What is this team missing?

[The Dude]

we need any dime-a-dozen average high school coach to come in and teach these kids how to hang on to a football.

[beanman]

1. Good coaching on the offensive side of the ball.

2. Vocal leaders (Suh was the last glimpse of one)

 

3. Playing with a purpose and a true passion for the game. The sideline of the Holiday bowl looked like a wake even before the first half was over.

 

In all fairness times change and things change. I don't expect the culture to be exactly the same as when Coach Osborne and co. were here. If we can fix #1 I think that will truly help this program. Immensely.

 

Are any of our past players coaches? Maybe getting them involved with the program would help some with the leadership. And no I'm not making a case for Frost or for Peter. Just saying, maybe getting some intensity back could help their mental toughness.

[WYHusk]

Amen to this whole thread. We're missing something, and I think it's leadership. Maybe someone will emerge in the offseason. Let's hope.

[dergibog]

Who's the player who walks the sidelines and gets in people's faces? Martinez? Nobody. The pictures from the sidelines showed guys sitting by themselves, dazed and confused. That's disappointing. I'm a little worried about next season in the Big 10!

[wilber24]

Along with leadership, we need to become MUCH more disciplined. The double digit penalties are really getting old.

The DUI's and urinating in public is getting old also!

Just no dedication, period!!!!!!

[Count 'Bility]

Nebraska became a great team in 1991 when the coaches,

after their 6th or 7th consecutive bowl loss, held a secret

closed door session.

 

In that secret meeting, the staff did a brutally honest self assessment.

The radical coaching changes implemented at that meeting led directly to

3 NCs and nearly 2 more.

 

No more alibis, no more Mr. Magoo, no more blaming the players,

no more self-serving BS.

 

That's what it takes to become great.

So far, we haven't seen it under Pelini.

 

1990 was only the 4th consecutive bowl loss. Tho the end of 1990 was disasterous. I do business with a man was with the team from 1990 thru 1994. He pins the 90's success to 3 major happenings.

1) psychology. Osborne, a doctor of psychology, and Jack Stark began the unity council and created the close knit atmosphere that allowed the team to succeed thru all upcoming adversity that had crumbled them in some of the previous years. College sports is all about mentality, cuz there is no motivation from money as in pros. Osborne and Stark knew this and revolutionized the way student athletes were coped with mentally.

 

2) Defense. Starting in 1992, McBride and the D began a transition from the conventional 52 to what was the new fling at the time, 43. It was full go by the end of 93. Basically all they did was make safeties outside backers and outside backers DEs to create speed. It allowed the D compete with the slinging offenses in the big bowls, then dominate them.

 

3) Strenght and conditioning. Boyd Epply (sp?) revolutionized strenght and conditioning in college football, maybe in sports all together. Nobody was at Nebraska's level in this phase all decade. NU was taking walkons and developing them into 5 star caliber talent. How many walkons who played 8 or 6 man in Podunk Nebraska wound up in the NFL.

 

They are trying to get point #1 back on track, and it's working but is does take some time, esp since Bo's first 3 years have been dealing with players left over from Callahan, who obviously knew nothing of the sort. Problem is is its not a secret no more and all programs are doing similar things to create unity.

Point 2, again, I think Bo again is revolutionizing defense in college football. The things he is doing were very rare if not ever done, and it's been successful.

Strenght and Conditioning. It's obvious every one caught up with Nebraska by the end of the decade and now everyone's pretty even in the sort, now it's just a matter of work ethic, who wants to put in the time.

 

One thing i dont recall is any major coaching changes taking place after 1990. For the most part all the main cogs of the staff were there for the run in the 90's.

