Good Luck Shawn Watson on that New Job!!

[bball_backer]

 

Is Josh McDaniels, one of THE best QB coaches in the business, to blame if Tim Tebow isn't a polished NFL quarterback yet this year? I don't think so. You can hand McDaniels Armanti Edwards and give him three years and I don't think he'd make a great QB from the 'quarterbacking' standpoint with him. Got to realize what we have to work with here.

Ummm... I don't know how to break this to you but, unlike Nebraska, Denver is smart. They know how important winning is, and as a result have FIRED McDaniels... so you may want to find another example.

[zoogs]

Yeah, good luck to Denver. In any case, they fired him as a HC. Not because he didn't develop Tebow, which is my point. The example stands if you are paying attention, unless you seriously think Tebow not being a NFL caliber quarterback this year has anything to do with Josh McDaniels and his quality coaching QBs.

[schuhbdoo]

Here's a stat for you, the offense cost us 3 games this year. This is becoming a trend.

 

 

Here a stat I mentioned a couple days ago.

 

In 7 losses in two years, the starting QB or QB's didn't throw a single TD in all 7 losses.

 

We need to be able to throw some TD's to win games.

[MCAT800]

Here's a stat for you, the offense cost us 3 games this year. This is becoming a trend.

 

More like a tradition, 3 games in 09, 3 games in 10..........

[zoogs]

Here's a stat for you, the offense cost us 3 games this year. This is becoming a trend.

 

 

Here a stat I mentioned a couple days ago.

 

In 7 losses in two years, the starting QB or QB's didn't throw a single TD in all 7 losses.

 

We need to be able to throw some TD's to win games.

 

Why does it matter if the offense gets a touchdown on the ground or through the air, or for that matter, if the QB or the Wildcat QB does the throwing on a passing touchdown?

[bshirt]

Here's a stat for you, the offense cost us 3 games this year. This is becoming a trend.

 

 

Here a stat I mentioned a couple days ago.

 

In 7 losses in two years, the starting QB or QB's didn't throw a single TD in all 7 losses.

 

We need to be able to throw some TD's to win games.

 

Why does it matter if the offense gets a touchdown on the ground or through the air, or for that matter, if the QB or the Wildcat QB does the throwing on a passing touchdown?

 

What matters is the dismally low amounts of TDs (frequently zero) scored vs any decent offense we face. What also matters is the comical high frequency of stopping anything that works due to the sole purpose of being "multiple".

 

Lastly, what matters most, despite your endless excuses, is the tiresome repetitive experience of watching our defense carry our pathetic offense on its back. It does a fantastic job but at times, just like Atlas....it shrugs.

[Hammerhead]

Be careful what you wish for, that's all I say.

 

The moment that Martinez was named the starter Watson had 2-3 weeks to develop a scheme that a redshirt freshman would succeed in. And you know what? He did a pretty darn good job, in fact we destroyed Washington, KSU, OSU and Missouri in the first half with that scheme and young QB. Scored more points on those teams than any other team all year, but once Taylor got hurt we were in trouble, we didn't have another QB that matched his talents with his legs. That combined with Bo's insistance on playing Taylor at 60-70% of his health made an ugly end to the season.

 

I say hats off to Shawn Watson for developing such a potent offense early in the year with a QB that very few thought would ever take a meaningful snap at QB for a BCS level program.

 

It wasn't the scheme that destroyed Washington, KSU, OSU, and Missouri. It was Taylor Martinez (mostly with the zone read, although I'll give him credit for making some nice passes in the OSU and Missouri games) with some help in the Mizzou game from Roy Helu. We found something they couldn't stop, and we pounded it at them time and again, which is something anybody at all would know how to do.

 

Those teams all have poor defenses though. Never mind that we scored so many points against them, as I said before if you can find something the other team can't stop and keep doing it, there's no reason why you shouldn't score that many points. What good is putting up 200 points on a crappy defense if you can't put up 20 on a decent defense? Sure, the dropped passes killed us in the Texas game, penalties killed us in the Texas A&M game, and turnovers killed us in the Big XII Championship, but they shouldn't have. A good offense can overcome those things.

