jjamuss Posted July 12, 2016 Share Posted July 12, 2016 I like what is happening now. When the W's come, the love for this staff will follow. Either way, I'm N and keep buying my tickets. 2015 was brutal and exposed the previous staff's shortcomings under a microscope... that part sucked; but it's over and the future seems bright. Quote Link to comment
Scratchtown Posted July 12, 2016 Share Posted July 12, 2016 I'd be curious to know how much of the vote is swayed by the 2017 class. If "Calibraska" hadn't happened would everyone feel the same? Quote Link to comment
Enhance Posted July 12, 2016 Share Posted July 12, 2016 I'd be curious to know how much of the vote is swayed by the 2017 class. If "Calibraska" hadn't happened would everyone feel the same? Recruiting momentum, their social media presence and general buzz around the program is playing a significant role. However, I would personally be supportive of the staff and program moving forward regardless. 2 Quote Link to comment
ColoradoHusk Posted July 12, 2016 Share Posted July 12, 2016 I'm supportive of the coaches and the program, but I selected "indifferent". The on-field results are what matters the most for me and the 2015 season was ridiculously bad. Riley is a nice person and a good offensive mind, but his in-game management stinks. It will be interesting if Langsdorf is truly interested in committing to running the ball this year. I understand that the WR's are a strength of the offense, but Armstrong shouldn't be throwing the ball more than 30 times a game. I think Banker sucks, and is not a good defensive coach. This is a guy who is Riley's lackey and Oregon State fans wanted fired years ago. The future is looking decent with the recruiting of skill players in 2016, and the current commits for 2017. But, I truly question if Riley's coaching ability can make the team a 10-12 game winner each season. IMO, Riley was hired because he was the complete opposite of Pelini. That's all that Eichorst was looking for. 4 Quote Link to comment
Savage Husker Posted July 12, 2016 Share Posted July 12, 2016 Last year was teased with "looking at using the QB run game" and that wasn't used as much until UCLA. Agree with your whole post except for the above line. To be fair to the staff, the run game they did with TA was way more than anything that they did at OSU. I can agree with your comment, in that they weren't experienced in the QB run game, therefore they weren't confident in applying it to their play calls as often as necessary. I guess I was expecting more designed runs because we know Tommy isn't a stand in the pocket passer like Mannion, kinda figured college coaches would identify that too, and not be too stubborn with their identity - like Mav was getting at in his post about Langs. Tommy is a threat in the run game, just think they should have used him more, and it took 4-5 games before they started tried increasing his designed runs. The UCLA was a great mix. The spring game showed more promise because IIRC TA had a number of designed runs in that scrimmage. Hopefully this season they find the right mix. I know defense wins championships, but I think the season hinges on TA's productivity. Quote Link to comment
NUance Posted July 12, 2016 Share Posted July 12, 2016 "Like". We win ten games this year and it'll be "love". Quote Link to comment
huKSer Posted July 12, 2016 Share Posted July 12, 2016 I'd be curious to know how much of the vote is swayed by the 2017 class. If "Calibraska" hadn't happened would everyone feel the same? Not at all on my part. I don't pay much attention to recruiting because a) there is no guarantee that they sign with Nebraska and b) many that do sign don't pan out for one reason or another. Quote Link to comment
ColoradoHusk Posted July 12, 2016 Share Posted July 12, 2016 I'd be curious to know how much of the vote is swayed by the 2017 class. If "Calibraska" hadn't happened would everyone feel the same? Not at all on my part. I don't pay much attention to recruiting because a) there is no guarantee that they sign with Nebraska and b) many that do sign don't pan out for one reason or another. To me, it's hard to get excited about a group of players who won't be making big contributions to the team until the 2018 or 2019 season at the earliest. Riley and staff has to do things to improve the team in '16 and '17 first. 3 Quote Link to comment
Landlord Posted July 12, 2016 Share Posted July 12, 2016 The answers are weird, because they attach performance expectations to how I feel about them. I love the new staff overall, but don't necessarily think or know that titles are going to be raining down. 3 Quote Link to comment
ColoradoHusk Posted July 12, 2016 Share Posted July 12, 2016 It looks like people are willing to put up with crappy on-the-field results as long as the coach and the staff are nice and they are strong at recruiting. I just hope it's not Bill Callahan 2.0. 2 Quote Link to comment
huskerfan2000 Posted July 12, 2016 Share Posted July 12, 2016 I didn't respond to the poll mainly because there wasn't an option for how I feel. it is close to indifferent... but then again, I'm not indifferent. I was shocked by the hire of a coach that had done so little, but was 100% willing to give him a chance. Last year was an eye opener because he ignored what he had, and went pass happy.. and lost. That said, I have not turned on him but his leash got considerably shorter. 2 Quote Link to comment
Enhance Posted July 12, 2016 Share Posted July 12, 2016 I'm supportive of the coaches and the program, but I selected "indifferent". The on-field results are what matters the most for me and the 2015 season was ridiculously bad. Riley is a nice person and a good offensive mind, but his in-game management stinks. It will be interesting if Langsdorf is truly interested in committing to running the ball this year. I understand that the WR's are a strength of the offense, but Armstrong shouldn't be throwing the ball more than 30 times a game. I think game planning and in-game management are two things undeniably in need of improvement. The staff is made up of a good "coaches," in the sense that they're good teachers of the game. You would hope and think year two would result in more of the team being on the same page and the staff better understanding their strengths/weaknesses. Quote Link to comment
huKSer Posted July 12, 2016 Share Posted July 12, 2016 It looks like people are willing to put up with crappy on-the-field results as long as the coach and the staff are nice and they are strong at recruiting. I just hope it's not Bill Callahan 2.0. Callahan might have been nice, especially early on. I probably would describe him as arrogant and condescending. Question: What kind of adjustments could you have made? Callahan: Oh, I think it's probably too technical for you, 1 Quote Link to comment
Scratchtown Posted July 12, 2016 Share Posted July 12, 2016 It looks like people are willing to put up with crappy on-the-field results as long as the coach and the staff are nice and they are strong at recruiting. I just hope it's not Bill Callahan 2.0. This is what makes me skeptical. I've seen West Coast in Lincoln before. Was the BC staff just that bad, or was it the style in a place that is super windy/blistering hot/chilling cold most of the time during August-November. 1 Quote Link to comment
Redux Posted July 12, 2016 Author Share Posted July 12, 2016 It looks like people are willing to put up with crappy on-the-field results as long as the coach and the staff are nice and they are strong at recruiting. I just hope it's not Bill Callahan 2.0. I'm not. They lose 7 this year and I will lose my sh#t. Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.