Strange Things Ive Noticed Lately

[Count 'Bility]

Hey guys how's everybody?

Couple things I've noticed are some just odd opinions and viewpoints that hopefully I can help put into perspective.

1) People claim we don't have NFL talent.

It was evident that we didn't have any seniors that were worthy of being drafted. In my opinion, that is correct. We didn't recruit very well in 08 and 09. Those would have been this years seniors. Don't make the mistake that we don't have NFL talent in the lower classes though. We have players that will be drafted. Just not in the 2013 draft.

2) We haven't developed the kids we have.

I don't believe you should use a draft class as proof of that. After Eric Martin's sophomore year I as on record saying he would never have a major impact on our team. He developed into a good college defensive end that I would take back for this year. Jake Cotton is a kid that will be drafted as is Spencer Long and they were both nowhere near as highly touted as Andrew Rodriguez. These are just very small examples, but my point stands that the 2013 draft class does not indicate how we are developing our young men.

3) Our scheme on defense isn't one that will win games

Listen, Les Miles before he hired Bo said that he was one of the toughest DCs to gameplan for because his scheme changes with the way he wants to go at offenses. In my opinion, we did not have the horses to run what Bo wants. That stems back to the 08 and 09 class. Which ultimately you have to hold Bo accountable for and he has accepted the blame. Patience is what I will tell you.

4) Our Coaching Staff isn't competent

Well, based on points one and two, shouldn't we credit the coaching staff's schemes week in and week out that allowed us to win games against teams with more experienced NFL draftees??? I don't think it's unfair to ask.

Cheers guys

Only one team in the Big 10 had more than 3 draft picks(Illinois). Don't act like the talent on the teams we beat is head and shoulders above ours. The only position you could make a case for is at defensive tackle.

That may have been a bad way of putting it on EZ's part. But how bout this.

In our 4 losses, we saw clearly how bad the defense could be. It's still one hell of an accomplishment by staff and players alike that they found a way to put together some solid enough defensive performances to get to 10 wins. I dont care what the competition is.

 

[beanman]

Hey guys how's everybody?

Couple things I've noticed are some just odd opinions and viewpoints that hopefully I can help put into perspective.

1) People claim we don't have NFL talent.

It was evident that we didn't have any seniors that were worthy of being drafted. In my opinion, that is correct. We didn't recruit very well in 08 and 09. Those would have been this years seniors. Don't make the mistake that we don't have NFL talent in the lower classes though. We have players that will be drafted. Just not in the 2013 draft.

2) We haven't developed the kids we have.

I don't believe you should use a draft class as proof of that. After Eric Martin's sophomore year I as on record saying he would never have a major impact on our team. He developed into a good college defensive end that I would take back for this year. Jake Cotton is a kid that will be drafted as is Spencer Long and they were both nowhere near as highly touted as Andrew Rodriguez. These are just very small examples, but my point stands that the 2013 draft class does not indicate how we are developing our young men.

3) Our scheme on defense isn't one that will win games

Listen, Les Miles before he hired Bo said that he was one of the toughest DCs to gameplan for because his scheme changes with the way he wants to go at offenses. In my opinion, we did not have the horses to run what Bo wants. That stems back to the 08 and 09 class. Which ultimately you have to hold Bo accountable for and he has accepted the blame. Patience is what I will tell you.

4) Our Coaching Staff isn't competent

Well, based on points one and two, shouldn't we credit the coaching staff's schemes week in and week out that allowed us to win games against teams with more experienced NFL draftees??? I don't think it's unfair to ask.

Cheers guys

Only one team in the Big 10 had more than 3 draft picks(Illinois). Don't act like the talent on the teams we beat is head and shoulders above ours. The only position you could make a case for is at defensive tackle.

Forgive me if I'm wrong here, but weren't you complaining midseason about the lack of talent on our team.

I've been complaining about lack of talent on defensive line for a couple years. But I think in general our talent is fine (for the /big 10 anyways). We're strong at every group on O. Secondary is good. LB was ok, not great but ok. And we have good talent there coming in.

