Watson a candidate for the Miami(OH) head coach position

[teachercd]

You win. You think Watson is very good and I think he is average at best.

[Hunter94]

I appreciate the stats you laid out but I dont care about what other teams did or didnt do against the same team. I care about what NU did vs those teams. Watson has shown, time and time again that vs top half defenses, he basically poops his pants.

 

This year we saw it again

 

UT

AM

OU

 

 

How many TOTAL points did he offense score in those 3 games? Was it 6, 6, 20? So, yeah, 32 points, so less then 11 points per game. The defense in those games let up, 20, 9, 23 (I think), so 52 points or about 17.5 points per game. Now, you can say what you want but I think that a good team should be able to let up 17-20 points per game and still win.

 

If you don't care about stats that other teams put up, why are you basing your aguments on "top half defenses"? Those are mostly built on stats against other teams.

 

2 of the 3 we played a majority of the game with a gimpy quarterback that was forced into doing things that he doesn't do well at. In the Texas game the scheme and playcalling certainly wasn't the issue, it was the execution. I would also argue the same in the A&M game, Watson's play had Reed in position for a TD, but an awful throw by Martinez ended up as an interception. Even in the OU game, it was poor decision making by Taylor that cost us the game. I put the A&M and OU losses on the coach that wanted Martinez in the game, and that wasn't our OC.

 

 

I am basing it on top half defenes because I thought that was a fair starting point to use. Dont you?

 

I get what your saying about the plays "being there", I have coached for 10 years and with the exception of the QB sneak, spike and kneel, I have NEVER seen an offensive play that was drawn up that was not "there" or was not designed to score a TD. They all are, the thing is, you have to know what to call, when to call and how to play to your players strongest points.

 

That goes for defense too, you probably wont see Bo having a DE cover a WR.

 

Sure, it's a fair starting point. But you said what other teams do against the same teams we played don't matter, yet that's exactly what stats are. You're argument just doesn't make sense, you're basically saying that because you don't like the stats I used, which show that Watson's horrible offense had the best performance against some teams that had faced some very explosive offenses, they aren't valid. Yet somehow, magically, we can use stats against top 50 defenses to show that Watson sucks.

 

Point 2, i'm a bit confused, are you admitting that Watson may have called the correct plays that just weren't executed? Taylor probably had at least 5-6 touchdowns dropped this year, many in big games that cost us. Taylor also missed receivers that cost us points or made bad throws, that's execution, not the play calling.

 

 

Point 3, I've certainly seen Bo drop DE's into short zones where receivers are running

 

 

Okay, I am not sure if perhaps I am not explaining myself right or if you are not understanding it, I do not mean for that to sound like I am a jerk.

 

Let me try again, to your first point: When you play a crappy defense the offense should, in theory, put up good stats. When they play a great defense they should, in theory, struggle, and when they play an average defense they should probably have some good games and some bad ones. Now, Watsons bad games, the ones that NU gets beat in, he averages WAY below what could be seen as effective. The stats show that. I said that I didnt care what OTHER teams do vs a team. Not the overall stats just I dont care what Stanford did vs UW.

 

Point 2, I am sure that Watson has called the "correct" play lots of times, like I said, with the exception of 3 plays that I know of, all plays are designed to score a TD, so yeah, he has called the "correct" play lots of times, the problem is that he calls the correct play without taking into consideration what the defense will do and how they will defend it, remember, the defense is trying to. That is the adjustment phase of the game. The part that Watson is just terrible at.

 

Point 3, well you made my point, you have seen the DE's drop into ZONE COVERAGE, they are not covering a WR, they are covering space. HUGE HUGE HUGE difference. Bo is not putting a DE out wide to cover a WR man-man. Sounds stupid right? Well, thats how Watsons offense is.

 

You have a QB that is not a great passer so you make him pass with a lot, you give him tough routes to throw/complete. It makes little or no sense.

 

Again, I am not a total Watson hater, I just think he is at best, average. That is not a bad thing but I think there are better guys out there for the job.

 

I see other teams that have hurt guys (the ducks this year) and dont miss a beat, or that have new QB's, Cam Newton, and dont miss a beat. Why is it that its always a fair excuse for Watson?

