Listening to Bennings Description of His Interview with Langs

[Saunders]

I think everyone should stop talking about recruiting, Frank, Bo, Bill, etc.. since they aren't relevant to the topic. Instead, spend 30-45 minutes of your time listening to this podcast. It's much more informational than anything opinions in this thread, and a better use of time than reliving the Frank Solich Saga®.

 

I would highly suggest that anyone remotely interested in this topic listen to last week's OWH Pick Six podcast.

 

http://www.omaha.com/huskers/blogs/pick-six-podcast-nu-s-identity-on-offense-armstrong-s/article_ae9e16a4-0678-11e6-8b05-9fca310911ca.html

 

Sam and Jon had a very interesting discussion about this very thing.

[GBRFAN]

So... You need your own guys to have a stated offensive philosophy. That's interesting.

 

The concern I have is that players don't even seem to understand the vision. How do you get alignment on a goal in that scenario?

 

You might not understand - Sure the players do. If i'm missing some quotes from the players, please share!!!

[Guy Chamberlin]

Exactly.

 

So CM agrees with the previous post and gets 2 +1s, while the post with the actual observation gets 0?

 

Can someone tell me how this keeps happening?

[cm husker]

 

 

So... You need your own guys to have a stated offensive philosophy. That's interesting.

 

The concern I have is that players don't even seem to understand the vision. How do you get alignment on a goal in that scenario?

You might not understand - Sure the players do. If i'm missing some quotes from the players, please share!!!

It's referred to in the videocast that's been posted. Also, there were articles from the spring practices quoting players, Armstrong in particular.

[Guy Chamberlin]

 

 

 

 

 

 

I love how when we fire coaches for not winning championships or "the games that matter", which were all explicitly stated by the responsible ADs, we like to pretend it's based on some rumor or innuendo.

We know that's a fiction, because if said coach had won a championship, he wouldn't have been fired.

And if they really did want to fire those coaches for supposed off the field issues that justified termination, they are hypocritical, sellouts who have no integrity if they wouldn't have pulled that trigger no matter what.

Even if Bo Pelini's '09 squad wins that Texas game and gives us a trophy, Bo still gets canned for calling ADSE a *****.

Is that why he was fired?

That is a reversal of chronology I hadn't heard before.

The point is Bo butting heads with ADSE is what got him canned, don't act like you don't know what I'm talking about.

And in the end, i think we'll find out that was more of a Perlman and Eichorst problem than a Bo problem, though he didn't handle their crap well.

Apparantely "didn't handle THEIR crap well" means ignoring recruiting, hiring yes men buddies, ranting and raving about our fans on secret recordings, instilling a venomous atmosphere among players and goating the AD to FIRE HIM after an ugly loss.

Interesting hyperbolic mischaracterization of what actually happened. You sound venomous. Is it Bo's fault?

 

 

Yes. It was Bo's fault.

[commando]

 

Exactly.

 

So CM agrees with the previous post and gets 2 +1s, while the post with the actual observation gets 0?

 

Can someone tell me how this keeps happening?

 

the world may never know

[Landlord]

So... You need your own guys to have a stated offensive philosophy. That's interesting.

 

The concern I have is that players don't even seem to understand the vision. How do you get alignment on a goal in that scenario?

 

 

Players don't need to understand a vision; that's a buzzword used for and by fans with an elementary, outsider's amount of knowledge. Players need to know the playbook. At the end of the day, Langs has a playbook, with specific plays with specific lines drawn in different directions, that the players will have, learn, and practice, under tutelage and with correction along the way.

 

 

Having concern about offensive philosophy is fine, but the players 'not understanding the vision' is probably the most nonsensical reasoning possible to get to that concern.

[Guy Chamberlin]

BRB, you bring up a prime example of my concern with this system. In this offense, that 20 yard pass was absolutely the "correct" read because it was single coverage.

 

To me, it's a problem when a correct read leads to a wrong play.

 

(And I don't think we should run on every 3rd and 1, especially not the sort of unimaginative running we see in this offense to date).

 

Fun Fact: Nebraska was #2 in the Big 10 in Third Down Conversion last season.

[Guy Chamberlin]

Okay. I don't really have anything to add here. No keen observation of my own, or funny meme to attach.

 

But could someone +1 this post so I can feel my life has meaning?

[Red Dead Redemption]

Okay. I don't really have anything to add here. No keen observation of my own, or funny meme to attach.

 

But could someone +1 this post so I can feel my life has meaning?

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ytCEuuW2_A

[cm husker]

 

 

So... You need your own guys to have a stated offensive philosophy. That's interesting.

