I've trash talked the coaching staff so..,.

[Elf]

I found Gerry's comments interesting. Article in OWH this morning:

 

 

On the team’s improvement: “Everyone kind of looked each other in the eye and we decided we were going to buy in and things are going to start cooking.”

 

 

The secondary looked pretty good for a change. Maybe they are finally buying in. Hard to win games when some of the players aren't trying........

I wish they had bought in sooner but I also understand that sometimes this takes time. Better late than never, right?

 

I wonder if there was a team meeting where Riley laid down the law (so to speak)? Two players quitting in the middle of the season and an immediate improvement by the rest of the team suggests this might be the case.

 

Nate Gerry has put to bed the argument on whether or not some players were buying in. Now that they have all bought in, we are winning ball games. I'm even more confident about the Huskers winning out now.

[Elf]

 

I found Gerry's comments interesting. Article in OWH this morning:

 

 

On the team’s improvement:[/size] “Everyone kind of looked each other in the eye and we decided we were going to buy in and things are going to start cooking.”[/size]

 

 

The [/size]secondary looked pretty good for a change. Maybe they are finally buying in. Hard to win games when some of the players aren't trying........

That is sad and good at the same time. Should have bought in from game one, makes a big difference and they are seeing the results.

 

I agree that would have been nice but we don't know what else was going on with the team. Maybe the toxic environment rumor is true as well? If that is the case it can go a long way towards explaining why the "buy in" didn't occur earlier. I think what matters most is that the buy in has finally happened. Now we can get to the serious business of winning ball games.

[Landlord]

Riley said he was not going to force his system on these players and he has done nothing but square peg/round hole it, since he got to Lincoln. That's why he's not a good coach. This is easily a 9-win team if he coaches it correctly.

 

 

 

What offense would our team "Correctly" run to 9 wins?

[AFhusker]

 

I found Gerry's comments interesting. Article in OWH this morning:

 

 

On the team’s improvement: “Everyone kind of looked each other in the eye and we decided we were going to buy in and things are going to start cooking.”

 

 

The secondary looked pretty good for a change. Maybe they are finally buying in. Hard to win games when some of the players aren't trying........

I wish they had bought in sooner but I also understand that sometimes this takes time. Better late than never, right?

 

I wonder if there was a team meeting where Riley laid down the law (so to speak)? Two players quitting in the middle of the season and an immediate improvement by the rest of the team suggests this might be the case.

 

Nate Gerry has put to bed the argument on whether or not some players were buying in. Now that they have all bought in, we are winning ball games. I'm even more confident about the Huskers winning out now.

 

The toxic environment left when one of those players quit.

[HuskerExpat]

This is not that complicated to figure out. 1. The players had to learn a new system. 2. The coaches had to learn new players. 3. We've been decimated by injuries (reference the stat displayed yesterday that 44 different players have made starts). 4. Our roster was in horrible shape compelling the use of true freshman.

 

There have been a lot of cries about the sky falling this year, but those 4 factors pretty simply explain our year. We lost five close games and one with a former walk on as QB who was responsible for five turnovers in that game.

 

I don't know what next year will bring, but the factors that contributed most to the results this year are likely to be less significant next year.

[soup]

 

Riley said he was not going to force his system on these players and he has done nothing but square peg/round hole it, since he got to Lincoln. That's why he's not a good coach. This is easily a 9-win team if he coaches it correctly.

 

 

 

What offense would our team "Correctly" run to 9 wins?

 

The offense that would win 9 games duh... ;-)

[BIGREDIOWAN]

 

Riley said he was not going to force his system on these players and he has done nothing but square peg/round hole it, since he got to Lincoln. That's why he's not a good coach. This is easily a 9-win team if he coaches it correctly.

 

 

 

What offense would our team "Correctly" run to 9 wins?

 

To me it has nothing to do with offense or defense just by itself, it has to do with game management as well. Listen, I'm glad we've won some games here towards the end, lord knows the kids need it for confidence, but the game management of this coaching staff has not been good and cost us several losses this year. Better game management and I'd venture to guess we have at least two more wins, put TA in the game against Purdue and that's probably three more wins because I doubt we lose to Purdue with him in the game. Couple the offensive issues, defensive issues, game management issues, with all the injuries and you've got this season. You can't point just to one thing and say, "THAT! That right there is the problem!"

[ScottyIce]

I will give credit to the team and the coaches to playing with focus and tenacity from the opening snap. The tight end reverse was a great play call, and the coaches have finally figured out how to get a resemblance of a run game going.