 

Im not trying to be antoginistic in any way, but this came from someone who was on those teams and his feeling on how the major success was created. The issue is, how much more can you do with these phases to be ahead of the pack again, there's only so much that can be done, they may already be maxed out by everyone. Now it's just a matter of putting in the work and executing. From scholarship limits to equality in money and facilities, the parody of College football is becoming more and more. Everyone's always looking for that style of play that is a step above the rest and every now and then someone finds one that is great for a few years (power T, wishbone, triple option, single back, spread pass, spread option, pistol, no-huddle) then everyone does it, then everyone finds a way to stop it until the next new fling comes around. Bottom line is, you have to have the talent, the coaches, and the willingness to put in the work.

[C N Red]

Basically what everyone is saying above, some without actually saying it, is leadership from the players! You have to have a handful of guys to be vocal and put up an unreachable standard to push everyone. Also, when players are not trying to reach the standard the leaders may have to throw down in practice.

 

I think it would be WELL worth the money to pay someone like jason peter to come in and teach leadership. Tell stories about how its done. Explain the tradition of leadership at nebraska and show why it worked in the 90s.

[zoogs]

We have a lot of middling talent on offense. On D we have had two of the best cornerbacks in the country with a solid supporting cast. Suh as the best defensive player in maybe a decade, last year. You look around on offense and the best we have are some solid role players. Where is our Prince/Fonzie of the offense?

 

Bo hasn't been 'dealing with' players left over from Callahan so much as making a ton of hay with them. But those 3 points are all good ones.

 

We are going to need some real difference makers, and I mean some studs on the line, and hope that guys like Bell, Carnes, Green, and Heard live up to their billing. Or else we will continue to get mediocre offenses.

[HUSKERCR]

Nebraska became a great team in 1991 when the coaches,

after their 6th or 7th consecutive bowl loss, held a secret

closed door session.

 

In that secret meeting, the staff did a brutally honest self assessment.

The radical coaching changes implemented at that meeting led directly to

3 NCs and nearly 2 more.

 

No more alibis, no more Mr. Magoo, no more blaming the players,

no more self-serving BS.

 

That's what it takes to become great.

So far, we haven't seen it under Pelini.

 

1990 was only the 4th consecutive bowl loss. Tho the end of 1990 was disasterous. I do business with a man was with the team from 1990 thru 1994. He pins the 90's success to 3 major happenings.

1) psychology. Osborne, a doctor of psychology, and Jack Stark began the unity council and created the close knit atmosphere that allowed the team to succeed thru all upcoming adversity that had crumbled them in some of the previous years. College sports is all about mentality, cuz there is no motivation from money as in pros. Osborne and Stark knew this and revolutionized the way student athletes were coped with mentally.

 

2) Defense. Starting in 1992, McBride and the D began a transition from the conventional 52 to what was the new fling at the time, 43. It was full go by the end of 93. Basically all they did was make safeties outside backers and outside backers DEs to create speed. It allowed the D compete with the slinging offenses in the big bowls, then dominate them.

 

3) Strenght and conditioning. Boyd Epply (sp?) revolutionized strenght and conditioning in college football, maybe in sports all together. Nobody was at Nebraska's level in this phase all decade. NU was taking walkons and developing them into 5 star caliber talent. How many walkons who played 8 or 6 man in Podunk Nebraska wound up in the NFL.

 

They are trying to get point #1 back on track, and it's working but is does take some time, esp since Bo's first 3 years have been dealing with players left over from Callahan, who obviously knew nothing of the sort. Problem is is its not a secret no more and all programs are doing similar things to create unity.

Point 2, again, I think Bo again is revolutionizing defense in college football. The things he is doing were very rare if not ever done, and it's been successful.

Strenght and Conditioning. It's obvious every one caught up with Nebraska by the end of the decade and now everyone's pretty even in the sort, now it's just a matter of work ethic, who wants to put in the time.

 

One thing i dont recall is any major coaching changes taking place after 1990. For the most part all the main cogs of the staff were there for the run in the 90's.

