What is this year about?

[Lonestar_Husker]

 

 

 

Initial lack of success means nothing.

No but it's a much more accurate predictor of future success than initial struggles. Off of this years top 10 in the coaches poll, each of these coaches improved on the previous years record.

 

1. OSU - Urban Meyer

2. TCU - Gary Patterson

3. Bama - Nick Saban• (Sanctions removed wins)

4. Baylor - Art Briles

5. Oregon - Mark Helfrich

6. MSU - Mark Dantonio

7. Auburn - Guz Malzahn

8. FSU - Jimbo Fisher

9. Georgia - Mark Richt

10. USC - Steve Sarkisian

 

7 out of 10 had better records than their predecessor, 1 was a tie (Rich) and Helfrich and Sark each had 1 less win. While year one success isn't the be all, end all, it's a pretty good indicator.

 

That's an erroneous conclusion based on a sample of teams that are, by being in the top ten, successful. Try the same exercise with teams currently ranked in the bottom ten and see how their most-recent coaching changes went. I'm guessing the picture won't look so rosy.

 

I would think, we're closer to the top 10 than the bottom ten. Plus, isn't that what we're aiming for? Look at what the formula is for success, then try to replicate it?

 

We have resources that the bottom feeders do not, and even Bo out recruited our divisional peers by a fair margin. We have facilities, fan support, and more money than we need. Riley and the staff are showing that Bo's whining about recruiting wasn't as big of a deal as he made it out to be.

 

I can continue going through the top 25, and document it, but by looking over that list, very few coaches in the top 25 regressed in year one over their predecessor. Obviously, our threshold is higher than most of those teams, but it statistically, if the new guys match or exceed the win total, the chances of them being successful is greater.

 

A couple things here: How many of these coaches needed to win 9+ to match or exceed their predecessor?

 

I think a lack of success, in terms of win total, in the first year of Nebraska's particular situation would be... difficult. The firing of Solich to bring in someone that was perceived to be better is what split the fan base in the first place. I feel that a drop in wins this year would bring something of a deja-vu for a lot of fans. If Mr. Riley isn't successful early, the pressure will be on and he will be made keenly aware of what is expected at N.U. Oregon State we are not. If he is not successful, we have once again fired a relatively successful coach because we think we deserve better. I think it would behoove us to remain patient, but, we have difficulties with patience. So I think first season success is very important. The talent is there to win at least 9, it's been proven several times by an inferior coach. I don't think Mr. Riley was hired because he has a nice smile. He was hired, at the very least, to maintain current measurable standards and maintain them with a nice smile. I'm sorry, but progress means different things to different people, so I will find it difficult to find progress with 7 or 8 wins, regardless of the amount of Whitestrips applied to his chicklets, or how well the team sings kumbaya.

 

I want Mike Riley to be successful. I wanted Pelini to be successful and I wanted Callahan to be successful. I was actually one of the last holdouts on Callahan. I'm stubbornly optimistic. It's just I know most Nebraska fans are not that patient and at least half seem to think that they know more than any given coach. I don't care what scheme we run, as long as it fits our personnel and works. I would think for a scheme to work, it needs to fit what we have, so stating the obvious there, but there are many(you know who you are) that want to win a certain way. Mention the WCO and suddenly I find myself dodging piles of vomit. I, for one, don't care how we do it, as long as it gets done. I appreciate football innovation, as well as proven tradition. It's a very good spectator sport.

 

Blowouts gonna blowout, sometimes. Like haters gonna hate. It happens to the best of them. Do I want to see my beloved Huskers on the wrong end of one? Hell, no! But they will happen. So I don't necessarily think if we get blownout once that all is lost and we need to start looking again, but if N.U. avoids the wrong end of one and wins 8 with a smile and a tip of the cap, I'm not sure I can call that progress, either.

 

I guess I think it will be difficult to keep firing 9 win coaches and remain successful as a program. Not that I think Pelini should have been retained, necessarily, it's that we are in a unique situation that could set the football program back to the Callahan era. When I say unique, I mean it in several different ways. Recruiting, expectations, history and tradition, location relative to major football populations, fan interest and general fan acumen, gameday experience and emphasis on academics are just a few things that I believe sets Nebraska apart from any other program. I feel Osborne spoiled us. He was so effing good!

 

Anyway, I've rambled on long enough and taken way too much of your time. All appreciations for you participation. See everyone in about 3 weeks!

[Enhance]

 

 

 

"And our new coach is going to do it in his first year or there'll be hell to pay."

I don't think anyone is saying that. I just refuse to lower my standards and expectations for Nebraska Football because it is Riley's first year. As mentioned in another thread:

I read that we should have vast improvements in the program, including:

• Better head coach.
• Ridding of culture/mentality problem that some feel we have.
• Better WR coach (read: not golf). Kenny Bell came back to work with him. Before one game, saying we need to open the checkbook.
• No more Coach Kaz.
• "Aggressive/attacking" defense.
• More coaching experience across the board.
• QB Whisperer.
• No more Tim Beck or getting Beck'd.
• Dedicated special teams coach.
• Recruiting "effort."
• Less WR option routes = less confusion.
• Better "player development."
• Better strength and conditioning program.
• All of our tough conference games are at home, not away like last year.

