Sam is trying to find any way he can to push the "not enough talent" narrative.I get that Sam is trying to make a point, but I am not sure what good it is going to do. If you went back and looked at the NU depth chart from 1997 you would see a lot of former walk-ons on it and there would be a ton of pride in seeing that.
Disagree here. He is about the best athlete (though Banderas is much better than many give him credit for) but I don't think he's close to the best LB, definitely not "by far." MRI and Young are definitely better.teachercd said:Newby is the best LB by far...MRI is well liked because of his major love for the fans and NU but he is not better than Newby.
I guess I am just tired of Sam and Lee and am ready for the season to start. Sam has been so down on this team for so long we all get it. Play the games and see what happens.Sam is trying to find any way he can to push the "not enough talent" narrative.I get that Sam is trying to make a point, but I am not sure what good it is going to do. If you went back and looked at the NU depth chart from 1997 you would see a lot of former walk-ons on it and there would be a ton of pride in seeing that.
Considering there's only 8-9 true freshmen on the chart, there are 15-20 more names than scholarship players. So there's going to be quite a few walk-ons.
His thoughts on the depth chart are fine, all he is trying to do with tweeting out that pictures of the depth chart is stir a pot.It looks like a lot of people here don't like Sam McKewon, but here are his thoughts on the depth chart.
http://www.omaha.com/huskers/blogs/sam-mckewon-s-takes-on-the-husker-depth-chart/article_e2f0f422-6e1e-11e6-97bf-83d2de3f0f7a.html
I think his points on the number of walk-ons are valid. I think there are some depth issues on the roster, which is shown in the number of walk-ons and the large number of redshirt and true freshman on the depth chart.His thoughts on the depth chart are fine, all he is trying to do with tweeting out that pictures of the depth chart is stir a pot.It looks like a lot of people here don't like Sam McKewon, but here are his thoughts on the depth chart.
http://www.omaha.com/huskers/blogs/sam-mckewon-s-takes-on-the-husker-depth-chart/article_e2f0f422-6e1e-11e6-97bf-83d2de3f0f7a.html
Mike Riley's offensive systems are built around the pass. The rush is secondary. If the pass works, the rush adds to your offensive weapons. If the pass doesn't work, you get behind the sticks and you have to pass more. If you do it long enough and get behind on the scoreboard, you have to pass to catch up. Pass first coaches often say, as Billy C. did, "Well, once we got behind, we had to pass and so the numbers got out of whack."Nah, based on last year's pre-season speak and in season results, his premise is solid. Your assertion that people are saying that "Riley is secretly plotting to fail" is absurd.He in in effect saying that Riley is lying about running wanting to run the ball more. He says we are all fearing this will happen. We are not! I stand by it, a pathetic post It could very well be that Newby ahead of Devine is a tip of the hat toward the pass over the run.
Eh ... I think the issue is mostly with how they did the depth chart. When you list six tight ends and three fullbacks, a good chunk of those are going to be walk-ons. Your backup PK, P and Snapper are often going to be walk-ons. Other than that, there are 11 walk-ons. I don't think that's too big of a number.I think his points on the number of walk-ons are valid. I think there are some depth issues on the roster, which is shown in the number of walk-ons and the large number of redshirt and true freshman on the depth chart.His thoughts on the depth chart are fine, all he is trying to do with tweeting out that pictures of the depth chart is stir a pot.It looks like a lot of people here don't like Sam McKewon, but here are his thoughts on the depth chart.
http://www.omaha.com/huskers/blogs/sam-mckewon-s-takes-on-the-husker-depth-chart/article_e2f0f422-6e1e-11e6-97bf-83d2de3f0f7a.html
If that's the point he's trying to make, it's undermined greatly by 3 walk-ons on what is widely believed to be one of the best receiving corp in Husker history.Sam is trying to find any way he can to push the "not enough talent" narrative.I get that Sam is trying to make a point, but I am not sure what good it is going to do. If you went back and looked at the NU depth chart from 1997 you would see a lot of former walk-ons on it and there would be a ton of pride in seeing that.
Considering there's only 8-9 true freshmen on the chart, there are 15-20 more names than scholarship players. So there's going to be quite a few walk-ons.
Yes and no. One is a fullback. Going forward that may be a scholarship position more often but it's been a walk-on position for most of what anyone can remember. One is due to injury and (possibly) not wanting to burn a redshirt for a game or two. And one is one of the best WRs in the B1G.I think the question of the number of walk-ons starting is valid. Five out of 22 players is just over 20%. That seems pretty high.
This isn't the 1980s & 1990s, when walk-ons were guys that SDSU, Wyoming & sometimes Northern Iowa are signing. These are guys those guys don't give scholarships to, and in the 85-scholarship era, those are decent players. Tom used to have those guys walk on but they're not footing the bill for their own education anymore. It costs more than twice as much to go to college now as in 1985 when the legend of the walk-on at Nebraska was in its heyday.
I look at all of the walk-on talent as a positive.His thoughts on the depth chart are fine, all he is trying to do with tweeting out that pictures of the depth chart is stir a pot.It looks like a lot of people here don't like Sam McKewon, but here are his thoughts on the depth chart.
http://www.omaha.com/huskers/blogs/sam-mckewon-s-takes-on-the-husker-depth-chart/article_e2f0f422-6e1e-11e6-97bf-83d2de3f0f7a.html
Depending on the walk-on program to fill a large number of holes in the depth chart is an indictment on the program's abilities to recruit and develop talent.I look at all of the walk-on talent as a positive.His thoughts on the depth chart are fine, all he is trying to do with tweeting out that pictures of the depth chart is stir a pot.It looks like a lot of people here don't like Sam McKewon, but here are his thoughts on the depth chart.
http://www.omaha.com/huskers/blogs/sam-mckewon-s-takes-on-the-husker-depth-chart/article_e2f0f422-6e1e-11e6-97bf-83d2de3f0f7a.html![]()