Editorial: "The Disappearing Act of Husker Football Tradition"

[Minnesota_husker]

I understand her being frustrated and feeling like the man she truly cares for was made to feel like less of a man.

 

I would hope that if something like this happened to me, that my Wife would defend me and stand up for me being mistreated.... HOWEVER

 

Writing an article that basically is a biased piece saying he was forced out, doesnt seem to help the situation at all.

 

Was it a bit coldhearted that they up and gave the job to someone who hasnt stepped on campus?- Yes.

 

 

But at the end of the day, that is part of the game. He wasnt kicked off the team, he was given options and was told basically that things wont work out.

 

 

While the way she writes it, it seems harsh, i think of it as this way. They are letting Josh know that he probably cant win the job... dont give him false hopes if he truly wants to start and play somewhere. By telling him where he stands, you are allowing him the chance to go elsewhere if he truly wants to play.

 

If he wants to continue to suit up for Nebraska, it sounds like he was given that option.

 

If 1-2 players get hurt, they might need Josh, who knows.

 

 

 

I think it came off as a bit of a "poor me" article, but i 100% understand where she is coming from. She feels like this administration wronged a person she clearly loves, and she wants people to know. I dont think this is the best way to go about it, but hell.. she is defending someone who means a lot to her and from her perspective i can see why she is mad.

 

 

 

College Football is a big business, and sadly very few Walk-ons ever get to play. Josh should be happy he got the chance he did and understand life isnt fair and sometimes you dont get what you want. Use this as a life lesson, prove the doubters/coaches wrong. Go in to practice everyday and practice your ass off. Work on longsnapping. Get better and be ready if your name is ever called.

 

If i am coach Bray, and i just told this kid he has no chance to play, and then i see him work even harder.... To prove me wrong.. That is the type of player you watch and sets a good example for those around him.

[Bigred_inSD]

Wasn't there an early statement from the coaches that the reason they wanted a long snapper was that "the ball wasn't getting to where it needs to be fast enough" I dont believe we had any blocked punts (other than the one Foltz buried in his own team mates rear end) but I'm surethe ccoaches ran a clock on delivery speed..

[The Dude]

Wasn't there an early statement from the coaches that the reason they wanted a long snapper was that "the ball wasn't getting to where it needs to be fast enough" I dont believe we had any blocked punts (other than the one Foltz buried in his own team mates rear end) but I'm surethe ccoaches ran a clock on delivery speed..

Could it be a factor in Brown missing 1/3 of his field goals?

[cg_8]

I'd really hate to nag here and discredit her and Faulkenberry's feelings regarding this whole thing, but didn't Faulkenberry get handed this job? Didn't our "presumed" starting LS have a back injury that kept him out the whole season? Which in turn gave Faulkenberry the job? I know that Baderas was a back up plan also.

 

It wasn't disastrous, I can't really think of a botched snap due to the LS. However, the reality is that they need roster spots. I highly doubt he was told this news the way that it is portrayed. We all are guilty of exaggerating bad news. I know I am, so the portrayal of the way Read told him could be guilty of that. Do we need 3 spots for LS? It wouldn't hurt. The LS position is undervalued in my opinion, but it just might be in the best interest of Faulkenberry to be somewhere else if playing time is important to him.

 

Plus, he's a Special Teams coach. I mean, c'mon. He probably knows what he's doing. He knows how fast a snap should be getting to a punter/holder in order to get timing correct and whether Faulkenberry was meeting that requirement.

 

Tough to see on her and Faulkenberry's part. Their feelings were hurt and they may have burned some bridges in the process. I doubt it, but it's possible.

 

Best of luck to him, and to her, but if he doesn't make the cut, just like Fyfe didn't make the cut, than that's the deal. We all know it's not because he's a walk-on. We've lost some serious talent leave due to having too much talent (Aaron Green comes to mind). You could be a 4 star recruit, with a couple games experience but get beat out by some RS freshman kid who takes it to the end zone on his first college carry. It's kind of reality of playing for a program like Nebraska. I'd hate to say it, but the winning tradition is more important to me than the walk-on tradition. I know we take pride in it and we say "That kid's from Hastings..." but when we lose I'm not saying "well, at least he's from Hastings..."

[Enhance]

 

IMHO the only thing overblown about the walk-on program is some people act like we have a ton of All-Americans hiding in the weeds in Nebraska.

IMO the only overblown thing is your exaggeration of what you claim people say about the walk on program and Nebraska kids.

 

Fans, over the last several years, have called for a stronger walk-on program and more attention to bringing in Nebraska kids. That's no exaggeration. It comes up on this board routinely and if you listen to any local sports talk-show in the state it comes up often. I merely pointed out that I think the success of former walk-ons had more to do with the scheme, approach and coaches we had more-so than the players we had in the state.

[zoogs]

One thing I do disagree with is the thought that "if Read is so good, he will develop Faulkenberry into a pro snapper." Maybe he recognizes that it's not going to happen in his timeframe, to get to the level required. And that Faulkenberry probably could play somewhere else.

