Lessons Learned 2015 Edition

[VectorVictor]

1. It took the coaches a lot longer to buy-in than it should have but when they finally did we saw the results. I respect them for finally buying in because it is difficult to change.

 

2. If UCLA did not start off dominating the way they did I would have just figured they did not want to be there but the fact is they did want to be there and they wanted to win but NU was just better.

 

3. I know people loved piling on TA but lets use a simple example...dunking a basketball...most of us can't do it or if we can it is a lame one handed dunk with no dribbling and it has to be from one certain spot on the floor. No coach would call plays for us to "throw one down" over and over over...Riley and Langsahan did that to TA but not last night! HUGE DIFFERENCE

 

Also, I really just wish I could dunk a basketball again

 

#3 is pretty much key to how this season went, IMO. Part of an OC's responsibility is to call plays to put his offense in the best position to succeed.

[irafreak]

The buy in claim is bullsh#t, as it was the coaches that needed to buy in to what this team is. A running team that uses the pass on occasion. I thought they figured it out against MSU, but Iowa proved that was not the case.

 

Maybe that was the wake up call we needed, well that and winning convincingly against UCLA while running be ball 76% of the time.

This right here is why no one should believe the coaches learned their lesson. Riley is who is his. Great win for the team. But I'm not looking forward to the next couple of seasons with optimism. Oh well. Happy holidays everyone.

[ColoradoHusk]

 

1. It took the coaches a lot longer to buy-in than it should have but when they finally did we saw the results. I respect them for finally buying in because it is difficult to change.

 

2. If UCLA did not start off dominating the way they did I would have just figured they did not want to be there but the fact is they did want to be there and they wanted to win but NU was just better.

 

3. I know people loved piling on TA but lets use a simple example...dunking a basketball...most of us can't do it or if we can it is a lame one handed dunk with no dribbling and it has to be from one certain spot on the floor. No coach would call plays for us to "throw one down" over and over over...Riley and Langsahan did that to TA but not last night! HUGE DIFFERENCE

 

Also, I really just wish I could dunk a basketball again

 

#3 is pretty much key to how this season went, IMO. Part of an OC's responsibility is to call plays to put his offense in the best position to succeed.

 

Yet, a lot of fans wanted to put all the blame on Tommy. I'm not saying Tommy is the perfect QB, but he can look good when put in better situations. Having him drop back 40 times a game and read defenses is not the best way to use him.

[Branno]

Count, the thing is, we played other teams with poor rush defenses and we didn't do this against them.

So much this.

[Dansker]

Several lessons for the coaches must be that they should never take a game for granted. It cost us 4 games. Next year, we can't afford to have this happen again.

 

Running the football and throwing less equals success.

 

The team got better with penalties over time and ball control seemed to improve up until the Iowa game. We have to be smarter with the football and bounce back when bad things happen like the fumble vs. UCLA. We played with more confidence that we hadn't seen since the MSU game. Nebraska needs to be that team week in and week out.

[ColoradoHusk]

The biggest lesson that the coaches should see is that they need to bring in better talent. I think the coaches cost the team numerous games with poor decisions and game management. NU was better than a 5-6 win team. This team should have been at least a 7-8-9 win team. But, to get NU to a 10-12 win team, NU needs an upgrade in talent.

[PTPer]

 

The buy in claim is bullsh#t, as it was the coaches that needed to buy in to what this team is. A running team that uses the pass on occasion. I thought they figured it out against MSU, but Iowa proved that was not the case.

Maybe that was the wake up call we needed, well that and winning convincingly against UCLA while running be ball 76% of the time.

ucla is one of the worst rush defenses in the nation and for whatever reason played with only 6-7 in the box all night. So you might wanna analyze the competition before jumping on the soap box and showin Langsdorf you told-you-so card. Its just the way i see it. But yes, this is how these guys wanna manage a game. We just happened to be in a matchup where we had that advantage to do so. This sh#t dont happen like that in the Big ten. Ucla played Pelini-esqu defense tonight. By god as my witness they were not gonna let tommy have that big flashy pass play. No way. Lol. So we better tailor the excitement some.

 

And dont call the buy in issue bullsh#t. It was real on many accounts and cited by several folks much more knowledgeable than myself. And ot was obvious to me. But obviously after that Purdue game there were some foots put down and some tough conversations had. And im callin out nate gerry cuz after that purdue game i was done with him. I was ready for him to never take another snap again. His effort and lack of give a damn was embarrasing. But whether he himself made the turnaround or there was another motivational factor in place, he made a 180 and has set a tone. And holy cow was he ballin tonight. He made me look like an a-hole. And i love it. He didnt just pack it in. He rallied and got back when everyone was coming down on him.

 

This doesnt absolve the questionable coaching decisions that took place. But a game is a compilation of 60 minutes and nearly 200 plays. And its won as a team and lost by the team. While you nitpick 2-3 times the coaches f'd us i could do the same in terms of the players. Team includes everyone. Coaches. Players. Trainers. Statiticians. Everyone.

This guy gets it^^^^^ +1000