Looking Back ... Looking Forward

[teachercd]

 

 

 

Mav is on fire today and 100% correct.

 

11 wins...if that clown Bo could get 9/10 each year than a professional like Riley with a staff that has like 200 years of coaching experience can get us fans 1/2 more wins.

Another poster just waiting for Riley to not win 10 or 11 games in his first year so he can either say "See? Bo wasn't a clown" or "See? Riley isn't that good." I just don't understand this.

 

Separate your desire to show other posters how wrong they were this offseason to be optimistic and really explain why Riley ought to be expected to win 10/11 games here in 2015. Would you have given Scott Frost, Jim Tressel, or Jim Harbaugh the same 1-year ultimatum?

 

 

 

Riley is taking over a 9-4 team with a good crop of returning players. It should not be unreasonable that fans expect him to go better than 9/10-4 in year one. He is supposed to be the coaching upgrade. And I would venture to guess that when you upgrade coaching on a winning team, they should win more.

 

Very well stated.

 

Boom...Nailed it!

We ALL want the Huskers to win lots of games...It is what we all hope for. Bo and his clowns were winning 9 and 10...we have a very experienced staff with lots of returning players and a very nice schedule...

[ColoradoHusk]

 

 

Mav is on fire today and 100% correct.

 

11 wins...if that clown Bo could get 9/10 each year than a professional like Riley with a staff that has like 200 years of coaching experience can get us fans 1/2 more wins.

Another poster just waiting for Riley to not win 10 or 11 games in his first year so he can either say "See? Bo wasn't a clown" or "See? Riley isn't that good." I just don't understand this.

 

Separate your desire to show other posters how wrong they were this offseason to be optimistic and really explain why Riley ought to be expected to win 10/11 games here in 2015. Would you have given Scott Frost, Jim Tressel, or Jim Harbaugh the same 1-year ultimatum?

 

 

 

Riley is taking over a 9-4 team with a good crop of returning players. It should not be unreasonable that fans expect him to go better than 9/10-4 in year one. He is supposed to be the coaching upgrade. And I would venture to guess that when you upgrade coaching on a winning team, they should win more.

 

I would agree with you if it were a NFL team, returning the bulk of its best players. NU is losing its 2 best offensive players (Ameer and Bell) and the most talented defensive player (Gregory). I am not sure what to expect, but I am not expecting NU to win 10 games and the West division.

[admo]

 

 

 

Mav is on fire today and 100% correct.

 

11 wins...if that clown Bo could get 9/10 each year than a professional like Riley with a staff that has like 200 years of coaching experience can get us fans 1/2 more wins.

Another poster just waiting for Riley to not win 10 or 11 games in his first year so he can either say "See? Bo wasn't a clown" or "See? Riley isn't that good." I just don't understand this.

 

Separate your desire to show other posters how wrong they were this offseason to be optimistic and really explain why Riley ought to be expected to win 10/11 games here in 2015. Would you have given Scott Frost, Jim Tressel, or Jim Harbaugh the same 1-year ultimatum?

 

 

 

Riley is taking over a 9-4 team with a good crop of returning players. It should not be unreasonable that fans expect him to go better than 9/10-4 in year one. He is supposed to be the coaching upgrade. And I would venture to guess that when you upgrade coaching on a winning team, they should win more.

 

I would agree with you if it were a NFL team, returning the bulk of its best players. NU is losing its 2 best offensive players (Ameer and Bell) and the most talented defensive player (Gregory). I am not sure what to expect, but I am not expecting NU to win 10 games and the West division.

 

I agree with you. Next season with Bo, Beck, Barney, Kaz, etc., while running a zone read option with TA and no Ameer and Bell? How hard is that for defenses to stop? Beck would easily launch 45 passes a game to try and stay in it against Miami, Wisconsin, Michigan State, Minnesota. And good luck with Bo's scheme keeping BYU's Taysom Hill from making the highlight reels in the opener. I hear we should be better with Riley, ok great. But I don't see 9 wins with Bo coaching here next year. Maybe 8 at best with the right bowl game opponent like KSU, Boston College or Pittsburgh.