 

I'd point out we typically do not blame a coach if a limited talent doesn't blossom, unless there is a pattern, and instead hope for the coach to get the best talent to work with. I know we usually do not give a passing thought to special teams, but the same should apply. If they are going to be serious about it, recruit the position. Plenty on the 85 never contribute. Doesn't hurt too much to invest a few spots in the points and field position operations that see some important field time.

 

BTW, was Faulkenberry on scholarship?

[I am I]

The walk-on program was successful because of the coaches, the S&C program and the type of schemes we ran. I also remember I asked Ron Brown a few years ago about the talent level in the state, and he thinks that it has dropped off in recent years.

 

IMHO the only thing overblown about the walk-on program is some people act like we have a ton of All-Americans hiding in the weeds in Nebraska. From my perspective, it's just not true. We had tenured, experienced coaches that really knew what they were doing under TO and a system that could utilize the talent pool available in Nebraska. I just don't think the university has that right now and hasn't since TO left.

 

Personally, I think the program we had is what made the walk-on system successful and not the other way around.

Exactly. Let's not forget until the early 80s (I believe) we had "freshman" teams. Freshman did not play. We had unlimited GAs until the late 80s (I believe). We had 100 scholarships until the early 90s (I believe) instead of 85.

 

More coaches, more time to spend w more players, more evaluation, more patience to develop instead of play right away...

 

In other words: IF the walk on program is diminished it's because there are fewer coaches with less time to develop said walkons.

[Bigred_inSD]

 

Wasn't there an early statement from the coaches that the reason they wanted a long snapper was that "the ball wasn't getting to where it needs to be fast enough" I dont believe we had any blocked punts (other than the one Foltz buried in his own team mates rear end) but I'm surethe ccoaches ran a clock on delivery speed..

Could it be a factor in Brown missing 1/3 of his field goals?

Didn't think of that, but very possible. Kicking field goals takes precise timing.

[Moiraine]

What a giant baby.

[alwayshusking]

Faulkenberry took a scholarship opportunity elsewhere bc he wasn't going to get one here. Good for him.

 

This staff values walks ons quite a bit. They actually gave reps to walk ons in practice, to give them a chance to show what they had. Guys that hadn't taken a single practice rep under the last staff.

 

Read may have terrible social skills though. Weird guy, which a lot of ST coaches are.

[Dagerow]

If what she said is true, and I have no reason to doubt her (except for asking him to leave, that makes no sense), I agree with her. And I don't understand the herd mentality here. Just because you like Riley or NU, doesn't mean you have to agree with everything he does. Each person does it there own way. I think the walk on tradition is important. But moreover, if it were established before he came here, due consideration should be given to walk-ons who have been afforded a scholarship. Taking away that scholarship (if it was going to be awarded this year) is (to me) the same as taking away a scholarship of a recruited player.

 

(And before you say it, yes, a lot of what I said is inapplicable as most walk on scholarships are awarded yearly and are not automatically renewed. But irrespective, I think a walk on who has been awarded one in the past should be given extra consideration and at the very least a shot).

[The Dude]

 

 

Wasn't there an early statement from the coaches that the reason they wanted a long snapper was that "the ball wasn't getting to where it needs to be fast enough" I dont believe we had any blocked punts (other than the one Foltz buried in his own team mates rear end) but I'm surethe ccoaches ran a clock on delivery speed..

Could it be a factor in Brown missing 1/3 of his field goals?

Didn't think of that, but very possible. Kicking field goals takes precise timing.

Turns out Faulkenberry only handled field goal and PAT snaps for about half the season, then Paul Kelly took over.

[I am I]

 

 

 

Wasn't there an early statement from the coaches that the reason they wanted a long snapper was that "the ball wasn't getting to where it needs to be fast enough" I dont believe we had any blocked punts (other than the one Foltz buried in his own team mates rear end) but I'm surethe ccoaches ran a clock on delivery speed..

Could it be a factor in Brown missing 1/3 of his field goals?

Didn't think of that, but very possible. Kicking field goals takes precise timing.

Turns out Faulkenberry only handled field goal and PAT snaps for about half the season, then Paul Kelly took over.

I think our long snapper will be good this year.

[JJ Husker]

The walk-on program was successful because of the coaches, the S&C program and the type of schemes we ran. I also remember I asked Ron Brown a few years ago about the talent level in the state, and he thinks that it has dropped off in recent years.

 

IMHO the only thing overblown about the walk-on program is some people act like we have a ton of All-Americans hiding in the weeds in Nebraska. From my perspective, it's just not true. We had tenured, experienced coaches that really knew what they were doing under TO and a system that could utilize the talent pool available in Nebraska. I just don't think the university has that right now and hasn't since TO left.

 

Personally, I think the program we had is what made the walk-on system successful and not the other way around.

Bingo.

[JJ Husker]

So some people are upset that this staff is trying to get the best players on the field? Mmmmmkay.