Nebfanatic Posted February 6, 2017 Share Posted February 6, 2017 Remember the off season is a long time. Drink the kool-aid, it's better for you. 2 Quote Link to comment
The Big Nebrowski Posted February 6, 2017 Share Posted February 6, 2017 I think Tanner Lee holds MR's future in his hands. He seems to be the only QB ready to play and if he can't put on a decent showing, that will impact this program severely. POB would be the man, asked to come in and stop the bleeding. Red shirt freshman that can do that, are hard to find! I'm a MR fan and like the way he handles the program. He was put in a bad spot coming into this job and has done as well as any available coach could have.I agree. But this is Nebraska, this isn't fing Kstate, and he's making big bucks and he was hyped as being the "QB guy" and "can coach em up, get more outta less" type guy. So, he's had 2 yrs to get somebody ready to come in and takeover after TA and keep the train running on the tracks. He's got all the freaking resources in the world. So, if he can't pull that off then he shouldn't be the coach @ NE and he isn't doing what he was hired to do. I don't feel sorry for coaches. Those mofos are getting RICH at this sh#t, Banker got RICH, so they gotta deliver. I'm glad he's a nice guy, but it doesn't matter if he's a nice guy, he's paid to produce @ NE. If he goes anything worse than 8-4 this year, I don't see any big reason for keeping him around especially if there's a hot prospect out there. Quote Link to comment
Hunter94 Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 no doubt, this is a huge rebuilding year, players and scheme.......playing out to a .500 season would be a success...........and boy that sucks! Quote Link to comment
Redux Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 no doubt, this is a huge rebuilding year, players and scheme.......playing out to a .500 season would be a success...........and boy that sucks! I hardly see this year as a rebuild, if anything this is where we start to see the rebuild come together. And .500 would be the opposite of success. 3 Quote Link to comment
huskered17 Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 I still think MR is here till the 2018 season if he only wins 7-8 games this year. We could be looking for a new coach if he can't keep us in and win a few of the tough games that year. Real tough road games in 2018, but this will show what he has built. MR needs to get his redshirts on the field this coming season, if they can help. Building for the future is now. I doubt the AD is waiting for 2019 season to see what he has built. jmo GBR!!! Quote Link to comment
Elf Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 I'm cautiously optimistic moving forward. I still have reservations about Riley and his ability to win a championship, but he's making the right moves, recruiting well and shoring up deficiencies on the coaching staff. My hope is he's at the point now where they can really make some headway in 2017, because 2018 is going to be here real fast. At Michigan At Wisconsin At Ohio State Michigan State At Iowa That has the potential to be really, really, brutal. Let's hope the brutality is only felt by our opponents! 3 Quote Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 The inconsistency is below expectations for me. And some of the staff he compiled were bombs from the beginning. I like that he made staff changes, so that's a big plus. And as far as Riley's ability to be in tune with the fans, Husker tradition, how he handles the press, social media and recruiting, he's been pretty good. The main thing he has to change next is the running game. I hate it and they have to open it up. But I'm not sure if that's on HCMR or OCDL, or combined. It's also a reason why they struggle to put up 26-30 points a game when it shouldn't be as hard as they make it out to be. MR had said at least a few times this last season that he "gets it" and wants to pound the rock. But that just wasn't happening so well this season. First, we don't have an Ameer Abdullah and if you go back and look @ his "tape" he was on another level than the guys we have now. He left a big hole, on the order of ~700 extra O yds per.Newby had a respectable year, nearly 900 yds, has talent and speed, but just can't make a lot happen on his own: namely, can't break tackles. Zig got hurt and Bryant looks good w hopefully some upside, but I'd be surprised if he gets to Ameer's level. This is why I am worried that we kind of whiffed @ RB in the '17 class. No big disrepect to Bradly, but we're going to have to do a lot better than that. the obsession with carrying around 5 QB'S instead of focusing on a damn good RB makes no sense to me.......but to Lang's all is probably well..........ugh!You're absolutely right about that, sir, especially