Change Scheme or Change QB?

[cm husker]

Pretty sure he that it wasn't the best idea for a offense at Nebraska because we don't have the luxury in recruiting that Alabama has and that he would like to see us run a offense closer to Osbornes. If I remember right Guy.

Yes, that sums it up well.

For every Alabama running a "balanced" system effectively, there's 10 Midwestern/Great Plains programs that failed miserably at it.

I recall when Husker fans used to laugh at the "boring" big 10 offenses like Michigan in '97. Now we apparently aspire to them as a model.

It's baffling to me why so many have jettisoned the lessons learned and passed on by TO.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

Pretty sure he that it wasn't the best idea for a offense at Nebraska because we don't have the luxury in recruiting that Alabama has and that he would like to see us run a offense closer to Osbornes. If I remember right Guy.

Didn't we just establish that my memory is better than yours?

It comes with the obsession.

 

[huskerfan2000]

Why is it such a big controversy why he came here?

He obviously thinks we have a program and coaches that will be the best for developing and using his skills.

Which I agree with and am glad for.

Not sure why there is an argument.

Well, read the thread. It really has nothing to do with KJ, it has to do with Riley and why he recruited the players he has.

recruit KJ, recruit Patrick.. those are keys to passing, not running. Riley says they will emphasize running, but recruited players for passing...

Kind of the opposite of how things are usually done when wanting to run more.

So because we recruited POB and KJJ we aren't committed to having s good rushing attack.

The logic there is just baffling and comical.

Did you even read the thread title? let me help..

Change Scheme or Change QB?
The point is will he change his scheme (as a pro-style type of coach) to be more of a running style coach. I said, look at who he recruited.. it doesn't lend itself to being a running style coach.

Nowhere did it suggest this..

we aren't committed to having s good rushing attack.

What it did mean was Riley is committed to being a pro-style coach. He won't change who he is.

You don't think my post might go as far as the title to the thread?

As for the bold. Being a "pro-style" coach doesn't mean he isn't going to understand the importance of running the ball.

Yes...I read the thread. People act like because he recruited POB and KJJ that he doesn't think the running game is important. That's just hogwash.

You can know the importance of the run game while utilizing another aspect more. I am sure every coach, regardless of the type of offense they run, understands the importance of the run game, they just go about it differently.

Would you call TO a passing coach? No, but he understood the importance of WHEN to use it. Again we are not talking about knowing the importance of one aspect of the offense, we are talking about changing the style of offense.

 

[flfmrredfan]

It's baffling to me why so many have jettisoned the lessons learned and passed on by TO.

After perusing so many Husker fan forums the last few years, this isn't baffling to me anymore. I've come to expect it from so many ignorant NU fans, who, possess short attention spans, are entitlement minded, and thus easily fall for a charlatan like SPEM and his braggadocio. They blindly expect that NU should win and recruit like some of the other elite schools like Alabama, etc., without investigating as to why that should be.

The reason why so many current events rhyme with past events is because so many people fail to learn from history.

 

[huskerfan2000]

It's baffling to me why so many have jettisoned the lessons learned and passed on by TO.

After perusing so many Husker fan forums the last few years, this isn't baffling to me anymore. I've come to expect it from so many ignorant NU fans, who, possess short attention spans, are entitlement minded, and thus easily fall for a charlatan like SPEM and his braggadocio. They blindly expect that NU should win and recruit like some of the other elite schools like Alabama, etc., without investigating as to why that should be.

The reason why so many current events rhyme with past events is because so many people fail to learn from history.

Ah yes, the "You're ignorant and I'm smart" post. These types of posts are not baffling to me anymore. They blindly expect that NU should run the same offense and recruit like TO, etc., without investigating as to why that should be.

By the way, what current events rhyme with past events?

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

Who is SPEM?

 

[Enhance]

It's baffling to me why so many have jettisoned the lessons learned and passed on by TO.

After perusing so many Husker fan forums the last few years, this isn't baffling to me anymore. I've come to expect it from so many ignorant NU fans, who, possess short attention spans, are entitlement minded, and thus easily fall for a charlatan like SPEM and his braggadocio. They blindly expect that NU should win and recruit like some of the other elite schools like Alabama, etc., without investigating as to why that should be.

The reason why so many current events rhyme with past events is because so many people fail to learn from history.

Completely disagree with bolded. In fact, I would argue the people who typically post statements like this are fans of other programs, and are using some 30,000 foot view to describe what they 'think' Husker fans believe.

The vast, vast, vast majority of Husker fans understand the unique position the university is in and the challenges they face. I can't think of a single time in recent memory where I've seen someone say 'Nebraska should be able to recruit like Alabama.' Nebraska couldn't even recruit like Alabama is now back in the 90's. Most Husker fans also know (and by most... I mean 9/10) a run like we had in the 90's will likely never happen again.