 

[beanman]

Hey guys how's everybody?

Couple things I've noticed are some just odd opinions and viewpoints that hopefully I can help put into perspective.

1) People claim we don't have NFL talent.

It was evident that we didn't have any seniors that were worthy of being drafted. In my opinion, that is correct. We didn't recruit very well in 08 and 09. Those would have been this years seniors. Don't make the mistake that we don't have NFL talent in the lower classes though. We have players that will be drafted. Just not in the 2013 draft.

2) We haven't developed the kids we have.

I don't believe you should use a draft class as proof of that. After Eric Martin's sophomore year I as on record saying he would never have a major impact on our team. He developed into a good college defensive end that I would take back for this year. Jake Cotton is a kid that will be drafted as is Spencer Long and they were both nowhere near as highly touted as Andrew Rodriguez. These are just very small examples, but my point stands that the 2013 draft class does not indicate how we are developing our young men.

3) Our scheme on defense isn't one that will win games

Listen, Les Miles before he hired Bo said that he was one of the toughest DCs to gameplan for because his scheme changes with the way he wants to go at offenses. In my opinion, we did not have the horses to run what Bo wants. That stems back to the 08 and 09 class. Which ultimately you have to hold Bo accountable for and he has accepted the blame. Patience is what I will tell you.

4) Our Coaching Staff isn't competent

Well, based on points one and two, shouldn't we credit the coaching staff's schemes week in and week out that allowed us to win games against teams with more experienced NFL draftees??? I don't think it's unfair to ask.

Cheers guys

Only one team in the Big 10 had more than 3 draft picks(Illinois). Don't act like the talent on the teams we beat is head and shoulders above ours. The only position you could make a case for is at defensive tackle.

That may have been a bad way of putting it on EZ's part. But how bout this.

In our 4 losses, we saw clearly how bad the defense could be. It's still one hell of an accomplishment by staff and players alike that they found a way to put together some solid enough defensive performances to get to 10 wins. I dont care what the competition is.

We had some gutsy wins. I'll give you that. I'd just prefer we don't get blown out and embarrassed.

 

[EZ-E]

Hey guys how's everybody?

Couple things I've noticed are some just odd opinions and viewpoints that hopefully I can help put into perspective.

1) People claim we don't have NFL talent.

It was evident that we didn't have any seniors that were worthy of being drafted. In my opinion, that is correct. We didn't recruit very well in 08 and 09. Those would have been this years seniors. Don't make the mistake that we don't have NFL talent in the lower classes though. We have players that will be drafted. Just not in the 2013 draft.

2) We haven't developed the kids we have.

I don't believe you should use a draft class as proof of that. After Eric Martin's sophomore year I as on record saying he would never have a major impact on our team. He developed into a good college defensive end that I would take back for this year. Jake Cotton is a kid that will be drafted as is Spencer Long and they were both nowhere near as highly touted as Andrew Rodriguez. These are just very small examples, but my point stands that the 2013 draft class does not indicate how we are developing our young men.

3) Our scheme on defense isn't one that will win games

Listen, Les Miles before he hired Bo said that he was one of the toughest DCs to gameplan for because his scheme changes with the way he wants to go at offenses. In my opinion, we did not have the horses to run what Bo wants. That stems back to the 08 and 09 class. Which ultimately you have to hold Bo accountable for and he has accepted the blame. Patience is what I will tell you.

4) Our Coaching Staff isn't competent

Well, based on points one and two, shouldn't we credit the coaching staff's schemes week in and week out that allowed us to win games against teams with more experienced NFL draftees??? I don't think it's unfair to ask.

Cheers guys

Only one team in the Big 10 had more than 3 draft picks(Illinois). Don't act like the talent on the teams we beat is head and shoulders above ours. The only position you could make a case for is at defensive tackle.

That may have been a bad way of putting it on EZ's part. But how bout this.

In our 4 losses, we saw clearly how bad the defense could be. It's still one hell of an accomplishment by staff and players alike that they found a way to put together some solid enough defensive performances to get to 10 wins. I dont care what the competition is.