[The Dude]

With the loss of Abdullah and Gregory, I think it's very likely we were looking at a 7-5 kind of year with Bo. I don't think we'll see that with Riley, but I'm not expecting to get over the hump right away either. 9-wins seems to be the ceiling with this group against this schedule.

 

Anything more than that would be fantastic, but I don't see it. Give it a few recruiting cycles.

 

I also don't think Bo was the worst coach ever, but I'm sure glad he's no longer representing the beloved Huskers.

[TheSker]

And here comes the justifications for Riley not winning. Pelini had 7 years of data for winning 9 or 10 games. Zero years of data for winning less than that. Every coach loses one or more standouts on each side of the ball every year. In different seasons, Pelini lost Suh, Crick, Amukamara, David on defense......Helu, Burkhead on offense. The schedule is not radically different. We now have ten million years of coaching experience. If Riley can't get this team to win immediately at or above Pelini's level......there are no words.

[Pwnyboy]

And here comes the justifications for Riley not winning. Pelini had 7 years of data for winning 9 or 10 games. Zero years of data for winning less than that. Every coach loses one or more standouts on each side of the ball every year. In different seasons, Pelini lost Suh, Crick, Amukamara, David on defense......Helu, Burkhead on offense. The schedule is not radically different. We now have ten million years of coaching experience. If Riley can't get this team to win immediately at or above Pelini's level......there are no words.

The way I see it, sure we haven't lost that many players, but we're installing a new offensive scheme. Now, in this scheme we're expecting to throw the ball a lot more. The problem is, our QBs aren't exactly comfortable with throwing the ball in this offense, or even at all. I'm afraid it may be less of a QB battle than a "who can step up and throw the the least-bad."

 

Bo was extremely lucky the past few years having studs at RB and having great Defenses to fill the void at the QB position. I feel that is why he was able to succeed here. Now, we still don't have a great QB and we're missing the safety net at RB while switching the offense to highlight passing. Sure we have better coaching, but if we don't have the resources to utilize in their philosophies, how much good does it do?

 

I don't think we'll win 10 games this year. I think we have the potential to if we're shown something completely different than what we've heard out of practice.

 

Maybe I'm wrong though, at we see sort of a repeat of the 2009 season. Bad offense and a good defense that will carry the team to victory.

[ColoradoHusk]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mav is on fire today and 100% correct.

 

11 wins...if that clown Bo could get 9/10 each year than a professional like Riley with a staff that has like 200 years of coaching experience can get us fans 1/2 more wins.

Another poster just waiting for Riley to not win 10 or 11 games in his first year so he can either say "See? Bo wasn't a clown" or "See? Riley isn't that good." I just don't understand this.

 

Separate your desire to show other posters how wrong they were this offseason to be optimistic and really explain why Riley ought to be expected to win 10/11 games here in 2015. Would you have given Scott Frost, Jim Tressel, or Jim Harbaugh the same 1-year ultimatum?

 

Riley is taking over a 9-4 team with a good crop of returning players. It should not be unreasonable that fans expect him to go better than 9/10-4 in year one. He is supposed to be the coaching upgrade. And I would venture to guess that when you upgrade coaching on a winning team, they should win more.

I would agree with you if it were a NFL team, returning the bulk of its best players. NU is losing its 2 best offensive players (Ameer and Bell) and the most talented defensive player (Gregory). I am not sure what to expect, but I am not expecting NU to win 10 games and the West division.

I agree with you. Next season with Bo, Beck, Barney, Kaz, etc., while running a zone read option with TA and no Ameer and Bell? How hard is that for defenses to stop? Beck would easily launch 45 passes a game to try and stay in it against Miami, Wisconsin, Michigan State, Minnesota. And good luck with Bo's scheme keeping BYU's Taysom Hill from making the highlight reels in the opener. I hear we should be better with Riley, ok great. But I don't see 9 wins with Bo coaching here next year. Maybe 8 at best with the right bowl game opponent like KSU, Boston College or Pittsburgh.

