Kenny Bell on Culture Change at NU

[cm husker]

 

 

 

 

My maverick theory is that if merely ONE player had bought into Riley's system better, Nebraska's record and attitude would already be on the upswing.

 

That player is Tommy Armstrong. My understanding is that there have been many crucial plays where Tommy has gone rogue on the playcalling, and has clearly ignored all advice on proper footwork and release, believing his really strong arm will carry the day. He's a gamer, but a high-risk player on a team that needs rhythm more than risk. Going rogue on the new coaching staff might not send the best message to the team either, unless you agree we are a long bomb thrown off the back foot away from glory.

 

I thought Riley and his designated quarterback whisperer could fix him. So yeah, that's on the coaching staff. When they look at the back-up QBs they inherited, they prefer to stick with Tommy. Probably the right call. Given a Newby instead of an Abdullah, it's hard to say the solution was simply to pound the rock more.

 

But in a season where a single first down, a field goal, or an avoidable pick-six could conceivably have the same team and scheme at 8-1, isn't it possible that one of the dozens of quarterbacks in the NCAA who can complete 60% of their passes with minimal mistakes could make a huge difference?

 

Yep. This same Tommy Armstrong went 9-4 last year. Ameer Abdullah and a healthy DPE covered for some of his off-games. It's not a perfect theory. But again, it's hard to imagine that a 60% passer doesn't make the difference in some of these razor thin games.

If the receivers didn't drop any passes . . .

If the OL held their blocks just a little longer . . .

If the coaches called timeouts in crucial sutuations when needed (last play against Illinois) . . .

If my aunt had balls . . .

Not surprised you're willfully missing the point.

 

I'm saying one player -- the most important player -- could negate all the above.

 

Not counting your aunt's conflicted genitalia.

That player is also among the leaders in offense in the league and country.

 

Quit looking to scapegoat players in defense of a .500 coach doing what a .500 coach does.

 

It just looks desperate.

[Savage Husker]

 

 

 

 

 

My maverick theory is that if merely ONE player had bought into Riley's system better, Nebraska's record and attitude would already be on the upswing.

 

That player is Tommy Armstrong. My understanding is that there have been many crucial plays where Tommy has gone rogue on the playcalling, and has clearly ignored all advice on proper footwork and release, believing his really strong arm will carry the day. He's a gamer, but a high-risk player on a team that needs rhythm more than risk. Going rogue on the new coaching staff might not send the best message to the team either, unless you agree we are a long bomb thrown off the back foot away from glory.

 

I thought Riley and his designated quarterback whisperer could fix him. So yeah, that's on the coaching staff. When they look at the back-up QBs they inherited, they prefer to stick with Tommy. Probably the right call. Given a Newby instead of an Abdullah, it's hard to say the solution was simply to pound the rock more.

 

But in a season where a single first down, a field goal, or an avoidable pick-six could conceivably have the same team and scheme at 8-1, isn't it possible that one of the dozens of quarterbacks in the NCAA who can complete 60% of their passes with minimal mistakes could make a huge difference?

 

Yep. This same Tommy Armstrong went 9-4 last year. Ameer Abdullah and a healthy DPE covered for some of his off-games. It's not a perfect theory. But again, it's hard to imagine that a 60% passer doesn't make the difference in some of these razor thin games.

If the receivers didn't drop any passes . . .

If the OL held their blocks just a little longer . . .

If the coaches called timeouts in crucial sutuations when needed (last play against Illinois) . . .

If my aunt had balls . . .

Not surprised you're willfully missing the point.

 

I'm saying one player -- the most important player -- could negate all the above.

 

Not counting your aunt's conflicted genitalia.

That player is also among the leaders in offense in the league and country.

 

Quit looking to scapegoat players in defense of a .500 coach doing what a .500 coach does.

 

It just looks desperate.

So you can scapegoat a coach instead?

[Kernal]

 

Rather than militate in favor of giving Riley more time, this sentiment is exactly why I think we should move now.

 

If you believe Kenny, most of the team is still in a transition period where they haven't quite bought into Riley. If that's true, you've lost little by getting rid of a staff to whom the players have not yet bonded versus waiting a few years when the team and staff have bonded before canning Riley. This team will never miss Riley & Co. less than if he were canned now.

