Does anyone think we'll be better next year?

[NUance]

out of curiosity, what is the difference between "bad luck" and "bone head plays"?

is "bad luck" a euphemism for bad coaching? Or is bad coaching caught under bone head plays?

just trying to track the rationalizations accurately.

I guess you're asking me since I used those terms in my post above. Although I really don't know what you're getting at in asking this. I find it hard to believe that you don't know the difference between a boneheaded play and just plain bad luck. Really, you don't know the difference?

Okay then, here you go. Let's look to the Miami game for a couple of examples.

Bad luck play: Miami's interception at the end of the third quarter. Tommy threw a decent pass to Brandon Reilly right at the 1st down line. It hit Reilly in the hands right as the defender made contact, and bounced up in the air. The two Miami defenders collide with Reilly, and #2 goes rolling on the ground. He rolls over, laying flat on his back, and the ball falls right in his lap. That pick was just due to an unlucky bounce for us. LINK

Boneheaded play: First play in OT. Tommy rolls right. He has Taariq Allen headed to the corner of the endzone. Instead of throwing it to the back corner of the endzone where it will either be a TD or fall incomplete, Tommy throws it about 10 yards short. Corn Elder picks it off and runs it back to midfield. You can see it here at 12:12: LINK

I hope this helps.

Nope, it doesn't. You're arbitrary assigning bad luck to one play failure and bone headed to another.

So which is it: Do you think Tommy made a boneheaded throw to Reilly that bounced off his hands and into the lap of the defender lying on the ground (in my bad luck example)? Or do you think it was just bad luck that Tommy underthrew Taariq Allen in the endzone and hit Corn Elder squarely in the chest for an interception (in my boneheaded play example)?

I'll bet I could post these two plays on the front page of HB and ask members to select one as a boneheaded play and the other as a bad luck play, and 99% of our members would pick them the way I've described them. That and the fact that you have two warning points in the last two days leads me to believe that this conversation, like many of your other recent conversations, is just a feeble attempt at trolling. Perhaps you should consider changing the way you interact with other HB members.

Both plays were bone head plays. Reilly should have caught the pass... he didn't. Bone head play on his part... and his bone head play resulted in an interception.

Neither play had anything to do with luck or bad luck.

Assigning "bad luck" to Nebraska's mistakes and failures in just another example of the endless excuse making we've seen for the last 18 years.

Yeah, Reilly could have caught that ball. But the Miami guy hit him at about the same time the ball arrived. I was thinking the bad luck was more in terms of the ball popping up like it did, and then landing right in the breadbasket of #2 as he's lying on his back on the field. What are the odds of that, anyway?

But sure, you could argue that there is no such thing as luck or happenstance or chance occurrences. And, technically, you'd be right. If Reilly's index finger had just imparted a couple more dynes of force on the ball as it left his hand it would have landed just outside that guy's reach.

 

[LumberJackSker]

With 9 conference games starting next year along with no more FCS teams win will be harder to come by. I would imagine more time with these coaches would make them more familiar with the schemes and better at executing them, but with a roster full of guys not meant for this system and only one full recruiting class an improvement from this year still might only be 5-6 wins. I hate to imagine what 9 wins in two years would do to this fan base.

 

[gobiggergoredder]

How could it come down to effort? You attribute nothing to 50 passes by a first time starter?

Kid threw two horrible passes. Get over the 50.

I'd love to see the angle you take if they ran 70 50 times for 1.8 a carry.

Edit: changed # of plays because they would be punting every 3 plays.

 

[BoNeyard]

I have the perfect scenario: If Banker is still here, Oregon may drop 80 on us at home. Hopefully afterwards they'll tell Riley to get on the plane back to Oregon, and they'll let Frost stay and take his place.

This staff got their butts handed to them by Oregons system for 7 straight years. Oregon did the same thing over and over for those 7 years, this staff lived only 45 miles away from what was happening in Eugene and they couldn't figure them out.

Riley and co. will get severly out coached vs the Ducks. This game is going to be unbearable.

 

[Polecat]

Your season sure reminds me of the Rich Rod debacle at UM. After his 3-9 first season, he promised UM would be back and that was interesting because Carr had won 9 games the year before. He went 5-7 and then 7-5. Riley is similar to RR in that he is loyal to bad assistant coaches. Mediocre head coaches need great staffs or you will just get mediocre.

 

[cm husker]

out of curiosity, what is the difference between "bad luck" and "bone head plays"?

is "bad luck" a euphemism for bad coaching? Or is bad coaching caught under bone head plays?

just trying to track the rationalizations accurately.

I guess you're asking me since I used those terms in my post above. Although I really don't know what you're getting at in asking this. I find it hard to believe that you don't know the difference between a boneheaded play and just plain bad luck. Really, you don't know the difference?

Okay then, here you go. Let's look to the Miami game for a couple of examples.

