Not going to be popular opinion

[caveman99]

I don't think that anyone (for the most part) is "against" Dylan on this matter. He brings up very valid and interesting points.

My initial Topic was that I "understand" why some of the recruits at QB-WR would second guess themselves based on this years' performance...REGARDLESS of the reasons.

my only "tiff" (what a puss of a word ) was the fact that this wasn't the same post as I started yesterday and that was cleared up.

I just have a hard time blaming Watson's play calling entirely on injuries. I understand that we could have been a better team without some of the season ending stuff to Qaulve and Burkes, but my goodness, look at OU and they still somehow hammered OSU at the end ( I know that their record, so please don't throw it out there)..

Plus, the fact that he is adding plays (option, toss sweep, option pass from the Osborne era, WHICH I LOVED THIS TYPE OF OFFENSE), in the middle of the season is so......... "junior highish".... like drawing up things in the dirt each week. I love those plays, but went away from ANYTHING he had tried to establish.

Wouldn't if have been nice to see a reverse to Paul-Cooper-Gillyen, 1/2 back pass, or jet sweep, toss sweep in Big 12 game? I think the top recruits are "scared" and "bored" with this offense. And they are going to base their decision on THIS YEAR, not last year. Back to the "what have you done lately" philosophy that our society has adopted.

I agree with you on this. I think that injuries and youth played a LARGE part in the issues the Offense has had this year, but the schemes seem erratic and at many times ill-conceived. I am not sure why the offense became super super conservative after ISU, they did get quite a few offensive yards and I don't think the Offensive Scheme caused every skill player to have fumbleitus.

I think the change also scarred CC away, Tyler I think was gone anyway. Will the issues keep NU from grabbing big time play makers in the future, yes it is possible. However NU still has a shot to get some pretty good playmakers this year DESPITE the offensive woes. Enunwa is on board and I think Austin Hill jumps on board also. Getting another 1-2 really good WR's on top of Enunwa is still a very good possibility. I have doubts about getting a QB this year since Tyler took so long to go to MU, but I think if NU had time they could bring one in. At the end of the day the Offense needs to have success next season. All of the big time Juniors they are working on for 2011 have to have some doubts about NU. If the Husker O can come out and have success next season then these Juniors will be sold even more on the Staff IMO. Something like that shows that the staff knows what they are doing and that what they are selling is the truth. So in some respects this all may pan out for some big time recruiting success on Offense, just maybe not this year.

 

[HANC]

Correct caveman......this year's class will not be a bust with or without a fw recruits, but I sure would love to have a few of these top teir guys stay on board (which was my thoughts yesterday)...

I look forward to hopefully seeing changes and a true identity next year. If we don't get a QB in this class, it isn't the end of the world. Green has 3 yrs., Spano will have 3 (will get medical), and if Martinez stays at qb he will have 4. If we bring a guy in next year, he would still have a year to learn the system before thrown into the fire..... Plus, we still have Lee for a year.

With that said, a good QB would be nice to grab.

 

[dylan]

I am not sure why the offense became super super conservative after ISU

because the staff decided their defense and special teams were good enough to win games if a struggling offense could just avoid shooting themselves in the a$$. looking at the results, they were right. we did win every game once they took that approach. it's unfortunate that it's providing fodder for negative recruiting and wasn't very sexy, but i'll take wins over style any day.

 

[caveman99]

I am not sure why the offense became super super conservative after ISU

because the staff decided their defense and special teams were good enough to win games if a struggling offense could just avoid shooting themselves in the a$$. looking at the results, they were right. we did win every game once they took that approach. it's unfortunate that it's providing fodder for negative recruiting and wasn't very sexy, but i'll take wins over style any day.

Yeah I get that, my point is that I don't fully buy that. The style of offense wasn't the reason for 5 fumbles. I get the reasoning of the supposed reason behind it I just don't see why they did it. If anything they should have went to an exclusive pass happy offense to reduce running time with the ball.

 

[dylan]

I am not sure why the offense became super super conservative after ISU

because the staff decided their defense and special teams were good enough to win games if a struggling offense could just avoid shooting themselves in the a$$. looking at the results, they were right. we did win every game once they took that approach. it's unfortunate that it's providing fodder for negative recruiting and wasn't very sexy, but i'll take wins over style any day.

Yeah I get that, my point is that I don't fully buy that. The style of offense wasn't the reason for 5 fumbles. I get the reasoning of the supposed reason behind it I just don't see why they did it. If anything they should have went to an exclusive pass happy offense to reduce running time with the ball.

if you're relying on defense you want to do two things: reduce turnovers to keep good field position and burn clock to shorten the game. those things are a lot easier with a ground based attack than a pass happy one (at least when you're not very good in the passing game, which we weren't). the proof is in the pudding though. it worked.