So what if these same guys that refuse to buy in now, also refuse to buy in to the next staff if we decide to make a move.

 

What if the 2016 Recruting class doesn't buy in to a staff that didn't recruit them.

 

Seems to me like this coaching staff has bought in. They love this program. The reached out to former coaches and players almost immediately. They've embraced the history and tradition, and they understand the challenge and the expectations.

 

If we've got people who aren't buying in and taking the challenge head on, don't want to be part of building this tradition, and don't love the program, then maybe they're the ones that need to bounce the hell on out of here.

 

Not saying I know for sure if there is those guys, or how many of them there are, but I know the coaching staff isn't "those guys".

 

 

Great post. This is why I'm still in favor of patience with Riley's staff. I would feel a lot different if they were 3-6 and calling us "hicks" or "f'ing fair-weathered fans."

[SouthLincoln Husker]

Its amazing how many new posters we have all of a sudden! When things are bad, here they come!

[Guy Chamberlin]

 

 

 

My maverick theory is that if merely ONE player had bought into Riley's system better, Nebraska's record and attitude would already be on the upswing.

 

That player is Tommy Armstrong. My understanding is that there have been many crucial plays where Tommy has gone rogue on the playcalling, and has clearly ignored all advice on proper footwork and release, believing his really strong arm will carry the day. He's a gamer, but a high-risk player on a team that needs rhythm more than risk. Going rogue on the new coaching staff might not send the best message to the team either, unless you agree we are a long bomb thrown off the back foot away from glory.

 

I thought Riley and his designated quarterback whisperer could fix him. So yeah, that's on the coaching staff. When they look at the back-up QBs they inherited, they prefer to stick with Tommy. Probably the right call. Given a Newby instead of an Abdullah, it's hard to say the solution was simply to pound the rock more.

 

But in a season where a single first down, a field goal, or an avoidable pick-six could conceivably have the same team and scheme at 8-1, isn't it possible that one of the dozens of quarterbacks in the NCAA who can complete 60% of their passes with minimal mistakes could make a huge difference?

 

Yep. This same Tommy Armstrong went 9-4 last year. Ameer Abdullah and a healthy DPE covered for some of his off-games. It's not a perfect theory. But again, it's hard to imagine that a 60% passer doesn't make the difference in some of these razor thin games.

If the receivers didn't drop any passes . . .

If the OL held their blocks just a little longer . . .

If the coaches called timeouts in crucial sutuations when needed (last play against Illinois) . . .

If my aunt had balls . . .

Not surprised you're willfully missing the point.

 

I'm saying one player -- the most important player -- could negate all the above.

 

Not counting your aunt's conflicted genitalia.

That player is also among the leaders in offense in the league and country.

 

Quit looking to scapegoat players in defense of a .500 coach doing what a .500 coach does.

 

It just looks desperate.

 

 

Didn't realize you were a fan of the volume passing game.

 

Tommy Armstrong appears to be a .500 passer, doing what a .500 passer does.

 

Is it hard for you to envision a more reliable passer making a positive difference on this team?

 

And in a season of razor thin defeats, do you deny even a slight improvement by this one player might translate to more wins?

 

Wait. You'd still be composing the same posts regardless.

 

Never mind.

[cm husker]

 

 

 

 

My maverick theory is that if merely ONE player had bought into Riley's system better, Nebraska's record and attitude would already be on the upswing.

 

That player is Tommy Armstrong. My understanding is that there have been many crucial plays where Tommy has gone rogue on the playcalling, and has clearly ignored all advice on proper footwork and release, believing his really strong arm will carry the day. He's a gamer, but a high-risk player on a team that needs rhythm more than risk. Going rogue on the new coaching staff might not send the best message to the team either, unless you agree we are a long bomb thrown off the back foot away from glory.

 

I thought Riley and his designated quarterback whisperer could fix him. So yeah, that's on the coaching staff. When they look at the back-up QBs they inherited, they prefer to stick with Tommy. Probably the right call. Given a Newby instead of an Abdullah, it's hard to say the solution was simply to pound the rock more.

 

But in a season where a single first down, a field goal, or an avoidable pick-six could conceivably have the same team and scheme at 8-1, isn't it possible that one of the dozens of quarterbacks in the NCAA who can complete 60% of their passes with minimal mistakes could make a huge difference?

