question... I'm actually wondering what is so different about this team less than a year after finishing 9-3 in the regular season. Are guys like Moore, Carriker, Bradley, Jackson, and Taylor really that hard to replace? I mean, not to take anything away from any of them, but I wouldn't have thought so, except for Carriker and maybe Taylor... Anyone want to jump in on this one? Please, just spare me the stuff about guts and a desire to win. I have no doubt that, at least before the train derailed, this team had plenty of both. They displayed it last year, and there wasn't too much turnover this offseason. So step back for a minute from the wild emotional rollercoaster ride that is the 2007 season so far, and tell me: what is so different this year? I think the Big 12 North is improving. You're right, that's probably part of it, but I guess we'll have to wait and see how NU fares against the rest of it's Big 12 schedule. All of those teams are looking pretty tough at the moment, aren't they? Quote Link to comment
Foppa Posted October 16, 2007 Share Posted October 16, 2007 Same coaches. For the most part, same players. A nearly identical schedule. Under those conditions, how do you go from being a competitive 9-3 team to a nearly unwatchable potential 6-6 or 5-7 (or maybe even 4-8...) team? This is not a rhetorical question... I'm actually wondering what is so different about this team less than a year after finishing 9-3 in the regular season. Are guys like Moore, Carriker, Bradley, Jackson, and Taylor really that hard to replace? I mean, not to take anything away from any of them, but I wouldn't have thought so, except for Carriker and maybe Taylor... Anyone want to jump in on this one? Please, just spare me the stuff about guts and a desire to win. I have no doubt that, at least before the train derailed, this team had plenty of both. They displayed it last year, and there wasn't too much turnover this offseason. So step back for a minute from the wild emotional rollercoaster ride that is the 2007 season so far, and tell me: what is so different this year? Coin flips and hopes for the best? Quote Link to comment
Glendower Posted October 16, 2007 Share Posted October 16, 2007 Same coaches. For the most part, same players. A nearly identical schedule. Under those conditions, how do you go from being a competitive 9-3 team to a nearly unwatchable potential 6-6 or 5-7 (or maybe even 4-8...) team? This is not a rhetorical question... I'm actually wondering what is so different about this team less than a year after finishing 9-3 in the regular season. Are guys like Moore, Carriker, Bradley, Jackson, and Taylor really that hard to replace? I mean, not to take anything away from any of them, but I wouldn't have thought so, except for Carriker and maybe Taylor... Anyone want to jump in on this one? Please, just spare me the stuff about guts and a desire to win. I have no doubt that, at least before the train derailed, this team had plenty of both. They displayed it last year, and there wasn't too much turnover this offseason. So step back for a minute from the wild emotional rollercoaster ride that is the 2007 season so far, and tell me: what is so different this year? I think the Big 12 North is improving. I think that it is good that the big 12 north is improving. the better the north is, the better and more respect the cornhuskers get. There are just not motivated to go out there and play....which is something you would think a competent head coach would do....but i guess bc doesn't give a sh#t so we got our asses handed to us. I think it's a good thing too! Earlier this season, think I said hypothetically that i would rather be in a good conference again even if it meant that we'd have to eat some losses (I didn't know that it would be THIS bad). But it's better to be struggling to succeed (and definitely better to succeed) in a competitive conference than it is to be the best of the worst. At the start of the season when it looked like the North would be the best that we'd get, that was a pathetic goal based on the North of previous years. Well, I'd still like to be competing for the conference title every year, but it would also be great if winning the North meant something semi-special, and now it does Quote Link to comment
SkerMin8r Posted October 16, 2007 Share Posted October 16, 2007 Are you kidding...has anyone noticed that Carriker is one of the few bright spots on the Rams defense. This teams demise started on defense...and the defensive line in particular. We've seen it before. Look at 2004...our primary issue...other than inconsistent offensive play...was a general lack of pass rush. The offense this year has simply folded under the pressure of having to carry a subpar defense...period... Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.