Strange Things Ive Noticed Lately

[True2tRA]

Fact is, yeah, we knew a few of these guys were terrible. Meredith, Steinkuhler, Compton, and in my opinion Stafford should not have been starting players at a Division 1 University like Nebraska. Yet, the NFL scouts didn't highly value guys I thought were pretty good ball players like Burkhead, Martin, Reed, and Cotton. So I just have to agree to disagree with those NFL scouts. I hope those players prove them wrong.

 

Here's the problem. Every one of these guys that was eligible for the draft a week ago was a former starter at their position last year correct? Meaning, they started over somebody who is on the current roster ? Correct?

 

Which leads me to two questions in my mind. Please explain to me why some of you have such a hard time seeing that if the best talent scouts in the world don't think these guys were worth sh#t, yet this entire class is made up of former starters...........How is it that does not reflect somewhat poorly on the guys behind them? Not adding up to me? To simplify it as much as possible.....if they suck, but they were better than you, then doesn't that mean you suck more? One would have to believe that purely by logic.

 

Second problem. Let's say for instance, EZ-E is right, and somehow these guys that we know nothing about, and haven't played more than a handful of snaps at this level, are somehow going to blow the lid off their future NFL drafts. These guys are just gonna make this NFL draft class a fluke, a long forgotten memory, never to be seen again. Well then wouldn't one have to think, if these guys are so damn good, what the f#*k are they doing riding the pine behind this class of Undrafted free agents? Doesn't make sense. You can try to pretend it makes sense, but it doesn't so I refuse to listen to any arguments that state otherwise.

 

Fact is, these young players "on the come" as Bo puts it ( God I hate that saying) might be, and in my belief, probably are more talented than the group of guys that just left. But what factual basis do we stand on when we say that. Really, we just hope to hell they are better. We want to believe it because let's face it, last year we got our asses kicked pretty severely at times. If they are better, then what the f#*k are they doing on the sidelines? That is also a problem. It's got to be fixed. You can write this draft off as nothing more than a fluke, with no indication of the future what so ever. But some of you act like you can't even connect the dots and see how one would come to the conclusion that maybe we don't have a lot of talent on this roster, which.........we do.

[BigRedBuster]

Fact is, yeah, we knew a few of these guys were terrible. Meredith, Steinkuhler, Compton, and in my opinion Stafford should not have been starting players at a Division 1 University like Nebraska. Yet, the NFL scouts didn't highly value guys I thought were pretty good ball players like Burkhead, Martin, Reed, and Cotton. So I just have to agree to disagree with those NFL scouts. I hope those players prove them wrong.

 

Here's the problem. Every one of these guys that was eligible for the draft a week ago was a former starter at their position last year correct? Meaning, they started over somebody who is on the current roster ? Correct?

 

Which leads me to two questions in my mind. Please explain to me why some of you have such a hard time seeing that if the best talent scouts in the world don't think these guys were worth sh#t, yet this entire class is made up of former starters...........How is it that does not reflect somewhat poorly on the guys behind them? Not adding up to me? To simplify it as much as possible.....if they suck, but they were better than you, then doesn't that mean you suck more? One would have to believe that purely by logic.

 

Second problem. Let's say for instance, EZ-E is right, and somehow these guys that we know nothing about, and haven't played more than a handful of snaps at this level, are somehow going to blow the lid off their future NFL drafts. These guys are just gonna make this NFL draft class a fluke, a long forgotten memory, never to be seen again. Well then wouldn't one have to think, if these guys are so damn good, what the f#*k are they doing riding the pine behind this class of Undrafted free agents? Doesn't make sense. You can try to pretend it makes sense, but it doesn't so I refuse to listen to any arguments that state otherwise.

 

Fact is, these young players "on the come" as Bo puts it ( God I hate that saying) might be, and in my belief, probably are more talented than the group of guys that just left. But what factual basis do we stand on when we say that. Really, we just hope to hell they are better. We want to believe it because let's face it, last year we got our asses kicked pretty severely at times. If they are better, then what the f#*k are they doing on the sidelines? That is also a problem. It's got to be fixed. You can write this draft off as nothing more than a fluke, with no indication of the future what so ever. But some of you act like you can't even connect the dots and see how one would come to the conclusion that maybe we don't have a lot of talent on this roster, which.........we do.

 

So, why did you ask the question?

[True2tRA]

I don't ever really want any answers you fool. I just like to hear myself type.

[Landlord]

Fact is, yeah, we knew a few of these guys were terrible. Meredith, Steinkuhler, Compton, and in my opinion Stafford should not have been starting players at a Division 1 University like Nebraska. Yet, the NFL scouts didn't highly value guys I thought were pretty good ball players like Burkhead, Martin, Reed, and Cotton. So I just have to agree to disagree with those NFL scouts. I hope those players prove them wrong.

 

Here's the problem. Every one of these guys that was eligible for the draft a week ago was a former starter at their position last year correct? Meaning, they started over somebody who is on the current roster ? Correct?