 

However, the game management near the end of the 2nd quarter was baffling. The first INT thrown by Tommy was a bad throw, on an open receiver. However, the coaches have to do a better job of understanding the game situation. Rutgers was doing nothing on offense, so Langsdorf didn't need to be super aggressive and have Armstrong throw it when it wasn't needed. Then when Rutgers did score and NU got the ball back with 1 minute left in the half, NU should have just eaten the ball and gone into half. Instead Langsdorf has Armstrong throw the ball on 2 straight plays, the 2nd resulting in another INT. That turnover almost led to more Rutgers points.

 

To me, it's one thing to be "aggressive" and go for the jugular, and another thing to be smart and understanding the game situation. To me, Riley and Langsdorf haven't impressed me with their game management decisions throughout the season.

Disagree. I love Langsdorf. He reminds me of myself 15 years ago playing madden. If there is time on the clock, ya gotta believe you can still score more points man! Can't wait til we start onside kicking more frequently!

[huskers15]

This is not that complicated to figure out. 1. The players had to learn a new system. 2. The coaches had to learn new players. 3. We've been decimated by injuries (reference the stat displayed yesterday that 44 different players have made starts). 4. Our roster was in horrible shape compelling the use of true freshman.

 

There have been a lot of cries about the sky falling this year, but those 4 factors pretty simply explain our year. We lost five close games and one with a former walk on as QB who was responsible for five turnovers in that game.

 

I don't know what next year will bring, but the factors that contributed most to the results this year are likely to be less significant next year.

[California Husker]

 

Yeah well, they made a bunch of stupid moves last week and won in spite of themselves and today they just did what they were supposed to do....get a lead and run the damn ball. I don't know why it took them 11 games to figure this out, but it is an improvement. However the frustrating part is that this team could easily be 9-2, 10-1 or even 11-0 right now instead of 5-6. I just hope it will not take nearly the entire fan base calling for their heads to get them to pull their heads out of their a** every year (I really wish there wouldn't be an "every year", but I know that's too much to wish for).

 

So we made a bunch of stupid moves last week and beat the #7 football team in the nation in spite of ourselves? Huh?? And all this time I thought we played a pretty good game against undefeated Michigan State.

 

 

 

If we had a qb that could make the most basic throws in the game, this "air raid" as you call it, woulda lead to an addition couple touchdowns, kept them off the scoreboard, and the resulting 28/35-0 halftime lead woulda been deemed as genius.

That's the problem with this coaching staff. Riley said he was not going to force his system on these players and he has done nothing but square peg/round hole it, since he got to Lincoln. That's why he's not a good coach. This is easily a 9-win team if he coaches it correctly. However, he has been stubborn and consistently tried to make this team the Nebraska Beavers. It hasn't worked.

 

 

I get the impression you think we run a pass happy offense. We don't. Through eleven games we've passed 394 times. We've run the ball 396 times. That's about as balanced as you can get.

 

But have there been games where we passed too much? Sure. Case in point, Purdue. If you recall, though, our starting QB was sitting on the sidelines injured. Do you think that might have affected our play calling some? And since the Boilers have the #74 pass defense in the nation, it wasn't totally crazy to try throwing the ball against them.

 

Prior to November Tommy was averaging 35.5 passes a game (your stat is through all 11 games and as noted the last couple of games have had less passing) last season he passed 26.5 passes a game. That's about a 33% increase in pass attempts from a passer who is career just over 50%. I don't personally don't think that is wise. Even if they thought they could make it work, the fact that he has been consistently around his career average all season shows that the experiment has failed. He was not recruited to play Riley's style of offense. I think by the looks of it, they finally figured it out. However, they still inexplicably pass at times when it is just unnecessary, but the last game was a step in the right direction.

 

Yes Purdue has a bad pass defense, however, the Husker's backup QB had thrown very few passes in his career and having him go out and throw as much as he did was also questionable.

[California Husker]

 

Riley said he was not going to force his system on these players and he has done nothing but square peg/round hole it, since he got to Lincoln. That's why he's not a good coach. This is easily a 9-win team if he coaches it correctly.

 

 

 

What offense would our team "Correctly" run to 9 wins?

 

Tommy Armstrong is just over 50% career passing. He should not be passing 35+ times a game. That does not play to his strength. He was recruited as a spread type, multi-threat QB. If these coaches, making the money they are making, can't figure out how to best use him, then they shouldn't be coaching this team. Riley is Callahan all over again.