For someone who thinks they've figured out 'so many ignorant fans,' you seem to lump yourself in with the ignorance, as well.

 

[cm husker]

Enhance99, all of the time people say we should model our program after Alabama, and back in the mid 00s, it was USC. Many people talk about how "the only way for NU to win is to have consistent top 10 recruiting classes and the only way to do that is to recruit like Alabama (i.e., offer a pro development system)." Those fans, of course, never really bridge the gap between how we get from our historical "top of tier 2" recruiting to the "top of tier 1" when so many schools with better situations try the same pitch, but that's neither here nor there at this point.

I don't get why you jumped from that topic to the 90s run. I agree it will never happen again, but I do think a consistent .700+ winner with occasional conf championships is possible. But I don't think we get there by trying to do what so many other similarly situated schools have failed at.

 

[Enhance]

Enhance99, all of the time people say we should model our program after Alabama, and back in the mid 00s, it was USC. Many people talk about how "the only way for NU to win is to have consistent top 10 recruiting classes and the only way to do that is to recruit like Alabama (i.e., offer a pro development system)." Those fans, of course, never really bridge the gap between how we get from our historical "top of tier 2" recruiting to the "top of tier 1" when so many schools with better situations try the same pitch, but that's neither here nor there at this point.

I don't get why you jumped from that topic to the 90s run. I agree it will never happen again, but I do think a consistent .700+ winner with occasional conf championships is possible. But I don't think we get there by trying to do what so many other similarly situated schools have failed at.

In my opinion, cm, it's a straw man. I don't see people literally saying "the only way for NU to win is to have consistent top 10 recruiting classes and the only way to do that is to recruit like Alabama." And if there are people saying it, then it is a significant minority of the fan base. Unless, of course, you're inferring or creating assumptions about people's statements.

Perhaps I am completely off base here, but I don't think I am. I'm not going to sit idly by and let people make claims about the fan base that are flat out incorrect or apply to minor segments.

As far as my 90's reference, that era proved that you didn't need consistent top 10 classes to win at Nebraska, because TO didn't bring those in. Therefore, stating people want to be like Alabama, as if we ever were like Alabama in the past, is a false representation of the situation.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

It was merely stated in the past that the four teams that made last year's college football playoffs: Oklahoma, Alabama, Michigan State and Clemson all ran offenses that some here would accuse of "balance," including passing the ball 30 times a game or more while still maintaining a robust running game. CM's scheme argument posited that it was hard for a team to get enough consistent reps both passing and running the ball in practice, and they need to pick one to be really effective. This would seem to be contradicted by the many teams that both run and pass well, along with the many teams that don't do one or both well for a variety of reasons having little to do with scheme. Mediocrity is just a statistical fact.

I believe CM has also held forth that Nebraska's lower desirability in the recruiting ranks prevents us from competing at the levels of these elite teams, especially in terms of passing the ball, a skill that is apparently reserved for sunnier climates and wealthier schools. Again, tons of evidence to the contrary. Alabama is in the driver's seat at this particular moment. Clemson has a warmer climate and prettier girls. Oklahoma is Nebraska's peer. And Michigan State is colder and behind us in tradition. There is absolutely no reason why Nebraska should feel like we have to surrender to their superiority based on our current trough. Alabama and Oklahoma have been through them before, and Michigan State and Clemson have never enjoyed consistent dominance. It still means something when Nebraska shows up at a recruit's door.

We can build on that, especially if we have Keyshawn Johnson and Gabrielle Union bragging on social media about coming to Lincoln, Nebraska.

Somewhere within the run/pass ratio, offensive coordinators get to make a lot of choices and engage in a lot of strategies. Talent will always make it a helluva lot easier, but you can get both clever and lucky with your talent.

It's not like there's only one way out of this.

 

[MasterPulverizer]

Who is SPEM?

Yes, who is this SPEM?

 

[huskerfan2000]

Enhance99, all of the time people say we should model our program after Alabama, and back in the mid 00s, it was USC. Many people talk about how "the only way for NU to win is to have consistent top 10 recruiting classes and the only way to do that is to recruit like Alabama (i.e., offer a pro development system)." Those fans, of course, never really bridge the gap between how we get from our historical "top of tier 2" recruiting to the "top of tier 1" when so many schools with better situations try the same pitch, but that's neither here nor there at this point.

