BYU

[True2tRA]

I say need because the whole reason we fired Bo was because are thirsty for more. We do NEED something.

But, you using that word as it pertains to this one game makes it sound like if we lose this game, it's disaster. Sure, we want something to hang our hats on and I'll be disappointed if we lose (just like anytime the Huskers lose). But, once again, this game will be absolutely no indication as to how the year or Riley era will turn out.

That's where I'm coming from. This game, in the grand scheme of things, isn't... anything. It's a tough first game for a new coach. Losing this game won't spell disaster, and if anyone uses a loss to BYU as the basis for any kind of "we should have kept Pelini" argument, they're a goober. Winning would tell us a little bit, maybe, about how well the players adapt to scheme and their willingness to buy in, or maybe about how decimated BYU was with their suspensions, etc. But losing, which I think is the most likely outcome, won't tell us much. Even if we bumble around and look lost... it's still a first game.

I agree, I think a loss is certainly possible and Nebraska fans should brace themselves. The problem with the 'throw away year' stuff is... the schedule gets significantly more difficult in the future.
We play:

2016: at Wisconsin, at Ohio State. We get Oregon at home.

2017: at Oregon, at Penn State. Ohio State and Wisconsin are at home.

2018: at Michigan, at Wisconsin, at Ohio State. We get Michigan State at home.

If 2015 is a throw away year, I don't know what the window for improvement is for Nebraska record wise. If Nebraska doesn't manage to win 10 games this season, I'm not sure when they're going too.

I know that the fans will cite improvement or how competitive we are in those games, but I don't know if the fans are going to be happy with likely 8-4 or 9-3 records.

I do see exactly what you're saying. It' only going to get harder.

That doesn't mean those games are automatic losses though. Thats the fun part. We get to see this guy make us the team that competes with the teams you just listed.

It won't be easy. i think Riley knows that. I still think he'd rather take on the challenge rather than be fired now, before he gets the chance.

I agree, there will be fans who whine when we go 9-3 again. I'm hoping a Mike Riley 9-3 year looks a lot prettier than a Bo Pelini 9-3 year. It ought to count for something if we can avoid those melt down games.

If not, then I guess we'll probably end up right back where we started. Still searching for the answer after T.O. retired.

 

[jsneb83]

If Minnesota has been a "good team" then Nebraska has been "great", and nobody truly believes that. They're an above average team in a garbage division that's the worst in the power 5. They recruit in the 60's and power rank in the upper 30's/40's. They've pegged at 5.5 wins by vegas and 3rd/4th in the division by the preseason mags.

Let's stop making them out to be world beaters.

You, and apparently two others who found some reason to plus 1 your comment, are getting a little carried away.
Nobody has said Minnesota is a world beater.

If Minnesota has been a "good team" then Nebraska has been "great", and nobody truly believes that.

How does this equate? Why would Nebraska be considered better than Minnesota? They've beaten us twice. Last year they came to our house and did it. Neither Nebraska or Minnesota has been great, but Minnesota has been better than us. Your logic is really unclear here.

They're an above average team in a garbage division that's the worst in the power 5.

So, they're just like Nebraska?
It won't take a world beater to win this division. Minnesota has been a solid team and this year, they just may have the fewest hurdles to overcome. That's all.

You've made the mistake of seeing their 8-5 record last year and instead of actually watching their football team and how hard they play, you've labeled the a failure because of the W/L record. How you see them as so dispicable is strange to me. You know, Nebraska has been extremely close to being 8-5 if it wasn't for a few miracles. Again, that 8-5 would include a loss to Minnesota. They've shown that.

Minnesota lost to TCU last year. The number 5 team in the country. They lost to Ohio St., the current National Champion, by a touchdown. They lost to Wisconsin by four points. Imagine if Bo could have ever managed to only lose to Wisconsin by four points. He may not be fired right now. They're loss to Illinios is unexplainable, and I didn't watch the game so I couldn't tell you. Not much different than how Nebraska found a way to lose to Northwestern a few years ago.

They did lose their best offensive and defensive players last year, so it is possible that they take a step back this year if no one can step up and fill those voids.

 

[SuperBigFan69]

I was surprised that the Vegas line on Minnesota for wins for the season was 5.5.

 

[Sargon]

I was surprised that the Vegas line on Minnesota for wins for the season was 5.5.

Anyone who favors Minnesota to beat Nebraska this year should be loading up on Minny over. What is the chance that Minny beats NU AND also loses 7 or more games in the regular season?

 

[Dr. Strangelove]

I say need because the whole reason we fired Bo was because are thirsty for more. We do NEED something.