 

Yep. This same Tommy Armstrong went 9-4 last year. Ameer Abdullah and a healthy DPE covered for some of his off-games. It's not a perfect theory. But again, it's hard to imagine that a 60% passer doesn't make the difference in some of these razor thin games.

If the receivers didn't drop any passes . . .

If the OL held their blocks just a little longer . . .

If the coaches called timeouts in crucial sutuations when needed (last play against Illinois) . . .

If my aunt had balls . . .

Not surprised you're willfully missing the point.

 

I'm saying one player -- the most important player -- could negate all the above.

 

Not counting your aunt's conflicted genitalia.

That player is also among the leaders in offense in the league and country.

 

Quit looking to scapegoat players in defense of a .500 coach doing what a .500 coach does.

 

It just looks desperate.

 

 

Didn't realize you were a fan of the volume passing game.

 

Tommy Armstrong appears to be a .500 passer, doing what a .500 passer does.

 

Is it hard for you to envision a more reliable passer making a positive difference on this team?

 

And in a season of razor thin defeats, do you deny even a slight improvement by this one player might translate to more wins?

 

Wait. You'd still be composing the same posts regardless.

 

Never mind.

 

 

 

It's hard for me to imagine a coaching staff that can't win with Armstrong figuring out how to win with a succession of QBs.

 

POB, I know, is the next Tom Brady. But what if they don't get another one of those guys?

[Husker Psycho]

Its amazing how many new posters we have all of a sudden! When things are bad, here they come!

 

 

I'm guessing you would be talking about me.

 

I've been a Nebraska fan for over 45 years... that's right 45 years.

 

I've been through the good-great times and the bad-disaster times... so I didn't just show up "all of a sudden".

 

And here you are... acting like an "old head". Yeah right.

[GBRedneck]

 

 

 

 

My maverick theory is that if merely ONE player had bought into Riley's system better, Nebraska's record and attitude would already be on the upswing.

 

That player is Tommy Armstrong. My understanding is that there have been many crucial plays where Tommy has gone rogue on the playcalling, and has clearly ignored all advice on proper footwork and release, believing his really strong arm will carry the day. He's a gamer, but a high-risk player on a team that needs rhythm more than risk. Going rogue on the new coaching staff might not send the best message to the team either, unless you agree we are a long bomb thrown off the back foot away from glory.

 

I thought Riley and his designated quarterback whisperer could fix him. So yeah, that's on the coaching staff. When they look at the back-up QBs they inherited, they prefer to stick with Tommy. Probably the right call. Given a Newby instead of an Abdullah, it's hard to say the solution was simply to pound the rock more.

 

But in a season where a single first down, a field goal, or an avoidable pick-six could conceivably have the same team and scheme at 8-1, isn't it possible that one of the dozens of quarterbacks in the NCAA who can complete 60% of their passes with minimal mistakes could make a huge difference?

 

Yep. This same Tommy Armstrong went 9-4 last year. Ameer Abdullah and a healthy DPE covered for some of his off-games. It's not a perfect theory. But again, it's hard to imagine that a 60% passer doesn't make the difference in some of these razor thin games.

If the receivers didn't drop any passes . . .

If the OL held their blocks just a little longer . . .

If the coaches called timeouts in crucial sutuations when needed (last play against Illinois) . . .

If my aunt had balls . . .

Not surprised you're willfully missing the point.

 

I'm saying one player -- the most important player -- could negate all the above.

 

Not counting your aunt's conflicted genitalia.

That player is also among the leaders in offense in the league and country.

 

Quit looking to scapegoat players in defense of a .500 coach doing what a .500 coach does.

 

It just looks desperate.

 

 

Didn't realize you were a fan of the volume passing game.

 

Tommy Armstrong appears to be a .500 passer, doing what a .500 passer does.

 

Is it hard for you to envision a more reliable passer making a positive difference on this team?

 

And in a season of razor thin defeats, do you deny even a slight improvement by this one player might translate to more wins?

 

Wait. You'd still be composing the same posts regardless.

 

Never mind.

 

I think there's a much better place to look for improvement of one person's performance leading to more wins. It's where the buck is supposed to stop.