 

Let's take a closer look at the Oklahoma game. A turnover and a sack cost us a shot at two field goals. The first time, we could've given Henery a chipshot. The second, we were right on the edge of Henery's range and could've easily gotten him a shot right down the middle, and probably could've gotten him a few extra yards. All we had to do was run the ball in those situations. That would've taken a lot of pressure off a quarterback who was injured and was getting hurried/sacked all night. Also, why did we stop running the wildcat when it was actually working? Yes, the wildcat is a gimmick offensive scheme. Does it say something when a gimmick offense is more productive than your usual offense, though? Watson said he didn't want to make us one-dimensional. We were NO-dimensional with Martinez taking the snaps. All we could do was move backwards. At least with the wildcat we could get positive yardage.

 

I'm not going to claim that I know the answer to fixing this anemic offense. What I do know is that insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. Expecting the same offensive unit that struggled against a team that won't even be playing in a bowl game to be productive against the best the Big Ten has to offer is insane. Something has to change.

[zoogs]

We found something they couldn't stop

 

By "we", of course, you mean Watson.

 

Any way you slice it, Watson designed the offense this year, one that worked very well up until the top 2 QBs got hurt. And yes, of course any offense that works well will rely on players that are good. We really maximized with this O out of Taylor and Roy and Rex this year, and it isn't putting them down to say the OC put them in a good position.

 

Again - will not argue about the end of the OU game, and those plays. That's exactly my view, pretty much.

[I am I]

Here's a stat for you, the offense cost us 3 games this year. This is becoming a trend.

 

 

Here a stat I mentioned a couple days ago.

 

In 7 losses in two years, the starting QB or QB's didn't throw a single TD in all 7 losses.

 

We need to be able to throw some TD's to win games.

 

Why does it matter if the offense gets a touchdown on the ground or through the air, or for that matter, if the QB or the Wildcat QB does the throwing on a passing touchdown?

 

What matters is the dismally low amounts of TDs (frequently zero) scored vs any decent offense we face. What also matters is the comical high frequency of stopping anything that works due to the sole purpose of being "multiple".

 

Lastly, what matters most, despite your endless excuses, is the tiresome repetitive experience of watching our defense carry our pathetic offense on its back. It does a fantastic job but at times, just like Atlas....it shrugs.

 

 

who is John Galt?

 

or more apropo, who is Tom Osborne?

[irafreak]

The most damning thing for this offense was the fact that we had the most accurate kicker in college football history. So many drives could've ended in points if we could just pick up a first down or two. Our defense was good enough to get us solid to great field position more often than not. I mean how do you NOT score more than 6 points against A&M? How do you NOT score PERIOD in the 2nd half of the OU game?

 

Don't talk to me about turnovers. Turnovers fall on the offensive coaches just as much as they do the players when they happen over and over. Shawn Watson has moments of brilliance. But just like the offense he's cold and hot. We watch our offensive coordinator make some of the most "huh" kind of calls and then watch our offense make the same types of "what in the world" mistakes.

 

I just find it hard to believe that the offense's penalties, fumbles, drops, and overall lack of composure falls on the kids. I don't buy it when the defense plays with less errors. Patterns can't be ignored. Bo Pelini pieced his defensive staff the way he knew it would work. His offensive staff is composed of misfits designed to carry the load while he fixed his side of the ball. The defense is fixed now changes need to be made. I don't care what changes. Keep watson but then you better get a line coach that can teach the kids to pass block.

 

The TE's are about the only consistenly solid group (RB's are close as helu's fumbles are my only complaint). We've seen Mike McNeil go from threat to nonexistent now that he's a wideout and Kyler Reed is just as big a threat to stretch the field as niles (plus he catches the ball). Ben Cotton can block like a beast and make tough catches as well. Bo either needs to pick HIS offense that compliments his defense and hire the guys that specialize in it or give Shawn Watson full reign and let him pick his staff. We can't keep turning out inconsistency. I refuse to blame this on a redshirt freshman qb (run the damn ball then!) or injuries. The defense rotates guys and the scheme still works.

[husker_99]

Watson shouldn't need a new job to get fired from this one. there is nothing positive you can say about the man after the job he did this year. The players overcame his dipsh*t calling.

