Huskers and Depth chart

[StuckinChicago]

right, and thats why, when Bill Callahan was the offensive coordinator, who is responsible for a vast majority of the offensive game planning, at Oakland, his offense dismantled alot of defenses, because BC couldnt game plan. I get it, and if you want to find out who is high on the depth chart, get up, go to the practices, which arent closed, and look at who gets the most reps. That way you can figure it out for yourself. Not releasing a public depth chart is for the benefit of the teams that we will play, not for hiding some horrible secrets from the husker faithful... allhtough there is a grassy knoll fairly near the new indoor complex.

 

[RedCountry]

This fervor for info is almost akin to people who demand to know what is taking place, in detail, with the war on terror. Both our war and the Huskers' training camp may both be best suited to keeping the enemy from learning much. If they are both more successful, because of the information staying inside, so be it. We will all know results when action commences. In the meantime we can speculate.
What we must be aware of is the journalists telling us what the truth is. They have agendas, fans just want results!

Great post Roy. :thumbs

 

[NamelessHusker]

Closing practices to the media and not releasing depth charts???
Does the staff have something to hide????

It's called gameplaning. It's called "why let your opponent know what cards you are bringing to the table". It's called "being ahead of the game"...etc

Surely you know what it means to not release a roster so your opponent doesn't know how to prepare for you. Or are you just trying to stir up something for the sake that someone takes the bait?

Don't worry, the coaches know who is going to play. That's all we need to know

Yep, it worked pretty good last year :sarcasm

Formerfan reponse from another thread:

We had 3 All American Cancer players.

You can't gameplan ahead if you have cancer players on the team

I'll borrow this one from Dave, *yawn*

These coaches have demonstrated that they have a tough time gameplanning, even when they have "their guys" who "buy in." These coaches can hardly gameplan at all.

Jordan Adams- Dennis Wagner recruit- Did not play due to spleen

Lyndon Murtha- Scott Downing/Bill Callahan recruit- Did not play b/c of inury

Adam Blankenship- John Blake recruit- Did not play (redshirt)

Joe Ganz- Kevin Cosgrove recruit- Did not play (redshirt)

Danny Muy- ?? recruit- Did not play (redshirt)

Beau Davis- John Blake recruit- Played in the second half of 1 game

Santino Panico- Kevin Cosgrove recruit- Special teams player (sorta)

Terrence Nunn-??? recruit- Played most of the season

Cornellius Thomas-Dennis Wagner recruit- Played most of the season

Brandon Jackson- John Blake recruit- played most of the season

These coaches have demonstrated that they have a tough time gameplanning, even when they have "their guys" who "buy in." These coaches can hardly gameplan at all.

You are right formerfan again. I mean far be it from me to question you when you consider 3 guys as a team. :blink:

 

[formerfan]

[Jordan Adams- Dennis Wagner recruit- Did not play due to spleenLyndon Murtha- Scott Downing/Bill Callahan recruit- Did not play b/c of inury

Adam Blankenship- John Blake recruit- Did not play (redshirt)

Joe Ganz- Kevin Cosgrove recruit- Did not play (redshirt)

Danny Muy- ?? recruit- Did not play (redshirt)

Beau Davis- John Blake recruit- Played in the second half of 1 game

Santino Panico- Kevin Cosgrove recruit- Special teams player (sorta)

Terrence Nunn-??? recruit- Played most of the season

Cornellius Thomas-Dennis Wagner recruit- Played most of the season

Brandon Jackson- John Blake recruit- played most of the season

These coaches have demonstrated that they have a tough time gameplanning, even when they have "their guys" who "buy in." These coaches can hardly gameplan at all.

You are right formerfan again. I mean far be it from me to question you when you consider 3 guys as a team. :blink:

Im talking about their results from other schools as well :thumbs

Sorry I didnt make that clear :sarcasm

Where exactly did I say that 3 guys were a team :wacko: I guess you got that from the same source that informed you that Auburn won a NC under Tuberville :rollin

 

[BigRedJake]

Where exactly did I say that 3 guys were a team :wacko: I guess you got that from the same source that informed you that Auburn won a NC under Tuberville :rollin

Right here:

even when they have "their guys" who "buy in."

 

[formerfan]

Where exactly did I say that 3 guys were a team :wacko:   I guess you got that from the same source that informed you that Auburn won a NC under Tuberville :rollin

Right here:

even when they have "their guys" who "buy in."

