Does anyone think we'll be better next year?

This is exactly what I was afraid of. They tank their first season so that next year's 6-6 looks like improvement. smh
Man you really post some irrational stuff. You need to put your tin foil hat in the closet. If you truly think that MR would tank a season so he looks better the next you need to have a serious talk with yourself. Or quit talking to yourself. Which ever works.
default_drunk.gif
You're right. Most of the games they gave away were probably stupidity, not malice. Although I'm not sure about Purdon't.

 
Yes we will be .500 at the start of the season!

Srs answer depends what adjustments are made if any to assistant coaches. Or to scheme and recruits too early to tell this type of speculation is just that.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Honestly, if the staff gets their sh#t together, I think we could be undefeated heading into Camp Randall.
You dribbled a little Kool Aid on your shirt, bruh.
default_tongue.png
I know. It's really going to depend on what he pulls in come signing day and the actual focus of the returning players. Plus Alex Lewis being gone may help, dude is a poison.

I just don't expect Fresno State to push us much on opening day, neither will Wyoming the following week. I think Oregon got exposed a bit this year and it may take them another year or so to return to form and since the games in Lincoln I give us a slight edge. Then we run the crappy Indiana/Illinois gauntlet. 3 of them beat us this year and 1 we have yet to play as conference foes. We beat em all I think. Then we start the REAL meat of the schedule in Camp Randall.

 
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.

 
Since we'll finish this season with a losing record, and going .500 is better than having a losing record, I'd say "yes."

 
This has been a crazy, disappointing and unexpected season.

So many places to point the fingers and thumbs. I thought the defense couldn't get any worse, and it did.

Yet with all the injuries, combined with the worst coaching in the history of the world, it looked to my eye that a single player -- a competent quarterback completing 60% of his passes -- could have made this exact same team and scheme anywhere from 6-3 to 9-0.

And I'm a Tommy Armstrong fan.

Well, I was.

Exciting as hell, but on a team that needs less excitement and more pedestrian third down conversions.

A system quarterback will help a lot, but I don't know how to reverse overnight what is now the fifth season of decline for the Nebraska defense.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
This is exactly what I was afraid of. They tank their first season so that next year's 6-6 looks like improvement. smh
Man you really post some irrational stuff. You need to put your tin foil hat in the closet. If you truly think that MR would tank a season so he looks better the next you need to have a serious talk with yourself. Or quit talking to yourself. Which ever works.
default_drunk.gif
You're right. Most of the games they gave away were probably stupidity, not malice. Although I'm not sure about Purdon't.
Purdue, at least to me, came down to effort. I try not to call out individual players, however, there seems to be a pretty telling gif floating around of Nate Gerry standing still on one of Purdue's offense plays - not doing a thing. I've heard a few people talking about it.

I don't think all the players have given up, but, some of them appear not to care as much as they did early season. I can't say I completely blame them; however, attitude really comes down to the individual.

 
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'm confused, too.

What did we call all the penalties, turnovers and bone headed plays the previous seven seasons?

 
Haven't even played a game in November yet and we're reduced to koolaid induced dreams of next year.

Hip, hip, koolaid.

 
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'm confused, too.

What did we call all the penalties, turnovers and bone headed plays the previous seven seasons?
Good question since the amount of those this year is about equal to the total amount over the last 7 seasons.

 
This is exactly what I was afraid of. They tank their first season so that next year's 6-6 looks like improvement. smh
Man you really post some irrational stuff. You need to put your tin foil hat in the closet. If you truly think that MR would tank a season so he looks better the next you need to have a serious talk with yourself. Or quit talking to yourself. Which ever works.
default_drunk.gif
You're right. Most of the games they gave away were probably stupidity, not malice. Although I'm not sure about Purdon't.
Purdue, at least to me, came down to effort. I try not to call out individual players, however, there seems to be a pretty telling gif floating around of Nate Gerry standing still on one of Purdue's offense plays - not doing a thing. I've heard a few people talking about it.

I don't think all the players have given up, but, some of them appear not to care as much as they did early season. I can't say I completely blame them; however, attitude really comes down to the individual.
How could it come down to effort? You attribute nothing to 50 passes by a first time starter?

What was Gerry supposed to do during that scrum? If he runs and sticks a helmet into the 8 dudes already piled up, he possibly pushes the pile forward or knocks a tackler off.

People are pointing at the GIF, but it's not from Gerry's point of view.

He was on the backside seal and looking at a mass of players. I don't even know if he could see that the RB got loose on the backside.

I'm tired of people taking plays like this out of context. One could look across games every weekend and find this sort of play during all sorts of situations.

It's not somehow indicative of where this team and its players are. And I'm tired of the guessing games that never give the benefit of the doubt to guys like Gerry, but assume they must be at fault when a .500 coach gets off to a poor start.

 
Back
Top