 

Im not trying to be antoginistic in any way, but this came from someone who was on those teams and his feeling on how the major success was created. The issue is, how much more can you do with these phases to be ahead of the pack again, there's only so much that can be done, they may already be maxed out by everyone. Now it's just a matter of putting in the work and executing. From scholarship limits to equality in money and facilities, the parody of College football is becoming more and more. Everyone's always looking for that style of play that is a step above the rest and every now and then someone finds one that is great for a few years (power T, wishbone, triple option, single back, spread pass, spread option, pistol, no-huddle) then everyone does it, then everyone finds a way to stop it until the next new fling comes around. Bottom line is, you have to have the talent, the coaches, and the willingness to put in the work.

 

 

Thanks for correcting my memory on the number of bowl losses (5) rather then 6 or 7. Those losses came the next two years.

 

My point was showing the courage to make gut wrenching changes rather than making more excuses, especially

when failure is repetitive. I never said there were coaching changes. Thankfully, NU had a solid group of coaches at that time (a decade later that was another story), but they still had to

revamp their entire approach to be successful.

 

The #1 major change was that the Huskers began recruiting speed, from places they had avoided recruiting from in the past. Top to bottom. Offense and defense.

[Big Red 40]

Basically what everyone is saying above, some without actually saying it, is leadership from the players! You have to have a handful of guys to be vocal and put up an unreachable standard to push everyone. Also, when players are not trying to reach the standard the leaders may have to throw down in practice.

 

I think it would be WELL worth the money to pay someone like jason peter to come in and teach leadership. Tell stories about how its done. Explain the tradition of leadership at nebraska and show why it worked in the 90s.

I agree with the whole post, especially about Jason. I wish every player on the team had his attitude.

[wilber24]

leadership!

[Big Red 40]

We have a lot of middling talent on offense. On D we have had two of the best cornerbacks in the country with a solid supporting cast. Suh as the best defensive player in maybe a decade, last year. You look around on offense and the best we have are some solid role players. Where is our Prince/Fonzie of the offense?

 

Bo hasn't been 'dealing with' players left over from Callahan so much as making a ton of hay with them. But those 3 points are all good ones.

 

We are going to need some real difference makers, and I mean some studs on the line, and hope that guys like Bell, Carnes, Green, and Heard live up to their billing. Or else we will continue to get mediocre offenses.

I agree.IMO Burkhead should be the go-to guy when you need to make a play in a crucial situation but i think its hard to win against top level teams without the QB being the leader.

[wilber24]

We have a lot of middling talent on offense. On D we have had two of the best cornerbacks in the country with a solid supporting cast. Suh as the best defensive player in maybe a decade, last year. You look around on offense and the best we have are some solid role players. Where is our Prince/Fonzie of the offense?

 

Bo hasn't been 'dealing with' players left over from Callahan so much as making a ton of hay with them. But those 3 points are all good ones.

 

We are going to need some real difference makers, and I mean some studs on the line, and hope that guys like Bell, Carnes, Green, and Heard live up to their billing. Or else we will continue to get mediocre offenses.

I agree.IMO Burkhead should be the go-to guy when you need to make a play in a crucial situation but i think its hard to win against top level teams without the QB being the leader.

Rexcat is a decent option when you need some yards, but you have to have a QB thats not "all about me"

[Count 'Bility]

Nebraska became a great team in 1991 when the coaches,

after their 6th or 7th consecutive bowl loss, held a secret

closed door session.

 

In that secret meeting, the staff did a brutally honest self assessment.

The radical coaching changes implemented at that meeting led directly to

3 NCs and nearly 2 more.

 

No more alibis, no more Mr. Magoo, no more blaming the players,

no more self-serving BS.

 

That's what it takes to become great.

So far, we haven't seen it under Pelini.

 

1990 was only the 4th consecutive bowl loss. Tho the end of 1990 was disasterous. I do business with a man was with the team from 1990 thru 1994. He pins the 90's success to 3 major happenings.