Well put. ^^^

 

[EZ-E]

My complaint along the DL is lack of depth. Last year we were basically forced to take Rome back because we didn't have anyone else.

Thad Randle can't see 60 snaps a game. If we can keep him around 35 or 40 I think he will be effective. Have to have the depth though.

 

[Landlord]

Only one team in the Big 10 had more than 3 draft picks(Illinois). Don't act like the talent on the teams we beat is head and shoulders above ours. The only position you could make a case for is at defensive tackle.

We also went 7-1 in B1G play.

 

[beanman]

Only one team in the Big 10 had more than 3 draft picks(Illinois). Don't act like the talent on the teams we beat is head and shoulders above ours. The only position you could make a case for is at defensive tackle.

We also went 7-1 in B1G play.

Fantastic. I was just pointing out the flaw in his statement, "shouldn't we credit the coaching staff's schemes week in and week out that allowed us to win games against teams with more experienced NFL draftees???"

Fair enough? Also, does the championship game not count as Big 10 play?

 

[Landlord]

Only one team in the Big 10 had more than 3 draft picks(Illinois). Don't act like the talent on the teams we beat is head and shoulders above ours. The only position you could make a case for is at defensive tackle.

We also went 7-1 in B1G play.

Fantastic. I was just pointing out the flaw in his statement, "shouldn't we credit the coaching staff's schemes week in and week out that allowed us to win games against teams with more experienced NFL draftees???"

Fair enough? Also, does the championship game not count as Big 10 play?

I was referring specifically to our conference schedule in the regular season, but yes it counts (although i would add a footnote explaining the bizarre nature of it and the reality of Wisconsin having 3 full weeks to prepare).

While his statement may be flawed, there is still something legitimate to be said about going 7-1 in conference against, at worst, quite similar and even talent levels. Even more so when including how many ways we seemed to try to lose games, and how often we came from behind.

 

[NUinID]

Fact is, yeah, we knew a few of these guys were terrible. Meredith, Steinkuhler, Compton, and in my opinion Stafford should not have been starting players at a Division 1 University like Nebraska. Yet, the NFL scouts didn't highly value guys I thought were pretty good ball players like Burkhead, Martin, Reed, and Cotton. So I just have to agree to disagree with those NFL scouts. I hope those players prove them wrong.

Here's the problem. Every one of these guys that was eligible for the draft a week ago was a former starter at their position last year correct? Meaning, they started over somebody who is on the current roster ? Correct?

Which leads me to two questions in my mind. Please explain to me why some of you have such a hard time seeing that if the best talent scouts in the world don't think these guys were worth sh#t, yet this entire class is made up of former starters...........How is it that does not reflect somewhat poorly on the guys behind them? Not adding up to me? To simplify it as much as possible.....if they suck, but they were better than you, then doesn't that mean you suck more? One would have to believe that purely by logic.

Second problem. Let's say for instance, EZ-E is right, and somehow these guys that we know nothing about, and haven't played more than a handful of snaps at this level, are somehow going to blow the lid off their future NFL drafts. These guys are just gonna make this NFL draft class a fluke, a long forgotten memory, never to be seen again. Well then wouldn't one have to think, if these guys are so damn good, what the f#*k are they doing riding the pine behind this class of Undrafted free agents? Doesn't make sense. You can try to pretend it makes sense, but it doesn't so I refuse to listen to any arguments that state otherwise.

Fact is, these young players "on the come" as Bo puts it ( God I hate that saying) might be, and in my belief, probably are more talented than the group of guys that just left. But what factual basis do we stand on when we say that. Really, we just hope to hell they are better. We want to believe it because let's face it, last year we got our asses kicked pretty severely at times. If they are better, then what the f#*k are they doing on the sidelines? That is also a problem. It's got to be fixed. You can write this draft off as nothing more than a fluke, with no indication of the future what so ever. But some of you act like you can't even connect the dots and see how one would come to the conclusion that maybe we don't have a lot of talent on this roster, which.........we do.

I'll give it a try and use examples. Not every good player in college is a good fit for pro football.

