Hunter94 Posted April 1, 2018 Share Posted April 1, 2018 41 minutes ago, Making Chimichangas said: If UCF can go 6-6 in 2016 to 12-0 in 2017... There is no reason to think that Nebraska can't go 9-3 or 10-2 from 4-8 last season. Talent wise, Nebraska can go 12-0. The biggest question is: can they mentally get over the hump? Logic says probably not in the first season, but there is always the possibility of exceeding expectations. I actually think a lot of Nebraska fans are more affected by by the previous coaching staff's ineptitude than the players are. I think this team will surprise almost everyone at how good they actually are. Not me though, I have a really good idea just how great they can be. Coach Frost and his coaches have incredibly high expectations for themselves and their players. So I am 100% buying into Coach Frost's philosophy and expectating great things. No, 12-0 is whiskey talk. 3 1 Quote Link to comment
Making Chimichangas Posted April 1, 2018 Share Posted April 1, 2018 4 minutes ago, yort2000 said: You need to lay off the kool aid. Did you see the results at the NFL combine? At best, you could say that NU's best players were slightly below average. I will drink as much kool-aid as I want, thank you very much. I do not expect 12-0, but I know it is possible--however unlikely it may seem to the pessimistic crowd. The biggest difference in my attitude from this staff from the current one, I'm not conceding any game as a loss until it actually happens. 1 Quote Link to comment
Making Chimichangas Posted April 1, 2018 Share Posted April 1, 2018 4 minutes ago, Hunter94 said: No, 12-0 is whiskey talk. Then imagine my surprise at not having consumed any whiskey. 2 Quote Link to comment
Scarlet Overkill Posted April 1, 2018 Share Posted April 1, 2018 7 minutes ago, Making Chimichangas said: I will drink as much kool-aid as I want, thank you very much. I do not expect 12-0, but I know it is possible--however unlikely it may seem to the pessimistic crowd. The biggest difference in my attitude from this staff from the current one, I'm not conceding any game as a loss until it actually happens. I'll drink some Koolaid with ya. 1 Quote Link to comment
Toe Posted April 1, 2018 Share Posted April 1, 2018 Pressed up on receivers? You mean we're not gonna see corners constantly lined up a mile off the line? 2 Quote Link to comment
HS_Coach_C Posted April 1, 2018 Share Posted April 1, 2018 52 minutes ago, BlitzFirst said: Ohio State was 6-7 the year before some coach named Urban Meyer took them over and then they had a perfect year the next year. Everyone forgets that they were dominant...they just couldn't do postseason due to Tattoo-gate. No reason to think that a proven good coach can turn in that kind of performance. In other words, it's not out of the realm of possibility and it isn't just whiskey talk. Is it very probable? Nope. But not impossible. It's not impossible, but the recruiting classes that made up that team for Ohio State were 4 top 10 classes and an 18th rated class. Nebraska's talent level is not on par with that. I think they can have a lot of success, but I think 9 wins is probably a ceiling for this year. 1 Quote Link to comment
Making Chimichangas Posted April 1, 2018 Share Posted April 1, 2018 Defensive backs playing tight coverage against receivers? Now that's just crazy talk. A far better strategy is to play 10 yards off... Quote Link to comment
B.B. Hemingway Posted April 1, 2018 Share Posted April 1, 2018 10 minutes ago, Making Chimichangas said: Defensive backs playing tight coverage against receivers? Now that's just crazy talk. A far better strategy is to play 10 yards off... I see bubble screens for 9 yard gains in my sleep 2 Quote Link to comment
Making Chimichangas Posted April 1, 2018 Share Posted April 1, 2018 4 minutes ago, HS_Coach_C said: It's not impossible, but the recruiting classes that made up that team for Ohio State were 4 top 10 classes and an 18th rated class. Nebraska's talent level is not on par with that. I think they can have a lot of success, but I think 9 wins is probably a ceiling for this year. I don't necessarily disagree with you, but I'm also not convinced Nebraska's "talent" is that far behind Ohio State's as certain perceptions would have one believe. A team having great "talent" and "speed" are largely by-products of great coaching and individual player effort. The last 5-6 years Nebraska's coaching has been average at best to horrendously awful at worst. During the same timeframe, player "want" (read hustle, motivation, desire to win, etc) waned considerably. You'll be amazed at how "fast" our players are this season because they'll actually be coached and know what they're supposed to do. Quote Link to comment