 

Bo lost TWO starting linebackers and turned the 3rd one into an ALL FREAKING AMERICAN. The offense gets a guy dinged up and it looks like the special olympics out there! Bo yanks guys on defense when they screw up, ALL THE TIME, yet, Watson continues to use the same players over and over even when they are not doing a good job.

 

But you measure defenses on how they performed overall against other teams. If you don't care about what other teams did against other teams, I don't see how you can use statistics for anything, since that's exactly what they are.

 

Many of Watson's adjustments or subs have been overruled by Bo.

 

And in the same respect as the LB comment, Watson took a kid that almost NOBODY thought could play QB at this level, and prior to the injury he was being hailed as a fringe Heisman candidate, he's got a fantastic QB effeciency rating despite being called an awful passer. We have a 3* running back named Roy Helu who had only 4 offers coming out of high school (BYU, pre Chip Kelly Oregon and Cal) who has had over 1000 yards from the LOS under Watson for 3 straight years, including 2 1,000 yard years. In fact, if Burkhead gets 88 yards, and Martinez 58 yards we'll have 3 players with 1,000 rushing yards.

 

Our horrible offense put up stats that are almost identical to the 2009 Oregon Ducks, and look at where they are now. Do I think Watson is the best OC in the country? Absolutely not. Do I think Nebraska would pay what it takes to get a Dana Holgorsen, Guz Malzahn or similar level OC? Absolutely not. If I had my wish right now, Nebraska would offer Mark Helfrich around $400K to come be our OC after Watson gets a HC gig, unfortunately, I don't think it's going to happen though.

 

 

we have been over this time and time again.........HELLO!

watson can run up the stats against any average team.....when we play a top 20 team with a decent D, he gets stymied consistently.....you can't be a BCS team unless you beat the better teams, unless you are TCU or Boise and run the table.....and score a lot of points against scrub teams...like SDSU or KU....we can't even do that!!

[HuskerNMO]

I appreciate the stats you laid out but I dont care about what other teams did or didnt do against the same team. I care about what NU did vs those teams. Watson has shown, time and time again that vs top half defenses, he basically poops his pants.

 

This year we saw it again

 

UT

AM

OU

 

 

How many TOTAL points did he offense score in those 3 games? Was it 6, 6, 20? So, yeah, 32 points, so less then 11 points per game. The defense in those games let up, 20, 9, 23 (I think), so 52 points or about 17.5 points per game. Now, you can say what you want but I think that a good team should be able to let up 17-20 points per game and still win.

 

If you don't care about stats that other teams put up, why are you basing your aguments on "top half defenses"? Those are mostly built on stats against other teams.

 

2 of the 3 we played a majority of the game with a gimpy quarterback that was forced into doing things that he doesn't do well at. In the Texas game the scheme and playcalling certainly wasn't the issue, it was the execution. I would also argue the same in the A&M game, Watson's play had Reed in position for a TD, but an awful throw by Martinez ended up as an interception. Even in the OU game, it was poor decision making by Taylor that cost us the game. I put the A&M and OU losses on the coach that wanted Martinez in the game, and that wasn't our OC.

 

 

I am basing it on top half defenes because I thought that was a fair starting point to use. Dont you?

 

I get what your saying about the plays "being there", I have coached for 10 years and with the exception of the QB sneak, spike and kneel, I have NEVER seen an offensive play that was drawn up that was not "there" or was not designed to score a TD. They all are, the thing is, you have to know what to call, when to call and how to play to your players strongest points.

 

That goes for defense too, you probably wont see Bo having a DE cover a WR.

 

Sure, it's a fair starting point. But you said what other teams do against the same teams we played don't matter, yet that's exactly what stats are. You're argument just doesn't make sense, you're basically saying that because you don't like the stats I used, which show that Watson's horrible offense had the best performance against some teams that had faced some very explosive offenses, they aren't valid. Yet somehow, magically, we can use stats against top 50 defenses to show that Watson sucks.

