Barney Moving to TE Coach?

[Danny Bateman]

In conclusion, why do we have such a hard time turning the highest rated kids we get into dominant college players on the OL?

I don't think it is a fair question yet. We need a few cycles of "highly rated" OL to come and go in order to churn them out all the time. Competition breeds dominance. We are on the right track with this class.

I suppose we'll wait and see.

 

I agree I think we're moving in the right direction.

 

This whole argument becomes one giant moot point though if Cotton has been removed of his OL responsibilities. I think the move really gives us the best of both worlds, because Barney excels in a big way at getting a very strong running game going.

 

Hopefully Garrison and whoever else assists (Stai??) can be more successful at perfecting technique, improving pass pro, and overall cultivating more highly drafted lineman.

 

It probably is too early to judge our returns on the OL in the program. However, of the kids we have had, ARod, Moore, and Klachko can now be considered busts, and though Yoshi turned into a very good lineman during his senior year, he was still undrafted.

 

That's four four star OL who haven't panned out, though at least Yoshi was successful for a year for us.

[Polarhusker]

In conclusion, why do we have such a hard time turning the highest rated kids we get into dominant college players on the OL?

I don't think it is a fair question yet. We need a few cycles of "highly rated" OL to come and go in order to churn them out all the time. Competition breeds dominance. We are on the right track with this class.

I suppose we'll wait and see.

 

I agree I think we're moving in the right direction.

 

This whole argument becomes one giant moot point though if Cotton has been removed of his OL responsibilities. I think the move really gives us the best of both worlds, because Barney excels in a big way at getting a very strong running game going.

 

Hopefully Garrison and whoever else assists (Stai??) can be more successful at perfecting technique, improving pass pro, and overall cultivating more highly drafted lineman.

 

It probably is too early to judge our returns on the OL in the program. However, of the kids we have had, ARod, Moore, and Klachko can now be considered busts, and though Yoshi turned into a very good lineman during his senior year, he was still undrafted.

 

That's four four star OL who haven't panned out, though at least Yoshi was successful for a year for us.

 

I will agree with you on this. But there are quite a few highly rated recruits that never work out. Hell a lot of times it takes a kid till his SR year for it all comes together, one just never knows.

[I am I]

Honest questions: all the walk-ons from yrs past when it was a "success story", how many started over highly recruited Star players? Who were the guys who flamed out and got pushed aside or passed over all those yrs? Anyone know?

 

When those walk-ons played/excelled (then got whipped 28-0 by Miami) were we less than happy w Milt?

 

My take on walk-ons playing is this (past and present):

 

15-20 yrs ago we had more coaches. More practice time. More scholarships, guys who would walk on today were scholly yesteryear. Which means we had battalions of players mixing and matching during 2-3 yrs of practice to get it right--guys waited their time--finally to get a shot during RS junior/senior yr.

now it's results, I mean, Moore started as a true frosh then was battling the next yr, only to quit cuz of it? Then we have 3 walkons and 1 is an AA?

 

But--false starts, last in sacks, defections, flameouts, etc...

 

I bet we're not alone....

[zoogs]

pelini and cotton inherited a crappy situtation when it comes to the offensive line i think we can all agree with that no matter our opinion of cotton

 

No they didn't. They created one.

[I am I]

Explain.

 

Watson had complete control (until it sucked) of an offense he'd been mostly in charge of for 3 yrs.

how come he couldn't build on HIS recruits and HIS offense?

[zoogs]

Watson didn't have complete control of the offense for three years! Bo clamped down in '09 after the Iowa State disaster, and I think it was for the best (except for keeping the Rexcat mathballed). We had a QB with a bad throwing arm, an offense that was rattled by their own miscues, and the conservative approach helped us stay steady and win games. In '10 the offense was what Bo wanted with the QB Bo wanted to run it.

 

In brief, the pipeline was drained when Callahan took over and a large part of his work was restocking those shelves. The situation he left was much improved over the one he inherited. However, it's gone downhill since then, ergo the efforts the staff has made to reinforce the coaching there. We're two full years after Watson has gone and it's a little silly to pin the offensive line troubles on him, when we've had the same guy manning that position for five.

 

Sure Watson had his faults, but going back to Callahan and Watson is really pushing it, as far as deflecting for Barney's sake goes.

[LumberJackSker]

pelini and cotton inherited a crappy situtation when it comes to the offensive line i think we can all agree with that no matter our opinion of cotton

 

No they didn't. They created one.

ok

[Danny Bateman]

Watson didn't have complete control of the offense for three years! Bo clamped down in '09 after the Iowa State disaster, and I think it was for the best (except for keeping the Rexcat mathballed). We had a QB with a bad throwing arm, an offense that was rattled by their own miscues, and the conservative approach helped us stay steady and win games. In '10 the offense was what Bo wanted with the QB Bo wanted to run it.