Example 1. Ed Steward, and Troy Dumas were starting LBs on NU's 1994 National Championship team. Steward was an 1st team AA and a Butkus award finalist. He never to my knowledge played a down in the NFL.

Example 2. Doug Coleman was an LB on that also and even started about half the games that year until he was over taken by Phil Ellis who started the rest of the year and all the next year at MLB. Ellis never played a down in the NFL but Coleman played 5-6 years in the NFL.

Example 3. Jay Forman played LB on from 95' to 98' he then played 7-8 years of pro ball. He started at Will LB as a RSFr, but then was moved to being a backup at MLB behind Jon Hesse. Why wasn't he playing in front of Hesse who I believe was originally a walk-on.

I can go on and on with examples like this, but what the use, you refuse to listen to arguments that state otherwise. :ahhhhhhhh

I'm pretty sure Jay Forman got into some hot water with the coaches or something. I distinctly remember one of the broadcasters of one of our televised games talking about why he lost his starting position. I was never impressed with Ed Stewart, but perhaps I'm in the minority there. I'll give ya the Phil Ellis one I guess, but from my recollection they both played a lot of snaps, just as our D line did in those days when they had enough depth to keep everyone rotating in and fresh.

Your missing the point I could of picked any position group and come up with the same thing. Older players even though they may not be quite as athletic as the younger guy may get the playing time because he is more developed physically and mentally. Even though ,in the end, the younger guy may end up being a better player than the guy he was playing behind. Those things have nothing to do with whether they play in the NFL or not. Of coarse there are exceptions and always will be.

This is a system that Nebraska has used for development for ever. Esp. with offensive and defensive linemen bring in a kid red shirt him, feed him make him bigger play scout team. RS Freshman play minimally as a back up, learn the system and keep getting bigger and better. Soph maybe be second team player and get enough playing time to letter maybe repeat of RS Freshman year if things are clicking. Jr and Sr. year starting or playing significant time as backup. This system was broken by Callahan. BP is slowly fixing it.

 

[KJ.]

Fact is, yeah, we knew a few of these guys were terrible. Meredith, Steinkuhler, Compton, and in my opinion Stafford should not have been starting players at a Division 1 University like Nebraska. Yet, the NFL scouts didn't highly value guys I thought were pretty good ball players like Burkhead, Martin, Reed, and Cotton. So I just have to agree to disagree with those NFL scouts. I hope those players prove them wrong.

Here's the problem. Every one of these guys that was eligible for the draft a week ago was a former starter at their position last year correct? Meaning, they started over somebody who is on the current roster ? Correct?

Which leads me to two questions in my mind. Please explain to me why some of you have such a hard time seeing that if the best talent scouts in the world don't think these guys were worth sh#t, yet this entire class is made up of former starters...........How is it that does not reflect somewhat poorly on the guys behind them? Not adding up to me? To simplify it as much as possible.....if they suck, but they were better than you, then doesn't that mean you suck more? One would have to believe that purely by logic.

Second problem. Let's say for instance, EZ-E is right, and somehow these guys that we know nothing about, and haven't played more than a handful of snaps at this level, are somehow going to blow the lid off their future NFL drafts. These guys are just gonna make this NFL draft class a fluke, a long forgotten memory, never to be seen again. Well then wouldn't one have to think, if these guys are so damn good, what the f#*k are they doing riding the pine behind this class of Undrafted free agents? Doesn't make sense. You can try to pretend it makes sense, but it doesn't so I refuse to listen to any arguments that state otherwise.

Fact is, these young players "on the come" as Bo puts it ( God I hate that saying) might be, and in my belief, probably are more talented than the group of guys that just left. But what factual basis do we stand on when we say that. Really, we just hope to hell they are better. We want to believe it because let's face it, last year we got our asses kicked pretty severely at times. If they are better, then what the f#*k are they doing on the sidelines? That is also a problem. It's got to be fixed. You can write this draft off as nothing more than a fluke, with no indication of the future what so ever. But some of you act like you can't even connect the dots and see how one would come to the conclusion that maybe we don't have a lot of talent on this roster, which.........we do.