when 4 outta the 5 QBs nvr see the field.This is NEBRASKA, it's the LAND, the earth, the ground and those in your face winds of November! Last time we had a stable of thoroughbred backs was the '95 team of the century and it was a thing of beauty to see back after back run roughshod over those STUPID Gators and their whiney ol' Ball Coach. Now that's what I'm talkin' about! I hate to say it, but last time I was real excited about an RB was Omaha's own Ahman Green and that kid was kickin' ass and takin' names right outta the shoot, givin' the #2 back in Husker history, LP(RIP) a run for his $. Aw, the good ol' days. Since then, well Ameer was a joy to watch his last 2 yrs and Rex and Roy were pretty good too. We're just starvin' for the next GREAT NU RB, starving! Did we have a good QB in '95 or was it just the RBs that were great? I forgot... We carry 5 QBs so we dont get into the same mess weve been in the last couple years. No depth behind the starter. We saw how well we did when Martinez and Armstrong went down. Even with Abdullah and Burkhead and Helu. Those guys are NFL RBs and we were still an average team. Why? Because the QB position was average. And we are recruiting some top talent backs in '18. Just because we missed on them in '17 doesnt mean we werent recruiting them. 3 QB'S is plenty. without a doubt 1 or 2 of them will walk by end of the season, we have seen this movie before. and if we can't scout and find the best 3, what the hell do we do with 5 guys fighting for essentially 2 spots? What??? Are you actually claiming we shouldn't get a good QB every year in the recruiting class because you think one or two will transfer? News flash, that's exactly WHY you recruit one in every class. Every year you bring in a new stud to compete. If they don't make it onto the top 3 list, they might transfer. If they choose to do that, that's their prerogative. If they stick around....great...it's more depth. After the last 8 years of not having any depth at the position and all the problems associated with that, I am totally baffled by the theory now that we are recruiting TOO MANY stud QBs. 6 Quote Link to comment
Danny Bateman Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 I don't think Nebrowski is tigerdroppings/IamGLORIOUS. Different posting styles Man, now I just miss TuffTiger. Quote Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 Got to thinking about this after signing day. Everyone talks about the top studs in the classes...etc. However, I got to thinking that the bottom of the classes are a very important part of recruiting and direction of the program. Sure, a program can get 2-5 stud players at the top. But, those don't help with depth...especially if those studs don't pan out. So, I went back and looked at the last 5 recruiting classes to see the average rating of the bottom 10 players in each class. 2017 .8502 2016 .8436 2015 .8290 2014 .8182 2013 .8331 It appears to me the bottom of the class is improving due to not having to reach as much for late signees. This should help with depth issues when injuries and attrition occurs. 2 Quote Link to comment
Redux Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 Solid point right here^, +1 Quote Link to comment
The Big Nebrowski Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 Got to thinking about this after signing day. Everyone talks about the top studs in the classes...etc. However, I got to thinking that the bottom of the classes are a very important part of recruiting and direction of the program. Sure, a program can get 2-5 stud players at the top. But, those don't help with depth...especially if those studs don't pan out. So, I went back and looked at the last 5 recruiting classes to see the average rating of the bottom 10 players in each class. 2017 .8502 2016 .8436 2015 .8290 2014 .8182 2013 .8331 It appears to me the bottom of the class is improving due to not having to reach as much for late signees. This should help with depth issues when injuries and attrition occurs. Not sure I follow. Bama has studs top and bottom, throughout. Sooo... Well, if we can get a majority of 4* players rather than 3*, across the board, I think that's the key. Quote Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 What don't you follow? It's a pretty simple concept. 2 Quote Link to comment
The Big Nebrowski Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 What don't you follow? It's a pretty simple concept.I want studs top and bottom, as many as possible, that's what I'm saying. Quote Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 What don't you follow? It's a pretty simple concept.I want studs top and bottom, as many as possible, that's what I'm saying. Who doesn't? And...how does that contradict my post? 2 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.