Did I miss anything?

 

On the other hand:

• We lost Ameer and Randy (who allegedly took plays off).
• We have to play BYU (home). They are experienced and good.
• We have to play Miami away, while they lost more talent to the NFL than we did. Zero players on ACC preseason team.

If all of the above is true, I think we should win more than nine games.

 

When you cut yourself, you put ointment on a bandage and put the bandage on your skin. Does it heal immediately or does the skin take time to right itself?

 

Does putting the bandage on make the wound worse?

 

Wounds often do look "worse" as the bacteria forms to heal the skin.

[redtrout]

 

Initial lack of success means nothing.

No but it's a much more accurate predictor of future success than initial struggles. Off of this years top 10 in the coaches poll, each of these coaches improved on the previous years record.

 

1. OSU - Urban Meyer

2. TCU - Gary Patterson

3. Bama - Nick Saban• (Sanctions removed wins)

4. Baylor - Art Briles

5. Oregon - Mark Helfrich

6. MSU - Mark Dantonio

7. Auburn - Guz Malzahn

8. FSU - Jimbo Fisher

9. Georgia - Mark Richt

10. USC - Steve Sarkisian

 

7 out of 10 had better records than their predecessor, 1 was a tie (Rich) and Helfrich and Sark each had 1 less win. While year one success isn't the be all, end all, it's a pretty good indicator.

 

LOL, I thought this was kind of funny and had to make my first post.

 

1. tOSU went 6-7 before Meyer took over

2. Wrong. Patterson took over a 10-1 TCU team, lost the bowl game, and went 6-6 the next year with a loss to FCS Northwestern State

3. Saban took Alabama from 6-7 to 7-6

4. Briles took Baylor from 3-9 to 4-8

5. Helfrich had one fewer win. 12-1 to 11-2. He was promoted from OC and it was a smooth transition with the staff mostly staying the same

6. Dantonio improved from 4-8 to 7-6

7. Gus took over a 3-9 Auburn team and had a great season

8. Jimbo went from 7-6 to 10-4

9. Richt went from 8-4 to 8-4

10. Sark had one fewer win than a team whose head coach was fired on the tarmac in Arizona. 10-4 to 9-4

 

All of the coaches that took over teams that won at least 9 actually did worse!!

[redtrout]

What I want to see is progress. The kind of season that makes us all expect great things in 2016. Not just hope for them, or expect them in the sense that they better do it (or else!), but expect them in the sense that we actually predict that a great season is more likely than not. Realistically I just don't see this years team competing with tOSU for the B1G title. Possible, sure, but it would be a pretty big upset if it were to happen. But I look at the distribution of scholarships, see who is leaving and who will replace them, and I think the 2016 team could actually compete with teams like tOSU.

 

So when I approach the question of whether I would prefer 9-4 with all close losses or 10-3 with a blowout loss with this perspective in mind, my initial thought is that I would prefer to see the 9-4 with all close losses. Because my guess is that that 9-4 team is closer to great things than the 10-3 team is. A team that comes to mind for me is 2012 MSU. They had 6 losses, 5 of which were very close. And then the next year they won the B1G and the Rose Bowl. Some Nebraska teams that come to mind for me are the 2009 and 2010 teams. Both 4 loss teams, but the rankings to begin the next year were #8 and #10. Those 2009 and 2010 had 4 losses but they were almost all close losses, and the country looked at those teams and expected top 10 teams the next year. Bo's next few 4 loss teams? The expectations following those seasons were not nearly as high.

 

Progress is what I wanted to see from Bo last year. I didn't care about the record all that much, I just wanted to see a team that if they didn't bring home a championship at least made us halfway expect one the following year. I didn't see that and supported his firing. And that's what I again want to see from Riley this year. A team that makes some people actually pick Nebraska to win the B1G in 2016. A team that makes us excited about the future and honestly predict great things to come.

[knapplc]

We don't lower expectations here.

Do our expectations match the situation, or are we just dogmatically locked into #9wins and anything less, no matter the circumstances, is unacceptable? Because if so...

 

[teachercd]

 

We don't lower expectations here.

 

Do our expectations match the situation, or are we just dogmatically locked into #9wins and anything less, no matter the circumstances, is unacceptable? Because if so...

 

Nope, not for me.

 

Better coach

More experience

20 starts at QB

Easy Defense

Favored over all but 2 teams

Tough games at home

 

And from more reports last night, this offense will fit what the players know. Basically all the Huskers have done is gotten better coaching with a simpler scheme on defense. This is good news.

[knapplc]

 

 

We don't lower expectations here.