yort2000 Posted April 1, 2018 Share Posted April 1, 2018 8 minutes ago, Making Chimichangas said: I don't necessarily disagree with you, but I'm also not convinced Nebraska's "talent" is that far behind Ohio State's as certain perceptions would have one believe. A team having great "talent" and "speed" are largely by-products of great coaching and individual player effort. The last 5-6 years Nebraska's coaching has been average at best to horrendously awful at worst. During the same timeframe, player "want" (read hustle, motivation, desire to win, etc) waned considerably. You'll be amazed at how "fast" our players are this season because they'll actually be coached and know what they're supposed to do. https://247sports.com/Season/2017-Football/CollegeTeamTalentComposite 2 Quote Link to comment
Scarlet Overkill Posted April 1, 2018 Share Posted April 1, 2018 21 minutes ago, B.B. Hemingway said: I see bubble screens for 9 yard gains in my sleep I remember talking my friend off the ledge about that - "Stop worrying, they're going to get better as the season goes on!" so THAT's what it feels like to be wrong. Ick. 2 Quote Link to comment
Making Chimichangas Posted April 1, 2018 Share Posted April 1, 2018 23 minutes ago, yort2000 said: https://247sports.com/Season/2017-Football/CollegeTeamTalentComposite Not real sure what purpose that link served. Recruiting "rankings" are by-product of on the field success. Teams that have success tend to have higher rated classes because these recruiting analysts see the team's success and then by default put their rankings higher. They rationalize that Nick Saban, Urban Meyer, Dabo Swinney, etc have had great success so the players they're after must be pretty good so those players are rated higher than others. It is at best an imperfect system. Let me ask you this: How do you realistically rate the top 20 LBs coming out of high school in the state of Florida? The top 20 RBs in Texas? The top 20 QBs in California? How do you give a #1-20 ranking? You take a wild guess or throw darts at a board. The #1 player at a given position is often not the best. Players mature and develop at different rates. Coaching, coaching scheme, coaching changes, a player's work ethic, individual attitude, staying injury free--all of these things either help or hurt a player's developmemt. To merely point to recruiting rankings, which is nothing more than someone's opinion, as the sole measure of "talent" is just plain lazy. Talent to win at the college level and NFL draftable talent are two very different things. Quote Link to comment
yort2000 Posted April 1, 2018 Share Posted April 1, 2018 3 minutes ago, Making Chimichangas said: Not real sure what purpose that link served. Recruiting "rankings" are by-product of on the field success. Teams that have success tend to have higher rated classes because these recruiting analysts see the team's success and then by default put their rankings higher. They rationalize that Nick Saban, Urban Meyer, Dabo Swinney, etc have had great success so the players they're after must be pretty good so those players are rated higher than others. It is at best an imperfect system. Let me ask you this: How do you realistically rate the top 20 LBs coming out of high school in the state of Florida? The top 20 RBs in Texas? The top 20 QBs in California? How do you give a #1-20 ranking? You take a wild guess or throw darts at a board. The #1 player at a given position is often not the best. Players mature and develop at different rates. Coaching, coaching scheme, coaching changes, a player's work ethic, individual attitude, staying injury free--all of these things either help or hurt a player's developmemt. To merely point to recruiting rankings, which is nothing more than someone's opinion, as the sole measure of "talent" is just plain lazy. Talent to win at the college level and NFL draftable talent are two very different things. Year NU-OSU 2011 - 34-27* (Bauserman) 2012 - 38-63 2016 - 3-62 2017 - 14-56 Oh yeah, we are right there with Ohio State. 2 Quote Link to comment
Making Chimichangas Posted April 1, 2018 Share Posted April 1, 2018 (edited) 7 minutes ago, yort2000 said: Year NU-OSU 2011 - 34-27* (Bauserman) 2012 - 38-63 2016 - 3-62 2017 - 14-56 Oh yeah, we are right there with Ohio State. You're right, talent rankings are infallible and exist in a vacuum where absolutely no other criteria matters. All hail recruiting rankings! Death to any who oppose or question their absolute truth! Edited April 1, 2018 by Making Chimichangas 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.