Bad luck play: Miami's interception at the end of the third quarter. Tommy threw a decent pass to Brandon Reilly right at the 1st down line. It hit Reilly in the hands right as the defender made contact, and bounced up in the air. The two Miami defenders collide with Reilly, and #2 goes rolling on the ground. He rolls over, laying flat on his back, and the ball falls right in his lap. That pick was just due to an unlucky bounce for us. LINK

Boneheaded play: First play in OT. Tommy rolls right. He has Taariq Allen headed to the corner of the endzone. Instead of throwing it to the back corner of the endzone where it will either be a TD or fall incomplete, Tommy throws it about 10 yards short. Corn Elder picks it off and runs it back to midfield. You can see it here at 12:12: LINK

I hope this helps.

Nope, it doesn't. You're arbitrary assigning bad luck to one play failure and bone headed to another.

So which is it: Do you think Tommy made a boneheaded throw to Reilly that bounced off his hands and into the lap of the defender lying on the ground (in my bad luck example)? Or do you think it was just bad luck that Tommy underthrew Taariq Allen in the endzone and hit Corn Elder squarely in the chest for an interception (in my boneheaded play example)?

I'll bet I could post these two plays on the front page of HB and ask members to select one as a boneheaded play and the other as a bad luck play, and 99% of our members would pick them the way I've described them. That and the fact that you have two warning points in the last two days leads me to believe that this conversation, like many of your other recent conversations, is just a feeble attempt at trolling. Perhaps you should consider changing the way you interact with other HB members.

Both plays were bone head plays. Reilly should have caught the pass... he didn't. Bone head play on his part... and his bone head play resulted in an interception.

Neither play had anything to do with luck or bad luck.

Assigning "bad luck" to Nebraska's mistakes and failures in just another example of the endless excuse making we've seen for the last 18 years.

Yeah, Reilly could have caught that ball. But the Miami guy hit him at about the same time the ball arrived. I was thinking the bad luck was more in terms of the ball popping up like it did, and then landing right in the breadbasket of #2 as he's lying on his back on the field. What are the odds of that, anyway?

But sure, you could argue that there is no such thing as luck or happenstance or chance occurrences. And, technically, you'd be right. If Reilly's index finger had just imparted a couple more dynes of force on the ball as it left his hand it would have landed just outside that guy's reach.

I guess my point is that it's a meaningless distinction and often driven more by agenda than facts. Obviously a butt fumble is a "boneheaded play" while an unfortunate wind gust effecting a pass would be "bad luck."

But we shouldn't get into the weeds of assigning a category to these plays. Even in the latter example of wind gust or yours about a well timed play by a Miami defender (which in my opinion is not a matter of luck at all), one should ask: did the playcall introduce unnecessary risk (e.g., calling a pass play against Illinois in high winds) that allowed outside factors (bad luck) to weigh in.

We need to ask the central questions of (a) why are all these games against mediocre to poor competition coming down to a play or two, and (b) why are they consistently breaking against NU? Statistics dictate that "bad luck" can't be the answer.

 

[cm husker]

How could it come down to effort? You attribute nothing to 50 passes by a first time starter?

Kid threw two horrible passes. Get over the 50.

I'd love to see the angle you take if they ran 70 50 times for 1.8 a carry.

Edit: changed # of plays because they would be punting every 3 plays.

I have no idea why you even raise that hypo.

That said, at least if we are running, we are grinding out the game and letting our punter and D work a field position battle. 5 turnovers by the QB over something like 12 possessions crushed our defense in a game we could have ground out and actually gotten a W.

Why that doesn't concern more people, I have no idea.

I guess for me, it's this:

NU may win BIGGER with a "more accurate QB (POB)" but there's no excuse at all for why NU hasn't won at least 3 more games this season by simply grinding their opponents out.

 

[cm husker]

With 9 conference games starting next year along with no more FCS teams win will be harder to come by. I would imagine more time with these coaches would make them more familiar with the schemes and better at executing them, but with a roster full of guys not meant for this system and only one full recruiting class an improvement from this year still might only be 5-6 wins. I hate to imagine what 9 wins in two years would do to this fan base.

What guys in this system aren't suited for this system?

What guys are currently being recruited that will be suited for this system?

 

[BoNeyard]

With 9 conference games starting next year along with no more FCS teams win will be harder to come by. I would imagine more time with these coaches would make them more familiar with the schemes and better at executing them, but with a roster full of guys not meant for this system and only one full recruiting class an improvement from this year still might only be 5-6 wins. I hate to imagine what 9 wins in two years would do to this fan base.

What guys in this system aren't suited for this system?

What guys are currently being recruited that will be suited for this system?

O'Brien is supposedly the next Peyton Manning.

 

[onlyHskrfaninIL]

With this same coaching staff? No. I see four or five wins (Fresno St or Wyoming, IL, Purdue, Maryland, maybe one other). I would be surprised if SE and MR make it thru next year to be honest.

 

[gobiggergoredder]

How could it come down to effort? You attribute nothing to 50 passes by a first time starter?

Kid threw two horrible passes. Get over the 50.

I'd love to see the angle you take if they ran 70 50 times for 1.8 a carry.

