McKewon: Huskers’ problems run deep, and aren’t necessarily new

[alwayshusking]

http://www.omaha.com/huskers/mckewon-huskers-problems-run-deep-and-aren-t-necessarily-new/article_01e30445-9003-5f64-b402-55c9103d412d.html

 

Some good stuff from Sam imo. Good layout of where we are and what kind of football we've played in recent years under Bo and now Riley. Both critical and forgiving.

 

 

Since Nebraska entered the Big Ten, it has played 37 league games. In those games, Nebraska outscored league foes 28.5-26.1 per game.

Though it’s a small sample size, Nebraska has technically “outscored” its four league foes 27.5-23 — the 23-point win at Minnesota is the reason.

 

In other words: 2015 Nebraska is more or less the same team you’ve been watching for four years — rather similar to the 2012 bunch, in some ways — minus the heroics.

 

[chamrocck]

Good article. Definitely presented some new points I had not seen presented in this manner before. I think we have all seen and know what Riley wants to do. Either get it done with our personnel or fill gaps with stellar recruiting. There are some juco defenders we are recruiting who could potentially be a big help.

[ndobney]

http://www.omaha.com/huskers/mckewon-huskers-problems-run-deep-and-aren-t-necessarily-new/article_01e30445-9003-5f64-b402-55c9103d412d.html

 

Some good stuff from Sam imo. Good layout of where we are and what kind of football we've played in recent years under Bo and now Riley. Both critical and forgiving.

 

 

Since Nebraska entered the Big Ten, it has played 37 league games. In those games, Nebraska outscored league foes 28.5-26.1 per game.

Though it’s a small sample size, Nebraska has technically “outscored” its four league foes 27.5-23 — the 23-point win at Minnesota is the reason.

 

In other words: 2015 Nebraska is more or less the same team you’ve been watching for four years — rather similar to the 2012 bunch, in some ways — minus the heroics.

 

This all points to its just time to clean house.

[Red Five]

Good article that touches on the myriad of problems Nebraska has this year - offense, defense, special teams, disciple, physicality, conditioning, and the one playmaker to change the game.

 

The below sums it up well. Overall, we are performing at about the same as the past 4 years. But we are losing instead of winning.

 

Riley hasn’t changed the performance profile much, has he?

Not yet. And he was hired to do that. Even if I argue it hasn’t really changed at all, it certainly hasn’t changed for the better, and that’s Riley’s job. But the underlying statistical profile suggests Riley hasn’t moved the needle — and he’s losing games while not moving the needle.

 

 

And as for inheriting Pelini's problems, I like the last paragraph:

 

Nebraska football has been in scramble mode for years, making its way through the Big Ten on a credit card. The bill is due. The 2015 team is, in part, paying for it. Riley didn’t rack up all the debt, but, it’s fair to ask: When does he start to chip away at it?

 

[Red Five]

And this is just how far behind Wisconsin we are:

 

In those games, Nebraska outscored league foes 28.5-26.1 per game. Its per game turnover margin is minus-.78. In those same 33 games, Nebraska’s offense averaged 5.4 yards per play and gave up 5.11 yards per play. In a hypothetical game of 70 plays for each team, that’s 20.3 total yards.

 

The Badgers outscored league foes by an average of 36.3-19.8 and had a plus-.51 per game turnover margin. They gained 6.62 yards per play, and gave up 4.84 per play. That’s 16.5 points per game and, over a 70-play game, 124.6 yards.

 

Wisconsin, in other words, was 14.1 points, 1.29 takeaways and, over 70 plays, 104.3 yards per game better than Nebraska in four years of Big Ten play. That’s statistically significant.

 

It explains why Wisconsin has humiliated the Huskers in their three games played away from Memorial Stadium.

 

 

[Red Five]

Bad 4th quarters:

 

In four Big Ten games, the Huskers experienced giant fourth-quarter swoons, giving up an average of 156.25 yards and 12 points to Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota and Northwestern. The Huskers scored an average of 8.25 points and gained an average of 78 yards in those same quarters.

 

Nebraska is not fresher or stronger when it matters. Even Saturday, the Huskers’ defense looked slow and overworked despite facing 56 plays.

 

 

[Red Five]

I could keep going, but just read the whole article...

[lo country]

I'll sum it up. Fire Mike Riley. Move on with a purpose and plan to restore NU to the greats of football instead of a bottom feeder.

 

Great read.

[ColoradoHusk]

I'll sum it up. Fire Mike Riley. Move on with a purpose and plan to restore NU to the greats of football instead of a bottom feeder.

 

Great read.

That's not what McKewon is saying. McKewon has been in Riley's corner and has said that Riley's approach (build trust through remaining positive) takes a long-term investment approach. The only issue is that Riley and his staff are making the hole deeper for themselves. To me, Riley is in over his head and he hasn't ever had to been in a place where wins and losses mean so much.

[lo country]

 

I'll sum it up. Fire Mike Riley. Move on with a purpose and plan to restore NU to the greats of football instead of a bottom feeder.

