Good call... you were a voice that was not calling for Tommy... like you say, we will never know what could have happened if it were someone else... but personally, I am glad we didn't burn the shirt at this stage in the season. We certainly couldn't have done worse, but at the same time, even if we win we still were shut out of CCG. Give the kid another year so that he develops into the QB we need.
Iowa 40, Nebraska 10: What Does it All Mean? (CFN.com)
- Thread starter Alum-Ni
- Start date
- Status
I don't envy the coaching staff leading up to the Iowa game. I suspect everyone, including the coaches, knew we were probably doomed without a healthy QB, which we didn't have.
They could have played darlington. He was healthy, he did take reps at qb and knows the system, and at least we would have had a shot. If we lose by 30 with the 3rd string, i can accept that. At least we dont have to woulda, coulda, shoulda. Now we will never know.
It was a no win for Riley and Langsdorf. It's easy to come a message board after getting drubbed and say if we had lost by 30 with Darlington playing I could accept that. When the fact is if Darlington, with a limited playbook, had played poorly, MOST people would be saying I would rather have seen Armstrong at 75% than a 3rd string QB using a scaled down playbook.
And the woulda coulda shoulda would just be about Armstrong playing at 75%.
And the woulda coulda shoulda would just be about Armstrong playing at 75%.
Yeah, here's what I'm thinking....Coaching staff thinks so little of him at the QB spot, that they preferred to trot out a completely ineffective and injured QB and stuck with him even though it was obvious from the start that he couldn't play, until it was to late. We were in a no win situation last Friday, literally. I'm just thankful that game has come and gone, that game was no fun to watch and not indicative of how we battled all year.
Thank God Nebraska didn't turn the ball over. If they did it could have been one of those "blackshirt" 70 point gems.
We were down 20-3 at half, ineffective passing and rushing. I was waiting to see Darlington to start the second half. Hindsight is 20/20, but there was no glimmer of hope.
I don't know hype from the truth concerning our qb's. But it's pointing towards POB only seeing the field if there's enough injuries to force him into action.
Last edited:
The belief that a third string qb would change the outcome in this game is insane.
The biggest blame in this game comes on the defensive unit. Iowa had the 121st ranked offense and somehow scored 40. That is what happens when you have a lack of passion.
The biggest blame in this game comes on the defensive unit. Iowa had the 121st ranked offense and somehow scored 40. That is what happens when you have a lack of passion.
I learned no other big ten team so willingly bent over, grabbed their ankles and took it in the backside from Iowa than dear old NU.
Iowa's easiest conference game. Never a game.
Iowa's easiest conference game. Never a game.
I could counter that by saying the following.."The belief that Tommy was healthy enough to even be suited up is insane" "The belief that an injured Fyfe was going to be the difference is insane".
As far as the defense goes, I wouldn't doubt one bit if they were thinking to themselves, "Well crap, if this is what were gonna do, then whatever". Something was different for that game. If I'm wrong then tell me what and how. Something changed in their attitudes for that game. They just flat out laid down.
Ferentz has a winning record against Michigan. Yes, he does tend to struggle when playing "lesser" talent, but the Hawkeyes are generally quite competitive against the upper-crust. It may not always translate to victories, but there are rarely and easy game hand-outs when Iowa fields the "under-dog" team.
Also, let's be quite clear. As a program, Nebraska isn't a lick better than Iowa is anymore. Sure, you've got history on your side, but that's all it is: HISTORY. As much as you don't want to hear it, you're batting .500 against that same "not good" program since you joined the league and you've lost 3 of the last 4.
You can blame coaches. You can blame injuries. You can blame the players for not being mentally prepared, but all of those are the symptoms of a "not good" program.
Half of your fans are ripping a kid who set nearly every freaking record at QB for your team. Another portion seems to be begging for the blood of the Coaches.
If I didn't know any better, I'd say you guys WERE Iowa fans.
It's quite simple. Your fanbase is ok being mediocre. This fanbase isn't.
You reward coaches who average 7.5 wins a year with a lifetime contract at $4.5 million per year. This program fires coaches who don't take their teams to title games.
You better get busy firing or get busy dying then...
Better get ready for another 7 win season then. Looking at historical data 2017 will be 7 win season, 2018 will be losing season then back to 7 followed by a 10, all the while finishing out of the top 25 but bragging about playing good teams close. But if that suits you, good on you.
Don't confuse our AD with our Fanbase. The two are not the same.
That said, I'd certainly agree that a larger portion of fanbase thinks it's d@mn near heresay to expect greater things from the program and it's staff.
Which is why you've gone through a ridiculous number of coaches and still no title games. That makes you a good fan base?
How's that strategy working out? There's something to be said about consistency.
TO won conference titles in his 3rd, 6th, 9th, 10th, 11th... seasons. His first MNC came in his 22nd season. Now a lot of folks wanna go scorched earth within a couple/few years?
And Iowa is paying $4.5 mil a year to not get there either and win 7 games a year on average. But then again, I am not trolling your team's website after an 8-4 season like my team won something.
Same as sitting on your *** waiting for 4.5 mil to win anything if impotance. But as I told your brother, I am not on your forum trolling after another 8-4 season of mediocre football. But hey do whatcha do.
I live in Omaha. Most of my friends are Huskers. How stating facts and asking a legitmate question is trolling is beyond me, but I'd love to hear how constant coaching turnover is good for a program.
I was talking with my coworkers today, and asked a simple question: who is Nebraska? None of them could say what UNL's identity was, and every single one of them said coaching turnover was part of the problem. So I'll ask you the same: who is Nebraska?
Too early to tell. I believe you will se the identity of this team come into focus next year.
Offensively you will see what Riley and Langsdorf will do. They had to scale back their playbook and alter their scheme due to the QB.
Defensively, again same deal to a point. Without lockdown corners, Banker couldn't play as much quarters and man to man as he wants to. I believe you will see at least one of the starting CBs not starting next year. The LBs are also to slow to play the position like it's designed. There will be more speed at that position group next season.
In understand where you are coming from, but the fact remains that Iowa and Nebraska are getting similar results going about it differently. So Iowa's consistency isn't getting it done. Wisconsin isn't winning or even playing for national titles doing things the Wisconsin way.
Mediocre? Go back and count in the past 15 years and count how many top ten finishes Iowa has then compare it to Nebraska's.
- Status