Watson haters.......Cool down and lets remember some things

[knapplc]

The concept that "opening up the offense" automatically equals "more turnovers per game" is absurd. There is no proof that this is the case.

 

Further, had we properly coached these kids there wouldn't be a fear of turnovers.

 

This tangent makes no sense.

[In the Deed the Glory]

The concept that "opening up the offense" automatically equals "more turnovers per game" is absurd. There is no proof that this is the case.

 

Further, had we properly coached these kids there wouldn't be a fear of turnovers.

 

This tangent makes no sense.

 

This

[zoogs]

Because our QB is lost out there on the field with extremely mistake-prone playmakers? At the very least it'd result in 3-and-outs that run a lot less time off the clock than running it 2 or 3 times.

 

Points scored per game certainly does. Most generally yards equal points.

 

I'm sorry, but this is the exact attitude I am talking about. Remember, man, WE ARE NEBRASKA. This is not good enough for this program.

 

Bottom line.

 

Again, there's a leap in the argument. More yardage = more points. Not necessarily. More yardage often just means playing catch-up. Forcing the O to try to win games, successfully or not. That kind of approach is disastrous this year.

 

As fans we want our team to be constantly dominant in all areas and we always believe that we have the players to do so. We love throwing names of completely unproven players out there already with visions of them tearing it up in our heads. When it doesn't happen we blame the coaches for not using them the way we would in our heads.

 

But coaches need to be brutally bottom line. Our O is not high flying this year and NO brilliant scheme changes that. We do what it takes to win. If it means putting the onus on the offense, see 2008. 2009, it meant putting the onus on the defense and playing field position and not making mistakes.

 

It wasn't pretty, but what happened? We have a team that we can throw out onto the field against ANYONE. We damn near defeated the #1/2 team in America with the guys we have on O. If that's not smart usage of marginal ability, I don't know what is. We take any other approach, and we are cowering under our seats at the thought of playing Arizona rather than assuming we'll take it to them.

 

Further, had we properly coached these kids there wouldn't be a fear of turnovers.

 

How the O-line has forgotten how to block and how the WRs can't do anything, is not on Watson. I'm not saying the O doesn't have a TON of problems. But Watson is the guy sitting at the head of it all with the pieces given to him, and trying to figure out how to best use them. Let's face it, we have over the years consistently had less than optimal pieces. But we've done a sometimes decent, sometimes spectacular job of harnessing them. I do not believe you can bring in another guy at the helm and expect him to use these crap parts better than Watson does. And nameless, faceless brilliant new OC isn't going to fix the WR and OL problems either.

[carlfense]

***snip***

You are assuming that some other offensive scheme would have given us more yardage as well as the wins. With this team? I don't believe that at all.

Scheme isn't the only problem. Teaching technique, route running, effort, decision making, and playcalling etc. is at least as much of a problem. My problem with Watson is about 10% scheme and 90% the other aspects of being a coach.

 

If you are defending Watson, what are you basing that on? What aspect of our offense gives you any hope for even mediocrity next year?

[carlfense]

The concept that "opening up the offense" automatically equals "more turnovers per game" is absurd. There is no proof that this is the case.

 

Further, had we properly coached these kids there wouldn't be a fear of turnovers.

 

This tangent makes no sense.

 

I don't know about automatic assumptions but I think it is fairly safe to assume that having Lee throw more against Texas would have resulted in more interceptions.

[In the Deed the Glory]

Because our QB is lost out there on the field with extremely mistake-prone playmakers? At the very least it'd result in 3-and-outs that run a lot less time off the clock than running it 2 or 3 times.

 

Points scored per game certainly does. Most generally yards equal points.

 

I'm sorry, but this is the exact attitude I am talking about. Remember, man, WE ARE NEBRASKA. This is not good enough for this program.

 

Bottom line.

 

Again, there's a leap in the argument. More yardage = more points. Not necessarily. More yardage often just means playing catch-up. Forcing the O to try to win games, successfully or not. That kind of approach is disastrous this year.

 

As fans we want our team to be constantly dominant in all areas and we always believe that we have the players to do so. We love throwing names of completely unproven players out there already with visions of them tearing it up in our heads. When it doesn't happen we blame the coaches for not using them the way we would in our heads.

 

But coaches need to be brutally bottom line. Our O is not high flying this year and NO brilliant scheme changes that. We do what it takes to win. If it means putting the onus on the offense, see 2008. 2009, it meant putting the onus on the defense and playing field position and not making mistakes.

 

It wasn't pretty, but what happened? We have a team that we can throw out onto the field against ANYONE. We damn near defeated the #1/2 team in America with the guys we have on O. If that's not smart usage of marginal ability, I don't know what is. We take any other approach, and we are cowering under our seats at the thought of playing Arizona rather than assuming we'll take it to them.

 

Further, had we properly coached these kids there wouldn't be a fear of turnovers.

 

How the O-line has forgotten how to block and how the WRs can't do anything, is not on Watson.

