NU's Beck learning on the job

[macroboy]

Hey, let's turn another topic into a second guessing Bo Pelini topic. Why not?

only if we can also turn it into a TO is a genius, he should ask for help thread that eventually devolves into a "we should run more option" thread.

Can it end with petty name calling and hurt hinies all around?

You need to go through the who is a good fan and who isn't thread transition before you get to the hurt hinies.

WOAW, Woaw, woaw! Slow down!!

We can't get to "I'm a real fan and you aren't" until we talk about bringing former huskers (Turner, Frost, etc.) back onto the coaching staff. Also, somewhere along the way we need a Beck to Watson statistical analysis. Not sure where, doesn't even need to have a point, just needs to get there.

BTW- we are right on schedule with the TO/ option part of this.

 

[It'sNotAFakeID]

We should bring in Scott Frost or Turner Gill. You all aren't good fans for questioning Beck's ability to call a game.

Just moving things along folks.

 

[Pedro Guerrero]

Bob Stoops has had a bunch of first time Coordinators since he has been at OU. Mangino was a 1st time OC, Mike Stoops was a first time DC, Chuck Long first time OC, Brent Venables first time DC, Josh Heupel first time OC.

Kevin Wilson and Jay Norvell are the only two OC’s under Bob Stoops that weren’t handling that duty for the first time. At a MAJOR University which if you ask me is a better, higher profile job then being on staff at Nebraska.

I don’t think Stoops has ever hired a former golf instructor though.

IMO Beck gets a C+ for his first season. There were to many turd filled drives, quarters, halves for him to get anything more than that.

 

[hskerprid]

Realizing that stats alone do not tell the whole story, I still wanted to compare Malzahn, Morris and Beck in their 1st year as OC at the D-1 level because of these similarities: a) They all had extensive high school coaching experience before jumping to D-1. b) They're spread-oriented OC's. c) They're roughly the same age (Malzahn 46, Beck 45, Morris 43).

Gus Malzahn 2006 @ Arkansas

4th Rushing (228.5 yds/gm)

108th Passing (149.5 yds/gm)

29th Total Offense (378 yds/gm)

31st Scoring Offense (28.8 pts/gm)

62nd Pass Efficiency (122.4 yds/gm)

2nd Sacks Allowed (0.64)

Avg. Rank of Opponents Total Defense = 43rd

Chad Morris 2010 @ Tulsa

15th Rushing (216.9 yds/gm)

13th Passing (288.6 yds/gm)

5th Total Offense (505.6 yds/gm)

6th Scoring Offense (41.3 pts/gm)

27th Pass Efficiency (144.7 yds/gm)

75th Sacks Allowed (2.15)

Avg. Rank of Opponents Total Defense = 76th

Tim Beck 2011 @ Nebraska

13th Rushing (223.9 yds/gm)

103rd Passing (166.5 yds/gm)

59th Total Offense (390.5 yds/gm)

43rd Scoring Offense (30.5 pts/gm)

73rd Pass Efficiency (125.4 yds/gm)

28th Sacks Allowed (1.25)

Avg. Rank of Opponents Total Defense = 52nd

So Beck has more yds per game but is 30 spots lower for Total Offense?? Where did you get these stats?

Wait, different years. Never mind.

 

[Rocketsocks]

IMO Beck gets a C+ for his first season. There were to many turd filled drives, quarters, halves for him to get anything more than that.

I agree with this. He didn't exactly light the world on fire with his offense this year.

 

[Stumpy1]

Look at the years that they coached in and you will find your answer.

 

[robsker]

Look harder... I have posted many, many times in positive ways about individual players. But enough of justifying myself...

The playing in a bowl game every year is something that the fans of at least 40 or so programs expect (and most get). That standard is a bit low. The winning record in bowl games is good. Agreed. The academic All-Americans and players staying out of trouble and the graduation rates being good are issues I have multiple times posted positively about (recently) --- these are as well good things.

The 9-win season thing is a bit overblown on this board --- 9 wins in the era of a 13 (or 14 game) season is very different from the era when teams played an 11 or 12 game schedule. The whole magic number of a 9 wins being the measure of success was when those 9 wins were out of 11 games --- not 13. Now a days, a 9 win season is a 4 loss season (or, in some cases, a 3 loss season) ... and I am not to sure that fans of teams hopeful of big things (and I'd sure think NU fans are still hopeful of big things) are going to be thrilled about a 4-loss season... or even a 3 loss season. Now, such seasons are not bad seasons, and many fan bases for many programs would see that as quite good. That said, if one envisions competing for BCS-type national-level competitive stature (as the top 15 or so programs are), such seasons are by no means successful. Consistent 3 & 4 loss seasons is not bad, I suppose... but given expectations of being competitive for BCS-level play... such seasons are not good either. Consistent 3 & 4 loss seasons mean, almost always, consistent seasons with 3 losses or so in conference (as non-conference losses, given that the caliber of non-conference competition is typically very low are usually not going to contribute to the losses) --- such will land your team in the upper middle (but almost never at the top) of the conference. So.... 9 win seasons are not conference championship-level and certainly not BCS-level play. So... 9 win seasons are not so hot.... and should not be counted as anything other than what they are... which is merely OK.