I don't get why you jumped from that topic to the 90s run. I agree it will never happen again, but I do think a consistent .700+ winner with occasional conf championships is possible. But I don't think we get there by trying to do what so many other similarly situated schools have failed at.

gotta say I have not heard any of that here in the heart of Nebraska

 

[84HuskerLaw]

In about 1996, Nebraska was THE nation's best program. Period. It was widely recognized and basically we could recruit almost any player we wanted. We were getting what TO identified as 25 of the top 100 players in the country in our classes typically. Perhaps the majority of recruiting 'gurus' and maybe even other coaches may not have agreed on all of our choices as being 'the best of the best' but I can recall Osborne stating flatly that they identified their top 100 and said we won't take anyone whose not on the list. For the most part they were able to do that. It hurt when Tom retired. Frank did not have the national rep and certainly did not have the recruiting ability. He was never a good recruiter but was able to recruit Nebraska/Omaha mainly.

Recruiting is all about image, reputation, apparnent 'need' in the positiion, type of offense and anticipated use of the player's self perceived skills, education, family values, etc. Not all parents thought Tom Osborne was a 'great man' but MOST did and he obviously had a very kind, personable and friendly way and a sense of humor and soft voice that would have been a very convincing salesman's presentation. He believed in what he was doing and saying and cared deeply for the best interests of the players. That was his greatest asset and it showed through plainly. Trust in him by families and the players was abundant.

Ironically, Joe Paterno was similar I think but it turned out that trust was falsely placed but who would have ever dreamed. I believe Mike Riley is much like this and I certainly believe, although I have not personally met him, that if I had a son playing football, I would trust him to be a great coach, mentor and friend and sincerely care about the future. Much more so that Bo, although I admit I was a big Bo fan from the beginning although I just always had my doubts as to whether he would ever become a Husker at heart. I think he began to in his first couple seasons but just could never get Ohio and the Buckeye out of their. Understandbly so and now he is back home where he apparently feels happy. Good for him.

Time will tell but I am more sold on Mike Riley today that I have been since his hire. I really feel the program is on the right track and the future looks bright. He may surprise about half the fan base who simply doesn't believe he has the right stuff.

 

[BRV920]

Frank wasn't a good recruiter according to you? Osborne said he was one of his best recruiters.

 

[MichiganDad3]

In about 1996, Nebraska was THE nation's best program. Period. It was widely recognized and basically we could recruit almost any player we wanted. We were getting what TO identified as 25 of the top 100 players in the country in our classes typically. Perhaps the majority of recruiting 'gurus' and maybe even other coaches may not have agreed on all of our choices as being 'the best of the best' but I can recall Osborne stating flatly that they identified their top 100 and said we won't take anyone whose not on the list. For the most part they were able to do that. It hurt when Tom retired. Frank did not have the national rep and certainly did not have the recruiting ability. He was never a good recruiter but was able to recruit Nebraska/Omaha mainly.

Recruiting is all about image, reputation, apparnent 'need' in the positiion, type of offense and anticipated use of the player's self perceived skills, education, family values, etc. Not all parents thought Tom Osborne was a 'great man' but MOST did and he obviously had a very kind, personable and friendly way and a sense of humor and soft voice that would have been a very convincing salesman's presentation. He believed in what he was doing and saying and cared deeply for the best interests of the players. That was his greatest asset and it showed through plainly. Trust in him by families and the players was abundant.

Ironically, Joe Paterno was similar I think but it turned out that trust was falsely placed but who would have ever dreamed. I believe Mike Riley is much like this and I certainly believe, although I have not personally met him, that if I had a son playing football, I would trust him to be a great coach, mentor and friend and sincerely care about the future. Much more so that Bo, although I admit I was a big Bo fan from the beginning although I just always had my doubts as to whether he would ever become a Husker at heart. I think he began to in his first couple seasons but just could never get Ohio and the Buckeye out of their. Understandbly so and now he is back home where he apparently feels happy. Good for him.

Time will tell but I am more sold on Mike Riley today that I have been since his hire. I really feel the program is on the right track and the future looks bright. He may surprise about half the fan base who simply doesn't believe he has the right stuff.

Here are the historical recruiting rankings. I never heard of a couple of them.

Year Rivals Scout PrepStar ESPN Emfinger Wallace Lemming
2011 15 22 14 17 15
2010 23 30 22 NR NR NR
2009 28 33 23 NR 24 NR
2008 30 21 NR 22 NR
2007 13 21 12 22 20 8
2006 20 29 20 NR 14
2005 5 10 5 22 1
2004 27 38 27 30 23
2003 42 28 40
2002 40 44 28
2001 14 7
2000 12 15
1999 25 17
1998 10 17
1997 17 19
1996 9 6/2
1995 3 8/11 5
1994 6 20
1993 18
1992 5 14 10
1991 28
1990 10
1989 12
1988 24
1987 6 7
1986 NR
1985 1