Underwhelmed

[MdStine]

16 minutes ago, Dogs In A Pile said:

"I wonder how much of this whole process was influenced by buy-out money?"

"What is 100%, I'll take the Head Coach Office lights are on but nobody is home for $250 Alex"

[Undone]

18 hours ago, MdStine said:

I will double down with Frost had to be told to nuke his offense coaching staff, he lacked the capacity to have the thought originally.

 

I think that's roughly accurate.

 

Remember, he fired Walters just two years ago. He wanted Lubick in here. I doubt it was his idea to can his 'first choice' guy after jumping through hoops to bring him in.

 

And Alberts also has his reputation on the line. This move gives the appearance that Alberts is bold and decisive (based on the quantity of staff fired), but like I said in that other post I'm pretty sure that firing the OC was much riskier than people realize.

 

But, Greg Austin & Verduzco needed to go. Especially Austin. Running back is more of an innate position and so I can't put much blame on RB production on Held's coaching - but that position is lacking as well, to be sure.

[cheekygeek]

I'll just leave this here:

 

 

[GSG]

[Guy Chamberlin]

Is this the thread where we're talking about Scott Frost and the future of Nebraska football?

 

I agree that Trev has to navigate a divided fanbase, and the largest portion of that fanbase wants to give Scott Frost more time.

 

If Frost shows no progress next season, they will believe that former Husker Trev Alberts gave former Husker Scott Frost a fair chance and we can move on, undivided.

 

The s#!tshow is if Frost goes 6-7, getting to but losing a minor bowl game. The definition of both "progress" and "underwhelming." 

 

What will that mean?

 

I"ll take my answer off the air.

[captain_sasquatch]

22 hours ago, knapplc said:

 

I always make a white sauce (roux, then milk) and add sharp shredded cheddar, and I usually use Louisiana Hot Sauce. A lot of recipes call for Frank's Red Hot, but I prefer this stuff. 

 

This, but smoked gouda and muenster. 

[MdStine]

2 hours ago, Undone said:

And Alberts also has his reputation on the line. This move gives the appearance that Alberts is bold and decisive (based on the quantity of staff fired), but like I said in that other post I'm pretty sure that firing the OC was much riskier than people realize.

I see it as Trev is playing with house money and regardless it is net gain for him.  Alberts has at his disposal: (1) "I did not hire Scott, I inherited him"  (2) "IF" Scott has a losing season as he has done 5 of 6 HC years, Trev can play "I gave additional time to our native son to lead us but for the good of our brand had to let him go, I want to thank Scott for all his effort and love for the Cornhuskers"  (3) And Most importantly "I SAVED US $7.5M in dead money by renegotiating his buyout from $15M to $7.5"   (4) "IF" Frost can go 8-4 or better next year, Trev wins for looking patient.....  nothing but gain for the new A.D.

[DefenderAO]

On 11/15/2021 at 10:01 AM, TGHusker said:

It shows. 

He'll have the best practice writing sessions of his life this week.

[TGHusker]

1 hour ago, DefenderAO said:

He'll have the best practice writing sessions of his life this week.

    Great insight!

[The Scarlet Pimpernel]

My biggest concern is that next year we'll go 6-6, it'll be considered "progress," and it'll only prolong the inevitable. I just want to see what transfer QB we land, because that's the guy who could make or break Frost next season.

[NebraskaHarry]

5 hours ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

Is this the thread where we're talking about Scott Frost and the future of Nebraska football?

 

I agree that Trev has to navigate a divided fanbase, and the largest portion of that fanbase wants to give Scott Frost more time.

 

If Frost shows no progress next season, they will believe that former Husker Trev Alberts gave former Husker Scott Frost a fair chance and we can move on, undivided.

 

The s#!tshow is if Frost goes 6-7, getting to but losing a minor bowl game. The definition of both "progress" and "underwhelming." 

 

What will that mean?

 

I"ll take my answer off the air.

6 or 7 wins and Scott wont be coaching at that bowl game anyway. 8 wins is iffy imo. 9 should be the minimum bar for next year 

[Guy Chamberlin]

52 minutes ago, NebraskaHarry said:

6 or 7 wins and Scott wont be coaching at that bowl game anyway. 8 wins is iffy imo. 9 should be the minimum bar for next year 

 

We can say 9 wins is the minimum, but I can tell you right now that's not likely to happen with a new QB and tons of attrition on defense. 

 

To be honest, a 7-5 season with a new QB showing potential and an offense forging some consistency might actually feel good. It would be deemed legitimate progress and Frost is back for Year Six. There are, of course, a lot of scenarios where that doesn't happen. 

[Enhance]

I'm genuinely surprised at the volume of people who think Scott coaching this team to six wins and a bowl game next season 'won't be good enough,' intimating that he'll lose his job or should lose his job for that result.

 

At least six wins and an automatic bowl berth for the first time since what... 2016? I realize in the context of it being year five that this is too little progress vs. the expectations... but I guess I'm nowhere near as ready as some of you to say that would be it for him. We'd just be trading stupidity jabs with ourselves in the eyes of college football. Instead of firing coaches after a few years, we give a coach five years to build a program, he finally gets to a bowl game, and then we're like "lol not good enough bye."

 

OK.

[Born N Bled Red]

2 minutes ago, Enhance said:

I'm genuinely surprised at the volume of people who think Scott coaching this team to six wins and a bowl game next season 'won't be good enough,' intimating that he'll lose his job or should lose his job for that result.

 

At least six wins and an automatic bowl berth for the first time since what... 2016? I realize in the context of it being year five that this is too little progress vs. the expectations... but I guess I'm nowhere near as ready as some of you to say that would be it for him. We'd just be trading stupidity jabs with ourselves in the eyes of college football. Instead of firing coaches after a few years, we give a coach five years to build a program, he finally gets to a bowl game, and then we're like "lol not good enough bye."

 

OK.

 

I agree to some extent. I think he has to do better than .500 though. I think at 7-6 he gets brought back. It depends wholly though at how improved the offense and whether or not the defense regresses. 

 

I do think that the inadequacies of our offense this year are greatly exaggerated due to poor kicking and an insane strength of schedule. Against an average schedule we probably have 3-4 more wins ( I know, I know, but but Illinois and Minnesota and Purdue blah blah blah.) Illinois has beaten more than just us, Minnesota and Purdue have both been ranked at some point this season. I think the BIG West is woefully underrated this year, largely due to Wisconsin being down to start the season. 

 

2 different lineman and 1 solid punter  and 1 solid kicker we are probably in the top 10 and Frosts offense remains intact. Its unfortunate that our specialists all decided to sh1t the bed this year. 

[Huskers93-97]

So even though we have more talent than 10 of the 12 teams we play next year. Many of you are ok winning 6 games? So you are saying you are good losing against 4 inferior teams in year 5? Not me. Oklahoma and Michigan are the only 2 programs who have outrecruited us in the Frost Era.