 

Great read.

That's not what McKewon is saying. McKewon has been in Riley's corner and has said that Riley's approach (build trust through remaining positive) takes a long-term investment approach. The only issue is that Riley and his staff are making the hole deeper for themselves. To me, Riley is in over his head and he hasn't ever had to been in a place where wins and losses mean so much.

 

The bolded was more my opinion. Not a fan of the hire and even less after 8 games. Just don't see anything is his resume to make me say "this guy gets or it" or "with his guys he'll be a winner". He had his guys for 13 years and was ranked 4 times. Never higher than 20.......... As the article said, per metrics the needle hasn't moved.

 

Not even sure if he was hired to be a long term fix or stop gap as the anti Bo. If he does get more time some of his staff needs to get sent packing....

[ColoradoHusk]

 

 

I'll sum it up. Fire Mike Riley. Move on with a purpose and plan to restore NU to the greats of football instead of a bottom feeder.

 

Great read.

That's not what McKewon is saying. McKewon has been in Riley's corner and has said that Riley's approach (build trust through remaining positive) takes a long-term investment approach. The only issue is that Riley and his staff are making the hole deeper for themselves. To me, Riley is in over his head and he hasn't ever had to been in a place where wins and losses mean so much.

 

The bolded was more my opinion. Not a fan of the hire and even less after 8 games. Just don't see anything is his resume to make me say "this guy gets or it" or "with his guys he'll be a winner". He had his guys for 13 years and was ranked 4 times. Never higher than 20.......... As the article said, per metrics the needle hasn't moved.

 

Not even sure if he was hired to be a long term fix or stop gap as the anti Bo. If he does get more time some of his staff needs to get sent packing....

 

I got ya. I am ready for Riley to leave, too. I understand the team wasn't in great shape with Bo, but Riley and his cronies just don't have what it takes. I think it's fair to have this opinion after 8 games. I am sure Riley will get at least 2 more years to prove himself. I have serious doubts if he will ever fire his best buddy, Banker, or even make Banker change at what they do. Riley played lip-service to using more QB run game and more "read-option" style offense, but he and Langsdorf have just sprinkled those plays into their normal offense. They will never commit to those types of plays, because they don't know how to coach those plays and they aren't comfortable with those plays. They are always going to go back to the West Coast Offense plays that have been a staple in their offense for 20 years.

[Jason Sitoke]

 

I'll sum it up. Fire Mike Riley. Move on with a purpose and plan to restore NU to the greats of football instead of a bottom feeder.

 

Great read.

That's not what McKewon is saying. McKewon has been in Riley's corner and has said that Riley's approach (build trust through remaining positive) takes a long-term investment approach. The only issue is that Riley and his staff are making the hole deeper for themselves. To me, Riley is in over his head and he hasn't ever had to been in a place where wins and losses mean so much.

 

 

It is certainly a big picture article, and he is not calling for Riley to be fired...but he does say this, with which I agree..

 

 

It’s still Mark Banker’s defense, no question. It’s so glaring you almost want to be clever and pretend it’s something else. It’s the No. 1 thing Riley has to examine in the offseason.

Like most of you, the Banker hire was a huge let down and a red flag for me. Riley, more than anyone else, knows Banker and what to expect from his defenses...and he brought him here. We should be looking for a new DC at a minimum at year's end, but Riley won't be doing that.

 

Riley is who is because of decisions like that. He presumably had the option to open up the checkbook and attract some innovative coordinators. Maybe the clash of personalities would be a challenge, but getting the talented minds in a room together should make everyone better. I mean, the mantra on Riley is how positive and easy to work with he is, so he's a perfect candidate to lead a room full of coaching egos to relevancy. Instead....he hires the guys he's 'comfortable' with. I wonder if, when he handed out assistant jobs to his friends , he thought about how that comfort level might change when he loses more than he wins in Lincoln....which is not Corvallis in terms of College Football landscape.

 

Throw in Langsdorf being allowed to flat out fail on the job as he learns, Cavanaugh trotting out the same 5 guys over and over to the tune of 2.2 yards a carry, and Stewart's dead last pass defense contribution......I mean...if you're a CEO of a company and these are the guys you've hand picked to run the operation...how safe can you, SHOULD YOU feel in your position?

 

I haven't been one to call for Riley's job, and until I wrote this post, I thought I was willing to give him some time...but the early returns are so discouraging. I don't want him fired, I guess. Not yet. I suppose I'm just reserved to watching this slow moving rain cloud settle over the team for a couple years, minimum. And then starting over again.

[lo country]

 

 

I'll sum it up. Fire Mike Riley. Move on with a purpose and plan to restore NU to the greats of football instead of a bottom feeder.

 

Great read.

That's not what McKewon is saying. McKewon has been in Riley's corner and has said that Riley's approach (build trust through remaining positive) takes a long-term investment approach. The only issue is that Riley and his staff are making the hole deeper for themselves. To me, Riley is in over his head and he hasn't ever had to been in a place where wins and losses mean so much.

