Armageddon?

[junior4949]

I was listening to Sports Nightly last night when John Bishop was talking about some of these message boards on the internet talking about Armageddon. He said anymore, the fans either love you or hate you depending upon your side meaning a BC and Pud fan or hater. Unfortunately, he's right. But then, we have to ask ourselves how did we get to this place? Whether your a lover or a hater really has no baring. I believe we first all have to agree as to how we got here.

Our team, the Nebraska Huskers were torn apart and Huskernation was split by one man. It's not BC because he did nothing wrong other than accept a job. It was Pud. He totally separated Huskernation. It doesn't matter if you agree with what he did or not, he split our fans. We have big problems down in Lincoln. When marginal players decide to go pro their junior year, I consider this a big problem. J. Bullocks' pro stock would have been much higher last year than it will be this year. If there wasn't some kind of problem, I believe he would have come back for his senior year and tried to mirror some of his stats from his sophomore year. Washington for the most part had a terrible year. For him to go pro is comical. Hell if JD was a junior, he'd probably be going pro. If you guys don't see this as problems with the program, then I don't want to be in your house when the electrical cord starts sparking.

Typically when players endure a season like last year, they want to come back that final year and rectify the situation. There is trouble brewing in Lincoln as I see it. Unless we want it to really get ugly, we'd better pray these recruits coming in are as good as they say. With all these guys quitting or going pro, it just lengthened the rebuilding process. We're possibly 2 years now away from even having a winning season!

 

[DaveH]

I refuse to believe that players turning Pro has everything to do with the recent changes. You said yourself that BC ins't to blame for this fan separation, but then you reference players leaving in the same paragraph. I am confused, so Pud has the most to do with players leaving?

Can't these players decide for themselves if they want to take a chance to go pro or is there always an ulterior motive now? We can't take these kids at their word anymore? Especially when they don't come out and blast everyone? I say that because IMO, that is the best way to pigeon hole yourself in the eyes of everyone listening. There is nothing wrong, IMO, with saying "I am turning pro/transfering because I don't see eye to eye with this staff" or something along those lines. That is leaps and bounds away from what kids like Birkel said on their way out.

We have had kid's skip their senior season before and they will in the future.

I do agree, however, about the fan split. It is quite obvious. However, how could one aviod doing so when you fire a guy like Frank Solich, which some thought was OK and some thought was horrible? There is your split right there. The fact that he got fired and this season has simply amplified it. More to the point, has there ever been a time where every Husker fan is happy with every aspect of the program or team? I doubt it.

 

[IrishAZ]

You've got a point, Junior.

My only critique would be that the incoming players, regardless of talent level (whatever that really means), won't be the solution.

Some of the fans think BC should be given a chance - but I think the burden of proof falls upon justifying his being here, not the other way around.

Here's a guy with no real track record or proof of ability. One lost Superbowl, followed by the most abyssmal post-Superbowl decline in NFL history. And then there's some marginal success at football powerhouses Illinois and pre-Alvarez Wisconsin.

Couple this with the absolutely largest fallacy about the Wine & Cheese Offense - that it will actually work in college.

It doesn't, and the way BC runs it, it never will. Even Chow and Tiller's versions of it use the sound principle of tailoring the system to the players' strengths, good scouting of the opposing defense to create mismatches and simplification to improve execution.

Forcing players ill-suited in training and skills into an offensive system which is inherently limited due to practice restrictions is an excercise in futility (one of the things that makes the WCO successful in the pros is that it forces defenses to prepare for a NYC Phonebook-sized playbook - something which can't be duplicated in college).

So, the real question is this: what was the point in changing coaches anyway? The ostensible answer was to prevent a slide into mediocrity and make the program more "modern".

But even then, BC is a step behind the times. The best offenses in both the NCAA and the NFL rely on what the players can actually do, and the hottest offenses in college today are using, ironies of ironies, *option hybrids*!!!

To insist on a system change just to seem more exciting is both an extreme display of hubris, and displays a total lack of the real goal - to win.