But, you using that word as it pertains to this one game makes it sound like if we lose this game, it's disaster. Sure, we want something to hang our hats on and I'll be disappointed if we lose (just like anytime the Huskers lose). But, once again, this game will be absolutely no indication as to how the year or Riley era will turn out.

That's where I'm coming from. This game, in the grand scheme of things, isn't... anything. It's a tough first game for a new coach. Losing this game won't spell disaster, and if anyone uses a loss to BYU as the basis for any kind of "we should have kept Pelini" argument, they're a goober. Winning would tell us a little bit, maybe, about how well the players adapt to scheme and their willingness to buy in, or maybe about how decimated BYU was with their suspensions, etc. But losing, which I think is the most likely outcome, won't tell us much. Even if we bumble around and look lost... it's still a first game.

I agree, I think a loss is certainly possible and Nebraska fans should brace themselves. The problem with the 'throw away year' stuff is... the schedule gets significantly more difficult in the future.
We play:

2016: at Wisconsin, at Ohio State. We get Oregon at home.

2017: at Oregon, at Penn State. Ohio State and Wisconsin are at home.

2018: at Michigan, at Wisconsin, at Ohio State. We get Michigan State at home.

If 2015 is a throw away year, I don't know what the window for improvement is for Nebraska record wise. If Nebraska doesn't manage to win 10 games this season, I'm not sure when they're going too.

I know that the fans will cite improvement or how competitive we are in those games, but I don't know if the fans are going to be happy with likely 8-4 or 9-3 records.

I do see exactly what you're saying. It' only going to get harder.

That doesn't mean those games are automatic losses though. Thats the fun part. We get to see this guy make us the team that competes with the teams you just listed.

It won't be easy. i think Riley knows that. I still think he'd rather take on the challenge rather than be fired now, before he gets the chance.

I agree, there will be fans who whine when we go 9-3 again. I'm hoping a Mike Riley 9-3 year looks a lot prettier than a Bo Pelini 9-3 year. It ought to count for something if we can avoid those melt down games.

If not, then I guess we'll probably end up right back where we started. Still searching for the answer after T.O. retired.

I hope that a 9-3 year under Mike Riley looks better too. That basically means losing 21-17 instead of 63-17 or something. Eliminate the blowout losses.

Still, it's going to be awfully hard for Nebraska to win a conference championship before 2019 (two decades since the previous one). Going to need a couple of great recruiting classes to catch up.

 

[True2tRA]

I say need because the whole reason we fired Bo was because are thirsty for more. We do NEED something.

But, you using that word as it pertains to this one game makes it sound like if we lose this game, it's disaster. Sure, we want something to hang our hats on and I'll be disappointed if we lose (just like anytime the Huskers lose). But, once again, this game will be absolutely no indication as to how the year or Riley era will turn out.

That's where I'm coming from. This game, in the grand scheme of things, isn't... anything. It's a tough first game for a new coach. Losing this game won't spell disaster, and if anyone uses a loss to BYU as the basis for any kind of "we should have kept Pelini" argument, they're a goober. Winning would tell us a little bit, maybe, about how well the players adapt to scheme and their willingness to buy in, or maybe about how decimated BYU was with their suspensions, etc. But losing, which I think is the most likely outcome, won't tell us much. Even if we bumble around and look lost... it's still a first game.

I agree, I think a loss is certainly possible and Nebraska fans should brace themselves. The problem with the 'throw away year' stuff is... the schedule gets significantly more difficult in the future.
We play:

2016: at Wisconsin, at Ohio State. We get Oregon at home.

2017: at Oregon, at Penn State. Ohio State and Wisconsin are at home.

2018: at Michigan, at Wisconsin, at Ohio State. We get Michigan State at home.

If 2015 is a throw away year, I don't know what the window for improvement is for Nebraska record wise. If Nebraska doesn't manage to win 10 games this season, I'm not sure when they're going too.

I know that the fans will cite improvement or how competitive we are in those games, but I don't know if the fans are going to be happy with likely 8-4 or 9-3 records.

I do see exactly what you're saying. It' only going to get harder.

That doesn't mean those games are automatic losses though. Thats the fun part. We get to see this guy make us the team that competes with the teams you just listed.

It won't be easy. i think Riley knows that. I still think he'd rather take on the challenge rather than be fired now, before he gets the chance.

I agree, there will be fans who whine when we go 9-3 again. I'm hoping a Mike Riley 9-3 year looks a lot prettier than a Bo Pelini 9-3 year. It ought to count for something if we can avoid those melt down games.

