When 9 wins a year isn't the whole story.

[Saunders]

No team should really get to play the 'What if we had been 100% healthy and every team we faced had the same injury situation as they originally did' card.

 

Sure, maybe, what if, but no.

Give me reasonably healthy TM and Spencer Long and my point still stands.

[suh_fan93]

No team should really get to play the 'What if we had been 100% healthy and every team we faced had the same injury situation as they originally did' card.

 

Sure, maybe, what if, but no.

Give me reasonably healthy TM and Spencer Long and my point still stands.

 

Are you taking into account our opponents injury problems as well? That's an honest question. It even's out maybe?

 

 

 

 

[TAKODA]

Was Iowa a better team than Georgia?

yeah, i think it is at least arguable.

 

 

Dang....Iowa fans are going to love hearing that.

you really think the georgia team we beat is that much better, if at all, than the iowa team we lost to? iowa was a pretty good team this year. i did not think that was news.

 

IMO:

 

Yes, that UGA team was a far superior team than the Iowa team we played. With or without UGA quarterback!

 

I am not going debate this 9 win sh*t again. When we become as we once were (competitive in all games - big and small); this will trump all the seasons with 9 wins ~ talk. (IMO).

[zoogs]

If a lot of things, then a lot of things...

[TAKODA]

If a lot of things, then a lot of things...

 

 

LMAO!

 

This ↑ is insightful. No Doubt!

[Foppa]

Was Iowa a better team than Georgia?

yeah, i think it is at least arguable laughable

 

Helped you out.

[HuskerNationNick]

Blame the pee-wee coaches and high school coaches then. These players should have the fundamentals for tackling down pretty good by the time they reach college.

So you're implying our coaches are poor evaluators of talent then?

I am? Let me ask you this...Our coaches are to blame because guys miss tackles. What do you have to say about them when it came to Lavonte. He very seldom missed tackles?

See this is the thing I don't understand... we can sit here and blame these coaches for these guys missing tackles, but these are things they KNEW how to do before they got here. Maybe some of them had to be taught the proper tackling form and how/where to tackle on guys much bigger than you. This year, I don't know how many times I saw our guys hitting these RB's up high. You hit Zwinak and Weisman up high, they are going to just run you over.

 

The problem I have in blaming these coaches on these guys missing tackles, is it happens in the NFL. Much higher caliber players than the collegiate level. The do it as well. Some guys just have a bad day, and when one thing isn't going right, it usually goes into the snowball effect.

[NUinID]

Blame the pee-wee coaches and high school coaches then. These players should have the fundamentals for tackling down pretty good by the time they reach college.

So you're implying our coaches are poor evaluators of talent then?

 

 

I am? Let me ask you this...Our coaches are to blame because guys miss tackles. What do you have to say about them when it came to Lavonte. He very seldom missed tackles?

Missed tackles/assignments has been prevalent throughout the better part of the Pelini era, at least the last 3-4 years. As for Lavonte...maybe his pee-wee/high school/JUCO coaches taught him good fundamentals? I'm just trying to figure out where you're going...you admit they missed tackles frequently and blame it on lower level coaches...which then puts blame on Pelini for recruiting. It's gotta be something, somewhere right?

 

Where did I admit that our guys missed tackles frequently? I just stated that if people are going to blame Bo and company for poor tackling, then the other coaches that taught the kids when they were younger should be to blame as much.

 

As far as your comment about Lavonte's coaches teaching him good fundamentals. It is comical that you say it could be from them doing a good job of teaching him but yet blame Pelini on the other players missing tackles. Doesn't really make sense.

 

I am sure fundamental tackling is taught at NU just as it is taught at all other schools and at all levels of competition from pop warner all the way through the NFL. But the plane simple fact is that some people like L. David are just good natural tacklers. Some guys are just better at it. Cory Cooper is a good tackler, so is ZA, Rose, and most the other LBs.

 

 

[The Dude]

Anyone claiming we wouldn't have been better being 100% healthy through out the entire season is totally either delusional or purposely not looking at reality in an effort to bolster their argument.

Same goes for every single team in the nation. That's why it's an invalid excuse.

 

That's not what you said.

 

This quote implies that it is delusional to think that we would have been a better team without those injuries. That is just flat out laughable.

 

 

Delusions that we would have been a significantly better team without those injuries is another.

Yeah, you missed the key word there.

 

It's not like we were world-beaters with Martinez and Long. We were a middle-of-the-pack Big Ten team that squeaked out a victory against a horrible Wyoming team and in fact lost to UCLA (in embarrassing fashion) and Minnesota (which is always embarrassing).

 

With the injuries we were still a middle-of-the-pack Big Ten team.

[The Dude]

Anyone claiming we wouldn't have been better being 100% healthy through out the entire season is totally either delusional or purposely not looking at reality in an effort to bolster their argument.

Same goes for every single team in the nation. That's why it's an invalid excuse.

 

 

It's not an invalid excuse just because you want it to be. That's not how things work.

Correct. It's an invalid excuse because it's not something that's exclusive to Nebraska.

[NUinID]

Anyone claiming we wouldn't have been better being 100% healthy through out the entire season is totally either delusional or purposely not looking at reality in an effort to bolster their argument.

Same goes for every single team in the nation. That's why it's an invalid excuse.

 

 

It's not an invalid excuse just because you want it to be. That's not how things work.

Correct. It's an invalid excuse because it's not something that's exclusive to Nebraska.