 

 

It is certainly a big picture article, and he is not calling for Riley to be fired...but he does say this, with which I agree..

 

 

It’s still Mark Banker’s defense, no question. It’s so glaring you almost want to be clever and pretend it’s something else. It’s the No. 1 thing Riley has to examine in the offseason.

Like most of you, the Banker hire was a huge let down and a red flag for me. Riley, more than anyone else, knows Banker and what to expect from his defenses...and he brought him here. We should be looking for a new DC at a minimum at year's end, but Riley won't be doing that.

 

Riley is who is because of decisions like that. He presumably had the option to open up the checkbook and attract some innovative coordinators. Maybe the clash of personalities would be a challenge, but getting the talented minds in a room together should make everyone better. I mean, the mantra on Riley is how positive and easy to work with he is, so he's a perfect candidate to lead a room full of coaching egos to relevancy. Instead....he hires the guys he's 'comfortable' with. I wonder if, when he handed out assistant jobs to his friends , he thought about how that comfort level might change when he loses more than he wins in Lincoln....which is not Corvallis in terms of College Football landscape.

 

Throw in Langsdorf being allowed to flat out fail on the job as he learns, Cavanaugh trotting out the same 5 guys over and over to the tune of 2.2 yards a carry, and Stewart's dead last pass defense contribution......I mean...if you're a CEO of a company and these are the guys you've hand picked to run the operation...how safe can you, SHOULD YOU feel in your position?

 

I haven't been one to call for Riley's job, and until I wrote this post, I thought I was willing to give him some time...but the early returns are so discouraging. I don't want him fired, I guess. Not yet. I suppose I'm just reserved to watching this slow moving rain cloud settle over the team for a couple years, minimum. And then starting over again.

 

It initially sounds crazy to call for a guys head 8 games in. Then when you think he has a lengthy resume to review and you see what you have written above, it seems a lot more logical. And really worse than it appears... IMO.

[mel4red]

Problem is ........ we could hire Urban Meyer or Nick Saban and still not get anything more out of this group of players. They're lost and apathetic to the cause.

[ColoradoHusk]

 

 

 

I'll sum it up. Fire Mike Riley. Move on with a purpose and plan to restore NU to the greats of football instead of a bottom feeder.

 

Great read.

That's not what McKewon is saying. McKewon has been in Riley's corner and has said that Riley's approach (build trust through remaining positive) takes a long-term investment approach. The only issue is that Riley and his staff are making the hole deeper for themselves. To me, Riley is in over his head and he hasn't ever had to been in a place where wins and losses mean so much.

 

 

It is certainly a big picture article, and he is not calling for Riley to be fired...but he does say this, with which I agree..

 

 

It’s still Mark Banker’s defense, no question. It’s so glaring you almost want to be clever and pretend it’s something else. It’s the No. 1 thing Riley has to examine in the offseason.

Like most of you, the Banker hire was a huge let down and a red flag for me. Riley, more than anyone else, knows Banker and what to expect from his defenses...and he brought him here. We should be looking for a new DC at a minimum at year's end, but Riley won't be doing that.

 

Riley is who is because of decisions like that. He presumably had the option to open up the checkbook and attract some innovative coordinators. Maybe the clash of personalities would be a challenge, but getting the talented minds in a room together should make everyone better. I mean, the mantra on Riley is how positive and easy to work with he is, so he's a perfect candidate to lead a room full of coaching egos to relevancy. Instead....he hires the guys he's 'comfortable' with. I wonder if, when he handed out assistant jobs to his friends , he thought about how that comfort level might change when he loses more than he wins in Lincoln....which is not Corvallis in terms of College Football landscape.

 

Throw in Langsdorf being allowed to flat out fail on the job as he learns, Cavanaugh trotting out the same 5 guys over and over to the tune of 2.2 yards a carry, and Stewart's dead last pass defense contribution......I mean...if you're a CEO of a company and these are the guys you've hand picked to run the operation...how safe can you, SHOULD YOU feel in your position?

 

I haven't been one to call for Riley's job, and until I wrote this post, I thought I was willing to give him some time...but the early returns are so discouraging. I don't want him fired, I guess. Not yet. I suppose I'm just reserved to watching this slow moving rain cloud settle over the team for a couple years, minimum. And then starting over again.

 

It initially sounds crazy to call for a guys head 8 games in. Then when you think he has a lengthy resume to review and you see what you have written above, it seems a lot more logical. And really worse than it appears... IMO.

 

Riley and his staff are the coaches who they are. They aren't going to change their philosophies or strategies. They were average coaches at Oregon State, and their record reflects that. Yes, Oregon State is a historically bad Power 5 conference program, but all that means is that the fans and alumni are more willing to accept "averageness". Being average won't cut it at NU, and this year they have taken the fine line of being average to downright bad. If NU wins half of the close games, they are still an average team.