I mean, would you rather have a 6 win WCO team next year, or a 9 win option team?

IRISH!

 

[joshuavacek]

No one said the transition would be easy. It will take a few years but we will get there. Who else runs the option?? No One. That is because the option is dead and does not work with the speed of todays defenses. The WCO is not about passing. It is about what the defense gives you, and we ran alot this year and I loved it. It we complete a few more passes the WCO would work. We just need a QB that can do it and more that 1 guy playing defense,(that was Barrett Rudd).

 

[hoyamannn]

Besides 1 or 2 morons on this site, does anybody else have a problem with Solich being let go? I don't think many do. The problem is the WAY it happened. And I for one don't agree with the way it was handled either. But looking back, when should he have been fired? After we beat MSU in the bowl game? Should NU have actively sought a replacement before Solich left?

As far as the offense, I didn't see as many 'mistakes' last year as I did 'bad plays.' It just seemed we didn't have the personnel to run it. It's also apparent that the coaches used the players for their offense rather than using the offense appropriate for the players they had, which may have been intentional in order to get the top guys in here to run things. But a few days ago was BC's 1st anniversary as the HC here, and I'm anxious to see what he'll do this year.

It was a lot easier to give Frank a chance when he was named HC because we had all the success the years prior to him taking over. And TO personally named him (and TO could do no wrong). BC was named coach by a highly unpopular AD, and changing the offense and dismantling the staff wasn't a popular choice as well. Why not give BC another year or two? College FB is not the same as it was when TO was here, with the scholarship limits and recruiting more wide-spread among teams now than ever before. Frank had the guys for his offense and went 7-7, with the 'same team' that played for a NC. If BC can get his guys in here and still fail to win games and go to *quality* bowl games, I'll jump on the anti-BC bandwagon as well. My optimism says we'll be BCS Bowlin' again in 07'.

 

[TouchdownTommie]

No one said the transition would be easy. It will take a few years but we will get there. Who else runs the option?? No One. That is because the option is dead and does not work with the speed of todays defenses. The WCO is not about passing. It is about what the defense gives you, and we ran alot this year and I loved it. It we complete a few more passes the WCO would work. We just need a QB that can do it and more that 1 guy playing defense,(that was Barrett Rudd).

People who say the option is dead and won't work any more NEVER understood NU football even on its most basic level. You think NU won National Championships because they had more speed then everyone else on the option?

If Dr. Tom said it once, he said it 100 times, we are gonna knock them down and then knock them down again. Over the course of a game it takes its toll.

I am no Solich sympathizer, his recruiting efforts were abysmal. But I wonder where we would all stand if Corell Buckhalter had not fumbled going into the end zone at Texas in 1999 and Solich wins the National Championship with what was clearly the best team in the country that year. Remember that NU "option" pounding Tennessee in the Fiesta Bowl, while we all watching in disgust as FSU couldn't stop VaTech from running the ball?

The option, just like the wishbone, just like the 46 defense, just like the Veer T all still work with the right combination of coaches and players.

 

[CalHusker]

You know, I have an 87 year old aunt in Lincoln that still goes to ALL the home games and many away games. I remember for years (back in the day) her writing to my dad and telling him how T.O. was terrible and needed to pass more and yes even should be replaced. Of course this was before his first NC. Now, the point I am trying to make is that she didn't have internet, there were no message boards. The media and communication regarding how fans felt about coaching was very limited and miniscule in the National fish bowl. Now we can see and read what people think and feel all over the world without the editing of a newspaper, etc. I am willing to bet that the amount of split opinions about BC is not much more than it was for T.O. at one time, it just has a lot more exposure, IMHO.

 

[DJR313]

The option, just like the wishbone, just like the 46 defense, just like the Veer T all still work with the right combination of coaches and players.

I will agree with you there Tommie. The problem with the option not working as well at Nebraska is that Nebraska hasn't had a great offensive line for a few years, a quarterback that makes good decisions and a running back that is feared. When those things are in place, the option can and will work still.