Do our expectations match the situation, or are we just dogmatically locked into #9wins and anything less, no matter the circumstances, is unacceptable? Because if so...

 

Nope, not for me.

 

Better coach

More experience

20 starts at QB

Easy Defense

Favored over all but 2 teams

Tough games at home

 

And from more reports last night, this offense will fit what the players know. Basically all the Huskers have done is gotten better coaching with a simpler scheme on defense. This is good news.

 

 

 

Let's take a look at that:

 

Better coach - NEW COACH. Better than Bo, but that's not necessarily saying a lot. Being better isn't the whole story, there's the rub. New coach, new schemes on both sides of the ball, a defensive coordinator whose previous defenses failed to excite... There are a lot of things on the other side of that scale from "Better coach," and most of them count against us.

 

More experience - NEW SITUATION. By weight of the calendar moving forward, because if so, that's a wash. Everyone has that. Experience in what, though? Bo's schemes? Toss those out the window for the players, and with it a lot of that experience. If it's coaching experience, that's probably the lone thing we can hang our hat on, but again, we have to figure out if we can through some kind of mental gymnastics translate what Riley did in Corvallis to what will happen here, and I'm not sure anyone's crystal ball is that clear.

 

20 starts at QB - INACCURACY at QB. What does that matter if Tommy can't connect with the receivers? Riley's offense is going to rely heavily on the pass, and this is Tommy's weakness. We're getting mixed reports out of Camp about the passing game - some nights it's on, some it's off. Even when Tommy's "on," we're hearing about the same dropped pass issues we saw all last year.

 

Easy Defense - PLAYER ABILITY. The learning curve should be lower, and we should be able to have the guys just go make plays rather than get bogged down in thinking about schemes and assignments, and the hope is that this translates to better play. But we're still lacking a Rush End, for all the hype neither Valentine nor Collins has ever taken over a game and they may never do that. Neither Gangwish nor McMullin are game-changers, or if they are, they've never shown it. Neither have shown the ability to consistently harass the quarterback. Depth behind them is an issue as well. Linebacker is paper-thin, with the two named starters comprised of a guy who was injured all last year, and the other guy had a pretty miserable year.

 

Favored over all but 2 teams - WE'RE ALWAYS FAVORED. About half our losses over the last ten years came against teams we were favored against, right? Vegas' betting lines don't mean much when we strap on the pads.

 

Tough games at home - WE LOSE AT HOME. Playing at home doesn't mean anything. We lost to Minnesota last year (a team we were favored against), Iowa, Michigan State & UCLA the year before that, Northwestern two years before that (another team we were favored against). On top of that, we play Miami away and Minnesota away, both games we could easily lose.

 

Those are all kool-aid fueled assessments, and I'm not trying to rain on anyone's party here, but there are some stark realities we're facing this year. Firing Bo didn't magically solve the glaring problems from the Bo Era. That hangover could last well into this season.

[teachercd]

Knapp...did you just downplay Gangwish? Coach Power T is not going to like that one bit!!!

[knapplc]

He'll forgive me. He knows I want nothing more than to see Gangwish wreaking havoc, preferably in Taysom Hill's face. We just haven't seen him do it yet.

 

My hope is to be pleasantly surprised. My prediction is that we'll see that fixing the mistakes of the last regime won't be accomplished in one summer.

[Enhance]

Easy defense.

 

This is not specifically directed at you teacher, though, I am using your words as a segway.

 

Can we all drop the notion that this new defense is actually a "high school" defense, as Banderas so eloquently put it? Because it's not. It's a simpler defense only in the way players see and react. This may improve the learning curve a bit, but, this does not mean the defense is all of a sudden going to play a lot better than they have. Plus, if some of you (again, not directed at you teacher) think we're going to line up and play simple against the Wisconsin's, Michigan State's and Ohio State's of the world, you're sorely mistaken. This is still going to have to be a division one college football defense with a lot of bells and whistles, not the Crete high school defense.

 

Furthermore, we have a lot of question marks on this defense, and though we have talent, we have very few gamechangers. Nothing at this point is a guarantee.

[teachercd]

 

Easy defense.

 

This is not specifically directed at you teacher, though, I am using your words as a segway.

 

Can we all drop the notion that this new defense is actually a "high school" defense, as Banderas so eloquently put it? Because it's not. It's a simpler defense only in the way players see and react. This may improve the learning curve a bit, but, this does not mean the defense is all of a sudden going to play a lot better than they have. Plus, if some of you (again, not directed at you teacher) think we're going to line up and play simple against the Wisconsin's, Michigan State's and Ohio State's of the world, you're sorely mistaken. This is still going to have to be a division one college football defense with a lot of bells and whistles, not the Crete high school defense.

 

Furthermore, we have a lot of question marks on this defense, and though we have talent, we have very few gamechangers. Nothing at this point is a guarantee.

 

Oh yeah, I totally agree with you!

[Bowfin]

Ten wins.