Coaching or Talent - which is more responsible

[Bowfin]

The run was available all game if the staff would have committed to it.

 

Nope. Third and 1 was, and is, a passing down. Just because Cross bulled his way through the line and into the secondary the previous 3rd and 1 doesn't mean it is a running down.

[BigRedBuster]

 

 

Coaching change.

Are you calling for one, or saying that coaching change is the cause of what we are seeing.

I fully support this staff.

 

Many times when there is a change there are struggles.

[Warrior10]

With all do respect. You can coach scheme, proper technique, what to do if someone does this, etc. all day long. But if your guy is a 240lb 4.7lb and he's covering a 4.3 WR he's going to get beat. And if you adjust your scheme to double team that star WR or if you play a dime defense to match up better with speed, and your corners are 4.5 on a 4.3 guy, the player can only do so much with coaching. What we are seeing this season is the result of Bo's lack of recruiting his final 2 years at Nebraska. Those final 2 years he heard all the talk about the fans questioning him. He knew he was on the hotspot. He was distracted and unorganized. Recruiting suffered. Miami had more speed than we did and we simply couldn't match up on defense. We have no 4.6-4.7 pass rushing end on the team who can beat blockers and get pressure on the QB. People say, we'll take the shirt off of Alex davis. You can't do that. He's played one year of football in his life. You think he miraculously has the football IQ to get out there and not make mental mistakes? You think he has the moves to beat these olinemen we see who have started 20-30 games? It gives the QB all day to check down to his 2nd and 3rd options. The DB's can't make breaks on the ball to go for the INT or pass breakup because they have no help from the d-line.

On offense dropped passes and penalties aren't coaching in our case either. Coach williams has had success everywhere he has gone. His WR's have never had this problem. The truth is that Miami defense was mean, and many of them saw those hits coming and braced for them before they had completely secured the ball. Westekamp is a great talent for us. But who do we have that was a highly recruited player out of high school that has that crazy ability? We don't. We don't have the 6'5" guy that can go over the top. We don't have the burner like Bell was. And at RB... Watch Newby. He doesn't make decisions quick enough. It takes him too long to hit the hole and he dances horizontally too much. Wilbon is a much better back at taking on the contact and hitting the spot quick, but he doesn't play because he can't pass protect. Cross is out big up the middle guy but he has no top end speed and can't break away unless it's an FCS team or the bottom of the big 10. We don't have Ameer, we don't have Rex, and we don't have Helu. We have some guys that haven't developed to what their star status said they would be. We have some undersized guys. We have ozigbo who is cross 2.0 does a lot of things fundamentally well but doesn't have the speed to break out. And we can look at the o line. We aren't starting most those guys because they are all Americans. We're starting them because we don't have any all Americans. We've missed on developing some guys. We've lost some guys to transfers because cotton played favorites. We've lost some tackles and we just haven't had the foot speed or talent to get us the guys we need. Plus you can coach all day long but some guys have a premadonna attitude and don't listen, or they appear to listen but then do what they want in games. What do you do in that situation as a coach if the backup doesn't have the athletic ability to hold his own in the game? You have to play the athletic guy and give him an earful hoping he responds. There's only so much coaching can do.

This is obvious when we walk out on the field with teams like Miami, UCLA, MichSt, UGA, USC. They just look different. We have pieces that have the look, just not a as a whole. Funny thing is the positions we are struggling at are the ones we don't look the part. I sometimes can't help but chuckle when I see Dudzris and McMullen as our DE's trying to get after the QB.

 

But I have faith that it can be changed. GBR, no matter what.

[AFhusker]

That walk-ons don't win you anything. Here's a stat that will show how much talent we are lacking at this time. We had 79 players on the travel roster. 24 of them were walk-ons. Bo's sh**ty recruiting was the equivalent to being put on self imposed probation.

[Warrior10]

That walk-ons don't win you anything. Here's a stat that will show how much talent we are lacking at this time. We had 79 players on the travel roster. 24 of them were walk-ons. Bo's sh**ty recruiting was the equivalent to being put on self imposed probation.

Wow, that is a staggering stat.