1) psychology. Osborne, a doctor of psychology, and Jack Stark began the unity council and created the close knit atmosphere that allowed the team to succeed thru all upcoming adversity that had crumbled them in some of the previous years. College sports is all about mentality, cuz there is no motivation from money as in pros. Osborne and Stark knew this and revolutionized the way student athletes were coped with mentally.

 

2) Defense. Starting in 1992, McBride and the D began a transition from the conventional 52 to what was the new fling at the time, 43. It was full go by the end of 93. Basically all they did was make safeties outside backers and outside backers DEs to create speed. It allowed the D compete with the slinging offenses in the big bowls, then dominate them.

 

3) Strenght and conditioning. Boyd Epply (sp?) revolutionized strenght and conditioning in college football, maybe in sports all together. Nobody was at Nebraska's level in this phase all decade. NU was taking walkons and developing them into 5 star caliber talent. How many walkons who played 8 or 6 man in Podunk Nebraska wound up in the NFL.

 

They are trying to get point #1 back on track, and it's working but is does take some time, esp since Bo's first 3 years have been dealing with players left over from Callahan, who obviously knew nothing of the sort. Problem is is its not a secret no more and all programs are doing similar things to create unity.

Point 2, again, I think Bo again is revolutionizing defense in college football. The things he is doing were very rare if not ever done, and it's been successful.

Strenght and Conditioning. It's obvious every one caught up with Nebraska by the end of the decade and now everyone's pretty even in the sort, now it's just a matter of work ethic, who wants to put in the time.

 

One thing i dont recall is any major coaching changes taking place after 1990. For the most part all the main cogs of the staff were there for the run in the 90's.

 

Im not trying to be antoginistic in any way, but this came from someone who was on those teams and his feeling on how the major success was created. The issue is, how much more can you do with these phases to be ahead of the pack again, there's only so much that can be done, they may already be maxed out by everyone. Now it's just a matter of putting in the work and executing. From scholarship limits to equality in money and facilities, the parody of College football is becoming more and more. Everyone's always looking for that style of play that is a step above the rest and every now and then someone finds one that is great for a few years (power T, wishbone, triple option, single back, spread pass, spread option, pistol, no-huddle) then everyone does it, then everyone finds a way to stop it until the next new fling comes around. Bottom line is, you have to have the talent, the coaches, and the willingness to put in the work.

 

 

Thanks for correcting my memory on the number of bowl losses (5) rather then 6 or 7. Those losses came the next two years.

 

My point was showing the courage to make gut wrenching changes rather than making more excuses, especially

when failure is repetitive. I never said there were coaching changes. Thankfully, NU had a solid group of coaches at that time (a decade later that was another story), but they still had to

revamp their entire approach to be successful.

 

The #1 major change was that the Huskers began recruiting speed, from places they had avoided recruiting from in the past. Top to bottom. Offense and defense.

 

Or 4. But as i said, i was not trying to be antagonistic in any way, if anything i was agreeing with your overall thought, but I was just instilling the fact that 1) we had not lost 6 or 7 straight bowl games at the time, but rather 4, and 2) I took "radical coaching changes" as firing/hiring as opposed to overall organizational changes. So i suppose we agree to agree or something of the sort? I also just went on to make points that came from someone who grew up in Nebraska and was a part of the team in those 5 years that were a catapult.

[HUSKERCR]

Nebraska became a great team in 1991 when the coaches,

after their 6th or 7th consecutive bowl loss, held a secret

closed door session.

 

In that secret meeting, the staff did a brutally honest self assessment.

The radical coaching changes implemented at that meeting led directly to

3 NCs and nearly 2 more.

 

No more alibis, no more Mr. Magoo, no more blaming the players,

no more self-serving BS.

 

That's what it takes to become great.

So far, we haven't seen it under Pelini.

 

1990 was only the 4th consecutive bowl loss. Tho the end of 1990 was disasterous. I do business with a man was with the team from 1990 thru 1994. He pins the 90's success to 3 major happenings.

