What Did We Learn - Wisconsin Edition

huskerfan74 said:
With Dana taking over, it seems like he has no favorites and he is just playing those who produce versus those who Satt thought should play.
Click to expand...


gobiggergoredder said:
I believe this is what has ruined our last decade+.
Click to expand...
I mean, Rhule has repeatedly emphasized, both in preseason and during the season, that he has no issue benching players who compromise the team, particularly when it comes to turnovers. And he's followed through on it several times.

The recurring 'favoritism' narrative that arises with every coaching staff feels both reductive and unsupported. Every time a new coach or coordinator comes in, we convince ourselves that they’ll avoid playing 'favorites,' and yet, within a year or two, the same accusations emerge. Instead of defaulting to this overly simplistic explanation, we should acknowledge the far more nuanced reality: coaching decisions involve trust, evaluation, and context.

Dana doesn’t have a long history to guide his decisions yet, but that’s not inherently a good thing. Experienced coaches naturally build trust in certain players over time, and while some may label this as favoritism, it’s more accurately called informed decision-making. Their jobs are far too complex, and their paychecks far too big, for them to rely on anything less than their best judgment and instincts. Success comes from making more good decisions than bad ones, not from adhering to a misguided ideal of treating every player exactly the same regardless of context.

 
Enhance said:
I mean, Rhule has repeatedly emphasized, both in preseason and during the season, that he has no issue benching players who compromise the team, particularly when it comes to turnovers. And he's followed through on it several times.

The recurring 'favoritism' narrative that arises with every coaching staff feels both reductive and unsupported. Every time a new coach or coordinator comes in, we convince ourselves that they’ll avoid playing 'favorites,' and yet, within a year or two, the same accusations emerge. Instead of defaulting to this overly simplistic explanation, we should acknowledge the far more nuanced reality: coaching decisions involve trust, evaluation, and context.

Dana doesn’t have a long history to guide his decisions yet, but that’s not inherently a good thing. Experienced coaches naturally build trust in certain players over time, and while some may label this as favoritism, it’s more accurately called informed decision-making. Their jobs are far too complex, and their paychecks far too big, for them to rely on anything less than their best judgment and instincts. Success comes from making more good decisions than bad ones, not from adhering to a misguided ideal of treating every player exactly the same regardless of context.
Click to expand...
You’re explaining theory.  You’re saying a guy can’t pick, or ride it out with, the wrong person because his job is too significant.  I’m going to tell you right now that’s horses#!t.  Favoritism isn’t even the word I would use.  I think it’s just poor coaching and leadership.  Sometimes your “best judgement” isn’t good enough.

Fact remains, you have no more knowledge than anyone else to develop an opinion.

-Emmett Johnson played significantly more than he has

-Fidone has been targeted all year and wasn’t out there at all. 
-Talk of getting ball to Mekhi Nelson.

-Nate B making multiple plays at TE

A new coach comes out after 10 days and says the O Line blocks well, the receivers don’t block and the RBs don’t hit the holes.

call it whatever you want but we have a new coach and we are seeing different players involved.  And a different outcome.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don’t think Benhart did anything bad yesterday. We sat right behind the bench and it’s unreal to see how much bigger he is then every other big player. 

 
Red Five said:
DB confirmed somewhere that Mekhi Nelson was the young player mentioned by Holgo this week.  Supposedly we had a package of plays for him that we took out of the game plan late in the week.
Click to expand...


I was two rows behind the bench and I saw Mekhi Nelson in the sub group next to the coaches with Bonner, Barney, Nelson, and a few others

Quinn Clark was bouncing between the group and the bench as well

 
krc1995 said:
I don’t think Benhart did anything bad yesterday. We sat right behind the bench and it’s unreal to see how much bigger he is than every other big player. 
Click to expand...
Compared to other games, he did great. I saw him get pushed back into DR a couple of times. Appeared to miss a block, but I assume he missed inside knowing there was outside help. The guy missed was picked up by either FB or TE chipping.

 
Undone said:
I know this is a stretch. But watching Emmett Johnson juke and spin and cut out there reminded me of sophomore year Ameer.

I know he's not necessarily Ameer. But damn, that is what you want to see. Just that complete frenetic & bolting style of cutting and slashing upfield. Damn.

Then you have Barney out there just doing whatever it takes. Such a good feeling to watch out team hang 44 on a solid defense.
Click to expand...


That's not that much of a stretch.  He looked a lot like Ameer out there.

 
Hagg said:
Not much if at all... come to think of it.  Different offense operation all around I guess.  A rewatch is warranted... not just for that.  :bounce
Click to expand...
We can only hope we don’t knock out their starter early in tje 2nd qtr only to have the backup come in and paint us up for 276yds and 2 tds.  Seems to be the norm for us. 

 
Odd bit of trivia I learned. November 23 is a terrible day in Husker history. To wit:
 

62-36

65-51
The Oklahoma loss where Mickey Joseph broke his leg
The 47-0 Oklahoma loss
The OU thrashing where Keith Jackson scored on a reverse
Several other Oklahoma losses

Prior to yesterday, Nebraska was 1-10 in our last 11 games played on November 23. The one win was against Iowa.

Historically it might be the worst day of the calendar year to be a Husker fan.

So yeah, exorcising more demons than one yesterday.
 

 
gobiggergoredder said:
You’re explaining theory.  You’re saying a guy can’t pick, or ride it out with, the wrong person because his job is too significant.  I’m going to tell you right now that’s horses#!t.  Favoritism isn’t even the word I would use.  I think it’s just poor coaching and leadership.  Sometimes your “best judgement” isn’t good enough.
Click to expand...
The crux of my response was coaching decisions on who to play and who not to play come down to far more than Satt just "playing the guys he wanted to play," a notion you quoted and suggested had been ruining the program for the last decade+. You're right - we can call it whatever we want - but the concept we're discussing seems tangibly understood, unless that is a misrepresentation of your view on what's been ruining things.

I guess I'm old enough to remember the days when Chinander was known for playing the right guys and making good coaching and leadership decisions.

gobiggergoredder said:
Fact remains, you have no more knowledge than anyone else to develop an opinion.
Click to expand...
I didn't say I did. But, I'm also not the one positing that the program has been ruined for a decade+ by coaches just "playing the guys they want to play" like Satt is allegedly guilty of. It's far more reasonable the guy made the best decisions he could and they weren't good enough, but that's not the same thing as what is being insinuated.

gobiggergoredder said:
A new coach comes out after 10 days and says the O Line blocks well, the receivers don’t block and the RBs don’t hit the holes.

call it whatever you want but we have a new coach and we are seeing different players involved.  And a different outcome.
Click to expand...
Yes, sometimes new coaches bring fresh perspectives and energy, leading to initial improvements. The key will be whether they can be sustained, something that a couple of games won't really tell us.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top