[AFhusker]

 

The run was available all game if the staff would have committed to it.

 

Nope. Third and 1 was, and is, a passing down. Just because Cross bulled his way through the line and into the secondary the previous 3rd and 1 doesn't mean it is a running down.

 

That was a bad call, but if we are going to have Newby in there, then I feel more safe with a pass because he has very poor instincts as a runner, even if we only needed one yard. I would have also put Cross in and ran the ball.

[Saunders]

We lack talent at positions, but there's much less talented teams performing a hell of a lot better than us.

 

Plus, Talent isn't why we're putting linebackers on slot receivers with no safety help, time after time.

[Count 'Bility]

 

That walk-ons don't win you anything. Here's a stat that will show how much talent we are lacking at this time. We had 79 players on the travel roster. 24 of them were walk-ons. Bo's sh**ty recruiting was the equivalent to being put on self imposed probation.

Wow, that is a staggering stat.

no sh#t. Thats not good. Not good at all. Thats like 99-00 solichesque roster management

 

I also remember some number of bos best class-the 2013 class- of the players not even being here anymore. Some riduculously high number.

[Enhance]

Some really good discussion and ideas in here.

 

First off, I don't know if a lack of "speed" is necessarily a glaring problem. I think, in some cases, people blame a lack of "speed" because they don't see or understand the schematic deficiencies that lead to a blown play. I didn't see a wealth of speedy talent destroying us yesterday. I saw a lot of guys just missing assignments and not making plays. Now, I do think Miami certainly did have some better talent at their WR position, for example, then we did in the secondary. But, a WR catching a ball in the middle of the field with no defender within 10 yards of him is not a speed problem. That's a guy (or multiple guys) missing their assignments.

 

Second, I think we really need to give more attention to the problems penalties and dropped passes created for us yesterday. We tried to run the ball Saturday, but when we needed big 3rd down conversions we kept making mental mistakes. Westerkamp had two huge third down catches, including at least one where he got blown up, and it was called back for a penalty. In other instances, guys like Hovey or Reilly were dropping passes. They were great plays and great throws, but the WR's weren't doing their job and that led to problems getting any rhythm.

 

Third, in terms of play-calling, the broadcast pulled up a stat at one point where Saturday showing the Huskers were dead even in play selection at 28 pass, 28 run. Guys, that's 50/50. There's no wishy-washiness there - we were trying to run the ball. But, again, penalties and a very inconsistent push along the o-line makes it seem like we aren't trying. I don't think this line is playing as well as last year's, but the more obvious and glaring problem is we don't have an amazing back in AA to make up for deficiencies. It kind of is what it is right now.

 

Lastly, and I've said this in other threads, I think really need to have more faith in the coaches. We've had 15 years of inadequacies in this program. These guys deserve more than just 9 months to make up for all the years of problems we've developed.

[StPaulHusker]

 

It seems highly unlikely that Riley is going to fire his buddies. Callahan didn't, Bo didn't, Frank only did after duress was applied. It's not typical.

^^ This. Most coaches want to coach with people they like and people they have worked with in the past.

He certainly isn't going to fire anyone 3 games into a season. How would that look?

[AFhusker]

Some really good discussion and ideas in here.

 

First off, I don't know if a lack of "speed" is necessarily a glaring problem. I think, in some cases, people blame a lack of "speed" because they don't see or understand the schematic deficiencies that lead to a blown play. I didn't see a wealth of speedy talent destroying us yesterday. I saw a lot of guys just missing assignments and not making plays. Now, I do think Miami certainly did have some better talent at their WR position, for example, then we did in the secondary. But, a WR catching a ball in the middle of the field with no defender within 10 yards of him is not a speed problem. That's a guy (or multiple guys) missing their assignments.

 

Second, I think we really need to give more attention to the problems penalties and dropped passes created for us yesterday. We tried to run the ball Saturday, but when we needed big 3rd down conversions we kept making mental mistakes. Westerkamp had two huge third down catches, including at least one where he got blown up, and it was called back for a penalty. In other instances, guys like Hovey or Reilly were dropping passes. They were great plays and great throws, but the WR's weren't doing their job and that led to problems getting any rhythm.

