NU should follow the Auburn formula. Recruit a Juco dual threat QB ASAP.

[StPaulHusker]

Let's say we could duplicate what Auburn has done with JUCO QB's. Who here would be happy winning a NC, going 8-5 and 3-9 the next 2 seasons and then going back to the NC game? Would we keep the coach after the 3-9 season?

 

Would Auburn?

They didn't. That's my point. What would we as Huskers fans be willing to tolerate.

[kchusker_chris]

Let's say we could duplicate what Auburn has done with JUCO QB's. Who here would be happy winning a NC, going 8-5 and 3-9 the next 2 seasons and then going back to the NC game? Would we keep the coach after the 3-9 season?

 

Would Auburn?

They didn't. That's my point. What would we as Huskers fans be willing to tolerate.

Husker fans need to realize there is more legitimacy to the Auburn model in todays game than to the Husker model. You just dont' keep a coach for 8-10 years and then all of a sudden win a championship. You'll have a hard, if not impossible time finding a program that has done that in the last 15-20 years. Doesn't happen. But you can find a dozen that have won big in year 2 or year 3. You fire till you get the right hire. Don't want to waste another 3 years? Well a lot of Husker fans will argue that's what we just did, and they have a pretty solid argument.

[alexhortdog95]

How about running an offense that isn't built solely around your QB's physical and decision making skills? Then, when the guy gets hurt, you don't have a huge drop off in production from your offense?

 

Or, even better, how about running an offense that requires an actual QUARTERBACK? One that is a QB first, elusive second, and mobile third?

 

Makes sense to me, at least.

[kchusker_chris]

How about running an offense that isn't built solely around your QB's physical and decision making skills? Then, when the guy gets hurt, you don't have a huge drop off in production from your offense?

 

Or, even better, how about running an offense that requires an actual QUARTERBACK? One that is a QB first, elusive second, and mobile third?

 

Makes sense to me, at least.

you mean use our depth and talent at RB to move the ball in the ground game, instead of the QB? That's crazy talk right thar'.

[alexhortdog95]

How about running an offense that isn't built solely around your QB's physical and decision making skills? Then, when the guy gets hurt, you don't have a huge drop off in production from your offense?

 

Or, even better, how about running an offense that requires an actual QUARTERBACK? One that is a QB first, elusive second, and mobile third?

 

Makes sense to me, at least.

 

LOLZ

 

I am sick of these darned zone read BS offenses. Look at teams like LSU, Bammer, Stanford. How do they win football games?

 

Line up and smack a mofo in the mouth until they can stop you. Get 5-6 yards on 1st down. Stay on schedule. Get 3 on 2nd down. Get into 3rd and short at the longest, open up the playbook for play action, screens and draws.

 

Defensively, make the scheme easier for kids to understand and enjoy playing in. Don't put so much pressure on your D tackles. Make football for defensive players what it should be....go get the ball. Plain and simple.

 

you mean use our depth and talent at RB to move the ball in the ground game, instead of the QB? That's crazy talk right thar'.

 

This should be what defense is about (LOL):