Do the results of the MSU and Iowa game make you feel...

[It'sNotAFakeID]

I like how people can say with confidence that this season would've been a 10, 11, maybe 12 win season had a coaching change not been made considering the last staff here never made it over 10 wins a season

[Moiraine]

Yup. The only reason we've "sucked" at recruiting is because we just aren't trying. It has absolutely nothing to do with the number of athletes that live near Lincoln, Nebraska. Ohio and Alabama are in identical situations to us as far as that's concernderp.

[Husker Psycho]

Yup. The only reason we've "sucked" at recruiting is because we just aren't trying. It has absolutely nothing to do with the number of athletes that live near Lincoln, Nebraska. Ohio and Alabama are in identical situations to us as far as that's concernderp.

 

Correct.

 

Callahan's 2005 recruiting class (5th ranked nationally) that included Ndamukong Suh, proved that once and for all.

 

Location means nothing.

 

 

We hashed this out a couple of weeks ago so this is my last comment on this.

[TonyStalloni]

1. I feel really good about Nebraska's bowl win. We matched up well with UCLA and took advantage of their Achilles Heel.

 

2. I predicted to several friends that NU would beat MSU and really thought they would beat Iowa.

 

3. MSU and Iowa both had tough matchups in their bowl games. Neither are elite teams and both had weaknesses and Bama and The Tree game planned for it.

 

4. This next year I'm hoping we can gain ground on the 2nd tier of BIG football. Whisky, Iowa, NW. Maybe win the west. If we get by the Ducks we may go 10-2. At worst 7-5.

 

5. Don't think we are ready to challenge OSU, MSU or even Mich yet. We need better line play, much better QB decisions and a tougher mentality all the way around.

[Moiraine]

 

 

Yup. The only reason we've "sucked" at recruiting is because we just aren't trying. It has absolutely nothing to do with the number of athletes that live near Lincoln, Nebraska. Ohio and Alabama are in identical situations to us as far as that's concernderp.

Correct.

 

Callahan's 2005 recruiting class (5th ranked nationally) that included Ndamukong Suh, proved that once and for all.

 

Location means nothing.

 

 

We hashed this out a couple of weeks ago so this is my last comment on this.

No, it didn't. I don't think you understand tendency.

[Hunter94]

Iowa had no chance against Stanford, zero. Ohio State would have matched up nice against Stanford in the Rose....but still fun to watch them bitch slap the Irish!!

[Kernal]

Better about the Huskers season

Worse about the Huskers season

No changes at all about the Husker season?

 

I don't think it matters to the Huskers, and those two losses don't re-write the season. All games are different and exist in their own set of circumstances.

 

I got the impression during the Iowa game that Iowa players spent too much mental energy being satisfied and celebrating the fact that they made it to the Rose Bowl, and not enough on preparing to execute, and then executing, against a decent team. I got a similar impression from Michigan State

 

It reminded me a little of the 2012 season where NU's mantra became "Make it to the Big Ten Championship." Well, if making it to the game is the goal then what happens after you arrive (and met your goal)? The goal should be to win the Big Ten Championship, to win the Rose Bowl, to win the Playoff Game.

 

Maybe I'm full of crap, but that's the impression I got. Both MSU and Iowa played uncharacteristically and lost badly. Stanford isn't that good, and neither is Alabama. But those two teams also benefited from having "been there done that." They weren't celebrating just being allowed to play in those games.

 

If there's a lesson here for Nebraska, it's that the goal should be to win them all and team retrospectives should be saved for after the last game is finished. If you shoot for 9-wins, you'll probably get no more than 9-wins. If you're happy making it to the CCG, you might get blown out after you do.

[teachercd]

 

Better about the Huskers season

Worse about the Huskers season

No changes at all about the Husker season?

 

I don't think it matters to the Huskers, and those two losses don't re-write the season. All games are different and exist in their own set of circumstances.

 

I got the impression during the Iowa game that Iowa players spent too much mental energy being satisfied and celebrating the fact that they made it to the Rose Bowl, and not enough on preparing to execute, and then executing, against a decent team. I got a similar impression from Michigan State

 

It reminded me a little of the 2012 season where NU's mantra became "Make it to the Big Ten Championship." Well, if making it to the game is the goal then what happens after you arrive (and met your goal)? The goal should be to win the Big Ten Championship, to win the Rose Bowl, to win the Playoff Game.

 

Maybe I'm full of crap, but that's the impression I got. Both MSU and Iowa played uncharacteristically and lost badly. Stanford isn't that good, and neither is Alabama. But those two teams also benefited from having "been there done that." They weren't celebrating just being allowed to play in those games.

 

If there's a lesson here for Nebraska, it's that the goal should be to win them all and team retrospectives should be saved for after the last game is finished. If you shoot for 9-wins, you'll probably get no more than 9-wins. If you're happy making it to the CCG, you might get blown out after you do.

This is an interesting way to look at it and it kind of falls in line with how I think the last staff did things with the team and with recruiting...kind of like "Well, let's not waste a lot of time on this high ranked kids cause we probably won't get them"

 

That is why I like how this current staff recruits...they go after some big timers

[cm husker]

Yup. The only reason we've "sucked" at recruiting is because we just aren't trying. It has absolutely nothing to do with the number of athletes that live near Lincoln, Nebraska. Ohio and Alabama are in identical situations to us as far as that's concernderp.

How do you possibly feel that Ohio and Alabama are the same as Nebraska in terms of proximity to talent?

[Enhance]

Please delete.