 

Which leads me to two questions in my mind. Please explain to me why some of you have such a hard time seeing that if the best talent scouts in the world don't think these guys were worth sh#t, yet this entire class is made up of former starters...........How is it that does not reflect somewhat poorly on the guys behind them? Not adding up to me? To simplify it as much as possible.....if they suck, but they were better than you, then doesn't that mean you suck more? One would have to believe that purely by logic.

 

Second problem. Let's say for instance, EZ-E is right, and somehow these guys that we know nothing about, and haven't played more than a handful of snaps at this level, are somehow going to blow the lid off their future NFL drafts. These guys are just gonna make this NFL draft class a fluke, a long forgotten memory, never to be seen again. Well then wouldn't one have to think, if these guys are so damn good, what the f#*k are they doing riding the pine behind this class of Undrafted free agents? Doesn't make sense. You can try to pretend it makes sense, but it doesn't so I refuse to listen to any arguments that state otherwise.

 

Fact is, these young players "on the come" as Bo puts it ( God I hate that saying) might be, and in my belief, probably are more talented than the group of guys that just left. But what factual basis do we stand on when we say that. Really, we just hope to hell they are better. We want to believe it because let's face it, last year we got our asses kicked pretty severely at times. If they are better, then what the f#*k are they doing on the sidelines? That is also a problem. It's got to be fixed. You can write this draft off as nothing more than a fluke, with no indication of the future what so ever. But some of you act like you can't even connect the dots and see how one would come to the conclusion that maybe we don't have a lot of talent on this roster, which.........we do.

 

 

 

Being a productive player takes going through the process of time. Transitioning physically, mentally, conditionally, etc. is exactly that; a transition. What we say when we claim these guys coming up will be an improvement is that they have more "stuff" to start with, all other things being equal. They have more talent and ability, but that's not all it takes. There's no way to prove it, but recruiting services are right more often than they are wrong, and our recruiting has been decidedly better.

 

And by Bo's admission some of these guys probably should have been on the field.

[The Dude]

Some people just can't grasp the concept that when you hire a first time head coach late in the recruiting process there is a chance his first recruiting class isn't going to be as productive as some would hope. In this case, that carried over somewhat into the next class also.

 

In college, those classes have to wash through the system. It's not like in the NFL where we could go out and get a bunch of free agents the next year to replace them. This graduating class of seniors is not indicative of the health of the program by any stretch of the imagination.

You don't necessarily have to let those classes wash through the system. There's no rules against starting underclassmen. We had no qualms with starting Martinez, Turner, Bell, ect. over upperclassmen on the offensive side of the ball, and our team benefited greatly because of it. Why is it such a no-no on defense?

[sd'sker]

i have noticed that rolos make me drool. that is strange.

[True2tRA]

I like rolos too. Anyways, we don't disagree landlord. My point is more toward the people who in no way associate this class with the current roster. Those people are wrong. It is a reflection of the roster until this roster PROVES otherwise. We can be optimistic but basing that optimism on any factual foundation is not possible. None of these guys have played! Didn't we lose 9 starters? The athleticism is there, but athleticism alone doesn't make a football player. Though it is about 80%. Fact is these guys might have more to start wih, but they rode the bench last year. Get em out there. Athleticism can disguise a lot of mistakes. I mean, Bo claimed Lavonte David was lost his entire career here. He sure didn't look lost to me.

[Count 'Bility]

3) Our scheme on defense isn't one that will win games

 

Listen, Les Miles before he hired Bo said that he was one of the toughest DCs to gameplan for because his scheme changes with the way he wants to go at offenses. In my opinion, we did not have the horses to run what Bo wants. That stems back to the 08 and 09 class. Which ultimately you have to hold Bo accountable for and he has accepted the blame. Patience is what I will tell you.

 

Pelini hasn't shown he can run an effective defense that doesn't have top level NFL talent. LSU, Oklahoma, and here all his top defenses had multiple first round talent. Pelini so far has shown he's an average defensive coach, that only excels with top talent. This year will be a test as how good of a d-coach he is.

Is this even worth responding too?

 

No.

 

Good god.

 

 

Fact is, yeah, we knew a few of these guys were terrible. Meredith, Steinkuhler, Compton, and in my opinion Stafford should not have been starting players at a Division 1 University like Nebraska. Yet, the NFL scouts didn't highly value guys I thought were pretty good ball players like Burkhead, Martin, Reed, and Cotton. So I just have to agree to disagree with those NFL scouts. I hope those players prove them wrong.

 

Here's the problem. Every one of these guys that was eligible for the draft a week ago was a former starter at their position last year correct? Meaning, they started over somebody who is on the current roster ? Correct?

 

Which leads me to two questions in my mind. Please explain to me why some of you have such a hard time seeing that if the best talent scouts in the world don't think these guys were worth sh#t, yet this entire class is made up of former starters...........How is it that does not reflect somewhat poorly on the guys behind them? Not adding up to me? To simplify it as much as possible.....if they suck, but they were better than you, then doesn't that mean you suck more? One would have to believe that purely by logic.