[Guy Chamberlin]

 

 

 

 

 

My maverick theory is that if merely ONE player had bought into Riley's system better, Nebraska's record and attitude would already be on the upswing.

 

That player is Tommy Armstrong. My understanding is that there have been many crucial plays where Tommy has gone rogue on the playcalling, and has clearly ignored all advice on proper footwork and release, believing his really strong arm will carry the day. He's a gamer, but a high-risk player on a team that needs rhythm more than risk. Going rogue on the new coaching staff might not send the best message to the team either, unless you agree we are a long bomb thrown off the back foot away from glory.

 

I thought Riley and his designated quarterback whisperer could fix him. So yeah, that's on the coaching staff. When they look at the back-up QBs they inherited, they prefer to stick with Tommy. Probably the right call. Given a Newby instead of an Abdullah, it's hard to say the solution was simply to pound the rock more.

 

But in a season where a single first down, a field goal, or an avoidable pick-six could conceivably have the same team and scheme at 8-1, isn't it possible that one of the dozens of quarterbacks in the NCAA who can complete 60% of their passes with minimal mistakes could make a huge difference?

 

Yep. This same Tommy Armstrong went 9-4 last year. Ameer Abdullah and a healthy DPE covered for some of his off-games. It's not a perfect theory. But again, it's hard to imagine that a 60% passer doesn't make the difference in some of these razor thin games.

If the receivers didn't drop any passes . . .

If the OL held their blocks just a little longer . . .

If the coaches called timeouts in crucial sutuations when needed (last play against Illinois) . . .

If my aunt had balls . . .

Not surprised you're willfully missing the point.

 

I'm saying one player -- the most important player -- could negate all the above.

 

Not counting your aunt's conflicted genitalia.

That player is also among the leaders in offense in the league and country.

 

Quit looking to scapegoat players in defense of a .500 coach doing what a .500 coach does.

 

It just looks desperate.

 

 

Didn't realize you were a fan of the volume passing game.

 

Tommy Armstrong appears to be a .500 passer, doing what a .500 passer does.

 

Is it hard for you to envision a more reliable passer making a positive difference on this team?

 

And in a season of razor thin defeats, do you deny even a slight improvement by this one player might translate to more wins?

 

Wait. You'd still be composing the same posts regardless.

 

Never mind.

 

 

 

It's hard for me to imagine a coaching staff that can't win with Armstrong figuring out how to win with a succession of QBs.

 

POB, I know, is the next Tom Brady. But what if they don't get another one of those guys?

 

 

Really? You can't imagine it? Lots of coaching staffs passed on guys like Armstrong and Martinez as their starting QBs, because they preferred solid single threat QBs to exciting but unpredictable dual threat QBs.

 

POB doesn't need to be Tom Brady. Not even close. That's the point. Connor Cook completes 58% of his passes. That's 6% more than Armstrong. Dozens of starting quarterbacks -- and second string quarterbacks -- are more efficient than Tommy. It's hard NOT to imagine a marginally more accurate passer winning a game or two that required a single fourth quarter first down.

 

Let me take this a slightly different direction:

 

If Joe Ganz had one more year of eligibility, Bo Pelini finishes in the Top 10 in 2009 and is still Nebraska's coach today.

 

And Joe Ganz wasn't Tom Brady, either.

[desertshox]

 

 

 

 

 

My maverick theory is that if merely ONE player had bought into Riley's system better, Nebraska's record and attitude would already be on the upswing.

 

That player is Tommy Armstrong. My understanding is that there have been many crucial plays where Tommy has gone rogue on the playcalling, and has clearly ignored all advice on proper footwork and release, believing his really strong arm will carry the day. He's a gamer, but a high-risk player on a team that needs rhythm more than risk. Going rogue on the new coaching staff might not send the best message to the team either, unless you agree we are a long bomb thrown off the back foot away from glory.

 

I thought Riley and his designated quarterback whisperer could fix him. So yeah, that's on the coaching staff. When they look at the back-up QBs they inherited, they prefer to stick with Tommy. Probably the right call. Given a Newby instead of an Abdullah, it's hard to say the solution was simply to pound the rock more.