 

Point 2, i'm a bit confused, are you admitting that Watson may have called the correct plays that just weren't executed? Taylor probably had at least 5-6 touchdowns dropped this year, many in big games that cost us. Taylor also missed receivers that cost us points or made bad throws, that's execution, not the play calling.

 

 

Point 3, I've certainly seen Bo drop DE's into short zones where receivers are running

 

 

Okay, I am not sure if perhaps I am not explaining myself right or if you are not understanding it, I do not mean for that to sound like I am a jerk.

 

Let me try again, to your first point: When you play a crappy defense the offense should, in theory, put up good stats. When they play a great defense they should, in theory, struggle, and when they play an average defense they should probably have some good games and some bad ones. Now, Watsons bad games, the ones that NU gets beat in, he averages WAY below what could be seen as effective. The stats show that. I said that I didnt care what OTHER teams do vs a team. Not the overall stats just I dont care what Stanford did vs UW.

 

Point 2, I am sure that Watson has called the "correct" play lots of times, like I said, with the exception of 3 plays that I know of, all plays are designed to score a TD, so yeah, he has called the "correct" play lots of times, the problem is that he calls the correct play without taking into consideration what the defense will do and how they will defend it, remember, the defense is trying to. That is the adjustment phase of the game. The part that Watson is just terrible at.

 

Point 3, well you made my point, you have seen the DE's drop into ZONE COVERAGE, they are not covering a WR, they are covering space. HUGE HUGE HUGE difference. Bo is not putting a DE out wide to cover a WR man-man. Sounds stupid right? Well, thats how Watsons offense is.

 

You have a QB that is not a great passer so you make him pass with a lot, you give him tough routes to throw/complete. It makes little or no sense.

 

Again, I am not a total Watson hater, I just think he is at best, average. That is not a bad thing but I think there are better guys out there for the job.

 

I see other teams that have hurt guys (the ducks this year) and dont miss a beat, or that have new QB's, Cam Newton, and dont miss a beat. Why is it that its always a fair excuse for Watson?

 

Bo lost TWO starting linebackers and turned the 3rd one into an ALL FREAKING AMERICAN. The offense gets a guy dinged up and it looks like the special olympics out there! Bo yanks guys on defense when they screw up, ALL THE TIME, yet, Watson continues to use the same players over and over even when they are not doing a good job.

 

But you measure defenses on how they performed overall against other teams. If you don't care about what other teams did against other teams, I don't see how you can use statistics for anything, since that's exactly what they are.

 

Many of Watson's adjustments or subs have been overruled by Bo.

 

And in the same respect as the LB comment, Watson took a kid that almost NOBODY thought could play QB at this level, and prior to the injury he was being hailed as a fringe Heisman candidate, he's got a fantastic QB effeciency rating despite being called an awful passer. We have a 3* running back named Roy Helu who had only 4 offers coming out of high school (BYU, pre Chip Kelly Oregon and Cal) who has had over 1000 yards from the LOS under Watson for 3 straight years, including 2 1,000 yard years. In fact, if Burkhead gets 88 yards, and Martinez 58 yards we'll have 3 players with 1,000 rushing yards.

 

Our horrible offense put up stats that are almost identical to the 2009 Oregon Ducks, and look at where they are now. Do I think Watson is the best OC in the country? Absolutely not. Do I think Nebraska would pay what it takes to get a Dana Holgorsen, Guz Malzahn or similar level OC? Absolutely not. If I had my wish right now, Nebraska would offer Mark Helfrich around $400K to come be our OC after Watson gets a HC gig, unfortunately, I don't think it's going to happen though.

 

 

we have been over this time and time again.........HELLO!

watson can run up the stats against any average team.....when we play a top 20 team with a decent D, he gets stymied consistently.....you can't be a BCS team unless you beat the better teams, unless you are TCU or Boise and run the table.....and score a lot of points against scrub teams...like SDSU or KU....we can't even do that!!

 

Top 20 teams this year

 

Oklahoma State- most points scored against them

 

MIssouri (#1 scoring D in the Big 12)- most points scored against them

 

OU- 20 points, not great, but decent output

 

Texas A&M- Agreed, poor output

 

Average against top 20 teams? 27 PPG, not too shabby against top 20 teams.