 

[Rocketsocks]

 

[shyndy]

that glass is neither half full or empty

 

[It'sNotAFakeID]

Not all teams play 13 or 14 games. 9 wins out of a 12 game schedule [which is what we have so far] is a 75% winning pct. It's not bad, but it's not any improvement from recent years. It was our first year in the Big Ten and I wasn't expecting us to set world on fire with the schedule we had. We didn't get to play conference teams like Indiana or Purdue or Illinois [Vanderbilt, Duke, Washington State, Kansas, or any Big East team] like most of the other teams did this year either.

I'm glad we're consistent. I'm glad we can put together at least 9 wins a year. I'm just hoping that Bo and the staff can take us up to that consistent 10, 11 win seasons in a couple of years or so.

 

[The Dude]

"I see the glass as too big."

-George Carlin

 

[robsker]

Not all teams play 13 or 14 games. 9 wins out of a 12 game schedule [which is what we have so far] is a 75% winning pct. It's not bad, but it's not any improvement from recent years. It was our first year in the Big Ten and I wasn't expecting us to set world on fire with the schedule we had. We didn't get to play conference teams like Indiana or Purdue or Illinois [Vanderbilt, Duke, Washington State, Kansas, or any Big East team] like most of the other teams did this year either.

I'm glad we're consistent. I'm glad we can put together at least 9 wins a year. I'm just hoping that Bo and the staff can take us up to that consistent 10, 11 win seasons in a couple of years or so.

me too --- 10 or 11 win seasons are what NU needs to have as a norm --- 10 wins in a "down" year, 11 wins in a "normal" year, and 12 or more in good years. Averaging at 11 wins. That would be play that would win conferences semi-regularly and be in the BCS with semi-regularity. That is, I would assume, the goal.

 

[Rocketsocks]

Not all teams play 13 or 14 games. 9 wins out of a 12 game schedule [which is what we have so far] is a 75% winning pct. It's not bad, but it's not any improvement from recent years. It was our first year in the Big Ten and I wasn't expecting us to set world on fire with the schedule we had. We didn't get to play conference teams like Indiana or Purdue or Illinois [Vanderbilt, Duke, Washington State, Kansas, or any Big East team] like most of the other teams did this year either.

I'm glad we're consistent. I'm glad we can put together at least 9 wins a year. I'm just hoping that Bo and the staff can take us up to that consistent 10, 11 win seasons in a couple of years or so.

me too --- 10 or 11 win seasons are what NU needs to have as a norm --- 10 wins in a "down" year, 11 wins in a "normal" year, and 12 or more in good years. Averaging at 11 wins. That would be play that would win conferences semi-regularly and be in the BCS with semi-regularity. That is, I would assume, the goal.

So basically you want the 90s run as a norm, not once every generation or so.

That's totally realistic. Which schools do that? Who should Nebraska be imitating?

 

[Excel]

The biggest issue I see in the thread is that none of you are real fans. You just pretend to be NU fans.

I'm far better because at least I'm honest about not being a Red Head.

 

[robsker]

Not all teams play 13 or 14 games. 9 wins out of a 12 game schedule [which is what we have so far] is a 75% winning pct. It's not bad, but it's not any improvement from recent years. It was our first year in the Big Ten and I wasn't expecting us to set world on fire with the schedule we had. We didn't get to play conference teams like Indiana or Purdue or Illinois [Vanderbilt, Duke, Washington State, Kansas, or any Big East team] like most of the other teams did this year either.

I'm glad we're consistent. I'm glad we can put together at least 9 wins a year. I'm just hoping that Bo and the staff can take us up to that consistent 10, 11 win seasons in a couple of years or so.

me too --- 10 or 11 win seasons are what NU needs to have as a norm --- 10 wins in a "down" year, 11 wins in a "normal" year, and 12 or more in good years. Averaging at 11 wins. That would be play that would win conferences semi-regularly and be in the BCS with semi-regularity. That is, I would assume, the goal.

So basically you want the 90s run as a norm, not once every generation or so.

That's totally realistic. Which schools do that? Who should Nebraska be imitating?

No..... read the post. Semi regularly winning the conference and semi regularly getting into BCS games. No statements about winning 3 or 4 NC's at all. Man. Read.

Not a return to the 90's. Rather, 1/3 the seasons with 10 wins, 1/3 the seasons with 11, 1/3 with 12 or more. That would put the team winning the conference between 1/3 to slightly less than 1/2 the time. BCS that often or slightly more. NC's? Who knows... once a decade or so... as there will typically be 3-5 teams each season with 11 wins or more. However, 9 win seasons, which are 3-4 loss seasons gets you no titles of any sort, no BCS of any sort.

The 10/11/12 win season teams of late to aspire to would be Alabama, USC, Oklahoma, Boise State, Oregon (of late), Ohio State (prior to this last year), Virginia Tech. Is it somehow unrealistic to aspire to being one of the top 6-7 programs? I think not. Averaging 11 wins gets you there. Averaging 9 wins... no. Averaging 2 losses per year gets you there. Averaging 3.5 to 4 losses does not. Consistent 9 wins means , well... consistent #3-5 in the conference and #20-#30 nationally at seasons end.