 

But in a season where a single first down, a field goal, or an avoidable pick-six could conceivably have the same team and scheme at 8-1, isn't it possible that one of the dozens of quarterbacks in the NCAA who can complete 60% of their passes with minimal mistakes could make a huge difference?

 

Yep. This same Tommy Armstrong went 9-4 last year. Ameer Abdullah and a healthy DPE covered for some of his off-games. It's not a perfect theory. But again, it's hard to imagine that a 60% passer doesn't make the difference in some of these razor thin games.

If the receivers didn't drop any passes . . .

If the OL held their blocks just a little longer . . .

If the coaches called timeouts in crucial sutuations when needed (last play against Illinois) . . .

If my aunt had balls . . .

Not surprised you're willfully missing the point.

 

I'm saying one player -- the most important player -- could negate all the above.

 

Not counting your aunt's conflicted genitalia.

That player is also among the leaders in offense in the league and country.

 

Quit looking to scapegoat players in defense of a .500 coach doing what a .500 coach does.

 

It just looks desperate.

 

 

Didn't realize you were a fan of the volume passing game.

 

Tommy Armstrong appears to be a .500 passer, doing what a .500 passer does.

 

Is it hard for you to envision a more reliable passer making a positive difference on this team?

 

And in a season of razor thin defeats, do you deny even a slight improvement by this one player might translate to more wins?

 

Wait. You'd still be composing the same posts regardless.

 

Never mind.

 

I think there's a much better place to look for improvement of one person's performance leading to more wins. It's where the buck is supposed to stop.

 

 

didnt a coach who constantly blamed his players for failures utter this?

[cm husker]

 

 

 

 

 

 

My maverick theory is that if merely ONE player had bought into Riley's system better, Nebraska's record and attitude would already be on the upswing.

 

That player is Tommy Armstrong. My understanding is that there have been many crucial plays where Tommy has gone rogue on the playcalling, and has clearly ignored all advice on proper footwork and release, believing his really strong arm will carry the day. He's a gamer, but a high-risk player on a team that needs rhythm more than risk. Going rogue on the new coaching staff might not send the best message to the team either, unless you agree we are a long bomb thrown off the back foot away from glory.

 

I thought Riley and his designated quarterback whisperer could fix him. So yeah, that's on the coaching staff. When they look at the back-up QBs they inherited, they prefer to stick with Tommy. Probably the right call. Given a Newby instead of an Abdullah, it's hard to say the solution was simply to pound the rock more.

 

But in a season where a single first down, a field goal, or an avoidable pick-six could conceivably have the same team and scheme at 8-1, isn't it possible that one of the dozens of quarterbacks in the NCAA who can complete 60% of their passes with minimal mistakes could make a huge difference?

 

Yep. This same Tommy Armstrong went 9-4 last year. Ameer Abdullah and a healthy DPE covered for some of his off-games. It's not a perfect theory. But again, it's hard to imagine that a 60% passer doesn't make the difference in some of these razor thin games.

If the receivers didn't drop any passes . . .

If the OL held their blocks just a little longer . . .

If the coaches called timeouts in crucial sutuations when needed (last play against Illinois) . . .

If my aunt had balls . . .

Not surprised you're willfully missing the point.

 

I'm saying one player -- the most important player -- could negate all the above.

 

Not counting your aunt's conflicted genitalia.

That player is also among the leaders in offense in the league and country.

 

Quit looking to scapegoat players in defense of a .500 coach doing what a .500 coach does.

 

It just looks desperate.

 

 

Didn't realize you were a fan of the volume passing game.

 

Tommy Armstrong appears to be a .500 passer, doing what a .500 passer does.

 

Is it hard for you to envision a more reliable passer making a positive difference on this team?

 

And in a season of razor thin defeats, do you deny even a slight improvement by this one player might translate to more wins?

 

Wait. You'd still be composing the same posts regardless.

 

Never mind.

 

 

 

It's hard for me to imagine a coaching staff that can't win with Armstrong figuring out how to win with a succession of QBs.

 

POB, I know, is the next Tom Brady. But what if they don't get another one of those guys?

 

 

Really? You can't imagine it? Lots of coaching staffs passed on guys like Armstrong and Martinez as their starting QBs, because they preferred solid single threat QBs to exciting but unpredictable dual threat QBs.

