Tradition vs Future Winning

[Scratchtown]

I'm not referencing trading games or championships for winning now, I'm saying, would you be willing to give up the Traditions of the tunnel walk, uniforms, blackshirts, and stuff like that to win championships now?

 

I'm not saying the traditions have to be taken away, but I'm to the point that if we wanted to hire a guy, let him do his thing, get rid of whatever he wants to get rid of and take us to the promised land. Would you be willing to let that stuff go if it meant being on Alabama's or Ohio State's level?

[ColoradoHusk]

I would trade it in a second. I just want to see winning football.

[VA Husker Fan]

How about letting go of the notion/tradition that we must run the ball?

[Scratchtown]

How about letting go of the notion/tradition that we must run the ball?

Meh, thats not necessarily a tradition as much as it is a necessity. Especially in the midwest. You have to be able to run the football, just like you have to be able to throw the football.

 

When I say that, it doesn't mean by the percentages. It means by effectiveness.

[VA Husker Fan]

What I'm saying is that if you're going to let a guy come in and do his own things, it's got to be everything, including put in his own style of offense, whatever it is.

[Dansker]

 

How about letting go of the notion/tradition that we must run the ball?

Meh, thats not necessarily a tradition as much as it is a necessity. Especially in the midwest. You have to be able to run the football, just like you have to be able to throw the football.

 

When I say that, it doesn't mean by the percentages. It means by effectiveness.

 

 

Yep, just like Houston's offense. Power spread running plays then bang, play action pass for 20+ yards. Very effective. I miss sucking in a defense after jamming the football down their throats and then gutting them for a huge gain via the play action.

[Scratchtown]

What I'm saying is that if you're going to let a guy come in and do his own things, it's got to be everything, including put in his own style of offense, whatever it is.

Ya, I understand. But that coach better be competent enough to know that you have to be effective at both to win championships. Rather than just doing one over the other because you don't believe in one side. That's recipe for disaster.

[Nebhawk]

Sure winning is important. However, Meyer didn't destroy tradition to win at OSU, neither did Saban at Alabama. They embraced it. This is why in a big part they have been successful, along with recruiting top 5.

[Nebhawk]

Running the ball in the midwest theory. Sure teams still run the ball. Thats all they can do. Look at Wisky, Iowa, and Michigan. They have to run, but if you stack the box, and stop the run, they are going to lose. This is why you have games like Wisky/Iowa, 10-6 ball game that no one could pass the ball. Balanced attack is the way football is going. Big 10 is just still 20 years behind.

 

Sure Ohio St won the title last year, but that was a balanced attack of passing and rushing.

 

Fundamentals of football still require to run the ball to soften the defense. That will never go away, but recruiting, and getting players to midwest schools requires an open mind on offense.

 

Move forward with the game. We fired two 9 win coaches in the last 12 years that recruiting runners for the running game and were getting lit up either by the pass or rush.

[JJ Husker]

I guess I don't see what one has to do with the other. Seems like a silly question. How exactly do we trade he blackshirt tradition or tunnel walk tradition for wins now?

 

If the real question is, do we give a new coach full autonomy, with the expectation he will gut our traditions, then no thanks. Pedersen and Callahan already tried that approach and we see what good that did the program. We need to go the other direction. Make sure the new coach understands he will run the ball, he will control the line of scrimmage, and he will put a defense with a nasty disposition on the field. I still would rather see Nebraska style football than whatever the hell it is we've been doing since 2001. I can handle a few losses if we're playing respectable, hard-nosed football. This current pansy a$$ throw first, run like a girl second, offense is for the birds. It wouldn't even matter to me if it were working, I don't want to watch it.

 

Edit- And I apologize to the girls out there for the reference. There are likely plenty of girls that would run and block harder than this current team does it. My point is, I don't like the Riley/Langsdorf offense. At. All.

[ADS]

How about we not give any of the things up that mark us who we are and just hire a coach who knows what the f#*k he's doing.

[Vitalis Jackson]

I might also add that traditions don't win football games. Talent, coaching, and a tad bit of luck DOES win football games. We, as fans, are fortunate enough to witness the process.

[Scratchtown]

My question was shaped with the idea that if a new guy came in and wanted to get rid of those things but he was a winner...would you put up with it? Not that hard to understand.

[secretasianman]

I prefer a staff that embraces tradition and even adds to it. Remember Callahan and the team gathering to sing the fight song in front of the band ?

 

Wins cure all, so I think fans would be tolerant of a coach that did in spite of traditions .

[Landlord]

My question was shaped with the idea that if a new guy came in and wanted to get rid of those things but he was a winner...would you put up with it? Not that hard to understand.

 

 

 

Everybody is saying "Yes screw it all as long as we win" but I don't believe them for a second.

 

This hypothetical coach that would ditch everything isn't going to go undefeated and win a conference and national championship each year. And the second he doesn't, people will start bitching about how forsaking tradition is hurting the culture and mindset of the program.