 

Of course you had to qualify against decent D's, find me an OC that DOESN'T stuggle against good defenses consistently. Then the argument will have merit.

 

 

 

 

 

[Big Red 40]

I appreciate the stats you laid out but I dont care about what other teams did or didnt do against the same team. I care about what NU did vs those teams. Watson has shown, time and time again that vs top half defenses, he basically poops his pants.

 

This year we saw it again

 

UT

AM

OU

 

 

How many TOTAL points did he offense score in those 3 games? Was it 6, 6, 20? So, yeah, 32 points, so less then 11 points per game. The defense in those games let up, 20, 9, 23 (I think), so 52 points or about 17.5 points per game. Now, you can say what you want but I think that a good team should be able to let up 17-20 points per game and still win.

 

If you don't care about stats that other teams put up, why are you basing your aguments on "top half defenses"? Those are mostly built on stats against other teams.

 

2 of the 3 we played a majority of the game with a gimpy quarterback that was forced into doing things that he doesn't do well at. In the Texas game the scheme and playcalling certainly wasn't the issue, it was the execution. I would also argue the same in the A&M game, Watson's play had Reed in position for a TD, but an awful throw by Martinez ended up as an interception. Even in the OU game, it was poor decision making by Taylor that cost us the game. I put the A&M and OU losses on the coach that wanted Martinez in the game, and that wasn't our OC.

How very Callahan-esque. When the offense looks good (even if it's only against a bottom of the barrel defense) it's due to great coaches and the gameplans they designed.

 

When it doesn't work, it's because of the players: injuries, lack of depth, lack of experience, execution, etc. Even when history dictates that our offensive coordinator has been mediocre at best, and other OCs seem to have better success with the same personnel issues.

 

Talk to almost any coach, winning and losing almost always comes down to who executes better. Yes, sometimes the game plan is just crap and you get hammered, but 90% plus of losses come back to not executing the play the way it was supposed to be ran. See dropped TD passes, blown coverages, QB's that don't throw the ball away resulting in a sack and fumbles.

 

Coaches can not go out of the field and execute for the players, we basically had the same offensive staff in the 80's when we could never win the big one as we did in the 90's when we won 3 titles. What was the difference? Talent and execution, you can't ignore the fact that up until the time that Martinez got hurt, we had a top 10 offense in the country with a freshman QB at the helm. You don't get there by pure luck, you get there by a good coaching staff and execution. When we had a gimpy QB, we lost the ability to execute our offense. The biggest mistake the coaching staff made this year, was not playing Cody Green in the A&M and OU games. Cody can't do what a healthy Martinez can do, but he is a better option than a gimpy Martinez. And the prodigal son is who made that call, not our maligned OC.

Best post in here IMO. Agree on all pionts.

[74Hunter]

we have been over this time and time again.........HELLO!

watson can run up the stats against any average team.....when we play a top 20 team with a decent D, he gets stymied consistently.....you can't be a BCS team unless you beat the better teams, unless you are TCU or Boise and run the table.....and score a lot of points against scrub teams...like SDSU or KU....we can't even do that!!

Wait, Martinez was hurt for KU and we just didn't want to play against SDSU, or we were only using like 2 plays all night.......

 

Well, if losing ONE player renders your offense totally useless, then your offense isn't that good. And Watsgrove cannot be given credit for Martinez's God-given speed.

[74Hunter]

Top 20 teams this year

 

Oklahoma State- most points scored against them

 

MIssouri (#1 scoring D in the Big 12)- most points scored against them

 

OU- 20 points, not great, but decent output

 

Texas A&M- Agreed, poor output

 

Average against top 20 teams? 27 PPG, not too shabby against top 20 teams.

 

Of course you had to qualify against decent D's, find me an OC that DOESN'T stuggle against good defenses consistently. Then the argument will have merit.

OSU is a top 20 team, but their defense is #91 in the nation === FAIL!

 

Missouri- our 1 good game quarter against the #41 in total D in the nation, the sun shines on a dog's ass every now and then.

 

Oklahoma- rated #57 in total D === FAIL!

