Falling Standards

[GBRedneck]

[NUance]

I was pleased with out win over the Gophers. But I don't think that means I've settled for mediocrity. I just realize that we might take a step backward before moving up to the next level. That's what happens when you change coaching staffs.

[Joe_5700]

I was pleased with out win over the Gophers. But I don't think that means I've settled for mediocrity. I just realize that we might take a step backward before moving up to the next level. That's what happens when you change coaching staffs.

Even coaching staffs that were fired for their lack of performance? Even the last guy improved things greatly in his first season.

[84HuskerLaw]

College football is different these days. Even under Callahan, NU could count on a win against Baylor. Lately, Baylor is a legitimate top-5 team year in and year out. Hell, Texas(!) is the worst Power 5 team in the state, behind Baylor, TCU, A&M, and Tech. And it's been that way for the last five years. Simply put, there is a lot more parity in college football these days.

 

Minnesota is a legitimate team that many picked to win the division. They have a solid coach and some good players. It shouldn't and won't define the season, but it's a nice K State-level win for a belleaguered team looking to find its identity.

Sorry but I can't agree that Minnesota is "K State level". This year, Minnesota is more like Iowa State or Okie State or Colorado level in my view. We are playing more in the K State level when we play well. We are playing in the Iowa State level when we don't play well. That is the bottom line. What has so many upset is the realization of these facts, whether they want to admit them or not. Nebraska is NOT playing at a "Nebraska" level anymore. We have not for about 5 years or so. There is a reason Bo was becoming so irreverent and obnoxious. He knew he was not getting it done whether the record was 9-4 or 4-9. We have been slipping downward slowly and fairly steadily for 15 years. The concern is whether we have bottomed out yet or not! I believe we actually HAVE bottomed and, despite our ugly record so far, are actually beginning a climb back up. We have fallen a long way and have a long climb back. But we will get there. Can Mike Riley bring us back to the top? I don't think so as his age is against him. If he stays healthy, he can get us back to a top 20 level program (we are about number 40 now in my opinion). From there, the next coach will have to take over and restore the order. Perhaps one of Riley's assistants as hopefully we won't have to survive yet another 'transition' as that takes a couple seasons minimum.

[NUance]

 

I was pleased with out win over the Gophers. But I don't think that means I've settled for mediocrity. I just realize that we might take a step backward before moving up to the next level. That's what happens when you change coaching staffs.

Even coaching staffs that were fired for their lack of performance? Even the last guy improved things greatly in his first season.

 

 

It depends on whether you think Callahan was a better recruiter than Bo. Did Callahan leave Bo with more depth than Bo left for Riley? And what about the schedule? Is this year's schedule easier, harder, or the same as the 2008 schedule? Are we comparing apples to apples?

[Joe_5700]

 

 

I was pleased with out win over the Gophers. But I don't think that means I've settled for mediocrity. I just realize that we might take a step backward before moving up to the next level. That's what happens when you change coaching staffs.

Even coaching staffs that were fired for their lack of performance? Even the last guy improved things greatly in his first season.

 

 

It depends on whether you think Callahan was a better recruiter than Bo. Did Callahan leave Bo with more depth than Bo left for Riley? And what about the schedule? Is this year's schedule easier, harder, or the same as the 2008 schedule? Are we comparing apples to apples?

 

It will never be apples to apples for sure. My point was the last guy did right the ship in his first year. I think it had much more to do with the coaching staff than the overall talent. We all know that there were not many strides after that for the next 6 years. My point was we should not have taken as many steps backward as we have especially in our secondary play with the coaching experience and pedigree we currently have. Add in some coaching gaffes and we are, where we are. What impresses me the most is how the team has kept fighting through the injuries and other adversities. Even with the rough start this team can still make a bowl which is better than the guy before the last guy.

[FrustratedHuskerFan]

Hey...I've made my fair share of ridiculous rants. But hopefully you see how you contradicted yourself. You say we used to crush Minnesota (even though we rode a 2 game losing streak against them), and, you complain about fans being content with beating them now.

 

Why wouldn't fans be relieved/excited/happy that we beat a team that has had our number recently? And even though we didn't crush them, you can't argue against the majority of the game flow favoring Nebraska.

 

Look...I actually like Riley, but if we want to get serious, he needs a better Defensive staff around him. I think he owes it to himself to try it. And on offense, Personally, I believe Langsdorf as a QB coach is still valuable.

 

Riley is not my preferred option, but if this is what we have, then I'd rather we look for ways to improve it.

 

Honestly the only game that really ticked me off was Miami, bc for three quarters it seemed noone cared. I hope whatever internal factor caused the lack of effort for those three quarters has been taken care of.

[Guy Chamberlin]

 

 

But hey, if you're fine with Nebraska at .500 and striving for a toilet bowl, then hip hip hooray for you then, I suppose?

 

 

I have never seen anyone utter any sentiment close to this.

 

Have standards and expectations dropped at Nebraska? Absolutely. Is it different at Nebraska than any of a dozen college football legacy programs? Nope.

 

Do we start looking for moral victories and signs of improvement?

 

Of course we do. Why wouldn't we?

 

Do we not celebrate a current victory because a past victory was greater?

 

What's the point of that?

 

Do the people celebrating seem deluded to you, or merely too happy for your tastes?

 

Can you honestly look at Nebraska's four losses and deduce that had the offense just "pounded the rock" as message board enthusiasts demanded, the team might have won?