If not, then I guess we'll probably end up right back where we started. Still searching for the answer after T.O. retired.

I hope that a 9-3 year under Mike Riley looks better too. That basically means losing 21-17 instead of 63-17 or something. Eliminate the blowout losses.
Still, it's going to be awfully hard for Nebraska to win a conference championship before 2019 (two decades since the previous one). Going to need a couple of great recruiting classes to catch up.

Yep, pretty much.

Urban Meyer has been successful everywhere he's been. Unfortunately, right now he's at Ohio State. We have to get past him to win a conference title.

Even sooner, we have to get past Wisconsin AND Minnesota to even get to the title game.

I'd like to at some point at least be in that conversation on a regular basis. The conversation that involves Nebraska vs. Ohio St. for the right to represent the Big Ten in the College Football Playoffs.

That in itself would be pretty cool, of course, that would be settling for less. We belong at the top. I'm hoping Riley pulls off one of those huge wins that we 'aren't supposed to win' and beats Ohio St. I think we saw enough evidene to realize that wasn't going to happen with the previous staff.

 

[Saunders]

If Minnesota has been a "good team" then Nebraska has been "great", and nobody truly believes that. They're an above average team in a garbage division that's the worst in the power 5. They recruit in the 60's and power rank in the upper 30's/40's. They've pegged at 5.5 wins by vegas and 3rd/4th in the division by the preseason mags.

Let's stop making them out to be world beaters.

You, and apparently two others who found some reason to plus 1 your comment, are getting a little carried away.

Nobody has said Minnesota is a world beater.

If Minnesota has been a "good team" then Nebraska has been "great", and nobody truly believes that.

How does this equate? Why would Nebraska be considered better than Minnesota? They've beaten us twice. Last year they came to our house and did it. Neither Nebraska or Minnesota has been great, but Minnesota has been better than us. Your logic is really unclear here.

They're an above average team in a garbage division that's the worst in the power 5.

So, they're just like Nebraska?

It won't take a world beater to win this division. Minnesota has been a solid team and this year, they just may have the fewest hurdles to overcome. That's all.

You've made the mistake of seeing their 8-5 record last year and instead of actually watching their football team and how hard they play, you've labeled the a failure because of the W/L record. How you see them as so dispicable is strange to me. You know, Nebraska has been extremely close to being 8-5 if it wasn't for a few miracles. Again, that 8-5 would include a loss to Minnesota. They've shown that.

Minnesota lost to TCU last year. The number 5 team in the country. They lost to Ohio St., the current National Champion, by a touchdown. They lost to Wisconsin by four points. Imagine if Bo could have ever managed to only lose to Wisconsin by four points. He may not be fired right now. They're loss to Illinios is unexplainable, and I didn't watch the game so I couldn't tell you. Not much different than how Nebraska found a way to lose to Northwestern a few years ago.

You're just assuming I didn't actually watch their team. I watched them destroy Iowa, who they basically are a clone of (different offense because of not having a QB). They lost to Illinois. They got smoked by Mizzou. They are a "sound" team but aren't fast and do not have a QB. The Ohio State game was as much about the fact that it was played in a snow storm than it was Minnesota's defense. Nebraska's 2-2 record against them since joining the B1G is mostly about the previous staffs failures and not Minnesota's successes. If we upgraded the staff, they shouldn't be much of a problem.

 

[SuperBigFan69]

Plus, NU was one odd fumble away from being 3-1 against them.

 

[Saunders]

Plus, NU was one odd fumble away from being 3-1 against them.

Yup, and the 2013 game would have been closer (possibly a win) if they hadn't played a gimped TM.

 

[Redux]

Yeah Bo Pelini went 2-2 against Minnesota. The two losses were to a failed yet gutsy perormance by a hobbled T Magic and last years uninspired loss at home sue to either receivers being unprepared or because I was in attendance. Probaably my being there.

 

[Red Five]

You've made the mistake of seeing their 8-5 record last year and instead of actually watching their football team and how hard they play, you've labeled the a failure because of the W/L record. How you see them as so dispicable is strange to me. You know, Nebraska has been extremely close to being 8-5 if it wasn't for a few miracles. Again, that 8-5 would include a loss to Minnesota. They've shown that.
Minnesota lost to TCU last year. The number 5 team in the country. They lost to Ohio St., the current National Champion, by a touchdown. They lost to Wisconsin by four points. Imagine if Bo could have ever managed to only lose to Wisconsin by four points. He may not be fired right now. They're loss to Illinios is unexplainable, and I didn't watch the game so I couldn't tell you. Not much different than how Nebraska found a way to lose to Northwestern a few years ago.