 

Texas A&M rated #50 in total D ==== EPIC FAIL!

 

Which top decent defense did Watson's offense shred this year, or any year for that matter?

 

I find it funny that the Watsgrove backers conveniently ignore the stats that back up the fact that he is a mediocre OC at best. Instead, they pull the excuse card year after year to defend his performance: injuries, freshman qb, lack of execution, etc. Well, if we have these same problems year after year, the excuses start wearing thin.

Edited December 28, 2010 by 74Hunter

[HuskerNMO]

Top 20 teams this year

 

Oklahoma State- most points scored against them

 

MIssouri (#1 scoring D in the Big 12)- most points scored against them

 

OU- 20 points, not great, but decent output

 

Texas A&M- Agreed, poor output

 

Average against top 20 teams? 27 PPG, not too shabby against top 20 teams.

 

Of course you had to qualify against decent D's, find me an OC that DOESN'T stuggle against good defenses consistently. Then the argument will have merit.

OSU is a top 20 team, but their defense is #91 in the nation === FAIL!

 

Missouri- our 1 good game quarter against the #41 in total D in the nation, the sun shines on a dog's ass every now and then.

 

Oklahoma- rated #57 in total D === FAIL!

 

Texas A&M rated #50 in total D ==== EPIC FAIL!

 

Which top defense did Watson's offense shred this year, or any year for that matter?

 

 

Your reading comprehension skills ===== EPIC FAIL!

 

Show me an offensive coordinator who constantly lights up top 25 defenses

 

And the Pelini's don't care about total D, they care about Scoring D, you don't see W's on the schedule because you gained more yards than the other team.

 

Missouri #6- 31 points

 

We didn't play any other top 25 scoring D's.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[n.e.husker]

http://www2.kusports.com/news/2010/dec/28/mangino-good-fit-nu/

 

Speculation has centered on Nebraska offensive coordinator Shawn Watson leaving the program after the Cornhuskers’ Holiday Bowl game Thursday against Washington. Watson’s a leading candidate for the Miami of Ohio head coaching job vacated by Mike Haywood, hired by Pittsburgh.

 

Bo Pelini’s expertise always has been defense, and he has his brother Carl as his D-coordinator. Nebraska’s offense, though better this year under red-shirt freshman quarterback Taylor Martinez, hasn’t kept pace with its defense since Pelini revived the program.

 

Mangino-to-Nebraska makes plenty of sense. Sure, Mangino has his detractors because of his fiery nature, but his sideline demeanor calls to mind Tom Landry’s when compared to Bo Pelini’s. Sure, Mangino lost his cool, but it never resulted in his team losing its cool during games. Mangino teams routinely did a solid job of avoiding penalties. Pelini’s team was penalized 16 times for 145 yards in a 9-6 loss to Texas A&M.

 

 

If Wats left, Would we have room for Mangino?

 

 

Edit: THere is already a thread on this. http://www.huskerboard.com/index.php?/topic/50098-mangino-would-be-a-good-fit-at-nebraska/

[74Hunter]

Your reading comprehension skills ===== EPIC FAIL!

touche' This is a road that you don't want to go down with me.....

 

Show me an offensive coordinator who constantly lights up top 25 defenses

Since I'm at work, I really don't have the time to look up all of the OCs in the nation, but it would be nice if we had an OC who could light up a mediocre defense. Or even Division 1AA South Dakota State. Or how about putting up more than 6 points against #50 Texas.

 

And the Pelini's don't care about total D, they care about Scoring D, you don't see W's on the schedule because you gained more yards than the other team.

I understand, but I do. It shows just how ineffective your offense moves the ball against defenses. You can't always be lucky enough to have your defense set you up at the 1 yard line, like against OU last year.

 

Missouri #6- 31 points

 

We didn't play any other top 25 scoring D's.

Thank you for unknowingly proving my point. One good quarter of football against a decent defense is called an abberation. The rest of the year was a struggle at best.

[huskerscott]

Top 20 teams this year

 

Oklahoma State- most points scored against them

 

MIssouri (#1 scoring D in the Big 12)- most points scored against them

 

OU- 20 points, not great, but decent output

 

Texas A&M- Agreed, poor output

 

Average against top 20 teams? 27 PPG, not too shabby against top 20 teams.