 

You are missing the main point. This offense, and all of its parts fall under Watson. My employees and my employees' employees are my responsibility, as is their performance. Consequently, it is also Bo's responsibility. Sh!t has and always will run downhill. Bo will fix this and Watson will either make a move on his staff or he will be the one removed.

[carlfense]

***snip***

And nameless, faceless brilliant new OC isn't going to fix the WR and OL problems either.

A named, faced, brilliant new DC named Pelini fixed our DL, LB, S, and CB problems using the exact same pieces as his predecessor. At least that was the situation the last time I checked.

[In the Deed the Glory]

***snip***

And nameless, faceless brilliant new OC isn't going to fix the WR and OL problems either.

A named, faced, brilliant new DC named Pelini fixed our DL, LB, S, and CB problems using the exact same pieces as his predecessor. At least that was the situation the last time I checked.

 

This is the argument I have been making. The talent is there, the coaching is missing.

[zoogs]

The thing is, Watson doesn't teach the O-line technique. Cotton doesn't either, which is the problem. Watson doesn't develop the receivers' route running abilities. Gilmore doesn't either, which is the problem.

 

Playcalling is a funny thing. Toughest part about being an OC because everyone in the world think they can call a better game than you, no matter what you do. Every time any OC is criticized you hear the same lines: "predictable. I knew 75% of the plays before they happened." I mean, the EXACT SAME LINE! Percentages varying from 70 to 100, of course. It's almost like the entire offensive coordinator profession doesn't know how to playcall. Or we have a lot of armchair QBs who play enough Madden to win the Super Bowl 5 seasons in a row.

 

I am defending Watson because he is willing to adapt, and because everything he does is for a win. I believe in him because he takes slow WRs and noodle-armed QBs like Ganz, and makes them a threat to score on almost anyone at anytime. I mean a team with those guys as our main playmakers, is not in the business of putting up barnburning scoring contests against anyone. But they did.

 

I want our OLs and WRs fixed, now. That is the real heart of the problem, but people go after the guy at the top. It is understandable but I don't agree with it at all.

 

 

A named, faced, brilliant new DC named Pelini fixed our DL, LB, S, and CB problems using the exact same pieces as his predecessor. At least that was the situation the last time I checked.

 

Oh, it's a COMPLETELY different story than that. We cleaned house on the defensive coaches. That is nothing CLOSE to using the exact same pieces. We brought in Mike Ekeler, John Papuchis, Marvin Sanders, and Carl Pelini. They worked with Bo in instilling that culture. That is the story on offense.

 

On offense, we took Callahan's strong offensive line and brought in Barney Cotton who threw all of that coaching out the window. And we retained Gilmore. That's the story on offense. Sorry, you can bring in whoever you want on OC, Barney and Gilmore will still be here and that won't do. If we could bring a Callahan back to just coach the OL, then our offense is scary.

 

Note that I am not criticizing the talent of our WR & OL. I am criticizing their coaching. Not Watson's coaching. Cotton and Gilmore's. Other guys can and should come in here to replace them, and they will transform these same pieces into a slick, well oiled machine that can put up points against anyone.

[carlfense]

The thing is, Watson doesn't teach the O-line technique. Cotton doesn't either, which is the problem. Watson doesn't develop the receivers' route running abilities. Gilmore doesn't either, which is the problem.

 

Playcalling is a funny thing. Toughest part about being an OC because everyone in the world think they can call a better game than you, no matter what you do. Every time any OC is criticized you hear the same lines: "predictable. I knew 75% of the plays before they happened." I mean, the EXACT SAME LINE! Percentages varying from 70 to 100, of course. It's almost like the entire offensive coordinator profession doesn't know how to playcall. Or we have a lot of armchair QBs who play enough Madden to win the Super Bowl 5 seasons in a row.

 

I am defending Watson because he is willing to adapt, and because everything he does is for a win. I believe in him because he takes slow WRs and noodle-armed QBs like Ganz, and makes them a threat to score on almost anyone at anytime. I mean a team with those guys as our main playmakers, is not in the business of putting up barnburning scoring contests against anyone. But they did.

 

I want our OLs and WRs fixed, now. That is the real heart of the problem, but people go after the guy at the top. It is understandable but I don't agree with it at all.

 

So he's the OC. He needs to make the recommendation to Pelini that we need new position coaches. If he doesn't insist on it, it's his neck on the line. If Pelini doesn't hold someone accountable, it's HIS neck on the line. I'd rather see Watson gone than Pelini. Therefore, fire away Bo.

[carlfense]

Plus, let's draw the Cosgrove connection. Were you calling for Cosgrove's head in 2007? I was. I bet you weren't saying it was simply a lack of talent and poor coaching by the position coaches.

[Karawithasmile]

The thing is, Watson doesn't teach the O-line technique. Cotton doesn't either, which is the problem. Watson doesn't develop the receivers' route running abilities. Gilmore doesn't either, which is the problem.

