Where we discuss our fondness - or lack thereof - for former coaches now departed - Again

[Undone]

I guarantee that as a lifelong fan I know as much or more than you do about what we did and did not do in the 90s, cm.

I edited my post to satisfy you while simultaneously furthering the driving home of the point.

 

[cm husker]

And we are back to the crux of the issue. Many of us don't think the program had "gone to sh#t" prior to 2004. We had one bad season, finishing 7-7 against a tough schedule.

And before people start with "2003 was an illusion," ask yourself if 2016 has been an illusion by the same measures.

 

[Mierin]

I finally put CM on ignore. I havent used this ignore thing in a while. simply because when someone else quotes that person you can still see that. But i figure with him being ignored by so many, this wont be as much of an issue. And I like to argue. I cant help it. it's enjoyment for me. but 4 others on my ignore list have all been banned. LOL. Maybe i'm not so stupid afterall.

He really does ruin roughly 1/3 of the threads in here for me personally by bringing up the 90s and Solich. That's why I think he's actually trolling us - I'm serious.

I get glimpses occasionally that he might actually believe the stuff he says...but at any rate, maybe the ignore feature is the way to go. I don't mean that to be personal to him if he's NOT a troll, though.

How many people have to put someone on ignore before they get a vacation from the forum?

 

[Undone]

And before people start with "2003 was an illusion," ask yourself if 2016 has been an illusion by the same measures.

Nobody wants to entertain that topic, because we've moved on and are living in the "here and now" of Husker football, not the Osborne/Solich years.

 

[Count 'Bility]

And before people start with "2003 was an illusion," ask yourself if 2016 has been an illusion by the same measures.

Nobody wants to entertain that topic, because we've moved on and are living in the "here and now" of Husker football, not the Osborne/Solich years.

2003 year 6

2014 year 7

2016 year 2

pretty common sense to me.

 

[Stumpy1]

We are not running TO's offense in any shape or fashion.

Between 1980 and 1997, NU had more seasons (3) where our offense averaged less than 100 yards passing than more than 150 yards per game passing (2). In no season did NU average more than 156 yards passing per game. Contrast that with a rushing attack that was never outside of the top 5 in the nation (and led the nation 11 times during that span).

In no way, shape, or form is NU stilling running a similar offense, in principle or otherwise.

And we aren't employing many of his other principles, either, at least in terms of recruiting.

It's encouraging that Riley has recently talked about the importance of recruiting locally, but as of now, he's signed or has committed the lowest % of "radius" recruits of any NU coach as far back as I can find. Lower even than Callahan, who launched the first "callibraska" movement.

Translation: Osborne ran the ball a lot. And he ran it out of the triple option. And Nebraska was really good at rushing. Therefore, Nebraska can only be great on offense by running the triple option and greatly limiting the passing game.
This is what taking crazy pills feels like.

I just dont understand this whole thing. In an every changing and ever evolving sport, yet where the simple basics will always remain key, and coaches and programs are chasing that next great nuance to get them the advantage, and so many places take pride in this. but we. We husker fans, due to failures recently and our stupidity to blame those failures on simply changes in philosophy, are so hot to claim that the OLD way is the ONLY way. it's stupid. Oklahoma did not win a National title in 2000 and umpteen conference titles since using the wishbone. And so many are quick to forget. This program went to sh#t BEFORE Callahan and the philisophical shift. It was our reluctance to change and roll with evolution within the sport to begin with that put us behind. Not Callahan and his attempt to modernize, both football stuff and recruiting.

How dare you say this about cm's favorite coach. Solich and Bo are like Batman and Robin to him.

 

[cm husker]

I guarantee that as a lifelong fan I know as much or more than you do about what we did and did not do in the 90s, cm.

I edited my post to satisfy you while simultaneously furthering the driving home of the point.

I'm sure on Xbox Nebraska can be great running all types of offenses.

But when I look at NU's history and the history of the college programs in our border states, they have been best when employing power rushing/option looks (e.g., CU in the early 90s, KSU throughout Snyder's career). An exception might be KU during their brief stint of offensive success under Mangino. But during their other successful stint in the 90s, they were run heavy and had a QB that had some mobility.

Again, in theory, any offense could work anywhere.

But it's probably prudent to examine what's actually worked in practice.

 

[Undone]

Again, in theory, any offense could work anywhere.

I think you just made an incredible breakthrough. This is a great moment, for all of us.