1) psychology. Osborne, a doctor of psychology, and Jack Stark began the unity council and created the close knit atmosphere that allowed the team to succeed thru all upcoming adversity that had crumbled them in some of the previous years. College sports is all about mentality, cuz there is no motivation from money as in pros. Osborne and Stark knew this and revolutionized the way student athletes were coped with mentally.

 

2) Defense. Starting in 1992, McBride and the D began a transition from the conventional 52 to what was the new fling at the time, 43. It was full go by the end of 93. Basically all they did was make safeties outside backers and outside backers DEs to create speed. It allowed the D compete with the slinging offenses in the big bowls, then dominate them.

 

3) Strenght and conditioning. Boyd Epply (sp?) revolutionized strenght and conditioning in college football, maybe in sports all together. Nobody was at Nebraska's level in this phase all decade. NU was taking walkons and developing them into 5 star caliber talent. How many walkons who played 8 or 6 man in Podunk Nebraska wound up in the NFL.

 

They are trying to get point #1 back on track, and it's working but is does take some time, esp since Bo's first 3 years have been dealing with players left over from Callahan, who obviously knew nothing of the sort. Problem is is its not a secret no more and all programs are doing similar things to create unity.

Point 2, again, I think Bo again is revolutionizing defense in college football. The things he is doing were very rare if not ever done, and it's been successful.

Strenght and Conditioning. It's obvious every one caught up with Nebraska by the end of the decade and now everyone's pretty even in the sort, now it's just a matter of work ethic, who wants to put in the time.

 

One thing i dont recall is any major coaching changes taking place after 1990. For the most part all the main cogs of the staff were there for the run in the 90's.

 

Im not trying to be antoginistic in any way, but this came from someone who was on those teams and his feeling on how the major success was created. The issue is, how much more can you do with these phases to be ahead of the pack again, there's only so much that can be done, they may already be maxed out by everyone. Now it's just a matter of putting in the work and executing. From scholarship limits to equality in money and facilities, the parody of College football is becoming more and more. Everyone's always looking for that style of play that is a step above the rest and every now and then someone finds one that is great for a few years (power T, wishbone, triple option, single back, spread pass, spread option, pistol, no-huddle) then everyone does it, then everyone finds a way to stop it until the next new fling comes around. Bottom line is, you have to have the talent, the coaches, and the willingness to put in the work.

 

 

Thanks for correcting my memory on the number of bowl losses (5) rather then 6 or 7. Those losses came the next two years.

 

My point was showing the courage to make gut wrenching changes rather than making more excuses, especially

when failure is repetitive. I never said there were coaching changes. Thankfully, NU had a solid group of coaches at that time (a decade later that was another story), but they still had to

revamp their entire approach to be successful.

 

The #1 major change was that the Huskers began recruiting speed, from places they had avoided recruiting from in the past. Top to bottom. Offense and defense.

 

Or 4. But as i said, i was not trying to be antagonistic in any way, if anything i was agreeing with your overall thought, but I was just instilling the fact that 1) we had not lost 6 or 7 straight bowl games at the time, but rather 4, and 2) I took "radical coaching changes" as firing/hiring as opposed to overall organizational changes. So i suppose we agree to agree or something of the sort? I also just went on to make points that came from someone who grew up in Nebraska and was a part of the team in those 5 years that were a catapult.

 

Oh, you weren't trying to be a smarta**? Of course you were.

You just wanted to correct the number of losses from 6-7 to 4?

Give me a break.

 

So what? What does that have to do with the point being made?

If you think I stated there were coaches fired, that's your

cognitive reading problem, not mine.

 

 

Those "insider" points you seem to be so very proud of have been published and

are rather well known. I just wanted to set the record straight, not trying to be

antagonistic or anything of the sort.....

 

You say you agree. Fine. Thank you. I'm honored.