 

The concern I have is that players don't even seem to understand the vision. How do you get alignment on a goal in that scenario?

 

Players don't need to understand a vision; that's a buzzword used for and by fans with an elementary, outsider's amount of knowledge. Players need to know the playbook. At the end of the day, Langs has a playbook, with specific plays with specific lines drawn in different directions, that the players will have, learn, and practice, under tutelage and with correction along the way.

 

 

Having concern about offensive philosophy is fine, but the players 'not understanding the vision' is probably the most nonsensical reasoning possible to get to that concern.

Hahahah. Hahahahahaha.

 

Having a philosophical understanding of what you're trying to get done is extraordinarily important and anyone who has coached or listens to coaches will m consider that over and over.

 

Vision produces mentality and only a fool wouldn't understand the importance of mentality in football success.

[Guy Chamberlin]

 

 

So... You need your own guys to have a stated offensive philosophy. That's interesting.

 

The concern I have is that players don't even seem to understand the vision. How do you get alignment on a goal in that scenario?

 

Players don't need to understand a vision; that's a buzzword used for and by fans with an elementary, outsider's amount of knowledge. Players need to know the playbook. At the end of the day, Langs has a playbook, with specific plays with specific lines drawn in different directions, that the players will have, learn, and practice, under tutelage and with correction along the way.

 

 

Having concern about offensive philosophy is fine, but the players 'not understanding the vision' is probably the most nonsensical reasoning possible to get to that concern.

Hahahah. Hahahahahaha.

 

Having a philosophical understanding of what you're trying to get done is extraordinarily important and anyone who has coached or listens to coaches will m consider that over and over.

 

Vision produces mentality and only a fool wouldn't understand the importance of mentality in football success.

 

 

I agree, and I think the fragile mentality of Bo Pelini's teams attests to that fact.

 

Although we may be confusing "vision" with it's bastard stepchild "attitude"

[Landlord]

 

 

So... You need your own guys to have a stated offensive philosophy. That's interesting.

 

The concern I have is that players don't even seem to understand the vision. How do you get alignment on a goal in that scenario?

 

Players don't need to understand a vision; that's a buzzword used for and by fans with an elementary, outsider's amount of knowledge. Players need to know the playbook. At the end of the day, Langs has a playbook, with specific plays with specific lines drawn in different directions, that the players will have, learn, and practice, under tutelage and with correction along the way.

 

 

Having concern about offensive philosophy is fine, but the players 'not understanding the vision' is probably the most nonsensical reasoning possible to get to that concern.

Hahahah. Hahahahahaha.

 

Having a philosophical understanding of what you're trying to get done is extraordinarily important and anyone who has coached or listens to coaches will m consider that over and over.

 

Vision produces mentality and only a fool wouldn't understand the importance of mentality in football success.

 

 

 

That's taken care of in practice, namely, in fall practice, via coaching. Whether or not the players can produce a satisfactory sound byte answer to the media to sate plebs like you and I doesn't really have any bearing on if it actually does or doesn't happen successfully.

[cm husker]

 

 

 

 

So... You need your own guys to have a stated offensive philosophy. That's interesting.

 

The concern I have is that players don't even seem to understand the vision. How do you get alignment on a goal in that scenario?

 

Players don't need to understand a vision; that's a buzzword used for and by fans with an elementary, outsider's amount of knowledge. Players need to know the playbook. At the end of the day, Langs has a playbook, with specific plays with specific lines drawn in different directions, that the players will have, learn, and practice, under tutelage and with correction along the way.

 

 

Having concern about offensive philosophy is fine, but the players 'not understanding the vision' is probably the most nonsensical reasoning possible to get to that concern.

Hahahah. Hahahahahaha.

 

Having a philosophical understanding of what you're trying to get done is extraordinarily important and anyone who has coached or listens to coaches will m consider that over and over.

 

Vision produces mentality and only a fool wouldn't understand the importance of mentality in football success.

 

That's taken care of in practice, namely, in fall practice, via coaching. Whether or not the players can produce a satisfactory sound byte answer to the media to sate plebs like you and I doesn't really have any bearing on if it actually does or doesn't happen successfully.

Keep whistling dude. And deflecting with personal attacks.

 

Everyone one of the players under TO understood what they were doing and why they were doing it.

 

And the player quotes are just a part of it. Listen to the Benning interview or the OWH videocast. Or use your own damn eyes. And then try to tell me there's a coherent offensive philosophy to what Langs tries to do.

 

Even in his interview with Benning, he didn't articulate one.

[cm husker]

I find it immensely amusing that the claim from some is that offensive or defensive philosophies are meaningless to players.

 

That's just hilarious and seriously undercuts the credibility of the speaker.