 

(hint: Riley and Langsdorf didn't "discover" the running game this week. It just worked a bit better)

 

Do you think that an athletic department that has invested heavily one of the biggest stadiums and best football facilities in the country from one of the smallest population bases will be content with mediocrity, too, even if it's strictly for business reasons?

 

Do you believe that time moves forward and things can change, or simply in entropy and doom?

[It'sNotAFakeID]

 

I find myself curious as to the outcome of the games, but I'll be honest, I'm not real interested in watching them. It's not entertaining to me, which is what football is supposed to be. Sad to say it but until they run the ball as a major focus and play an attacking style of defense, I'll probly not cancel more entertaining plans to tune in. Still love the Cornhuskers tho.

 

And therein lies the danger of settling for mediocrity. People start tuning out, and Nebraska football stops becoming the event that it was/is.

 

As for the assertion that people that dislike the current regime are pining for '94, '95, or '97...that's a hell of an unsubstantiated leap, to say the least. Most of us realize that the 90s will likely never happen again, and the only reason they happened for 'Bama is because they cheated their way there--otherwise, it still wouldn't be replicated.

 

That doesn't mean we should relax our standards for this program--this program should compete, get division championships regularly (or be Top 2/3, depending), and the occasional conference title. This team has the kids and talent to have won the West--our coaching staff bungled it, bottom line, and that should give pause to folks that are paying attention, as it does not mean there's a rosy upside to this staff in year 2, 3, or beyond. It means we hired a .500 staff, and we're getting .500 results.

 

But hey, if you're fine with Nebraska at .500 and striving for a toilet bowl, then hip hip hooray for you then, I suppose?

 

 

I don't know how you are able to say this with 100% confidence. There is literally zero data backing your claim that "a coach's first seven games at a program will tell you how well he will do in year 2, year 3, and beyond." Bo was 4-3 (just one game better against a similar schedule) after his first 7 games, and we know he never did worse than 9-4.

 

But, I digress; no two coaching situations are the same, because there are so many factors that play a role. You have to consider the talent left by the previous coaching staff, the depth left by the previous coaching staff, the number of injuries/missed games, the resources available to the coach at other schools, the relative talent level of school A in conference A versus school B in conference B, the strength of opponents, adjustment to new schemes, and the list can go on and on.

 

Not to mention, the probability of us being 3-4 right now is incredibly, incredibly low, so we're really better than our record indicates. Yes, we played a role in creating our own bad luck, but two teams play the game; Mangum could've misfired, Tommy could've thrown the football a little further, or the Miami CB could've been playing a little deeper, Alex Lewis could have not made a boneheaded decision, Ozigbo could've caught the ball, or Tommy could've kept the ball, the Illinois player could've dropped the long pass and the TD pass, Gaglionone could've missed the FG...

 

It just amazes me how ignorant people are with regards to the number of factors that play a role in a team's record (factors that can't be controlled by the current coaching staff). This lowering standards is a made-up storyline used by fans who just want to be mad at something. Nobody has lowered their standards, some just understand that it's a process and that there isn't just a single path that leads to where we want to be.

[dvdcrr]

Some times a group of coaches has the other teams number for some reason. With regard to MN the coaching change was a good one for us. Also I like our chances against Iowa.

[alwayshusking]

It's a transition year, people will expect more next year and in the years that follow. I don't get a sense that Nebraska fans have dropped their standards overall.

[BigRedBuster]

 

 

 

But hey, if you're fine with Nebraska at .500 and striving for a toilet bowl, then hip hip hooray for you then, I suppose?

 

Please point out ANYONE....just one would be fine but you can list more if you so desire....who is fine with Nebraska being at .500 and striving for a toilet bowl?

[Bowfin]

but we are 45 seconds from being 6-1 and 12 points away from being undefeated

 

LOL My bank statement says I'm only a handful of zeros away from being a millionaire.

[beorach]

Thinking we'd be back to what we used to expect, which varies greatly with the age of the fan, by this time in the Riley era is folly. Our relative talent ceiling is lower and the talent on hand isn't a match for the schemes the new coaches want to install. You'd think it was reasonable to think that Bo was holding our kids back the way people expected Nebraska to beat Wisconsin as soon as a new staff arrived (even one showing a lack of comfort with respect to game management issues).

[huskerfan333157]

 

 

 

 

 

 

I was pleased with out win over the Gophers. But I don't think that means I've settled for mediocrity. I just realize that we might take a step backward before moving up to the next level. That's what happens when you change coaching staffs.

Even coaching staffs that were fired for their lack of performance? Even the last guy improved things greatly in his first season.

It depends on whether you think Callahan was a better recruiter than Bo. Did Callahan leave Bo with more depth than Bo left for Riley? And what about the schedule? Is this year's schedule easier, harder, or the same as the 2008 schedule? Are we comparing apples to apples?

It will never be apples to apples for sure. My point was the last guy did right the ship in his first year. I think it had much more to do with the coaching staff than the overall talent. We all know that there were not many strides after that for the next 6 years. My point was we should not have taken as many steps backward as we have especially in our secondary play with the coaching experience and pedigree we currently have. Add in some coaching gaffes and we are, where we are. What impresses me the most is how the team has kept fighting through the injuries and other adversities. Even with the rough start this team can still make a bowl which is better than the guy before the last guy.

So you're saying bo was just as good of a recruiter as Callahan? Did you eveb see Callahans recruiting classes?