:blink: :blink: :blink: :blink: :blink:

So, apparently to you, me saying that they have not had alot of success even when they have "their guys" who "buy in, is the same as me supposedly saying that 3 guys are a team??????? :wacko: :wacko:

Wow, I cant argue with the illogical.

 

[BigRedJake]

Where exactly did I say that 3 guys were a team :wacko:   I guess you got that from the same source that informed you that Auburn won a NC under Tuberville :rollin

Right here:

even when they have "their guys" who "buy in."

:blink: :blink: :blink: :blink: :blink:

So, apparently to you, me saying that they have not had alot of success even when they have "their guys" who "buy in, is the same as me supposedly saying that 3 guys are a team??????? :wacko: :wacko:

Wow, I cant argue with the illogical.

There were 3 guys on last years team that were "their guys" who "bought in." This isn't that hard. I know you're deadset on playing the fool here and arguing semantics but the fact is the team wasn't "their guys" and the team hadn't "bought in." You implied the opposite, therefore 3 guys are a team from your point of view.

 

[formerfan]

There were 3 guys on last years team that were "their guys" who "bought in."  This isn't that hard.  I know you're deadset on playing the fool here and arguing semantics but the fact is the team wasn't "their guys" and the team hadn't "bought in."  You implied the opposite, therefore 3 guys are a team from your point of view.

We must be talking about 3 different guys, then. The 3 guys I was referring to were the supposed 3 "cancers" from last years squad.

 

[BigRedJake]

We must be talking about 3 different guys, then. The 3 guys I was referring to were the supposed 3 "cancers" from last years squad.

Nameless listed the recruits and which played (3: Nunn, Thomas and Jackson), quoted you about "their guys" and said you consider 3 guys a team. I don't see where you missed that.

 

[formerfan]

We must be talking about 3 different guys, then. The 3 guys I was referring to were the supposed 3 "cancers" from last years squad.

Nameless listed the recruits and which played (3: Nunn, Thomas and Jackson), quoted you about "their guys" and said you consider 3 guys a team. I don't see where you missed that.

Like I said, I was referring to the 3 All American caliber players whom were then referred to as "cancers." And when talking about "their guys" I was referring to the coaches stints and mediocre results at other schools as well.

BTW, its nice to see only half of that recruiting class listed above, and dont forget about Grixby either :thumbs .

 

[BigRedJake]

We must be talking about 3 different guys, then. The 3 guys I was referring to were the supposed 3 "cancers" from last years squad.

Nameless listed the recruits and which played (3: Nunn, Thomas and Jackson), quoted you about "their guys" and said you consider 3 guys a team. I don't see where you missed that.

Like I said, I was referring to the 3 All American caliber players whom were then referred to as "cancers." And when talking about "their guys" I was referring to the coaches stints and mediocre results at other schools as well.

BTW, its nice to see only half of that recruiting class listed above, and dont forget about Grixby either :thumbs .

Hey now, I wasn't defending either position; I know far too little about recruiting to do so. I'm just trying to make sense of some of your babbling. Maybe you should be a little clearer when attacking different parts of the team. It gets confusing sometimes.

 

[formerfan]

I know far too little about recruiting to do so. I'm just trying to make sense of some of your babbling.  Maybe you should be a little clearer when attacking different parts of the team.  It gets confusing sometimes.

It doesnt stop others, sometimes :thumbs I'll simplify it for you next time

 

[formerfan]

right, and thats why, when Bill Callahan was the offensive coordinator, who is responsible for a vast majority of the offensive game planning, at Oakland, his offense dismantled alot of defenses, because BC couldnt game plan.

Actually, that was Gruden's team and his offensive schemes. See how they worked against the Raiders in the Superbowl. We didnt actually see billy c's offensive philosophy and schemes until 2003, and see how they turned out?

Thats why alot of the team had a problem with him at Oakland.

 

[BigRedJake]

I know far too little about recruiting to do so. I'm just trying to make sense of some of your babbling.  Maybe you should be a little clearer when attacking different parts of the team.  It gets confusing sometimes.

It doesnt stop others, sometimes :thumbs I'll simplify it for you next time

I would appreciate it

Sorry 'bout the vitriol there FF, Monday has...not been an easy day so far.

 

[StuckinChicago]

Hey, Im not sure how much you know about football, but in a large majority, aka all of them not run by Mike Sherman, in the NFL, the person who calls the plays is (drum role please) the offensive coordiatior. Which means that the offensive gameplay is his responsibility. And by the way, Grixby was recruited by Solich, not Callahan, as was half of that year's recruiting class, so Nameless, for the sake of being accurate, did not count him.