What did we learn-Wyoming edition

[fb30]

I don't remember getting clobbered by Colorado?

[Count 'Bility]

I don't remember getting clobbered by Colorado?

in 1990 we led Colorado 12-0 after 3. They won 27-12. We then lost to unranked Oklahoma 45-10 and Ga Tech 45-24. But yeah. Osboren was Jesus and the option killed cancer so we actually we never lost

 

Nebraska had fallen to 3rd in the Big 8 pecking order. The tie in Boulder in 91 actually felt like an accomplishment

[GBRFAN]

It's means they averaged 8.5 wins a year for the last 8 years while having recruiting classes ranked from 87 to 127th. Is that clear enough for you GBR?

 

so more than what? - i'm guessing our 8 year win average just clips 8.5

[GBRFAN]

You should look it up. Probably not at high as Purdue or Illinois.

 

It's usally best to include all teams on the schedule when you use a stat like 8.5 wins per year

[BRV920]

God you're dense. We did it with much higher rated recruiting classes also. Maybe you should take a look at what our coach did during that time frame at Oregon State.

[commando]

this thread has turned into an incredible

 

[Count 'Bility]

I sort a broke down the competition level for Navy earlier int he thread. Their overall record, then their record for year against P5 opponents, whcih included notre dame and boulw games. What was noteworthy was not only their usual losing record against P5's over the past decade, but the number of actual P5's they actually played.

 

Here's the deal. if youre gonna ignore this and credit Navy for their "accomplishments" then Boise better be gettin some damn high praise as well. Boise is way ahead of Navy in terms of accomplishment. But I bet no one'll wanna go there, will they? Why? pretty simple. Boise doesnt run the option...........

 

I stand on my premise in all this. I dont care about the circumstances. If you cant consider the circumstances for Nebraska, or for Riley at Oregon St, then you cant for Navy. be consistent at least. Navy aint dun sh#t.

[dvdcrr]

 

 

 

The only thing that changed between 90 team and the 94 team was the defense. Very little changed on the offensive side of the ball. Also why do you guys always imply that I don't want to pass the ball? I want to, but not as the foundation of my offense.

 

 

I love the whole times have changed argument. I remember when they said the the game has passed Osborne by while we were in the midst of a 7 game bowl losing streak. We all know how that turned out. Navy is a great example of what can be accomplished when you establish a identity for you team and then build and recruit for it. They routinely beat teams with far more talent.

When they were saying the game passed Osborne by, it wasnt simply him sticking to his plan that led to 60-3. he didnt just simply stick with it and prove everyone wrong. There were other significant changes made to just about every single other facet of the program from the defensive plan to what the players were eating for an afternoon snack. So this is another false perception "Osborne ran the option and made it work, so we should do it today". He didnt sxclusively "make it work". He made changes to numerous other areas that allowed for the whole system to work. At a very dominant level. And he didnt line up in the i pro and pound it 50 times a game. he didnt line up in the ace and run spring option 50 times a game either. He did a little bit of everything and when games were still in doubt (which in them days, was not long) he was throwing a lot more than ppl wanna remember, cuz it's inconvenient for the run-the-ball guy's argument. Osborne was doing things with spread concepts and the option and tempo way back then long before Chip kelly and his genius ever came along.

Osborne constantly changed tactics, but he never changed strategy.

 

Any student of Nebraska history knows he talked constantly about his process and priorities, and first and foremost, he was run-oriented (and by the late 70s, he wanted a mobile QB because he understood the pressure that places on a D).

 

You're making things up about tempo, but I agree that his concepts, especially in the zone option game, are the basis of the best offenses today.

 

Oh, and that just reinforces the central point, which is that we should emulate the best offenses of today, not chase a dying paradigm of "balanced" offense, which apparently means 20 or so rush attempts up the middle with no diversity or diversion at all, mixed with 30 pass attempts (of which some will turn into scrambles).

If you want to see balanced offense look at the Patriots and how they moved the ball against Arizona. That was play action as crisp as I have ever seen it.

[BRV920]

He's a fun project since we want to nitpick what Navy's done. Why don't we look at the recruiting rankings of all the teams we lost to last year. That should be educational.

[TAKODA]

Yes, dumpster fire is correct. Argued to the point of nauseam.

[fb30]

Gotcha! Proved you wrong! What a douche.

[Redux]

God you're dense. We did it with much higher rated recruiting classes also. Maybe you should take a look at what our coach did during that time frame at Oregon State.

Can you provide a link?

[BRV920]

Yeah, go to Navy football recruiting. Last year 87. And the two years before that 120's.

[ADS]

What's the point of discussing Navy and their recruiting rankings? Has nothing to do with Oregon.

[Red Five]

What's the point of discussing Navy and their recruiting rankings? Has nothing to do with Oregon.

Exactly.

 

It has to do with the outcome of the Wyoming game. Duh.