 

Third, in terms of play-calling, the broadcast pulled up a stat at one point where Saturday showing the Huskers were dead even in play selection at 28 pass, 28 run. Guys, that's 50/50. There's no wishy-washiness there - we were trying to run the ball. But, again, penalties and a very inconsistent push along the o-line makes it seem like we aren't trying. I don't think this line is playing as well as last year's, but the more obvious and glaring problem is we don't have an amazing back in AA to make up for deficiencies. It kind of is what it is right now.

 

Lastly, and I've said this in other threads, I think really need to have more faith in the coaches. We've had 15 years of inadequacies in this program. These guys deserve more than just 9 months to make up for all the years of problems we've developed.

Overall a very good post. The only part that I would have to disagree with is the lack of speed. Miami was bigger, faster, and stronger than we were. Their DL averaged 30 lbs more than our OL did. The only way this is going to get fixed is by recruiting and that is what this staff is doing right now, recruiting their butt off. They made some mistakes in both offensive and defensive play calling, esp on leaving our CB's on an island, if that is what they want to do, wait until we get better players at the position. But then it again it may not matter with the lack of overall talent on the defense as there is very little on it.

[84HuskerLaw]

That walk-ons don't win you anything. Here's a stat that will show how much talent we are lacking at this time. We had 79 players on the travel roster. 24 of them were walk-ons. Bo's sh**ty recruiting was the equivalent to being put on self imposed probation.

Maybe I am missing something here on this stat but isn't this about 'normal' for a travel roster because you have a total of 85 max on scholarship and in most years about all your freshman and one or two (non frosh) are red shirt scholarship players who would not travel. If you give about 22 scholarships each year off of 85 scholarships, that means you travel with at most about 63 scholarship players and the rest would then necessarily be walk ons. Apparently we only had 55 in Miami but several had injuries and could not play so maybe they didn't travel either. I am just estimating therefore that about five (5) walk ons have beat out scholarship guys on the travel squad. I think that says some good walk ons made the team as you would surely expect and hope. A few upper classman didn't turn out and quit or transferred or got in trouble, etc.

Thus, if I am reading your comment as you intended it, I don't think we can really fault Bo's recruiting bad scholarship guys that are apparently not as good as walk ons this year according to Riley. ? Am I missing something in this analysis? Just trying to understand the point. Maybe you are right and if so, it is shocking and disappointing to think the recruiting has been 'that bad' in recent years. On the other hand, maybe that is good because we can hopefully recruit better and thereby improve the team significantly as a result.

[cg_8]

 

This should go without mention, but Newby, 14 carries for 82 yards--that's 5.9 YPC. Armstrong, excluding that dreadful 20 yard loss, had 10 rushes for 69 yards--that's 6.9 YPC. We couldn't commit to the run because we were never in a position to where we commit to it. The game required a lot of passing, and so we did.

 

I swear some of us would be happy losing by 20 if we ran the ball the entire game.

 

Eh, I'm not so sure about that. We gained four yards on the first play of the game. Then threw two incomplete passes and punted. The next time we got the ball back we went run for 5, pass for 4, run for 5, run for 10, incomplete pass, run for 1, in complete pass. It's not like the run wasn't working. We just kept deciding to pass.

 

If you move the sacks to the passing stats (like the NFL does), we had 30 runs for 176 yards (5.9 yards per play) and we had 47 passing plays for 286 yards (6.1 yards per play). Now, a good chunk of TA's rushing yards came on called passing plays but it's not like we were that much more effective passing the ball than running. When you factor in the interceptions, you could say we were more effective running the ball. We just chose to pass.

 

Starting with the last first down of each possession, our first four possessions went:

Run for 4, Incomplete pass, incomplete pass

Incomplete pass, run for 1 yard, incomplete pass

Run for 3, penalty, pass for 8, run for 1

Penalty, pass for 0, pass for 14, sack on 3rd and 1

 

That early in the game, we were by no means forced into passing. But twice we passes on two out of three plays and once got sacked on third and 1. We didn't make much of an attempt to commit to the run. That's not what Langsdorf does.