[Hammerhead]

We found something they couldn't stop

 

By "we", of course, you mean Watson.

 

Any way you slice it, Watson designed the offense this year, one that worked very well up until the top 2 QBs got hurt. And yes, of course any offense that works well will rely on players that are good. We really maximized with this O out of Taylor and Roy and Rex this year, and it isn't putting them down to say the OC put them in a good position.

 

Again - will not argue about the end of the OU game, and those plays. That's exactly my view, pretty much.

 

Yes, but the zone read was a pretty easy choice for a team with a very elusive quarterback who is a freshman and doesn't have the playbook memorized from front to back and two halfbacks who aren't afraid of contact. It's simple, and it's effective... if the team you're playing against doesn't know how to stop it. Texas figured out how to bluff our QBs into making the wrong reads and completely nullified it. We thought it was Taylor's inexperience causing the wrong reads to be made, but it was simply Texas having a defensive scheme that proved better than our offensive scheme. Other than a few pass attempts (many of which resulted in drops, which I obviously can't blame on Watson) we didn't have a good contingency plan in case the zone read didn't work, which it didn't. I can't say for certain what would've been a good plan against Texas. I don't get paid to do so, and I haven't observed enough of Texas's defense to say what their biggest weakness was. Shawn does, and has.

 

Again, I can't blame everything on Shawn. The lack of discipline is partially Bo's fault, and partially the players' too. Bo has our defense playing as well as they have in several years, though, so we can't afford to let him go. We have to address the problem somehow, and frankly, at this point Shawn is our only expendable commodity.

[JTrain]

Pretty much ready to give up arguing with the Watson apologists at this point.

 

Look, with any coach at this level, no matter how ultimately unsuccessful they are, you can point out bright spots. Cosgrove's defense led the nation in sacks in 2005. Barney Cotton's offense once ran for 333 yards. There were times in 99 you would have thought Osborne was calling the plays again.

 

On the other hand, you can always point to unusually poor spots with great coaches. Bo's defense is 111th in TFLs. McBride gave up 80000 yards to Troy Edwards. TO's mighty option game couldn't even get on the board against ASU. Peyton Manning's thrown an ungodly amount of INTs in the last three games. Belichick and Brady looked inept against the Browns.

 

Watson's had his bright spots. Tough to give him too much credit for a bunch of 50+ yard runs by a freakishly fast QB that nobody had heard about. But still, he's had his moments over the years. But the overarching results are just painfully mediocre. One offense that produced in the top third of the conference. Failing to produce at the most crucial times in the biggest games.

 

Nobody hates the guy personally. He seems pretty likable to me. He knows more about football than 99% of us ever will. He makes more money than 99% of us ever will. And really nobody has asked him to be some kind of genius whose offenses rank in the top ten every year. We just need somebody that can put is in the top third of the conference most years. Watson isn't going to be that guy.

[Skull&Bones]

Three things could and one will happen...1)Watson gets a head coaching job 2) Watson is let go after the bowl game 3) Watson is still N next season

 

 

Bo knows what it takes to win and Osborne knows a thing or two about the game. If Watson is around next season it's our best option for the time being. We are rolling into a whicked schedule next season and whoever is at the helm Bo and Osborne put or left there for a reason. No matter what happens I wish Watson the best, he is a Husker.

[knapplc]

We found something they couldn't stop

 

By "we", of course, you mean Watson.

 

Any way you slice it, Watson designed the offense this year, one that worked very well up until the top 2 QBs got hurt. And yes, of course any offense that works well will rely on players that are good. We really maximized with this O out of Taylor and Roy and Rex this year, and it isn't putting them down to say the OC put them in a good position.

 

Again - will not argue about the end of the OU game, and those plays. That's exactly my view, pretty much.

 

Wait a second. In another thread you were running with the notion that Martinez didn't beat out Green or Lee, but that BO chose Martinez. Now you're saying Watson chose him?

 

And in other recent threads you've been pinning this offense on Bo, stating that it's not the offense Watson wants to run but that Bo forced the issue, and now you're giving credit for its success to Watson?

 

Seriously, zoogies, your Watson love is out of control. The facts change from thread to thread to blindly support Watson no matter the circumstance.