I agree that a Bo coached team probably would have had a 8-9 win ceiling this year. But, the coaching change is a wildcard. Riley could be a lot better coach long-term, and finish the season with 7-8 wins. He is adjusting to the roster and the roster is adjusting to him and his staff.

[TheSker]

 

The way I see it, sure we haven't lost that many players, but we're installing a new offensive scheme. Now, in this scheme we're expecting to throw the ball a lot more..

This is a concern about Mike Riley, not just as coach at Nebraska, but perhaps as a college coach.

[The Dude]

I guess I don't understand the fixation with immediate results. I think if we're all being honest with ourselves, we would agree the immediate future doesn't look particularly bright, and that has more to do with Pelini than it does Riley. Laying it all at Riley's feet reeks of Boliever logic.

[True2tRA]

I guess I don't understand the fixation with immediate results. I think if we're all being honest with ourselves, we would agree the immediate future doesn't look particularly bright, and that has more to do with Pelini than it does Riley. Laying it all at Riley's feet reeks of Boliever logic.

Home run.

[Mavric]

I guess I don't understand the fixation with immediate results. I think if we're all being honest with ourselves, we would agree the immediate future doesn't look particularly bright, and that has more to do with Pelini than it does Riley. Laying it all at Riley's feet reeks of Boliever logic.

 

I agree and don't think there has to be immediate improvement. But are you expecting the W-L record to get worse?

[teachercd]

And here comes the justifications for Riley not winning. Pelini had 7 years of data for winning 9 or 10 games. Zero years of data for winning less than that. Every coach loses one or more standouts on each side of the ball every year. In different seasons, Pelini lost Suh, Crick, Amukamara, David on defense......Helu, Burkhead on offense. The schedule is not radically different. We now have ten million years of coaching experience. If Riley can't get this team to win immediately at or above Pelini's level......there are no words.

#Logic

Husker fans are now trying to convince themselves that getting a BETTER coaching staff means worse results.

If the basketball team got Brad Stephens for next year, would you expect them to be worse, better or the same?

 

Be excited and be positive!

[Army_Allen]

How do people think this is a weak schedule this year? BYU and Miami this year for ooc. Then Wisconsin has always played us tough etc.

[True2tRA]

I wouldn't find it surprising at all to see a team that loses by far its best players on offense, doesn't have a quarterback, inherits a shaky situation at DE & LB, and is changing schemes on both sides of the ball along with every single coach, might win fewer games this year than last year. Considering last year was a pretty flat performance that was closer to 8 than 10 wins.I mean, this team was in nailbiters with McNeese St., Minnesota, and Iowa. They just managed to take 2 out of those 3 to get to 9. Really don't think we're at a point to write off too many teams on the schedule.Maybe the transition will be seamless. Maybe they'll not take so long to work with "any individual player." Or maybe not.What I find silly is the idea that if Riley doesn't win 10? 11? games in Year One, it would somehow prove something one way or another. That's a standard that seems to be applied only to Mike Riley.

 

 

(shakes hand) Thank you.

[Hunter94]

 

And here comes the justifications for Riley not winning. Pelini had 7 years of data for winning 9 or 10 games. Zero years of data for winning less than that. Every coach loses one or more standouts on each side of the ball every year. In different seasons, Pelini lost Suh, Crick, Amukamara, David on defense......Helu, Burkhead on offense. The schedule is not radically different. We now have ten million years of coaching experience. If Riley can't get this team to win immediately at or above Pelini's level......there are no words.

#Logic

Husker fans are now trying to convince themselves that getting a BETTER coaching staff means worse results.

If the basketball team got Brad Stephens for next year, would you expect them to be worse, better or the same?

 

Be excited and be positive!

 

but keep it real! for the players AND the coaches.