 

Second problem. Let's say for instance, EZ-E is right, and somehow these guys that we know nothing about, and haven't played more than a handful of snaps at this level, are somehow going to blow the lid off their future NFL drafts. These guys are just gonna make this NFL draft class a fluke, a long forgotten memory, never to be seen again. Well then wouldn't one have to think, if these guys are so damn good, what the f#*k are they doing riding the pine behind this class of Undrafted free agents? Doesn't make sense. You can try to pretend it makes sense, but it doesn't so I refuse to listen to any arguments that state otherwise.

 

Fact is, these young players "on the come" as Bo puts it ( God I hate that saying) might be, and in my belief, probably are more talented than the group of guys that just left. But what factual basis do we stand on when we say that. Really, we just hope to hell they are better. We want to believe it because let's face it, last year we got our asses kicked pretty severely at times. If they are better, then what the f#*k are they doing on the sidelines? That is also a problem. It's got to be fixed. You can write this draft off as nothing more than a fluke, with no indication of the future what so ever. But some of you act like you can't even connect the dots and see how one would come to the conclusion that maybe we don't have a lot of talent on this roster, which.........we do.

Tommie Frazier did ride the pine behind Mike Grant for 6 weeks.

[sd'sker]

Tommie Frazier did ride the pine behind Mike Grant for 6 weeks.

and how did tommie's nfl career pan out? case-in-point. (i really do not know what we are talking about).

[zeWilbur]

Some people just can't grasp the concept that when you hire a first time head coach late in the recruiting process there is a chance his first recruiting class isn't going to be as productive as some would hope. In this case, that carried over somewhat into the next class also.

 

In college, those classes have to wash through the system. It's not like in the NFL where we could go out and get a bunch of free agents the next year to replace them. This graduating class of seniors is not indicative of the health of the program by any stretch of the imagination.

You don't necessarily have to let those classes wash through the system. There's no rules against starting underclassmen. We had no qualms with starting Martinez, Turner, Bell, ect. over upperclassmen on the offensive side of the ball, and our team benefited greatly because of it. Why is it such a no-no on defense?

 

Perhaps, with the new coaches, we were putting new offensive schemes in at the time so no upperclassman knew any more than anybody else. Athleticism wins when everyone screws up equally. You did see that on the defensive side with Amukamara and a few others. Defensive players today just missed the window on that side of the ball.

[It'sNotAFakeID]

Some people just can't grasp the concept that when you hire a first time head coach late in the recruiting process there is a chance his first recruiting class isn't going to be as productive as some would hope. In this case, that carried over somewhat into the next class also.

 

In college, those classes have to wash through the system. It's not like in the NFL where we could go out and get a bunch of free agents the next year to replace them. This graduating class of seniors is not indicative of the health of the program by any stretch of the imagination.

You don't necessarily have to let those classes wash through the system. There's no rules against starting underclassmen. We had no qualms with starting Martinez, Turner, Bell, ect. over upperclassmen on the offensive side of the ball, and our team benefited greatly because of it. Why is it such a no-no on defense?

 

That is a great question.

 

I'm betting when Pelini and Co. make their selections for the team, they have it boiled down to a few, if not several distinct factors: how they've practiced leading up to the week, athleticism, knowledge of the defense, importance to the team as a leader, how they match up to the other team's offense, etc... something like that. Then you factor in injuries/other emergencies which rule players out.

 

Maybe it was just the case that the staff thought risking athleticism for all the other factors was important enough to start the less athletic players. And then you certainly couldn't blame them for continuing to make those selections while we were winning. Winning has a way of soothing the notion that things aren't okay.

 

I'm very interested to see the defensive depth chart this year. I'm betting it's filled with more underclassmen than upperclassmen.

[The Dude]

I'm very interested to see the defensive depth chart this year. I'm betting it's filled with more underclassmen than upperclassmen.

Way to go out on a limb.

[It'sNotAFakeID]

I'm very interested to see the defensive depth chart this year. I'm betting it's filled with more underclassmen than upperclassmen.

Way to go out on a limb.

 

Yeah, maybe I should have said down the road, when these underclassmen are upperclassmen and there happens to be an athletic defensive recruiting class coming in.

[Count 'Bility]

Tommie Frazier did ride the pine behind Mike Grant for 6 weeks.

and how did tommie's nfl career pan out? case-in-point. (i really do not know what we are talking about).

It was more about True's question as to if the lower classman are better, why werent they playing to begin with. I think Tommie is a perfect example. Some guys just need a little longer to grow. Doesnt mean they aint gonna be better, or even a sh#t ton better.

[sd'sker]

Tommie Frazier did ride the pine behind Mike Grant for 6 weeks.

and how did tommie's nfl career pan out? case-in-point. (i really do not know what we are talking about).

It was more about True's question as to if the lower classman are better, why werent they playing to begin with. I think Tommie is a perfect example. Some guys just need a little longer to grow. Doesnt mean they aint gonna be better, or even a sh#t ton better.

i agree. i also think that bo deferred to experience over athleticism. that needs to change and i think it will.