McKewon: The Great Nebraska Talent Debate

[RedDenver]

Yet it took a brand new coaching staff to get anything out of that existing talent. Same old excuse...

 

 

What point are you trying to make?

 

You're saying, "Michigan had talent, got better coaching, and got much better". How does that apply to the discussion here that Nebraska didn't have talent (or enough talent)?

[zoogs]

Yet it took a brand new coaching staff to get anything out of that existing talent. Same old excuse...

 

This is kind of my argument. I love that we are doing so well in recruiting. At some point in the next 2-3 years we're going to have to ask if these coaches are the ones who should be trying to maximize that talent. I hope they step up to the plate, I really do. But if/when that time comes I hope we won't go back to the "if you fire them, nobody will EVER come to Nebraska again" line. Hogwash -- this is a primo destination in college football. Recruits will come here, and so will great coaches.

[suh_fan93]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Well, it should be pretty easy to explain:

 

- new system, new coaches; acclimation period

- one hell of a lot of razor-close games

 

The interesting thing is the W/L causes a perception that the '15 team was so much worse than the '16 team. They weren't so far apart. Frankly, I think the '15 team might have the edge (though part of that is due to injuries causing the fade at the end of last year). What do you hate about such pieces?

The acclimation excuse is just that. An excuse that is 'easy' to throw out there while there are other coaches who inherited/took on new teams only to have them miraculously do better. (Scott Frost, Jim Haraugh) and that's just a few off the top of my head. Also while Nebraska might have only had 1 player drafted this year there are a number of guys who are also getting serious looks/interest from NFL teams right now. For me the bottom line is Riley's teams have not been as talentless as McKewon makes them out to be and 2015 especially should never have been that bad.

uhhh, Michigan just put 11 players in the draft...

So that means Nebraska only had 1 talented player on the entire team last year?

It means Michigan was still pulling in guys like Jabrill Peppers (who at one point was considered the top prospect in his class) before Harbaugh was even hired. Per 247, they had 25 four star players and 2 five stars between the '13 and '14 classes (17 of those fours stars being in '13!!). Compare that to our 9 four stars between the '13 and '14 classes (with only 2 of those guys in the '14 class). I get that stars don't mean everything, but come on.

 

To compare Riley situation here to Harbaugh's Michigan tenure thus far is asinine.

First off the article isn't about comparing Michigan to Nebraska but if you want to go there then in case you couldn't figure it out Brady Hoke couldn't do what Jim Harbaugh stepped in and did with the very same talent.

you were the one who b

 

RedDenver said: What point are you trying to make?

 

You're saying, "Michigan had talent, got better coaching, and got much better". How does that apply to the discussion here that Nebraska didn't have talent (or enough talent)?

 

 

Have you read this thread at all or are you just reading this post all by itself? Hint: This post was concerning the attrition excuse. It took the 'right' coaching staff to put that talent all together. Nebraska imo actually has more talent than McKewon's article would lead you to believe.

 

Also great post zoogs! +1

[teachercd]

The talent gap is a moot point if we had a QB the last 2 years. Put a 60%+ guy under center and we win 10 or 11 games both years. Riley critics have to ask themselves- is there a coach in the country that could have compensated for Tommy's play? Sure hope the fan base can give Riley a fair shake with his recruits.

Ummm, yes?

[ColoradoHusk]

The talent gap is a moot point if we had a QB the last 2 years. Put a 60%+ guy under center and we win 10 or 11 games both years. Riley critics have to ask themselves- is there a coach in the country that could have compensated for Tommy's play? Sure hope the fan base can give Riley a fair shake with his recruits.

If the QB is the only reason that NU was so poor/average the past 2 years, what's the excuse going to be when NU wins 8 or 9 games in 2017?

[RedDenver]

 

RedDenver said: What point are you trying to make?[/size]

You're saying, "Michigan had talent, got better coaching, and got much better". How does that apply to the discussion here that Nebraska didn't have talent (or enough talent)? [/size]

Have you read this thread at all or are you just reading this post all by itself? Hint: This post was concerning the attrition excuse. It took the 'right' coaching staff to put that talent all together. Nebraska imo actually has more talent than McKewon's article would lead you to believe.