Edit: changed # of plays because they would be punting every 3 plays.

I have no idea why you even raise that hypo.

That said, at least if we are running, we are grinding out the game and letting our punter and D work a field position battle. 5 turnovers by the QB over something like 12 possessions crushed our defense in a game we could have ground out and actually gotten a W.

Why that doesn't concern more people, I have no idea.

I guess for me, it's this:

NU may win BIGGER with a "more accurate QB (POB)" but there's no excuse at all for why NU hasn't won at least 3 more games this season by simply grinding their opponents out.

The grind it out running theory that you propose works absolutely fantastic when your defense gives up 14 points a game. However it would be a struggle when you have a D that could give up a touchdown in seconds.

 

[cm husker]

How could it come down to effort? You attribute nothing to 50 passes by a first time starter?

Kid threw two horrible passes. Get over the 50.

I'd love to see the angle you take if they ran 70 50 times for 1.8 a carry.

Edit: changed # of plays because they would be punting every 3 plays.

I have no idea why you even raise that hypo.

That said, at least if we are running, we are grinding out the game and letting our punter and D work a field position battle. 5 turnovers by the QB over something like 12 possessions crushed our defense in a game we could have ground out and actually gotten a W.

Why that doesn't concern more people, I have no idea.

I guess for me, it's this:

NU may win BIGGER with a "more accurate QB (POB)" but there's no excuse at all for why NU hasn't won at least 3 more games this season by simply grinding their opponents out.

The grind it out running theory that you propose works absolutely fantastic when your defense gives up 14 points a game. However it would be a struggle when you have a D that could give up a touchdown in seconds.

Think you're going to have to step me through that logic.

Seems to me that a system that limits possessions by bleeding clock is better than the 3 and out pass routine we've seen.

 

[gobiggergoredder]

How could it come down to effort? You attribute nothing to 50 passes by a first time starter?

Kid threw two horrible passes. Get over the 50.

I'd love to see the angle you take if they ran 70 50 times for 1.8 a carry.

Edit: changed # of plays because they would be punting every 3 plays.

I have no idea why you even raise that hypo.

That said, at least if we are running, we are grinding out the game and letting our punter and D work a field position battle. 5 turnovers by the QB over something like 12 possessions crushed our defense in a game we could have ground out and actually gotten a W.

Why that doesn't concern more people, I have no idea.

I guess for me, it's this:

NU may win BIGGER with a "more accurate QB (POB)" but there's no excuse at all for why NU hasn't won at least 3 more games this season by simply grinding their opponents out.

The grind it out running theory that you propose works absolutely fantastic when your defense gives up 14 points a game. However it would be a struggle when you have a D that could give up a touchdown in seconds.

Think you're going to have to step me through that logic.

Seems to me that a system that limits possessions by bleeding clock is better than the 3 and out pass routine we've seen.

If you can't move The ball, then you're not bleeding any clock. 2 yards a carry, and a three and out equals about 3 1/2 minutes.

 

[JJ Husker]

Really can't get much worse. So yes it should be better.

This^^^^

Can't be any worse than this year so next year will be better. I won't say a lot better or even good, but better than 3 or 4 wins. Due to luck and maybe a few things going our way just by haphazard chance.

I just don't see where Riley & Co. are trying to do anything that requires significantly different players than what they currently have available (other than a more pure passing QB). The rushing game they want is a remedial finesse style (not power in nature), and won't be a focus of attention so it won't get better. The defense Banker wants to run won't be helped by recruiting, other than possibly slightly if they can get some true NFL caliber lock down coverage guys but I don't see that happening and without more D line pressure, no DB's will be able to cover forever so, pass defense likely never improves either (unless Banker gets replaced-which won't happen). We've already got a dedicated ST coach and that hasn't helped ST one bit so don't see that getting noticeably better. Hopefully the clock management issues and penalties get better but once again I see no reason to think they will. This staff has been around and together long enough that clock management and play calling shouldn't be remotely the problems they were this season. Same with penalties, if these guys couldn't improve within 8 games over the player discipline/penalty problems BP historically had, I don't see where that problem improves in another year. Time and different players won't heal bad schemes, bad play calling, and lack of discipline.

So, if I had to guess I would say 5 to 7 wins next year. Better but still painfully bad. Likely looking for a new staff by the end of the 2016 season and then there we'll be swinging in the wind with some BP guys, some MR guys and a program not suited for anything and in need of another change in offensive and defensive direction. Sorry, that's my honest assessment of where we're at and where we're headed. I wish I could believe MR had a shot at getting it turned around but I just can't. I'm not buying the have to step backwards before going forward BS. This should've been an attitude rebuild and slight tweak only, not a burn the whole village to embers rebuild. Nothing has shown any sign of getting better and plenty of things have shown signs of getting worse. The Kool-Aid spigot has done run dry for me.

 

[chainsaw]

I'm in MR corner. he has lots to fix. when it becomes fixed all the idiots who have babbled out of there a** this year will be hiding under different keyboard names!