 

POB doesn't need to be Tom Brady. Not even close. That's the point. Connor Cook completes 58% of his passes. That's 6% more than Armstrong. Dozens of starting quarterbacks -- and second string quarterbacks -- are more efficient than Tommy. It's hard NOT to imagine a marginally more accurate passer winning a game or two that required a single fourth quarter first down.

 

Let me take this a slightly different direction:

 

If Joe Ganz had one more year of eligibility, Bo Pelini finishes in the Top 10 in 2009 and is still Nebraska's coach today.

 

And Joe Ganz wasn't Tom Brady, either.

 

 

 

Actually, it's 57.5 versus 53.5; a matter of 4 percent (not 6, as you claimed). And that's despite throwing 30 more attempts this year, including during hurricane conditions at Illinois.

 

But, boiling it down, your argument is that with a guy who might be slightly better than our QB, we are 5-4 instead of 3-6. Hopefully with wins over two teams that are among the worst coached in P5 (Illinois and Purdue).

 

Do you think that'd be cause for celebration?

[Kernal]

 

 

 

 

 

 

My maverick theory is that if merely ONE player had bought into Riley's system better, Nebraska's record and attitude would already be on the upswing.

 

That player is Tommy Armstrong. My understanding is that there have been many crucial plays where Tommy has gone rogue on the playcalling, and has clearly ignored all advice on proper footwork and release, believing his really strong arm will carry the day. He's a gamer, but a high-risk player on a team that needs rhythm more than risk. Going rogue on the new coaching staff might not send the best message to the team either, unless you agree we are a long bomb thrown off the back foot away from glory.

 

I thought Riley and his designated quarterback whisperer could fix him. So yeah, that's on the coaching staff. When they look at the back-up QBs they inherited, they prefer to stick with Tommy. Probably the right call. Given a Newby instead of an Abdullah, it's hard to say the solution was simply to pound the rock more.

 

But in a season where a single first down, a field goal, or an avoidable pick-six could conceivably have the same team and scheme at 8-1, isn't it possible that one of the dozens of quarterbacks in the NCAA who can complete 60% of their passes with minimal mistakes could make a huge difference?

 

Yep. This same Tommy Armstrong went 9-4 last year. Ameer Abdullah and a healthy DPE covered for some of his off-games. It's not a perfect theory. But again, it's hard to imagine that a 60% passer doesn't make the difference in some of these razor thin games.

If the receivers didn't drop any passes . . .

If the OL held their blocks just a little longer . . .

If the coaches called timeouts in crucial sutuations when needed (last play against Illinois) . . .

If my aunt had balls . . .

Not surprised you're willfully missing the point.

 

I'm saying one player -- the most important player -- could negate all the above.

 

Not counting your aunt's conflicted genitalia.

That player is also among the leaders in offense in the league and country.

 

Quit looking to scapegoat players in defense of a .500 coach doing what a .500 coach does.

 

It just looks desperate.

 

 

Didn't realize you were a fan of the volume passing game.

 

Tommy Armstrong appears to be a .500 passer, doing what a .500 passer does.

 

Is it hard for you to envision a more reliable passer making a positive difference on this team?

 

And in a season of razor thin defeats, do you deny even a slight improvement by this one player might translate to more wins?

 

Wait. You'd still be composing the same posts regardless.

 

Never mind.

 

I think there's a much better place to look for improvement of one person's performance leading to more wins. It's where the buck is supposed to stop.

 

 

didnt a coach who constantly blamed his players for failures utter this?

 

 

Constantly screaming at players, officials, media, fans, administrators, assistants, and opposing coaches isn't blaming them as long as you add "I point the thumb" once in a while.

[Guy Chamberlin]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

My maverick theory is that if merely ONE player had bought into Riley's system better, Nebraska's record and attitude would already be on the upswing.

 

That player is Tommy Armstrong. My understanding is that there have been many crucial plays where Tommy has gone rogue on the playcalling, and has clearly ignored all advice on proper footwork and release, believing his really strong arm will carry the day. He's a gamer, but a high-risk player on a team that needs rhythm more than risk. Going rogue on the new coaching staff might not send the best message to the team either, unless you agree we are a long bomb thrown off the back foot away from glory.

 

I thought Riley and his designated quarterback whisperer could fix him. So yeah, that's on the coaching staff. When they look at the back-up QBs they inherited, they prefer to stick with Tommy. Probably the right call. Given a Newby instead of an Abdullah, it's hard to say the solution was simply to pound the rock more.

 

But in a season where a single first down, a field goal, or an avoidable pick-six could conceivably have the same team and scheme at 8-1, isn't it possible that one of the dozens of quarterbacks in the NCAA who can complete 60% of their passes with minimal mistakes could make a huge difference?

 

Yep. This same Tommy Armstrong went 9-4 last year. Ameer Abdullah and a healthy DPE covered for some of his off-games. It's not a perfect theory. But again, it's hard to imagine that a 60% passer doesn't make the difference in some of these razor thin games.

If the receivers didn't drop any passes . . .

If the OL held their blocks just a little longer . . .

If the coaches called timeouts in crucial sutuations when needed (last play against Illinois) . . .

If my aunt had balls . . .

Not surprised you're willfully missing the point.

 

I'm saying one player -- the most important player -- could negate all the above.

 

Not counting your aunt's conflicted genitalia.

That player is also among the leaders in offense in the league and country.

 

Quit looking to scapegoat players in defense of a .500 coach doing what a .500 coach does.

 

It just looks desperate.

 

 

Didn't realize you were a fan of the volume passing game.

 

Tommy Armstrong appears to be a .500 passer, doing what a .500 passer does.

 

Is it hard for you to envision a more reliable passer making a positive difference on this team?

 

And in a season of razor thin defeats, do you deny even a slight improvement by this one player might translate to more wins?

 

Wait. You'd still be composing the same posts regardless.

 

Never mind.

 

 

 

It's hard for me to imagine a coaching staff that can't win with Armstrong figuring out how to win with a succession of QBs.

 

POB, I know, is the next Tom Brady. But what if they don't get another one of those guys?

 

 

Really? You can't imagine it? Lots of coaching staffs passed on guys like Armstrong and Martinez as their starting QBs, because they preferred solid single threat QBs to exciting but unpredictable dual threat QBs.

 

POB doesn't need to be Tom Brady. Not even close. That's the point. Connor Cook completes 58% of his passes. That's 6% more than Armstrong. Dozens of starting quarterbacks -- and second string quarterbacks -- are more efficient than Tommy. It's hard NOT to imagine a marginally more accurate passer winning a game or two that required a single fourth quarter first down.

 

Let me take this a slightly different direction:

 

If Joe Ganz had one more year of eligibility, Bo Pelini finishes in the Top 10 in 2009 and is still Nebraska's coach today.

 

And Joe Ganz wasn't Tom Brady, either.

 

 

 

Actually, it's 57.5 versus 53.5; a matter of 4 percent (not 6, as you claimed). And that's despite throwing 30 more attempts this year, including during hurricane conditions at Illinois.

 

But, boiling it down, your argument is that with a guy who might be slightly better than our QB, we are 5-4 instead of 3-6. Hopefully with wins over two teams that are among the worst coached in P5 (Illinois and Purdue).

 

Do you think that'd be cause for celebration?

 

 

Right. Only a 4% better passer can make a big difference.

 

And since were in hypothetical land, let's go ahead and make Nebraska 9 - 0 with that marginally more accurate quarterback, since we've decided Bo Pelini would be undefeated by now, too.

 

Let's just agree that it's a really weird year that neither Riley fan or detractor had predicted, and what happens next is hardly more predictable.

[cm husker]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

My maverick theory is that if merely ONE player had bought into Riley's system better, Nebraska's record and attitude would already be on the upswing.

 

That player is Tommy Armstrong. My understanding is that there have been many crucial plays where Tommy has gone rogue on the playcalling, and has clearly ignored all advice on proper footwork and release, believing his really strong arm will carry the day. He's a gamer, but a high-risk player on a team that needs rhythm more than risk. Going rogue on the new coaching staff might not send the best message to the team either, unless you agree we are a long bomb thrown off the back foot away from glory.