 

Also great post zoogs! +1

 

Then you'd need to show that Michigan had similar attrition to Nebraska or that the talent was similar in some way. Otherwise, your reference to Michigan doesn't really support your conclusion. You're just saying that with similar talent, better coaching produces better results, which I doubt anyone disagrees with. But it doesn't address the thrust of McKewon's article which suggests that the talent is not there.

 

The rest of your argument is that your opinion of Nebraska's talent is somehow more accurate than McKewon's.

 

It's not that I think you're necessarily wrong, but I'm not following your logic.

 

(Edit: fixed the quotes which weren't lining up for some reason.)

[Guy Chamberlin]

So what I hear you saying is that the Great Nebraska Talent Debate isn't over?

[VectorVictor]

The talent gap is a moot point if we had a QB the last 2 years. Put a 60%+ guy under center and we win 10 or 11 games both years. Riley critics have to ask themselves- is there a coach in the country that could have compensated for Tommy's play? Sure hope the fan base can give Riley a fair shake with his recruits.

 

Most of the better ones could have, and likely wouldn't have asked Tommy to throw as many passes as our HC/OC did.

 

Having said that, Tommy's ability to scramble and be a running threat helped negate many of the problems this O-Line had the past two seasons. Plus, any time we saw Tommy either restricted to being a pure pocket-passing QB (e.g. Illinios 2015) or injured (e.g. Iowa 2016), the opposition was able to tee off and take advantage of the weak O-Line to our detriment.

 

And frankly, a 60% guy isn't going to be above 60% for long with a poor O-Line (like what we had in 2016) unless he can pass from the prone position.

[BigRedBuster]

A 60% + passer would help the O line.

[RedDenver]

So what I hear you saying is that the Great Nebraska Talent Debate isn't over?

I doubt it'll ever be over.

[Guy Chamberlin]

A QB who loves to improvise and loves to throw deep balls is exciting to watch, but that style of playground ball can be hell on an offensive line.

 

Tommy Armstrong became Nebraska's all-time total offense leader under two different coaches who got similar results from him. I can't say either misused Tommy. I'd even go so far as to say Tommy and Taylor Martinez wouldn't have set records at any other University but Nebraska.

 

But if either Tommy or Taylor had Nebraska's 2009 defense backing him up, Nebraska wins more games and hardly anyone is dissecting their throwing motion and completion percentage.

[teachercd]

A QB who loves to improvise and loves to throw deep balls is exciting to watch, but that style of playground ball can be hell on an offensive line.

 

Tommy Armstrong became Nebraska's all-time total offense leader under two different coaches who got similar results from him. I can't say either misused Tommy. I'd even go so far as to say Tommy and Taylor Martinez wouldn't have set records at any other University but Nebraska.

 

But if either Tommy or Taylor had Nebraska's 2009 defense backing him up, Nebraska wins more games and hardly anyone is dissecting their throwing motion and completion percentage.

 

That's a really good point

[alwayshusking]

Don't think there is much of a debate about talent, we haven't had nearly enough of it in recent times. The only debate is whether Riley will do any better overall than some of his predecessors.

[StPaulHusker]

Debating talent is pointless if you don't have depth at the positions.

 

We were thin at basically every position but DB and WR.

 

Get the scholarship distribution numbers where they need to be and then lets see where we are

[Savage Husker]

 

A QB who loves to improvise and loves to throw deep balls is exciting to watch, but that style of playground ball can be hell on an offensive line.

 

Tommy Armstrong became Nebraska's all-time total offense leader under two different coaches who got similar results from him. I can't say either misused Tommy. I'd even go so far as to say Tommy and Taylor Martinez wouldn't have set records at any other University but Nebraska.

 

But if either Tommy or Taylor had Nebraska's 2009 defense backing him up, Nebraska wins more games and hardly anyone is dissecting their throwing motion and completion percentage.

That's a really good point

Which makes me wonder what could have been had Taylor started, or even played, as a true freshman. I remember reading quotes from that defense who said he was amazing on the scout team.