[California Husker]

 

 

If we had a qb that could make the most basic throws in the game, this "air raid" as you call it, woulda lead to an addition couple touchdowns, kept them off the scoreboard, and the resulting 28/35-0 halftime lead woulda been deemed as genius.

That's the problem with this coaching staff. Riley said he was not going to force his system on these players and he has done nothing but square peg/round hole it, since he got to Lincoln. That's why he's not a good coach. This is easily a 9-win team if he coaches it correctly. However, he has been stubborn and consistently tried to make this team the Nebraska Beavers. It hasn't worked.

 

So using the fullback and designed qb runs (to name a couple examples) is forcing a square peg into a round hole? Anyone that thought we weren't going to be throwing the ball very much was wrong. Besides, Armstrong was going to be throwing the ball regardless of which offense he was running, Beck's or Riley's. As long as Riley is here we are going to be throwing the ball a lot. We are getting better, so sit back and enjoy.

 

As I previously noted...having a QB who is has just barely over a 50% career completion percentage and has averaged 26.5 attempts a game and inserting an offense that has him throwing the ball 33% more often is trying to force a square peg into a round hole.

 

Unless you think they wanted to watch that many passes to fall incomplete? Because his completion percentage has stayed pretty consistent, it has just resulted in a lot more unsuccessful plays and stalled drives. That is on the coaches. Tommy wasn't recruited to throw the ball 36 times a game, but these clowns don't care...they're going to make him throw it that much come hell or high water. Square peg, round hole.

[MichiganDad3]

Wish whatever "clicked" had clicked weeks ago. Same team and staff that started this season.

 

Don't know if its the heat of being fired, finally healthy, butts being kicked in the locker room, captains finally challenging guys or what, but the past 2 games we have looked better and are improving.

 

Iowa is beatable. Beathard is getting it done for Iowa. They play sound and physical. Nothing flashy. NU just needs to man up in the trenches and POUND THE ROCK.

 

This game (win or loss) IMO, will rest solely on the play calling of Langs. He needs to take this next 2 weeks and really truly do what was promised in January. Look at what we do well and do that. This game is for the seniors and a shot at a bowl. His (their) system can wait 2 more games. (I am optimistic as this and a bowl game) Do what has been working. Power running to open the pass, PA off the run, move TA into designed option/pass rollouts. Limit his reads. Crap can that screen play, please. Put TA in a position to succeed. Let him know there are many play makers on this team. He doesn't have to do it on his own.

 

We have the talent to win as evidenced by MSU and ultimately the close games and wins form last year. IMO, 4 of the losses were poor coaching with play calling and time management.

 

2 weeks. 2 weeks to prepare and see what this "experienced" staff can do.

I agree. We can beat Iowa if Langs plays to the strengths of the team. TA is bad at touch passes, and someone is going to get killed the way he throws the screens. I would even advocate benching TA for a couple of plays if he makes a stupid throw. We can beat Iowa, but not if we throw three interceptions. By the way, has anyone heard about how healthy TA is. He tweaked his ankle and took a hard hit on the hip. Hopefully with two weeks to heal and game plan we can ruin the hawkeye season.

[Landlord]

 

 

Riley said he was not going to force his system on these players and he has done nothing but square peg/round hole it, since he got to Lincoln. That's why he's not a good coach. This is easily a 9-win team if he coaches it correctly.

 

 

 

What offense would our team "Correctly" run to 9 wins?

 

Tommy Armstrong is just over 50% career passing. He should not be passing 35+ times a game. That does not play to his strength. He was recruited as a spread type, multi-threat QB. If these coaches, making the money they are making, can't figure out how to best use him, then they shouldn't be coaching this team. Riley is Callahan all over again.

 

 

 

 

Okay but you didn't answer the question. What IS the best way to use him that they haven't figured out?

[jsneb83]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Riley said he was not going to force his system on these players and he has done nothing but square peg/round hole it, since he got to Lincoln. That's why he's not a good coach. This is easily a 9-win team if he coaches it correctly.

 

 

What offense would our team "Correctly" run to 9 wins?

Tommy Armstrong is just over 50% career passing. He should not be passing 35+ times a game. That does not play to his strength. He was recruited as a spread type, multi-threat QB. If these coaches, making the money they are making, can't figure out how to best use him, then they shouldn't be coaching this team. Riley is Callahan all over again.

 

 

Okay but you didn't answer the question. What IS the best way to use him that they haven't figured out?

Triple option, obviously.