Regardless of what most of the armchair coaches say..

[TheSker]

I agree about stopping the run.....and have never disagreed with that.

 

But the importance of the run game offensively is what has been the hot topic since game one. And it's deja vu all over again from the last time it didn't work. Some, like you, could care less what Nebraska football looks like as long as Pelini is gone. He is. Breathe.

 

I mentioned Pelini in my post in regard to Osborne's philosophy. You have your weekly Pelini watch going on. I watch the Huskers.

[Whs from cb]

 

Is it possible to call an entire game without something the fans will complain about? I doubt it is.

bad play calling appears to be the main culprit. Which there was in the fourth quarter. Even the announcers did a "hear we go again" on that drive with three straight pass plays. So yes, when there is bad play calling there will be complaints. Especially when you are 3-4. Comes with the territory.

 

Agree. When we get up on a team we need to keep our defense off the field as long as possible. That series in the forth quarter reminded me of where this coaching staff came from. If you watch the Pac 12 this is the norm.

[Stumpy1]

 

it really was a win against a poor team, but for us any win is good......now, the trick is, let's see if they can build off this game and improve......not stay the same, but get better.

Agreed.

 

The win is great, but the underlying issues are much much bigger.

 

The only one I've seen on the entire board address this is The Duke.

 

Tom Osborne has more coaching experience alone than some posters have been alive. Osborne showed the blueprint for what works with football at the University of Nebraska. The only coach since Solich who remotely took Osborne's input was Pelini. Callahan and Riley have both dismissed it. Run the ball.

 

Yes, we ran the ball yesterday and ran it well. That type of game plan, however, is not the M.O. of Riley/Langsdorf. Which means, similar to the Callahan years, they will be slowly implementing their system which simply does not lend itself toward consistent winning football at Nebraska.

 

We're 3-4 after reeling off consecutive 9+ win seasons for 7 years. Ironically, on either side of those 7 years we've had head coaches with philosophies that won't cut it for football at Nebraska.

 

And, on top of that, we've got the "political drama" between Perlman and Osborne.

 

It has been said many times on here and I will say it again. Osborne wasn't always a run first coach. He was a heavy passer when he had Tagge, Humm and Ferragamo. He later switched to a run based offense when he had the likes of Turner Gill, Steve Taylor and such as QBs.

[TheSker]

 

 

it really was a win against a poor team, but for us any win is good......now, the trick is, let's see if they can build off this game and improve......not stay the same, but get better.

Agreed.

 

The win is great, but the underlying issues are much much bigger.

 

The only one I've seen on the entire board address this is The Duke.

 

Tom Osborne has more coaching experience alone than some posters have been alive. Osborne showed the blueprint for what works with football at the University of Nebraska. The only coach since Solich who remotely took Osborne's input was Pelini. Callahan and Riley have both dismissed it. Run the ball.

 

Yes, we ran the ball yesterday and ran it well. That type of game plan, however, is not the M.O. of Riley/Langsdorf. Which means, similar to the Callahan years, they will be slowly implementing their system which simply does not lend itself toward consistent winning football at Nebraska.

 

We're 3-4 after reeling off consecutive 9+ win seasons for 7 years. Ironically, on either side of those 7 years we've had head coaches with philosophies that won't cut it for football at Nebraska.

 

And, on top of that, we've got the "political drama" between Perlman and Osborne.

 

It has been said many times on here and I will say it again. Osborne wasn't always a run first coach. He was a heavy passer when he had Tagge, Humm and Ferragamo. He later switched to a run based offense when he had the likes of Turner Gill, Steve Taylor and such as QBs.

 

Yes, Osborne made adjustments offensively and defensively over the years. Riley is not young enough to have that luxury.

 

Osborne's legacy is his later years.

 

He has also stated he didn't feel he would survive a losing season.

[Nebhawk]

Go ahead and keep dreaming about the good old days of Nebraska football. First off just a reminder but when Osborne was coaching for the better part of his 25 years as head coach the Big 8 was awful. Nebraska could run there 3 rd string squad on the field and beat the likes of Iowa St, KSU, KU, Mizzou, Colorado. 3rd string. 2nd String would have beaten Okie St most years. Point is running the ball was easy against the likes of those teams.

 

Keep comparing what Osborne did what is going on today, and no wonder the program appears to be in a mud hole spinning its tires.

 

Being honest, whether most like it or not, Nebraska usually had one good non-con game, and one real opponnent in the conference season, which was OU. 25 years of that mostly. Sure Colorada has some good seasons and beat NU, sure KU, KSU started having some better seasons towards the end of Ozzys reign, but by an large, it was a 2 pony race every year, even when OU fell off, it was Cu taking its place.

 

Big 12 had better talent going forward from 1996 and into the 2000's. Now with the Big 10, even though I think the style of play is dead in the water, top to bottom, pretty much average football teams with no one being great, and no one being poor. West Div talking. The issue with looking back is, the competitiion level. The level of competition now is far better overall than ever in teh BIg 8 for 23 of 25 years Ozzy coached. Since I read that we have talent its just coaching blah, blah, blah, blah, its got to be teams are better today than 30 years ago.

[74Hunter]

 

Hip, hip, hooray.....we sqeaked out a win against a bad team, and now we may just hit .500, for the year.

Wow, your life must suck. A 23 point win is not squeaking out a win. Minnesota is not a bad team. Reading your posts I almost think you would be happier if they would have lost.

The way you talk you stopped watching college football in 1997. There are a lot of solid decent football teams in college that if you don't show up to play you will lose to.

You just sound so whiny it is pathetic.

Lol. I had a very nice day yesterday. A little short, but nice.

 

If you think that there still aren't issues with this program and everything is now fixed, then that's on you.