I'll give it a try and use examples. Not every good player in college is a good fit for pro football.

Example 1. Ed Steward, and Troy Dumas were starting LBs on NU's 1994 National Championship team. Steward was an 1st team AA and a Butkus award finalist. He never to my knowledge played a down in the NFL.

Example 2. Doug Coleman was an LB on that also and even started about half the games that year until he was over taken by Phil Ellis who started the rest of the year and all the next year at MLB. Ellis never played a down in the NFL but Coleman played 5-6 years in the NFL.

Example 3. Jay Forman played LB on from 95' to 98' he then played 7-8 years of pro ball. He started at Will LB as a RSFr, but then was moved to being a backup at MLB behind Jon Hesse. Why wasn't he playing in front of Hesse who I believe was originally a walk-on.

I can go on and on with examples like this, but what the use, you refuse to listen to arguments that state otherwise. :ahhhhhhhh

I'm pretty sure Jay Forman got into some hot water with the coaches or something. I distinctly remember one of the broadcasters of one of our televised games talking about why he lost his starting position. I was never impressed with Ed Stewart, but perhaps I'm in the minority there. I'll give ya the Phil Ellis one I guess, but from my recollection they both played a lot of snaps, just as our D line did in those days when they had enough depth to keep everyone rotating in and fresh.

Your missing the point I could of picked any position group and come up with the same thing. Older players even though they may not be quite as athletic as the younger guy may get the playing time because he is more developed physically and mentally. Even though ,in the end, the younger guy may end up being a better player than the guy he was playing behind. Those things have nothing to do with whether they play in the NFL or not. Of coarse there are exceptions and always will be.

This is a system that Nebraska has used for development for ever. Esp. with offensive and defensive linemen bring in a kid red shirt him, feed him make him bigger play scout team. RS Freshman play minimally as a back up, learn the system and keep getting bigger and better. Soph maybe be second team player and get enough playing time to letter maybe repeat of RS Freshman year if things are clicking. Jr and Sr. year starting or playing significant time as backup. This system was broken by Callahan. BP is slowly fixing it.

Wait. What?

 

[Blackshirt96]

Tommie Frazier did ride the pine behind Mike Grant for 6 weeks.

and how did tommie's nfl career pan out? case-in-point. (i really do not know what we are talking about).

Not Cool!!

 

[The Dude]

That may have been a bad way of putting it on EZ's part. But how bout this.

In our 4 losses, we saw clearly how bad the defense could be. It's still one hell of an accomplishment by staff and players alike that they found a way to put together some solid enough defensive performances to get to 10 wins. I dont care what the competition is.

All those wins were against terrible offenses, though. Ohio State was the best offense we faced in-conference, and that offense was ranked 47th nationally. And even that mediocre offense ended up hanging 63 on us.

I think it's more accurate to say we had solid enough offensive performances to get 10 wins, despite mostly awful defensive play.

 

[Count 'Bility]

That may have been a bad way of putting it on EZ's part. But how bout this.

In our 4 losses, we saw clearly how bad the defense could be. It's still one hell of an accomplishment by staff and players alike that they found a way to put together some solid enough defensive performances to get to 10 wins. I dont care what the competition is.

All those wins were against terrible offenses, though. Ohio State was the best offense we faced in-conference, and that offense was ranked 47th nationally. And even that mediocre offense ended up hanging 63 on us.

I think it's more accurate to say we had solid enough offensive performances to get 10 wins, despite mostly awful defensive play.

You reiterated the whole point. All you did was point out the implied asterisk.

Regardless. Against Northwestern when the offense and special teams were crapping their pants, it was the defense getting stop after stop to keep us in the game.

Michigan game. Defense kept getting stops whent he offense couldnt blow it open.

Michigan St. Defense got stop to get us the ball back time and time again.

Penn St. Defense held them to field goals when the game coudlve been over at halftime.

Iowa. Defense had to win that game plain and simple.