 

I thought Riley and his designated quarterback whisperer could fix him. So yeah, that's on the coaching staff. When they look at the back-up QBs they inherited, they prefer to stick with Tommy. Probably the right call. Given a Newby instead of an Abdullah, it's hard to say the solution was simply to pound the rock more.

 

But in a season where a single first down, a field goal, or an avoidable pick-six could conceivably have the same team and scheme at 8-1, isn't it possible that one of the dozens of quarterbacks in the NCAA who can complete 60% of their passes with minimal mistakes could make a huge difference?

 

Yep. This same Tommy Armstrong went 9-4 last year. Ameer Abdullah and a healthy DPE covered for some of his off-games. It's not a perfect theory. But again, it's hard to imagine that a 60% passer doesn't make the difference in some of these razor thin games.

If the receivers didn't drop any passes . . .

If the OL held their blocks just a little longer . . .

If the coaches called timeouts in crucial sutuations when needed (last play against Illinois) . . .

If my aunt had balls . . .

Not surprised you're willfully missing the point.

 

I'm saying one player -- the most important player -- could negate all the above.

 

Not counting your aunt's conflicted genitalia.

That player is also among the leaders in offense in the league and country.

 

Quit looking to scapegoat players in defense of a .500 coach doing what a .500 coach does.

 

It just looks desperate.

 

 

Didn't realize you were a fan of the volume passing game.

 

Tommy Armstrong appears to be a .500 passer, doing what a .500 passer does.

 

Is it hard for you to envision a more reliable passer making a positive difference on this team?

 

And in a season of razor thin defeats, do you deny even a slight improvement by this one player might translate to more wins?

 

Wait. You'd still be composing the same posts regardless.

 

Never mind.

 

 

 

It's hard for me to imagine a coaching staff that can't win with Armstrong figuring out how to win with a succession of QBs.

 

POB, I know, is the next Tom Brady. But what if they don't get another one of those guys?

 

 

Really? You can't imagine it? Lots of coaching staffs passed on guys like Armstrong and Martinez as their starting QBs, because they preferred solid single threat QBs to exciting but unpredictable dual threat QBs.

 

POB doesn't need to be Tom Brady. Not even close. That's the point. Connor Cook completes 58% of his passes. That's 6% more than Armstrong. Dozens of starting quarterbacks -- and second string quarterbacks -- are more efficient than Tommy. It's hard NOT to imagine a marginally more accurate passer winning a game or two that required a single fourth quarter first down.

 

Let me take this a slightly different direction:

 

If Joe Ganz had one more year of eligibility, Bo Pelini finishes in the Top 10 in 2009 and is still Nebraska's coach today.

 

And Joe Ganz wasn't Tom Brady, either.

 

 

 

Actually, it's 57.5 versus 53.5; a matter of 4 percent (not 6, as you claimed). And that's despite throwing 30 more attempts this year, including during hurricane conditions at Illinois.

 

But, boiling it down, your argument is that with a guy who might be slightly better than our QB, we are 5-4 instead of 3-6. Hopefully with wins over two teams that are among the worst coached in P5 (Illinois and Purdue).

 

Do you think that'd be cause for celebration?

 

 

Right. Only a 4% better passer can make a big difference.

 

And since were in hypothetical land, let's go ahead and make Nebraska 9 - 0 with that marginally more accurate quarterback, since we've decided Bo Pelini would be undefeated by now, too.

 

Let's just agree that it's a really weird year that neither Riley fan or detractor had predicted, and what happens next is hardly more predictable.

 

 

 

If you really want to get wrapped around the axle over 4%, think of it this way: in a 30 attempt game, that's 16 completions versus 17 completions. I'm not seeing that as a game changer.

 

I don't think this is a weird year at all. It was highly predictable that Riley would go 8-5 or worse. Going 4 or 5 and X at this point won't be that much of a deviation from what Coach Riley has historically done.

[beorach]

 

Its amazing how many new posters we have all of a sudden! When things are bad, here they come!

 

 

I'm guessing you would be talking about me.

 

I've been a Nebraska fan for over 45 years... that's right 45 years.

 

I've been through the good-great times and the bad-disaster times... so I didn't just show up "all of a sudden".

 

And here you are... acting like an "old head". Yeah right.

 

If you're going to take offense to someone writing a general statement about new posters, the internet might not be the place for you.