I find the bolded funny. Anyways, I'm sure there is a Minnesota thread to take this argument to. I'm in saunders corner btw.

 

[True2tRA]

You've made the mistake of seeing their 8-5 record last year and instead of actually watching their football team and how hard they play, you've labeled the a failure because of the W/L record. How you see them as so dispicable is strange to me. You know, Nebraska has been extremely close to being 8-5 if it wasn't for a few miracles. Again, that 8-5 would include a loss to Minnesota. They've shown that.

Minnesota lost to TCU last year. The number 5 team in the country. They lost to Ohio St., the current National Champion, by a touchdown. They lost to Wisconsin by four points. Imagine if Bo could have ever managed to only lose to Wisconsin by four points. He may not be fired right now. They're loss to Illinios is unexplainable, and I didn't watch the game so I couldn't tell you. Not much different than how Nebraska found a way to lose to Northwestern a few years ago.

I find the bolded funny. Anyways, I'm sure there is a Minnesota thread to take this argument to. I'm in saunders corner btw.

Yea, when I typed it I knew that someone would somehow take it that because I didn't watch a "BARNBURNER" like Minnesota vs. Illinois, that somehow meant I hadn't paid attention to their season. Couldn't care less whose corner you're in. I'm a Husker fan who thinks Minnesota is a pretty good team. I'm not the only one.

BTW, Minnesota was 6-1 at home last season. 2-3 on the road. One of those two road wins, was at Nebraska.

 

[AksarbenHusker]

Should be a great game. BYU was a Heisman-QB-candidate-injury away from a 10- (or even 11- or 12-) win season last year, and I expect they will light up a defense adjusting to a new scheme. Regardless of whether Pelini or Riley led our team onto the field, this game was going to be a challenge.

Our front 7 on defense will be weak and lack depth. I'm optimistic Riley's attacking scheme will help some, but the better teams on the schedule should be able to fend off our attacks. Our lack of depth means BYU's offense will open up holes in the defense by the 2nd half, and BYU will win by 10 points.

I am very optimistic for the Riley era, but this first season will not be a cake walk.

I'm curious as to what was meant by this.

I understand the depth part, and maybe you just meant linebackers, but I have a hard time seeing MC, VV, McMullen and Gangwish be considered a "weak" unit.

Also, to me, front 4 will pretty much define the 2nd level (LB's) in any defense. Whether the backers are young and lack depth, I think the front 4 will help them maximize production as defenders.

I'm hoping that a lot of the line's troubles last year were related to scheme and coaching. If that's the case, then obviously my predictions about the BYU game will change dramatically.

However, based on the last couple of year's of results from our defensive line--getting very few sacks and allowing opposing offenses to rush for hundreds of yards--I will remain skeptical until I see things change on the field. Let's not forget, that same unit that also had Randy Gregory allowed 281 rushing yards against Minnesota last year rushed, good enough for 5.3 yards per attempt.

 

[Saunders]

You've made the mistake of seeing their 8-5 record last year and instead of actually watching their football team and how hard they play, you've labeled the a failure because of the W/L record. How you see them as so dispicable is strange to me. You know, Nebraska has been extremely close to being 8-5 if it wasn't for a few miracles. Again, that 8-5 would include a loss to Minnesota. They've shown that.

Minnesota lost to TCU last year. The number 5 team in the country. They lost to Ohio St., the current National Champion, by a touchdown. They lost to Wisconsin by four points. Imagine if Bo could have ever managed to only lose to Wisconsin by four points. He may not be fired right now. They're loss to Illinios is unexplainable, and I didn't watch the game so I couldn't tell you. Not much different than how Nebraska found a way to lose to Northwestern a few years ago.

I find the bolded funny. Anyways, I'm sure there is a Minnesota thread to take this argument to. I'm in saunders corner btw.

Yea, when I typed it I knew that someone would somehow take it that because I didn't watch a "BARNBURNER" like Minnesota vs. Illinois, that somehow meant I hadn't paid attention to their season. Couldn't care less whose corner you're in. I'm a Husker fan who thinks Minnesota is a pretty good team. I'm not the only one.

BTW, Minnesota was 6-1 at home last season. 2-3 on the road. One of those two road wins, was at Nebraska.

But that win was basically because of a fumble, against Bo, who sucks. And Riley is better, so we should win. Right?

 

[The Dude]

I don't think Minnesota has the quality depth to do all the things it has to do over the course of the season to win the division (not sure we do either).

But for one game, I don't think there's any question they're a dangerous opponent for us. They've done more than enough to earn that kind of respect.

I mean, they've literally proved it.