 

I normally wouldn't say this about this offense, and I know this is going to sound as dumb as the next guy that comes and says "RUN THE BALL!!" But against a team like Miami, and seeing what I saw against FAU, we really needed to come out and establish the run the way we did against USA.

 

That being said, that didn't happen. Considering what did happen, the way the game played out was obviously the best scenario considering we came back from 23 points down. That should be commended.

 

I still believe, against Miami, we needed to pound the ball as early and often as possible. We didn't. We had the opportunity to on that first drive, but we didn't. Call me crazy, but I think we have better control of the game if we ran the ball early in the game. Unfortunately, we played catch up all game, and after the second series, it had to become a passing happy offense. Which I am fine considering I think we will be successful with that with the majority of our opponents. But this game, I feel differently about.

 

That being said, I have a lot of trust in Langsdorf. Who knows what would have happened had we not dropped a few of those balls.

[Danny Bateman]

Third, in terms of play-calling, the broadcast pulled up a stat at one point where Saturday showing the Huskers were dead even in play selection at 28 pass, 28 run. Guys, that's 50/50. There's no wishy-washiness there - we were trying to run the ball. But, again, penalties and a very inconsistent push along the o-line makes it seem like we aren't trying. I don't think this line is playing as well as last year's, but the more obvious and glaring problem is we don't have an amazing back in AA to make up for deficiencies. It kind of is what it is right now.

 

Lastly, and I've said this in other threads, I think really need to have more faith in the coaches. We've had 15 years of inadequacies in this program. These guys deserve more than just 9 months to make up for all the years of problems we've developed.

Couldn't agree more man. Nailed it. +1 for days.

 

I never really thought about it until now, but the reason we have been so good at running the last few years was because we had NFL RBs making the line look way better than it is, rather than true dominating OL play. Ameer masked how poorly the Pipeline has been stocked the last handful of year.

 

Agree with the last line as well. Crazy to think Huskerboard is blessed with so many experts that already KNOW Riley, Banker, and/or any other coaches are doomed to fail after three games. Oy.

[AFhusker]

 

That walk-ons don't win you anything. Here's a stat that will show how much talent we are lacking at this time. We had 79 players on the travel roster. 24 of them were walk-ons. Bo's sh**ty recruiting was the equivalent to being put on self imposed probation.

Maybe I am missing something here on this stat but isn't this about 'normal' for a travel roster because you have a total of 85 max on scholarship and in most years about all your freshman and one or two (non frosh) are red shirt scholarship players who would not travel. If you give about 22 scholarships each year off of 85 scholarships, that means you travel with at most about 63 scholarship players and the rest would then necessarily be walk ons. Apparently we only had 55 in Miami but several had injuries and could not play so maybe they didn't travel either. I am just estimating therefore that about five (5) walk ons have beat out scholarship guys on the travel squad. I think that says some good walk ons made the team as you would surely expect and hope. A few upper classman didn't turn out and quit or transferred or got in trouble, etc.

Thus, if I am reading your comment as you intended it, I don't think we can really fault Bo's recruiting bad scholarship guys that are apparently not as good as walk ons this year according to Riley. ? Am I missing something in this analysis? Just trying to understand the point. Maybe you are right and if so, it is shocking and disappointing to think the recruiting has been 'that bad' in recent years. On the other hand, maybe that is good because we can hopefully recruit better and thereby improve the team significantly as a result.

 

22 a year is more than 85. 24 walk ons is an tribute of how much Bo disliked and how lazy they were when it came to recruiting. That is an average of 6 walk ons a year when you should average 2 maybe 3 if you get lucky and find a kid that everyone missed on, which isn't going to happen very often now days or maybe a kicker. The previous staff was more focused on trying to create new excuses as to why they couldn't get talent to Nebraska instead of putting in more work to get them here. Yes recruiting has been "that bad" under Bo. He just didn't like it and it is fitting that he went to a small school where they only get the kids that are not good enough to make it to the big schools. Which is why it wouldn't surprise me if he was successful at Youngstown State, just like Frank at Ohio as you don't have to be a good recruiter to win at that level.