You calling their running back "average" talent. Granted he's running behind a very good O line but that dude is one of the best in the country. They're well coached. They've been recruiting to that same system for decades. They have some difference makers and they don't beat themselves.(Stanley Morgan might not play for them) Sounds like many folks want to flip the apple cart and start all over again with another completely different system with athletes who weren't recruited for it. Sounds like a recipe for success.
Gerald Foster "doesn't want to be like Wisconsin..."
- Thread starter Hoosker Du
- Start date
You are short crediting Notre Dame and Iowa, and pining for days gone by jsut like me.
However, look up his old quotes, not ones from solely a Nebraska sources. I'll help. He said "he learned football from Bob Devany, organization from Hayden Fry, and motivation from Lou Holz, and each one values establishing the run, passing for balance, and sound defense".
The revisionist quotes and insinuation all things stem from Nebraska is not true, and not what he said many times as he was gaining fame as he turned wisky around. Now, you get a pass because that is how Nebraska media wrote when Nebraska joined the B1G. But there's the rest of the story for you.
It's comical people wishing for the return to the TO glory days while saying we need to be like Wisconsin... We are like Wisconsin now on both sides of the ball but we're less than 3 years in from recruiting for the spread and less than a year from the 4-3 on D.
You give Saban or Meyer our roster, and they win 9+ games with it...next year. And I'm betting neither Lee nor Bryant would be starting in the backfield.
Nick would make sure the appropriate family member got a stack of bills to get an NFL RB on campus but Lee would start for Nick given the QBs on campus right now. Nick would also re-institute the better athletes through chemistry program....
It's asinine that people want to go away from what has proven to be successful at Nebraska before and believe it's all about 'crootin.
I know about the rankings. Regardless of the their rankings, they've recruited for their system and have done a good job of developing monster O linemen for that system. They win by consistency and mauling people. I don't care what that RB was ranked, he's darned good.
Wisconsin has an all time winning % of 58, a .500 bowl record, and no titles. You are striving for average. Talk about dumb.....
True, but that's not a huge improvement then Pelini was accomplishing here at Nebraska. I just want the team to improve enough to compete for conference titles and not get curb stomped by Wisky and Ohio State. I believe once this happens we will see the recruiting improve to the point, we can have a real conservation about a run at the national title again.
Hello...Mr. Van Winkle...time to wake up! You have obviously been sleeping since the early 90s. Are you well rested? Then maybe you would like to now spend some time catching up on the last 25+ yards of college football. Mosey on over to YouTube and catch up.
In their first year winning 9+ games with a team that has been through multiple coaching changes would be pretty decent. And by having a good OLine coach, we would sustain drives. And wouldn't be putting the pressure on our defense to not get worn when our offense doesn't sustain drives to allow for them to rest.
This is coaching, and I'll bet anything that a lot of it is because we don't do enough live good on good drills and scrimmaging.
We are in a complete daze. Every day that we stay on the same course is a wasted day. Wisconsin has **** figured out. The Huskers do not. Sweet lord. We have to be different. Create different challenges for opposing defenses. Whether thats a power running offense or a wild *** Chip Kelly/Mike Leach offense, I dont know, but I do know that our best hope to compete on a high level. Trying to do what everyone else does with inferior talent is just asinine. smmf'nh
He is good. Very good. But an OLine can make a guy look better too. You're correct that they've been recruiting to a system for a long time. Don't think Barry Alvarez doesn't still have a hand in what they do. They've been doing this since the early 90s.
My apologies for the idiot comment. I know I shouldn't be throwing that comment around. I agree with a lot of your posts. Just not in this instance.
Might wanna look again. The graphic went up during the game that over the last several years they're #4 in best record.
NU should be able to become better than Wisconsin. Right now they're looking up at the Badgers and they have been for years.
Well you and my wife agree on at least one thing.Winking I appreciate your passion but I try to take a more measured approach. IF for whatever reason we end up with a coaching search and Frost is the guy, I'm not going to be horribly upset BUT I still thinkRiley can be a successful head coach. He may have to make a staff change. He may not. I see things that encourage me. Obviously the O line play is concerning but damn they were really good in that first half against a really stout Wisconsin D. Did we run out of gas or did Wisconsin change their attack? I keep seeing things that make me say, "wow that sucked" then I see some things that make me wonder what another year for Lee and the younger players on both sides might do without starting all over again.
No they do not. This is so frickin dumb, call them both pro style and everyone thinks they're the same. The two offenses are nothing alike, and rileys offense at OSU wasn't either, although they have the same name or whatever bs.
The part about. COACH BETTER in your post should have been bolded, underlined and enlarged. That's our problem right now. Players need coaching and development. Ours sucks, especially compared to wisconsin. Period.
Boy, I'd think most Husker fans would sell their first son to have the same success in the future Wisky has had over the last couple decades.
Wisconsin runs a very similar WCO based (that's a wide net) attack with more emphasis on power sets and running the ball. While obviously there are differences in how we block things, we run a bunch of virtually the same plays. Please explain why their offense other than being more run heavy with more heavy sets is vastly different than what we do.
We don't have to be just like Wisconsin but they do a lot of things very well even after several coaching changes:
They're consistent, hard working, physical on both sides of the ball, they play smart, they protect the football better than most, their receivers are clutch the few times the ball is thrown to them, they rise to the occasion in big games, and most importantly they have an identity.
I don't feel we've excelled in ANY of those areas in the last 15 years for sure and we should be! There is no excuse. It will take time to build that culture. I like Riley but I don't think he is going to make it. I don't see the mental discipline or toughness in our teams. This was true of the Callahan and Pelini teams too but this falls on Riley and I'm still seeing the same old boneheaded mistakes.
They're consistent, hard working, physical on both sides of the ball, they play smart, they protect the football better than most, their receivers are clutch the few times the ball is thrown to them, they rise to the occasion in big games, and most importantly they have an identity.
I don't feel we've excelled in ANY of those areas in the last 15 years for sure and we should be! There is no excuse. It will take time to build that culture. I like Riley but I don't think he is going to make it. I don't see the mental discipline or toughness in our teams. This was true of the Callahan and Pelini teams too but this falls on Riley and I'm still seeing the same old boneheaded mistakes.
Let's see...you say different sets, different blocking schemes, and more run oriented in regards to play calling and scheme.
How in the hell is that not, in itself, vastly different than what Riley/Langsdorf? You just answered your own question.
Yes just about every offense can run an unlimited number of plays. What they actually do is what makes them different. Rileys offense and wisconsins are not similar. Never have been never will be.
That goes without saying.
Rob Zatechka and Chris Dishman were probably the closet to the current Wisc. group. Big and strong and not that all nimble. Even so, these two were closer to 6'4 while the Wisc bunch has 6'6, 6'7 guys.
They list a couple of them in the 340 range but I would be shocked if some of those guys aren't over 350. Big dudes.
So what we have now is a recipe for success? Could have fooled me.
Recipe for success in the Sun Belt conference maybe. Certainly not the MAC or Big Ten.
No way does Wisconsin run a WCO, their approach in a game doesn't match the philosophy. They feature a strong running game with the idea of opening up the pass, more so the play action, etc. The idea with the WCO is to stretch the field in hopes that it opens up the run game. Wisconsin is more of a traditional pro style offense. I'm not even sure we're a true WCO offense to be honest.
Gotta walk before you can run. We still have fans talking national championship and scoffing at programs like Iowa. I say we do a reality check, forget delusions of grandeur for a while, and just try to beat Iowa five years in a row. If we can do that, I would say that it's pretty likely that we would be in contention in the west any of those years, and eventually good enough to beat anyone in the Big 10.
4th most wins in college football in the last 5 years.
This is now. Right now. We are Minnesota.
I did not say "they run diferent sets" Wisconsin runs MORE heavy sets. Not different necessarily. Sure it's different in execution from team to team in the details but the basic concepts are similar. Good Lord we had this discussion when Riley got the job. You CAN be a power run team while running the WCO. I'm not saying we are now. We try at times. Go look at what Stanford did. The only thing I have EVER heard Alvarez's offense described as was a run heavy WCO. It's very similar to what Stanford did. What Riley and Chryst do comes from the same family tree. What Tom ran and what Frost runs now are from a different forest let alone not the same tree.
The problem is giving names to offenses.
Wisconsins playbook isn't titled "west coast offense" or anything like that. It's titled Wisconsin offense.
What the hell does frost have to do with this?
Different heavy sets more heavy sets it's all the same thing. Plus the other differences YOU mentioned which are pretty big differences.
Just because there are other offenses even more different it doesn't mean ours are similar.
Nebraskas and wisconsins offense are not alike, under Riley they never have been, and they never will be. This is extremely obvious.
Wisconsin has a very, very good team culture.
Kids from two parent families mostly, very good students, unself team players, willing to work and wait their turn if they must.
Much more important than stars but it's harder for us to find great players or win the recruiting rankings war.
Kids from two parent families mostly, very good students, unself team players, willing to work and wait their turn if they must.
Much more important than stars but it's harder for us to find great players or win the recruiting rankings war.
Key word here is developing. Our o line makes the same mistakes over and over. Where is the development?
Any OL that doesnt want to be physical like Wisky regardless of the style of O they play in will probably fail miserably.
Ill bet your right. Time for blood baths and brawls in practice. Not being sarcastic. This is a violent physical sport if you arent either of those things you will lose.
Dear God. Maybe you should avoid discussing topics you know nothing about.