Edited January 2, 2016 by Enhance89

[olddominionhusker]

Guys. That was her point..it's not effort but goegraphy. Sarcasm

[cm husker]

 

 

Yup. The only reason we've "sucked" at recruiting is because we just aren't trying. It has absolutely nothing to do with the number of athletes that live near Lincoln, Nebraska. Ohio and Alabama are in identical situations to us as far as that's concernderp.

Correct.

 

Callahan's 2005 recruiting class (5th ranked nationally) that included Ndamukong Suh, proved that once and for all.

 

Location means nothing.

 

 

We hashed this out a couple of weeks ago so this is my last comment on this.

That 2005 class is some of the best proof that recruiting rankings aren't accurate. That and the 2011 (iirc) classes were not nearly as productive as their billing. And the '05 class threw off roster management for years to come.

[Kernal]

 

 

Better about the Huskers season

Worse about the Huskers season

No changes at all about the Husker season?

I don't think it matters to the Huskers, and those two losses don't re-write the season. All games are different and exist in their own set of circumstances.

 

I got the impression during the Iowa game that Iowa players spent too much mental energy being satisfied and celebrating the fact that they made it to the Rose Bowl, and not enough on preparing to execute, and then executing, against a decent team. I got a similar impression from Michigan State

 

It reminded me a little of the 2012 season where NU's mantra became "Make it to the Big Ten Championship." Well, if making it to the game is the goal then what happens after you arrive (and met your goal)? The goal should be to win the Big Ten Championship, to win the Rose Bowl, to win the Playoff Game.

 

Maybe I'm full of crap, but that's the impression I got. Both MSU and Iowa played uncharacteristically and lost badly. Stanford isn't that good, and neither is Alabama. But those two teams also benefited from having "been there done that." They weren't celebrating just being allowed to play in those games.

 

If there's a lesson here for Nebraska, it's that the goal should be to win them all and team retrospectives should be saved for after the last game is finished. If you shoot for 9-wins, you'll probably get no more than 9-wins. If you're happy making it to the CCG, you might get blown out after you do.

This is an interesting way to look at it and it kind of falls in line with how I think the last staff did things with the team and with recruiting...kind of like "Well, let's not waste a lot of time on this high ranked kids cause we probably won't get them"

 

That is why I like how this current staff recruits...they go after some big timers

 

 

I'm convinced that the psychology and mental preparation of a team is probably the most important aspect. Especially in today's hyper-connected social media atmosphere. It's easy to lose perspective, which inevitably leads to changes in behavior. Iowa is a great example: they made a living this year simply out-executing their opponents. To me, you can only do that by out-focusing your opponent. But that's something that isn't dependent on players' star-rankings, or anything like that.

 

It's half of why, in my opinion, the Huskers were so dominant in the early and mid-90s. Something happened to those teams ability to focus, and they out-executed everyone as a result. And since the late 90s, we've seen the inverse. Nebraska football has been so full of distractions, not the least of which is the constant, enormous media presence and intense fan focus and discussion.

 

We see this too, imo, when a team like Houston suddenly goes on a decent run, or a team like Michigan turns it around in one year. Harbaugh and Herman brought something to those programs that engaged the players such that they focused in a way they hadn't been previously. I mean, they didn't get all new players this year. And if anything, new schemes should be less effective due to them being "new."

[Enhance]

 

Yup. The only reason we've "sucked" at recruiting is because we just aren't trying. It has absolutely nothing to do with the number of athletes that live near Lincoln, Nebraska. Ohio and Alabama are in identical situations to us as far as that's concernderp.

 

Correct.

 

Callahan's 2005 recruiting class (5th ranked nationally) that included Ndamukong Suh, proved that once and for all.

 

Location means nothing.

 

 

We hashed this out a couple of weeks ago so this is my last comment on this.

 

A distribution analysis from 2008-2013 shows which states, out of 42, have the highest percentage of division one football recruits.

 

The top six, in order, were Texas, Florida, California, Georgia, Ohio and Alabama. Nebraska came in the bottom four at #38.

 

I don't think it is in any way factual to state location has absolutely nothing to do with recruiting. It's just simply not true. Now, you could argue that there has been a lack of effort, if you want. But, I think location has more of an impact than you give it credit for.

 

For example, I've heard several local recruiting analysts go on record talking about how difficult it can sometimes be to get recruits on Nebraska's campus during the fall for official visits. If they live really far way, it can be very challenging for them to play a game Friday night, travel to Nebraska on Saturday and get back home in time to do everything else before they have to be back in class Monday. Is this a rampant issue? Perhaps not. But, it's certainly one of concern.

 

----------

One more note: of the current 2016 class rankings, 19 of the top 25 schools are located in the Top 10 most fertile recruiting states in the country. I don't know how that can be equated to those schools simply trying harder than the rest.

[84HuskerLaw]

I suppose this is the kool aid perspective but I feel fairly positive about the future, despite the 6-7 season because: offensively we produced a very good average in yards per game in the first season of a totally new system. As the season wore on, the offensive line did make improvements as the competition got better. Remember that all teams tend to improve as the season goes too, yet we seemed to do better. November overall was one of the best Novembers in a long time. We won a bowl game against a "9 win" California team in California.. UCLA is still a "Name" school with recruiting prowess that certainly rivals or exceeds ours.

But for a couple very poor performances by Tommy A at the QB spot, we likely win another 3 or 4 games. Certainly we had chances to win each and every one of the seven games we lost and despite a lopsided mess in the Purdue game which we made a bit of a rally in the final quarter, we were not 'blown out' (I define blow out as losing by more than 30 pts and a sizeable shortfall statistically.

 

I think the bowl win was one of our best bowl wins in a long time! Period. A good sign for the future!