 

[junior4949]

While a majority of our skill players might/will come from outside the 500 mile radius, it's highly unlikely that our most important players (OL & DL) will also come from outside the 500 mile radius. Has there been a position group bitched about more this year than the OL? Just a quick glance, it appears that a lot of our OL are from within the 500 mile radius. An offense just doesn't work well without good/great OL play. What I believe CM is basically saying is that we need to run an offense that takes advantage of the skills that our OL has or hides their weaknesses the best.

While scrolling down through the pages, I got a chuckle when I saw Joel Wilks name pop up. The only reason he became a Husker was because KState wouldn't offer him a scholarship. Snyder said he wasn't big enough. This was towards the beginning of Snyder's career as head coach at KState when he was running a pass heavy offense.

 

[cm husker]

While a majority of our skill players might/will come from outside the 500 mile radius, it's highly unlikely that our most important players (OL & DL) will also come from outside the 500 mile radius. Has there been a position group bitched about more this year than the OL? Just a quick glance, it appears that a lot of our OL are from within the 500 mile radius. An offense just doesn't work well without good/great OL play. What I believe CM is basically saying is that we need to run an offense that takes advantage of the skills that our OL has or hides their weaknesses the best.

While scrolling down through the pages, I got a chuckle when I saw Joel Wilks name pop up. The only reason he became a Husker was because KState wouldn't offer him a scholarship. Snyder said he wasn't big enough. This was towards the beginning of Snyder's career as head coach at KState when he was running a pass heavy offense.

Yes.

And that's interesting about JW. I hadn't heard that before.

 

[junior4949]

While I realize Bama doesn't do what it did a few years ago offensively since Kiffin has taken control of the offense, they somewhat mirrored what we did back in the day. They relied on great RB talent and great OL play. The QB position for Bama at one time was basically plug and play. All they needed was a game manager similar to how we were able to win with Berringer and Turman in 94'.

 

[Mavric]

And we are back to the crux of the issue. Many of us don't think the program had "gone to sh#t" prior to 2004. We had one bad season, finishing 7-7 against a tough schedule.

And before people start with "2003 was an illusion," ask yourself if 2016 has been an illusion by the same measures.

So by your definition, a "tough schedule" means losing to teams that finished 7-7, 8-5 and 7-6 and having your best win be over a 6-6 team.

And, yes, 2003 was an illusion. Solich beat two teams with winning records - an Oklahoma State team that got blasted by Oklahoma and Texas and a Southern Miss team that was 1-4 against non-C-USA foes - and lost the three games badly.

I was saying that we weren't as good as some thought this year before we forgot to show up against Ohio State.

 

[cornstar]

Osborne was using RPO and Kent Pavelka was literally calling it that because that's what it was 25 years ago.

True. But those were much different than what we saw last week. Not sure that this offense has anything resembling what TOs offense did.

 

[cornstar]

Fortunately for all of us, what Osborne did or didn't do doesn't really apply to Nebraska football anymore. For some of you, for whatever reason, you take that personally. I can't figure out why.

If we don't attract the most talented players we can and FAST, we're screwed. Recent history has proven this.

I don't think anyone takes it personally, it's just that without TO, we probably don't have any national championships. He made the blueprint, and any time we've deviated from the Devaney/Osborne tree, we've had disastrous results.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

TO didn't tailor his offense to attract coastal talent. But he certainly recruited the coasts. And rightfully so.

I missed the part where Mike Riley is doing anything different.

Unless you want to go ahead and explain that "coastal talent" is your code word for a pass-first offense, a skillset that somehow eludes the millions of football players in the middle of the country.

You could also come to the coast seeking the best running backs in the country. California is full of them. Florida has dual threat quarterbacks. New Jersey has speed and talent on both sides of the ball. Every offense will need good players at every position. Tom Osborne knew this. MIke Riley does, too. Probably because it's not a secret. There's no discernible geographic speciality when it comes to football, but there are high school football hotbeds.

Mike Riley getting traction among prized California recruits — who take to social media bragging about coming to Nebraska — is nothing but good.

Unless you want to be a d!(k about it.

We've been around and around on this, so I won't rehash it again. I'll just (THREE PARAGRAPHS OF REHASHING))

I'll stick with post #20, which you've done nothing to refute.

But as long as I'm here: Tom Osborne actually did listen to his critics, and nearly 20 seasons into his head coaching career he changed his recruiting philosophy, focusing more on speed, more on defense and more on faraway high school football hotbeds. As you may recall, this led to "championship" football, although I'm not sure why you put the word in quotes.

By the way....didn't this used to be a completely different thread?