does the new coaching stuff owe anything to anyone?
The reason I pose this question is based on the departures of Witt and Culbert, some of the posts about Barry Turner on this site, and a great article in the Nebraska State paper titled "As Bold as Bo Wants to Be", where Bo is described as moving any player to any position and switching things up as much as he wants with no/little regard to what the player has been doing the last 2-3 years, or what they were recruited here to do. It seems that the coaching staff is very, very big picture minded and not very individual player minded. I am curious about if this is their mentality or just the situation they are in, due to the fact that most of the players these issues have come up with haven't been their recruits.
Most of their recruiting this year was about filling needs... are they going to try and do that with the current roster for next year, regardless of what players have done in the past?
There are several positives and negatives
Positives:
Every player should know they are not more important than the team. If they can benefit the team playing else where, then they will be moved.
If we can shuffle players around, then that means the 2 or 3 deep must have the coaches' confidence.
Competition will be increased as players are shuffled into different positions. For example, if Thenarse were pulled into Linebacker drills for a couple days, you can imagine that all of the linebackers would step up their play.
Maybe there are some hidden gems that would work out better at different places
Negatives:
No player wants to feel like they are be experimented with. I don't see the benefit of telling a 1 or 2 deep at any position: "hey, we are going to try you at DE today instead of LB, just to see what happens" How could a player both take that seriously, and feel like their sills are valued at their true position?
We want players constantly competing to keep their starting spot, but tooo much looking over your shoulder can make a lot of players play below their potential as well.
Needless to say, the article and some other opinions make it seem like Bo is treating things like it is first day of freshman ball, and that there is nothing to lose by trying some things out. It is like he has absolutely no obligations to any player in keeping them at a position or giving them some security in their future this spring. Is that true? Is that best?
I am aware that I am reading way to much into the article above and that the entire program is not going to be given a shot at Kicker, but the article made me think.
now you can point out the errors of my reasoning.
The reason I pose this question is based on the departures of Witt and Culbert, some of the posts about Barry Turner on this site, and a great article in the Nebraska State paper titled "As Bold as Bo Wants to Be", where Bo is described as moving any player to any position and switching things up as much as he wants with no/little regard to what the player has been doing the last 2-3 years, or what they were recruited here to do. It seems that the coaching staff is very, very big picture minded and not very individual player minded. I am curious about if this is their mentality or just the situation they are in, due to the fact that most of the players these issues have come up with haven't been their recruits.
Most of their recruiting this year was about filling needs... are they going to try and do that with the current roster for next year, regardless of what players have done in the past?
There are several positives and negatives
Positives:
Every player should know they are not more important than the team. If they can benefit the team playing else where, then they will be moved.
If we can shuffle players around, then that means the 2 or 3 deep must have the coaches' confidence.
Competition will be increased as players are shuffled into different positions. For example, if Thenarse were pulled into Linebacker drills for a couple days, you can imagine that all of the linebackers would step up their play.
Maybe there are some hidden gems that would work out better at different places
Negatives:
No player wants to feel like they are be experimented with. I don't see the benefit of telling a 1 or 2 deep at any position: "hey, we are going to try you at DE today instead of LB, just to see what happens" How could a player both take that seriously, and feel like their sills are valued at their true position?
We want players constantly competing to keep their starting spot, but tooo much looking over your shoulder can make a lot of players play below their potential as well.
Needless to say, the article and some other opinions make it seem like Bo is treating things like it is first day of freshman ball, and that there is nothing to lose by trying some things out. It is like he has absolutely no obligations to any player in keeping them at a position or giving them some security in their future this spring. Is that true? Is that best?
I am aware that I am reading way to much into the article above and that the entire program is not going to be given a shot at Kicker, but the article made me think.
now you can point out the errors of my reasoning.
Last edited by a moderator:
