Although I think the fact we are 3-0 against them doesn't mean much since both teams have had coaching changes since the last time we played, I think people are writing that game off way too quickly. I think it's still up in the air whether they continue their momentum from last year. They obviously played much better the second half of the season than the first half. Was that because things really clicked or because they just got hot? I don't think we really know yet. We'll know a lot more about that game when we play than we do now since they are the 2nd to last game of the season. But at this point, I think it's wrong to chalk that one up as an automatic loss. I think it makes sense to see them as the favorite, but not as overwhelming of a favorite as most people make them out to be.
Good Write-Up On Upcoming Season
- Thread starter mpbrown27
- Start date
Yes actually I won a ton of money doing just that when Ohio State lost their 1st string qb.. their 2nd string q.b and still won the playoffs with their 3rd string q.b.. but for every one that says injuries at key positions don't matter does that make sense ?? No I guess they didn't take on the mentality that they could never win the national championship that year because nobody told them that..or listen to this board. Look I get that it injuries hurt a team..and at key positions makes it worse.. just tired of using excuses like our team is the only one who deals with injuries. I don't buy the what if he was healthy.. so therefore the next man up has to play...didnt you play football
No one said our team was the only one who dealt with injuries. If our team's 2nd string QB was drafted to play WR in the NFL and our 3rd string QB was a 4th round NFL draft pick then I would say next man up. But Ryker Fyfe ain't playing in the league and neither will Zack Darlington.
Sometimes excuses are reasons. And whatbdoes the fact that someone played football have to do with next man up? I know plenty of kids that played football and got into games but weren't nearly as good as the guy they were replacing. Having a next guy up attitude is fine but always expecting the next guy up to fill the role as well as the starter, especially at QB for Nebraska last year, is unrealistic.
Sometimes excuses are reasons. And whatbdoes the fact that someone played football have to do with next man up? I know plenty of kids that played football and got into games but weren't nearly as good as the guy they were replacing. Having a next guy up attitude is fine but always expecting the next guy up to fill the role as well as the starter, especially at QB for Nebraska last year, is unrealistic.
Why the negativity towards Frost? Because he's a former Husker? People thought Pelini was a Husker guy? You do remember the job was between him and basically Mr. Nebraska, don't you?
I get wanting to take swipes at those who invoke tradition, but your post is tilting at windmills.
Uhm, I said in another post that I find myself in the group that wants Frost back.
Don't confuse my observations of how the NU fan base moves and reacts, with how I personally feel about the guy.
I also said "if he was a bust" not "when he is a bust".
Wisconsin and Texas had change coaches and still kept beating us.
We own Michigan St tbh and we change coaches.
Keep the superstition alive.
If Mr. Nebraska is Gill, there weren't all that many people pining for Gill.
Pelini was the hot name at the moment, with a national title ring, and all the Ruud "I'd run through a brick wall to play for that guy" accolades in local press.
By and large Husker nation thought Bo's fire and brimstone would pick the program up by balls and refuse to be denied greatness.
Even after Bo was selected, the few who wanted Gill lamented he was never given a realistic shot.
Pelini was a hot name and half the fan base wanted him. But those who specifically wanted a "Nebraska guy" were in Turner's corner.
What I remember is most fans wanting either Pelini or Gill because there was a Husker connection. Almost 1 and 1A.
This.
I remember wanting pelini so bad because our defense was terrible. Had we gone with Gill I would have been happy as well. Loved the turnaround he pulled at buffalo.
Yah, in no way was I implying that Pelini was more "Mr. Nebraska" than Gill, but he was a whole lot more than a Houston Nutt or Jim Grobe.
It's been 15 years since the January 2002 national championship game vs Miami in Pasadena. Many posters here were probably too young to remember that game, yet most posters here seem to still believe our coaches should be held to the standards of that year and the previous 30 years, not the past 15 years of mediocrity.
While I'd like to see championships as much as anyone, I have reached the point that I'm okay with just a winning record. To me all of the what ifs re Riley's future should be based on what NU football has become over the past 15 years, a top 30 program at best -- so 7 or 8 wins is about what I would think keeps Riley employed as long as he wants. I'll duck my head now.
While I'd like to see championships as much as anyone, I have reached the point that I'm okay with just a winning record. To me all of the what ifs re Riley's future should be based on what NU football has become over the past 15 years, a top 30 program at best -- so 7 or 8 wins is about what I would think keeps Riley employed as long as he wants. I'll duck my head now.
At first I was going to respond vociferously and then I realized I had been punked. Nice one.
Yeah, and the way that this program is being rebuilt (gradually and hopefully with some stability) suggests that we are going to SLOWLY but hopefully surely regain our position of winning a lot.
We didn't hire a rock star coach like Michigan and Ohio State did, we hired a guy who was going to come in and build. I know that rock star coaches can get things turned around really fast, but on the other hand, they also tend to jump ship and let programs implode (Urban Meyer left Florida in ruins when he was chased out of Gainesville/"retired for health concerns," and very few people seem to remember that. That program has yet to completely recover.). I like what Im seeing here, and I want it to continue in this trajectory.
"In 11 games against ranked opponents, he went 1-10 with a 48 percent completion rate and a 100.6 passer rating."
And there you have it.
And there you have it.
Not entirely his fault, but it gives you a very clear idea of exactly how good the team ever was. If you sort by ranked opponents and things start to look hideous, you're probably not an upper-tier team.
Somewhat agree with your thoughts. I would've guessed that most on here are roughly in the 40 to 60 yr old crowd (including myself). I think it's good to set some standard, something to attain. Is a standard going to be the same all the time, or could it vary with the tenure of the coach? Personal decision. Winning record this year and I don't see myself complaining a whole lot. We pour money into the program, it has to payoff at some point though.
Go back to before big conference tv contracts. If you could generate ticket revenue (or endowment) and be one of the handful of teams to go bowling every year, then you could leverage financial position to separate from most of div 1 football. At least for today, that's what I see as the big difference between now and before 2002. Is the NU of today just another average program? I definitely think we are still way above average. But money is pouring into the P5 conferences, and we will be just another team if we make the wrong moves.
This year I want to think we could do real good. It's hard not to drink the koolaid. But I keep my enthusiasm in check with my dark cloud.
My response was to dinglefritz tuco...thats why I used his remarks to reply to. My Pont is that next man up is referring to us having to do a much better job of recruiting to get in that position.. Osborne made sure that all players during practices got reps..so if they were ever put into a position to have to go in the game there wouldn't be too much of a drop off.. I realize different era with the changes in schoolies (prop 48) I just think with the way our o line is being coached that we could have 10 guys ready to go in and there shouldn't be that big of a drop...seems weird that only 5 guys get reps and I don't agree with that..i guess my comment would be more geared towards the 5 starting online in regards to those injuries last year.. I get the q.b deal
Ok fair enough.
So do you believe there was not a significant drop off in talent between 1-5 and say 6-10?
Also comparing what Cavanaugh is doing and what Osborne did is not totally fair. Osborne had depth already built in. The guys he was giving reps to at 6-10 were RS Juniors and walkon seniors more than it was RS freshmen and RS Soph.
I also believe that is a little overstated. Osborne did not sub out entire lines and if you look back most of the time his 1st string 5 played until the game was out of reach. It was also a different world of college football.
With that said, I believe you will see more rotation this year, as the most talented backups are a year older and not players you were debating burning a redshirt.
Agree. While nothing about the OL has impressed me yet, you can't just dismiss the notion that he's had a bunch of walk-ons to work with. It was a full time job around here to **** on Barney Cotton, you though Cav was gonna come in here and take Barney's guys and a half-empty OL room and start rushing for 400 yards a game?
I'm on the same planet with all of you where we watched Mark Pelini start at center, right? I'm not saying Cav is definitely a great coach, but I don't know who was gonna come in there and light the world on fire with such a lack of depth. The best players he had were in their first and second years. You don't plan for success with a bunch of 19 year old OL. You just don't.
I just think we have landed quite a few stud online recruits that just seem to Peter out by the time they could get significant playing time.. I don't go to practices don't know how physical they are so I can't tell you if there is a big drop off from 1-5 and 6-10.. I guess I was basing that comment on comments made before in year 1 when cav and Riley both agreed they would stick with the best 5... I'm all for finding continuity on the line..in fact I'm pretty critical of it because that's what I played.. both d and oline.. albeit not at a high level but enough to know the ins and outs of the positions so maybe I'm not being fair
With all that being said I do believe the next group of lineman coming up can and should be really good
With all that being said I do believe the next group of lineman coming up can and should be really good
I have to say, that is a somewhat different perspective. We have other folks ready to jump off a bridge because Cav can't recruit and you are saying we have too many guys to get significant playing time.
That is why I don't get the whole, "I'm good with six or seven win thing.". Bo averaged more than nine wins a season...and that wasn't good enough for me, Shawn, or Harvey. It shouldn't be good enough now either.
There is an assumption that Pelini would have continued to win 9 games going forward. The overall talent that was on this roster in November 2014 coupled with the lack of emphasis on recruiting under Pelini, leaves me doubtful he continues that success. That doesn't even take into account the palpable tension between he and the Administration, the Athletic Dept, the media and the fans base in general.
First things first. We have to wait for the season to play out anyway. Next is semantics. I doubt you will find many (if any) Husker fans doing high-fives if we win six or seven games. Six wins? I would be upset with six wins and be willing to let the chips fall where they may. Seven wins? An average P5 football program can win 7 games. I see no reason for NU to ever...ever...ever...fall below average. This is a one year get out of jail free card for me, not some new expectations for the program.
So with that out of the way:
Some people might think we will reap big rewards a few years down the line, so it's best not to make hasty decisions.
Some people might question if starting over from scratch is good thing, considering we have a HC that will change some things. If we were to replace Riley, we could end up with another version of Banker, Read, Hughes, Cav, and Davis also.
As for me, "not good enough" means firing. And at this point in time, firing a coach with winning record will do more harm than good.
1. We will win between 8 and 11. So most of this discussion is moot.
2. If the number is 7 Shawn is in trouble. If it is 6 Shawn better hope Alvarez retires or embarrasses himself so much he is forced out.
3. It's time for improvement. Blowouts coupled with single digit number of wins is a fail.
2. If the number is 7 Shawn is in trouble. If it is 6 Shawn better hope Alvarez retires or embarrasses himself so much he is forced out.
3. It's time for improvement. Blowouts coupled with single digit number of wins is a fail.
Why is everyone so worried about Shawn. Dude makes a mint. Well respected in the Athletic community.
If we don't want him, he's not going to be down washing windows by Conagra's recently vacated campus.
If we don't want him, he's not going to be down washing windows by Conagra's recently vacated campus.
Not going to judge the season solely by win-loss record. Need to see smart, disciplined players giving it everything they've got. Be physical and finish every play. If we do that, we should have a respectable record and keep the recruiting momentum up.
We cannot accept division among the ranks, lack of discipline, and soft play. This team is not going to win a national championship. Focus on growth, momentum, and establish our IDENTITY.
GBR
We cannot accept division among the ranks, lack of discipline, and soft play. This team is not going to win a national championship. Focus on growth, momentum, and establish our IDENTITY.
GBR
Dont get me wrong, it was time for Bo to go a year before.
But why do the goalposts move, when a "monkey" could win 9 games at Nebraska?
I never said a monkey could win 9. So my goalposts didn't move.
Regardless. Every discussion makes the assumption Pelini was going to continue winning 9 a year. My opinion is that the program was in a bigger decline than the record indicated. Especially with my 20/20 hindsight.
I am definitely going to judge the season almost solely by win-loss record. It is high time for it.
I don't disagree with any of this.
However, where there will be questions in how a couple of terms are defined by Husker fans.
Physical - many Nebraska fans confuse physical with power run game.
Our identity - again those words to most Husker fans mean a power run, run first offense.
Same exact thoughts here.
Making the fly sweep and screen game a central component of the run game, doesn't like its going to tickle the same fancy as the old Option.
Yes understood, and I dont assume he would continue winning nine.
Im simply pointing out the general board feelings about 9 wins. It wasnt hard, and those who compared it to Tom were incorrect because back then there were less ga,es and no fcs on sched.
While your goal posts havent moved, some definitely have, and I find that disappointing
What you're missing is that his 9 wins weren't putting NU any closer to where it needed to be than Riley's 6 or 9 wins. That's why people don't care about Riley's win total vs. Bo's. Bo won 9, sure, he also got his face kicked in against OSU and Wisconsin. Just blown out like they should change their name to South East Nebraska Tech. And so has Riley. So essentially they're the same, with these key differences:
Riley's recruiting momentum is better
Riley is a much more mature and likeable human being
The number of wins doesn't matter much when both teams get the same rating on the "prove it" test: Could beat the bad teams but didn't belong with the good ones.
You can rest assured that if Riley's win totals don't rise and maintain at a certain level, he will meet the same end. Except for him I see a greater likelihood that he resigns and declares it was the plan all along for him to hand over the reins.