Now, the point I am trying to make is that she didn't have internet, there were no message boards. The media and communication regarding how fans felt about coaching was very limited and miniscule in the National fish bowl. Now we can see and read what people think and feel all over the world without the editing of a newspaper, etc. I am willing to bet that the amount of split opinions about BC is not much more than it was for T.O. at one time, it just has a lot more exposure, IMHO.

Great point, Cal. No way of really getting a good feel for who was a supporter through the bad times, but I remember growing up and my dad and uncles complaining how Osborne can't and never will win the big game, then boom he wins 3 championships and his last 4 bowl games and he is awesome then.

 

[formerfan]

You've got a point, Junior.
My only critique would be that the incoming players, regardless of talent level (whatever that really means), won't be the solution.

Some of the fans think BC should be given a chance - but I think the burden of proof falls upon justifying his being here, not the other way around.

Here's a guy with no real track record or proof of ability. One lost Superbowl, followed by the most abyssmal post-Superbowl decline in NFL history. And then there's some marginal success at football powerhouses Illinois and pre-Alvarez Wisconsin.

Couple this with the absolutely largest fallacy about the Wine & Cheese Offense - that it will actually work in college.

It doesn't, and the way BC runs it, it never will. Even Chow and Tiller's versions of it use the sound principle of tailoring the system to the players' strengths, good scouting of the opposing defense to create mismatches and simplification to improve execution.

Forcing players ill-suited in training and skills into an offensive system which is inherently limited due to practice restrictions is an excercise in futility (one of the things that makes the WCO successful in the pros is that it forces defenses to prepare for a NYC Phonebook-sized playbook - something which can't be duplicated in college).

So, the real question is this: what was the point in changing coaches anyway? The ostensible answer was to prevent a slide into mediocrity and make the program more "modern".

But even then, BC is a step behind the times. The best offenses in both the NCAA and the NFL rely on what the players can actually do, and the hottest offenses in college today are using, ironies of ironies, *option hybrids*!!!

To insist on a system change just to seem more exciting is both an extreme display of hubris, and displays a total lack of the real goal - to win.

I mean, would you rather have a 6 win WCO team next year, or a 9 win option team?

IRISH!

Amen, brother, I couldnt have said it better myself!!!!!!!!!!

 

[formerfan]

1. Besides 1 or 2 morons on this site, does anybody else have a problem with Solich being let go? I don't think many do. The problem is the WAY it happened. And I for one don't agree with the way it was handled either. But looking back, when should he have been fired? After we beat MSU in the bowl game? Should NU have actively sought a replacement before Solich left?
As far as the offense, I didn't see as many 'mistakes' last year as I did 'bad plays.' It just seemed we didn't have the personnel to run it. It's also apparent that the coaches used the players for their offense rather than using the offense appropriate for the players they had, which may have been intentional in order to get the top guys in here to run things. But a few days ago was BC's 1st anniversary as the HC here, and I'm anxious to see what he'll do this year.

It was a lot easier to give Frank a chance when he was named HC because we had all the success the years prior to him taking over. And TO personally named him (and TO could do no wrong). BC was named coach by a highly unpopular AD, and changing the offense and dismantling the staff wasn't a popular choice as well.

2. Why not give BC another year or two?

3. College FB is not the same as it was when TO was here, with the scholarship limits and recruiting more wide-spread among teams now than ever before.

4. Frank had the guys for his offense and went 7-7, with the 'same team' that played for a NC. If BC can get his guys in here and still fail to win games and go to *quality* bowl games, I'll jump on the anti-BC bandwagon as well.

5.My optimism says we'll be BCS Bowlin' again in 07'.

1. Agreed.

2. Because he is an idiot loser coach who doesnt deserve the chance to dismantle the program any more than he already has.

3. Gee, thats just what they told TO in the late 80's early 90's, then low-and-behold, he won 3 NC's.

4. You couldnt be further from the truth. To start with we lost a Heisman qb and and All American left guard, I believe, not to mention quite a few others that slip my mind.

5. Only if cally and co mysteriously end up missing and are replace by, well, anybody with a pulse.