[MichiganDad3]

I think Langsdorf called a damn good game! I thought the playcalling was an A-! Defensively, I have no idea why our cb's play 8 yards off, it makes me wonder if they don't trust our corners in press man to man coverage.

I agree with the exception of the mid 4th quarter. Langs went into play not to lose mode, and had a couple quick possessions that almost let Minny back into the game.

[MichiganDad3]

Minnesota is no powerhouse but it was VERY important to put them in their place and end their streak against us. We dominated them with a MASH unit on D too. Nothing to take for granted. Great win because we had to have it.

It is unacceptable to let Minny get a 3 game winning streak against us. They were already talking trash; making us sound like an aging movie star who lost her looks but didn't know it. Now I'm not saying it isn't true, but Minny is not allowed to point it out

[MichiganDad3]

 

I was good with the play calling except for that series in the 4th quarter that everyone is mentioning. That one about gave me an aneurysm...................one eye shut like, "really, this isn't happening right?!"

Yeah, I could see the first down play. Just had a good run and then try to catch them off guard with the deep ball. But on the 2nd and 3rd down plays, I was like really?

 

The deep ball is my complaint. Why not catch them off guard with a 15 yard route? MR loves the 50 yard pass attempt.

[RADAR]

 

 

Hip, hip, hooray.....we sqeaked out a win against a bad team, and now we may just hit .500, for the year.

Wow, your life must suck. A 23 point win is not squeaking out a win. Minnesota is not a bad team. Reading your posts I almost think you would be happier if they would have lost.

The way you talk you stopped watching college football in 1997. There are a lot of solid decent football teams in college that if you don't show up to play you will lose to.

You just sound so whiny it is pathetic.

Lol. I had a very nice day yesterday. A little short, but nice.

 

If you think that there still aren't issues with this program and everything is now fixed, then that's on you.

 

Every program has issues, just ask Ohio St. or Michigan or Oregon ect.. so what is your point?

[jsneb83]

 

 

I was good with the play calling except for that series in the 4th quarter that everyone is mentioning. That one about gave me an aneurysm...................one eye shut like, "really, this isn't happening right?!"

Yeah, I could see the first down play. Just had a good run and then try to catch them off guard with the deep ball. But on the 2nd and 3rd down plays, I was like really?

 

The deep ball is my complaint. Why not catch them off guard with a 15 yard route? MR loves the 50 yard pass attempt.

 

Safeties creep up into the box to stop the run, meaning one-on-one on the outside. You're going for the jugular on that play and squash any hope they had at a comeback.

[MichiganDad3]

 

 

 

I was good with the play calling except for that series in the 4th quarter that everyone is mentioning. That one about gave me an aneurysm...................one eye shut like, "really, this isn't happening right?!"

Yeah, I could see the first down play. Just had a good run and then try to catch them off guard with the deep ball. But on the 2nd and 3rd down plays, I was like really?

 

The deep ball is my complaint. Why not catch them off guard with a 15 yard route? MR loves the 50 yard pass attempt.

 

Safeties creep up into the box to stop the run, meaning one-on-one on the outside. You're going for the jugular on that play and squash any hope they had at a comeback.

 

I understand, but MR always chooses to go deep. The deep ball is a poor percentage play. Get a first down, and burn some clock every once in a while. I need to look at some stats, but it wouldn't surprise me if Nebraska leads the nation is pass attempts longer than 30 yards.

[Kernal]

 

 

I was good with the play calling except for that series in the 4th quarter that everyone is mentioning. That one about gave me an aneurysm...................one eye shut like, "really, this isn't happening right?!"

Yeah, I could see the first down play. Just had a good run and then try to catch them off guard with the deep ball. But on the 2nd and 3rd down plays, I was like really?

 

The deep ball is my complaint. Why not catch them off guard with a 15 yard route? MR loves the 50 yard pass attempt.

 

 

How many of the deep passes were:

• called by Riley?
• versus, called by Langsdorf?
• versus, reads/decisions by Armstrong?

You seem pretty sure they were called and "loved" by Riley, but do you really know that?

[MichiganDad3]

 

 

 

I was good with the play calling except for that series in the 4th quarter that everyone is mentioning. That one about gave me an aneurysm...................one eye shut like, "really, this isn't happening right?!"

Yeah, I could see the first down play. Just had a good run and then try to catch them off guard with the deep ball. But on the 2nd and 3rd down plays, I was like really?

 

The deep ball is my complaint. Why not catch them off guard with a 15 yard route? MR loves the 50 yard pass attempt.

 

 

How many of the deep passes were:

• called by Riley?
• versus, called by Langsdorf?
• versus, reads/decisions by Armstrong?

You seem pretty sure they were called and "loved" by Riley, but do you really know that?

 

I don't know if they were called by Riley or Langs, and I suspect TA likes to wing it deep. I mentioned MR because in more than one press conference he has stated how he likes to go deep often.

[Count 'Bility]

 

 

 

I was good with the play calling except for that series in the 4th quarter that everyone is mentioning. That one about gave me an aneurysm...................one eye shut like, "really, this isn't happening right?!"

 

Yeah, I could see the first down play. Just had a good run and then try to catch them off guard with the deep ball. But on the 2nd and 3rd down plays, I was like really?

The deep ball is my complaint. Why not catch them off guard with a 15 yard route? MR loves the 50 yard pass attempt.

How many of the deep passes were:

• called by Riley?
• versus, called by Langsdorf?
• versus, reads/decisions by Armstrong?

You seem pretty sure they were called and "loved" by Riley, but do you really know that?

thats because ppl who dont know football think that on a pass play the coaches call the play, set the routes, change the protections, make the presnap reads, post snap reads, option the routes based on leverage and rotation, AND make the throws to particular receiver. All the qb has to do is stand there and take the credit when its a great play.