 

Playcalling is a funny thing. Toughest part about being an OC because everyone in the world think they can call a better game than you, no matter what you do. Every time any OC is criticized you hear the same lines: "predictable. I knew 75% of the plays before they happened." I mean, the EXACT SAME LINE! Percentages varying from 70 to 100, of course. It's almost like the entire offensive coordinator profession doesn't know how to playcall. Or we have a lot of armchair QBs who play enough Madden to win the Super Bowl 5 seasons in a row.

I am defending Watson because he is willing to adapt, and because everything he does is for a win. I believe in him because he takes slow WRs and noodle-armed QBs like Ganz, and makes them a threat to score on almost anyone at anytime. I mean a team with those guys as our main playmakers, is not in the business of putting up barnburning scoring contests against anyone. But they did.

 

I want our OLs and WRs fixed, now. That is the real heart of the problem, but people go after the guy at the top. It is understandable but I don't agree with it at all.

 

 

1. I have won the Super Bowl 10 seasons in a row. And not on rookie either. So I'm probably more qualified than most, even though I'm a girl.

 

2. Watson hasn't really adapted much this season. And he hasn't developed our noodle-noogin QB named Lee. Lee actually appears to have regressed this season. He hasn't developed our WRs into playmakers or even ball-catchers. At all. The entire season. I can see this argument carrying weight if there was ANYTHING resembling improvement this season, but sadly there is not. Even last season, with these more talented players, Wats only got us to the middle of the big 12 statistically as far as offense.

[zoogs]

I'm not sure he has the authority to do that. The whole Barney Cotton thing reeks of fishiness in every direction. I don't think he was Bo's guy, and he certainly wasn't Watson's guy. I think he was T.O's guy, and he is getting a weird amount of special treatment. As much as anyone even on the staff may want him gone, I don't think it's happening. I have no idea who should be held accountable for that.

 

I mean, it's weird, but I'm not even sure Bo has the authority to fire him. Or maybe it's that he doesn't want to. I don't know. I just hope he doesn't wait until things come to a head...not that they kind of haven't, already.

 

2. Watson hasn't really adapted much this season. And he hasn't developed our noodle-noogin QB named Lee. Lee actually appears to have regressed this season. He hasn't developed our WRs into playmakers or even ball-catchers. At all. The entire season. I can see this argument carrying weight if there was ANYTHING resembling improvement this season, but sadly there is not. Even last season, with these more talented players, Wats only got us to the middle of the big 12 statistically as far as offense.

 

Well, when the guy has a noodle noggin, there's not much to do about that. Right, Mr. Keller?

 

I wish we had someone better at QB. I really do. I've been the biggest supporter of Lee but, it's not a good sign that he has to be our starter right now. And Watson DID adapt this season. The offense we run now and the one we tried to run at the beginning, night and day.

[carlfense]

***snip***

Oh, it's a COMPLETELY different story than that. We cleaned house on the defensive coaches. That is nothing CLOSE to using the exact same pieces. We brought in Mike Ekeler, John Papuchis, Marvin Sanders, and Carl Pelini. They worked with Bo in instilling that culture. That is the story on offense.

***snip***

 

First, I meant players when I said "pieces."

 

Second, why shouldn't we do the same thing on offense? Clean house. Find a successful staff. It's the EXACT SAME THING. A blatant lack of production coupled with excuse making and hope filled fans that somehow think we can keep doing the same thing and get different results. Bookmark this post. If Watson is here at the end of next year you will hear the exact same complaints.

[In the Deed the Glory]

I'm not sure he has the authority to do that. The whole Barney Cotton thing reeks of fishiness in every direction. I don't think he was Bo's guy, and he certainly wasn't Watson's guy. I think he was T.O's guy, and he is getting a weird amount of special treatment. As much as anyone even on the staff may want him gone, I don't think it's happening. I have no idea who should be held accountable for that.

 

I mean, it's weird, but I'm not even sure Bo has the authority to fire him. Or maybe it's that he doesn't want to. I don't know. I just hope he doesn't wait until things come to a head...not that they kind of haven't, already.

 

2. Watson hasn't really adapted much this season. And he hasn't developed our noodle-noogin QB named Lee. Lee actually appears to have regressed this season. He hasn't developed our WRs into playmakers or even ball-catchers. At all. The entire season. I can see this argument carrying weight if there was ANYTHING resembling improvement this season, but sadly there is not. Even last season, with these more talented players, Wats only got us to the middle of the big 12 statistically as far as offense.

 

Well, when the guy has a noodle noggin, there's not much to do about that. Right, Mr. Keller?

 

I wish we had someone better at QB. I really do. I've been the biggest supporter of Lee but, it's not a good sign that he has to be our starter right now. And Watson DID adapt this season. The offense we run now and the one we tried to run at the beginning, night and day.

 

This posts says TO is like a Don controlling the family and Bo is a figure head. Conspiracy theories are by nature based on loose connections and prejudice. I am going to need some evidence to your fishiness smell, without it it is just an open can of tuna on the counter you didn't throw away.