 

In brief, the pipeline was drained when Callahan took over and a large part of his work was restocking those shelves. The situation he left was much improved over the one he inherited. However, it's gone downhill since then, ergo the efforts the staff has made to reinforce the coaching there. We're two full years after Watson has gone and it's a little silly to pin the offensive line troubles on him, when we've had the same guy manning that position for five.

 

Sure Watson had his faults, but going back to Callahan and Watson is really pushing it, as far as deflecting for Barney's sake goes.

I read much less into your reply than this.

 

I assumed you were talking about slotting Baker at DT instead of OT. Still think we went the wrong way on that one. All conference type of DT (kind of), All American OL.

[The Screaming Pelini]

In conclusion, why do we have such a hard time turning the highest rated kids we get into dominant college players on the OL?

Maybe because they have a sense of entitlement being highly rated, knowing that they could go almost anywhere they want and start immedietly. Except at Nebraska. It's such a travesty that Barney picks the guys who work the hardest and perform the best in practice and not pick the guy with four or five stars next to his name. Not every four or five star recruit goes on to the NFL, if I remember right, of the top 150 players rated by NFL Network the average for those players was like 3 stars. Four and five star recruits actually have quite a track record of not doing a damn thing in the NFL. Just sayin' =].

[zoogs]

4 and 5 star recruits have quite the track record of success, compared to 3 star recruits.

 

Entitlement is an issue anywhere.

 

What we have here has been, IMO, a talent development issue. There's been modest success for a long time and most of it is a credit to Garrison's work with the walk-ons and interior linemen.

[The Dude]

pelini and cotton inherited a crappy situtation when it comes to the offensive line i think we can all agree with that no matter our opinion of cotton

 

No they didn't. They created one.

Yes they did. It just took them longer than expected to start turning it around.

 

But it has improved every year under Cotton. Whether people like it or not.

[zeWilbur]

In conclusion, why do we have such a hard time turning the highest rated kids we get into dominant college players on the OL?

 

Any chance they are just not driven to compete by the other lineman? And by that I mean the D-line. We have been weak at DT with the injury bug but for the last few years the DL just hasn't been as productive as we hoped it would be. If steel sharpens steel than what has the O-line actually been cutting into these last few years to make themselves better?

[The Screaming Pelini]

Top 10 recruitng classes(Rivals) from last year, here's what they did on offense:

1. Alabama: Passing yards per game- 218

Rushing yards per game- 227.5

 

2.Florida St.: Passing yards per game- 264.9

Rushing yards per game- 205.9

 

3.Texas: Passing yards per game- 263.2

Rushing yards per game- 171.5

 

4.USC: Passing yards per game- 282.3

Rushing yards per game- 150.6

 

5. Georgia: Passing yards per game- 285.1

Rushing yards per game- 182.6

 

6.LSU: Passing yards per game- 200.5

Rushing yards per game- 173.7

 

7. Auburn: Passing yards per game- 156.6

Rushing yards per game- 148.4

 

8. Clemson: Passing yards per game- 321.6

Rushing yards per game- 191.1

 

9. Oregon: Passing yards per game- 222.2

Rushing yards per game- 315.2

 

10.Notre Dame: Passing yards per game- 222.8

Rushing yards per game- 189.4

 

NEBRASKA: Passing yards per game- 207.4

Rushing yards per game- 253.4

 

So Barney Cotton started three walk- ons and coached an offense as good or better than almost every team in the top 10 in recruiting from a season ago, I'd also add that the 10 on this list have been the best recruiting teams over that last 3-5 years as well. Our offense was almost dead even with Alabama and was better than Notre Dame, they played for the National Title this year and consistently bring in the best recruits in the country. Rosters full of four and five star recruits get the same production, or less, than an offense with three walk- ons starting. Hmm, must be a problem with coaching. =]

[The Dude]

4 and 5 star recruits have quite the track record of success, compared to 3 star recruits.

 

Entitlement is an issue anywhere.

 

What we have here has been, IMO, a talent development issue. There's been modest success for a long time and most of it is a credit to Garrison's work with the walk-ons and interior linemen.

I still have a hard time believing this since Cotton was in charge of the interior line. At least he was until they started over-achieving, then we decided he wasn't.

[zoogs]

I'll refer back to da skers' repeated comments to the contrary, but we've had this conversation in the past.

 

Also to PaulCrewe/EZ talking about how our offense under Beck was able to be creative enough to get a run game out of its playmakers, in spite of a pretty average line.

 

I get why people are averse to any criticism of any coach and want to stick up for Barney. I feel it's probably better to acknowledge that he's been average, and that he's had more than his fair share of time here to prove otherwise. As important as we all agree a great OL is to any team's efforts, I think it's OK to start expecting great OL coaching if we want the team to reach the heights I know we all want for them.