 

Of course you had to qualify against decent D's, find me an OC that DOESN'T stuggle against good defenses consistently. Then the argument will have merit.

OSU is a top 20 team, but their defense is #91 in the nation === FAIL!

 

Missouri- our 1 good game quarter against the #41 in total D in the nation, the sun shines on a dog's ass every now and then.

 

Oklahoma- rated #57 in total D === FAIL!

 

Texas A&M rated #50 in total D ==== EPIC FAIL!

 

Which top defense did Watson's offense shred this year, or any year for that matter?

 

 

Your reading comprehension skills ===== EPIC FAIL!

 

Show me an offensive coordinator who constantly lights up top 25 defenses

And the Pelini's don't care about total D, they care about Scoring D, you don't see W's on the schedule because you gained more yards than the other team.

 

Missouri #6- 31 points

 

We didn't play any other top 25 scoring D's.

 

I think we should worry about teams in top 50 before trying the top 25.

 

Not very often teams shred a top 25 defense, but the teams that do win those games have coordinaters that keep their playing calling off balance enough to keep the defense guessing. Those teams dont put 50 on the board they put 24-28 pts, enough to win the game. As you can see 24-28 pts wouldve won us every game this year.

 

To have a potenial NC run with an outstanding defense ruined by a pathetic offense makes me wanna puke.

[bshirt]

I appreciate the stats you laid out but I dont care about what other teams did or didnt do against the same team. I care about what NU did vs those teams. Watson has shown, time and time again that vs top half defenses, he basically poops his pants.

 

This year we saw it again

 

UT

AM

OU

 

 

How many TOTAL points did he offense score in those 3 games? Was it 6, 6, 20? So, yeah, 32 points, so less then 11 points per game. The defense in those games let up, 20, 9, 23 (I think), so 52 points or about 17.5 points per game. Now, you can say what you want but I think that a good team should be able to let up 17-20 points per game and still win.

 

If you don't care about stats that other teams put up, why are you basing your aguments on "top half defenses"? Those are mostly built on stats against other teams.

 

2 of the 3 we played a majority of the game with a gimpy quarterback that was forced into doing things that he doesn't do well at. In the Texas game the scheme and playcalling certainly wasn't the issue, it was the execution. I would also argue the same in the A&M game, Watson's play had Reed in position for a TD, but an awful throw by Martinez ended up as an interception. Even in the OU game, it was poor decision making by Taylor that cost us the game. I put the A&M and OU losses on the coach that wanted Martinez in the game, and that wasn't our OC.

How very Callahan-esque. When the offense looks good (even if it's only against a bottom of the barrel defense) it's due to great coaches and the gameplans they designed.

 

When it doesn't work, it's because of the players: injuries, lack of depth, lack of experience, execution, etc. Even when history dictates that our offensive coordinator has been mediocre at best, and other OCs seem to have better success with the same personnel issues.

 

 

Yeah, it sure rings a bell doesn't it?

 

I too heard those same excuses for the four unbearable Clownahan years. When we get annihilated, it's the "no talent" excuse. When we beat a Ball St or someone it's "great coaching". Above all else, get big yds/points at garbage time so the offense stats looks good.

 

Just like 2008. We play a good defense and we're stuffed like sardines....down 35 - 0 in the 2nd qtr we start racking up the garbage pts vs the Sooner waterboys (4 TDs) and we get to pretend they couldn't stop us.

 

Thank God Bo doesn't buy that bs.

[teachercd]

Thank you!!!

 

Another sane poster that understands garbage time!

[macroboy]

I can't believe I keep checking this thread. It's worse that getting Rick-rolled.

[macroboy]

Thank you!!!

 

Another sane poster that understands garbage time!

 

Garbage time started around page 2 when this went from a rumor about Watson getting a job to the very tired Shawn Watson bitch fest. Oh, wait, not what you meant by garbage time?

[bshirt]

I can't believe I keep checking this thread. It's worse that getting Rick-rolled.

 

Then why are you here? Someone have a gun to your head?