 

Your correct it is not exclusive to Nebraska, but do you think Georgia would have played differently throughout the year with Gurley and there top 2 receivers playing the whole year? How about Robinson the year before when NU beat Michigan? Lots of Nebraska fans think that was the difference in the game. How about Miller going out against Nebraska in 2011? Lots of people think that made a difference, or is it just part of the game and happens to every team.

Actually its both. It's part of the game and can make a difference.

 

Personally I think losing long was a bigger blow than losing Martinez. The O-line was playing real well with him in there. It wasn't nearly as good after he was hurt. Long is going to handle that big d-tackle from Minnesota a whole lot better than Moudy did in that game. A healthy TM helps a lot in all those loses.

 

Every team loses players to injury, but when you lose a real good player it usually effects your team. How about OU after Sam Bradford went down? How about Colt McCoy going down in the BCS game in 2010. I could go on like this all night.

 

[The Dude]

Anyone claiming we wouldn't have been better being 100% healthy through out the entire season is totally either delusional or purposely not looking at reality in an effort to bolster their argument.

Same goes for every single team in the nation. That's why it's an invalid excuse.

 

 

It's not an invalid excuse just because you want it to be. That's not how things work.

Correct. It's an invalid excuse because it's not something that's exclusive to Nebraska.

 

Your correct it is not exclusive to Nebraska, but do you think Georgia would have played differently throughout the year with Gurley and there top 2 receivers playing the whole year? How about Robinson the year before when NU beat Michigan? Lots of Nebraska fans think that was the difference in the game. How about Miller going out against Nebraska in 2011? Lots of people think that made a difference, or is it just part of the game and happens to every team.

Actually its both. It's part of the game and can make a difference.

 

Personally I think losing long was a bigger blow than losing Martinez. The O-line was playing real well with him in there. It wasn't nearly as good after he was hurt. Long is going to handle that big d-tackle from Minnesota a whole lot better than Moudy did in that game. A healthy TM helps a lot in all those loses.

 

Every team loses players to injury, but when you lose a real good player it usually effects your team. How about OU after Sam Bradford went down? How about Colt McCoy going down in the BCS game in 2010. I could go on like this all night.

I guess I just don't see the point of the what if game. What if Martinez plays all year, and since he doesn't have the arm Kellogg or Armstrong have, we don't complete the hail mary against Northwestern, or the 99.9 yard pass against Georgia. Then we're a six loss team.

 

Seems like a productive exercise.

[HuskerNationNick]

I guess I just don't see the point of the what if game. What if Martinez plays all year, and since he doesn't have the arm Kellogg or Armstrong have, we don't complete the hail mary against Northwestern, or the 99.9 yard pass against Georgia. Then we're a six loss team.

 

Seems like a productive exercise.

So you think we would be in the same exact position on those plays had Martinez been healthy? Lol sarcastic question and not really looking for an answer.

 

With Taylor healthy, I think we can all agree we would have had a better chance at a better record. Do we know it would have happened? Who knows.

 

But... since we like to bring up the past as proof, like Bo's 4 loss seasons. Proof shows that Narduzzi can't coach a game against Martinez. Proof shows Iowa has never beat us with Martinez under center. Minnesota has also never beat Taylor when he was healthy either. We honestly never know what the outcome would have been, but let the people who think we would have had a better season with a healthy Martinez believe it. What's the harm there? Being positive?

[The Dude]

I guess I just don't see the point of the what if game. What if Martinez plays all year, and since he doesn't have the arm Kellogg or Armstrong have, we don't complete the hail mary against Northwestern, or the 99.9 yard pass against Georgia. Then we're a six loss team.

 

Seems like a productive exercise.

So you think we would be in the same exact position on those plays had Martinez been healthy? Lol sarcastic question and not really looking for an answer.

 

With Taylor healthy, I think we can all agree we would have had a better chance at a better record. Do we know it would have happened? Who knows.

 

But... since we like to bring up the past as proof, like Bo's 4 loss seasons. Proof shows that Narduzzi can't coach a game against Martinez. Proof shows Iowa has never beat us with Martinez under center. Minnesota has also never beat Taylor when he was healthy either. We honestly never know what the outcome would have been, but let the people who think we would have had a better season with a healthy Martinez believe it. What's the harm there? Being positive?

No harm. There's also no harm in residing in the realm of reality.

 

I just find one to be preferable to the other. Also no harm done.

[HuskerNationNick]

I guess I just don't see the point of the what if game. What if Martinez plays all year, and since he doesn't have the arm Kellogg or Armstrong have, we don't complete the hail mary against Northwestern, or the 99.9 yard pass against Georgia. Then we're a six loss team.

 

Seems like a productive exercise.

So you think we would be in the same exact position on those plays had Martinez been healthy? Lol sarcastic question and not really looking for an answer.

 

With Taylor healthy, I think we can all agree we would have had a better chance at a better record. Do we know it would have happened? Who knows.

 

But... since we like to bring up the past as proof, like Bo's 4 loss seasons. Proof shows that Narduzzi can't coach a game against Martinez. Proof shows Iowa has never beat us with Martinez under center. Minnesota has also never beat Taylor when he was healthy either. We honestly never know what the outcome would have been, but let the people who think we would have had a better season with a healthy Martinez believe it. What's the harm there? Being positive?

No harm. There's also no harm in residing in the realm of reality.

How is it reality that we wouldn't have a better record with a healthy Martinez? Seems like an assumption, just like those who think we would have a better record. The reality is Martinez was injured and we will never know.