It's obvious the past several years especially under Pelini the strength and conditioning program was not a strength of the program. My question to people around the program does that appear to be improving.
Strength and conditioning
- Thread starter jedimasterjed
- Start date
Good Question Here. I know that I am very happy the Boyd Eppley is back involved in the program again.
Well Boyd thought we needed a year and a half to get the guys to where he thought they should be. That was back in Dec 2015, so we are about at that mark next month. It would be interesting to know where we stand.
Here's the original article:
http://www.omaha.com/huskers/boyd-e...cle_1a7c4940-a387-11e5-9643-0bc10d4a2c5d.html
Here's the original article:
http://www.omaha.com/huskers/boyd-e...cle_1a7c4940-a387-11e5-9643-0bc10d4a2c5d.html
AND we are also becoming a research center as promoted. What long term records are being broken? We had two DL make it in the pros recently and the twins are leaders in S+C through recently: so on limited information, I would judge its working for the D now. The O-line may be a matter of who was played and coaching tweaks needed by roundtable. GBR
Absolutely critical to turn the corner on this. All the recruiting success in the world won't mean much without it.
By what metrics do you judge whether the S&C program is working? Fewer injuries, ability to dominate late in games, pure physical numbers, or a combination of a bunch of things. Just looking at the players tells nothing, you can't tell how strong someone is just by how they look.
When you look at Alabama players they look different. I thought last year teams like Iowa were more physical.
The look isn't the end all be all but it matters. NU lacks guys on the LOS that look the part.
There are a myriad of metrics but I just want to see a football team capable of playing 4 quarters of physical ball.
Yea, Bama starts out with studs from the get-go. By "different" do you mean more muscle definition, less body fat, increased speed, etc? I agree with the physical part which formerly was the hallmark of Husker teams.
So the bottom line is conditioning and physical play which I can certainly agree with. I just wonder what Boyd has to say about the latest group and how they have changed.
The time is now for the lines to perform. No excuses for lack of physicality this year! Strength staff has been here long enough. OL specifically needs to get it done this fall.
Oh, would it be nice to have a cold one with Boyd on this subject.
It would be interesting to hear what he has to say. I like Boyd and am glad he is back. However, it might be good to hear an objective person share with us. Otherwise, it could come across as "It was good when I was here before, it sucked when I left, and now that I'm back it's good again."
Good point... having said that, who else would come out and say it? It almost has to be Boyd doesn't it? As long as he is providing statistics to show improvement, That speaks all by itself no matter who says it.
But he had to throw out a bunch of statistics of the prior regime because they didn't know what they were doing. (Remember the whole record controversy?)
Maybe not gain an edge, but right now we are just looking to catch up... remember, there were something like 3 volleyball players to score at a pro level compared to 1 football player, out of 85 scholarship and how ever many walk ins to test...
We were pathetic and are (hopefully) making strides in at least catching up to other programs.
I too am glad Boyd is back, but I mean, we have to understand that as much as S&C was a hallmark of the old Nebraska program, a LOT of programs have that now. I think, at best, we're going to just be as physical as the best in the country, but we're not going to tower over programs anymore. That's just part of the changed landscape of college football.
Land of 10 had a good article on where we all think Nebraska football is going to be in 5 years. They argue that we'll likely be perennial picks to go to the championship game (and maybe even win it once or twice), and MAYBE maybe get into the CFB playoff, but even that might be a little lofty. Riley has definitely righted the ship, and we're starting to land the kind of talent we need to really kick *** in our division, but becoming dominant in the game is just very, very hard now.
They also note that the Big Ten in particular is very egalitarian; every school gets the same shares and same amount of money shared between them. I for one think this is a great set-up; it allows all schools to have a relatively equal shot at development of their athletic programs (where they decide to focus their money and talent is up to them, and not always in football). We're in a very competitive conference, so our days of towering over the Big 8 and later Big 12 North are also long gone.
Just some thoughts on expectations and where the program is headed.
Land of 10 had a good article on where we all think Nebraska football is going to be in 5 years. They argue that we'll likely be perennial picks to go to the championship game (and maybe even win it once or twice), and MAYBE maybe get into the CFB playoff, but even that might be a little lofty. Riley has definitely righted the ship, and we're starting to land the kind of talent we need to really kick *** in our division, but becoming dominant in the game is just very, very hard now.
They also note that the Big Ten in particular is very egalitarian; every school gets the same shares and same amount of money shared between them. I for one think this is a great set-up; it allows all schools to have a relatively equal shot at development of their athletic programs (where they decide to focus their money and talent is up to them, and not always in football). We're in a very competitive conference, so our days of towering over the Big 8 and later Big 12 North are also long gone.
Just some thoughts on expectations and where the program is headed.
Good points here. The only exception is being in a competitive division. Our division was the only one among all the Power 5 conferences to not have two teams in the top 25 last year. Right now it is Wisconsin and that's it. (And even Wisky doesn't recruit very well.) Our path to the championship is pretty easy.
Sorry, my comments on how tough the Big Ten is refers to the conference overall, not our division, which is, yes, the weaker of the two and one of the weaker in all of college football. In a way, one could picture a return of the Big 12 North with us basically the favorites to win, fending off tough challenges from Wisconsin, Iowa, and sometimes Minnesota and Northwestern, but usually emerging the clear winner.