Now. I know what youre saying. Not exactly offensive juggernauts we faced there, but regardless, the defense did more than enough. Even in the UCLA game, the defense did more than enough to win the game. They held UCLA to 3 points most the entire second half until the 4th when Taylor finally threw that pick.

I still go back to the mentality issue that it's obvious when one bad thing happened to this defense it quickly spiraled out of control. I think if that psychological issue gets fixed, the rest will take care of itself.

 

[Landlord]

That may have been a bad way of putting it on EZ's part. But how bout this.

In our 4 losses, we saw clearly how bad the defense could be. It's still one hell of an accomplishment by staff and players alike that they found a way to put together some solid enough defensive performances to get to 10 wins. I dont care what the competition is.

All those wins were against terrible offenses, though. Ohio State was the best offense we faced in-conference, and that offense was ranked 47th nationally. And even that mediocre offense ended up hanging 63 on us.

I think it's more accurate to say we had solid enough offensive performances to get 10 wins, despite mostly awful defensive play.

You reiterated the whole point. All you did was point out the implied asterisk.

Regardless. Against Northwestern when the offense and special teams were crapping their pants, it was the defense getting stop after stop to keep us in the game.

Michigan game. Defense kept getting stops whent he offense couldnt blow it open.

Michigan St. Defense got stop to get us the ball back time and time again.

Penn St. Defense held them to field goals when the game coudlve been over at halftime.

Iowa. Defense had to win that game plain and simple.

Now. I know what youre saying. Not exactly offensive juggernauts we faced there, but regardless, the defense did more than enough. Even in the UCLA game, the defense did more than enough to win the game. They held UCLA to 3 points most the entire second half until the 4th when Taylor finally threw that pick.

I still go back to the mentality issue that it's obvious when one bad thing happened to this defense it quickly spiraled out of control. I think if that psychological issue gets fixed, the rest will take care of itself.

Well said.

Honestly, our defense wasn't a bad unit. They truly weren't and if you watched the season objectively in hindsight you would see that. There were just two tough moments of a dam breaking open.

Our defense kept us in every game and gave us chances to win except for, like, one full game and one quarter in two others. You look at the Ohio State game, we came out aggressive and getting pressure and being in position to make plays and we were right in that game through the 3rd, but something happened. You look at the Georgia game and we played lights out, only to be beat by a matter of inches on perfect, undefendable NFL throws and one gamble of a play call.

And we also led the country in pass efficiency defense. I know, because I updated the Quarterback Graveyard thread for about 6 straight weeks.

 

[NUinID]

That may have been a bad way of putting it on EZ's part. But how bout this.

In our 4 losses, we saw clearly how bad the defense could be. It's still one hell of an accomplishment by staff and players alike that they found a way to put together some solid enough defensive performances to get to 10 wins. I dont care what the competition is.

All those wins were against terrible offenses, though. Ohio State was the best offense we faced in-conference, and that offense was ranked 47th nationally. And even that mediocre offense ended up hanging 63 on us.

I think it's more accurate to say we had solid enough offensive performances to get 10 wins, despite mostly awful defensive play.

You reiterated the whole point. All you did was point out the implied asterisk.

Regardless. Against Northwestern when the offense and special teams were crapping their pants, it was the defense getting stop after stop to keep us in the game.

Michigan game. Defense kept getting stops whent he offense couldnt blow it open.

Michigan St. Defense got stop to get us the ball back time and time again.

Penn St. Defense held them to field goals when the game coudlve been over at halftime.

Iowa. Defense had to win that game plain and simple.

Now. I know what youre saying. Not exactly offensive juggernauts we faced there, but regardless, the defense did more than enough. Even in the UCLA game, the defense did more than enough to win the game. They held UCLA to 3 points most the entire second half until the 4th when Taylor finally threw that pick.

I still go back to the mentality issue that it's obvious when one bad thing happened to this defense it quickly spiraled out of control. I think if that psychological issue gets fixed, the rest will take care of itself.

I agree that things do seem to spiral out of control when something bad happens to the defense. They seemed to really get down when they gave up a big play.