BYU

[zoogs]

People did not expect Bo to win 9 games his first season. They knew we were installing a new system on one side of the ball and knew that a new coaching staff meant a significant culture shift. They also knew the offense was in relatively good hands, and had a smooth transition coming.

I would argue that the team Riley is inheriting is much less talented than the team Bo inherited. We have talent, yes. We also have serious depth issues, especially at DE and at LB -- this after a defensive mastermind's unit last year got wrecked (again) by Minnesota, et al. There is zero continuity and a new system being put in place on both sides of the ball.

A lot of it will come down to Tommy. Does he stumble in Year 3, or get replaced by a different QB in Riley's first season? Or can he steady the team like Ganz did with his prolific '08? Unlike in '08, we also have some serious playmaker attrition on offense. People underplay how important Kenny was to the team, and most people I think recognize how Ameer practically carried this team last year.

If you recognize that Bo's string of successive 9/10 win seasons was unusual, then it should follow that the expectation is most coaches will not have that as a baseline under which their program never, ever crosses. Think of Bob Stoops, who has had 7, 8, and 8 win seasons spread throughout a dominating career. Nick Saban, who had 8 wins two out of his first three years at LSU. Or any other coach people have claimed Bo to be in exclusive company of, or with.

So, the idea that Riley must win 9 in a total transition year, with what Bo left him with his somewhat under-recruited classes...I mean, it'd be pleasant, and a goal within reach. Not more than that.

 

[TheSker]

So, the idea that Riley must win 9 in a total transition year, with what Bo left him with his somewhat under-recruited classes...I mean, it'd be pleasant, and a goal within reach. Not more than that.

Urban Meyer would like some clarification on what a transition year is.

 

[zoogs]

Oooooh, sick burn.

You must have thought Bo Pelini was the worst.

 

[TheSker]

Oooooh, sick burn.

You must have thought Bo Pelini was the worst.

I thought Pelini won some games, including his "transition" year. Mike Riley is allegedly an elite developer and evaluator of talent, apparently despite his record. Did we hire Riley to go backward?

 

[zoogs]

If you think failing to win 9 games in his first year as Bo did means the program is going backwards under Riley, I will politely disagree. All I think that would mean is we don't really have a quarterback.

 

[ADS]

So, the idea that Riley must win 9 in a total transition year, with what Bo left him with his somewhat under-recruited classes...I mean, it'd be pleasant, and a goal within reach. Not more than that.

Urban Meyer would like some clarification on what a transition year is.

Urban was also handed a team that had Braxton Miller and the previous coach wasn't fired for his knack for embarrassing blowouts. He had a complete team.

 

[TheSker]

If you think failing to win 9 games in his first year as Bo did means the program is going backwards under Riley, I will politely disagree. All I think that would mean is we don't really have a quarterback.

Yes, I think it would be going backward with a returning quarterback. And Pelini was not my only example.

 

[TheSker]

So, the idea that Riley must win 9 in a total transition year, with what Bo left him with his somewhat under-recruited classes...I mean, it'd be pleasant, and a goal within reach. Not more than that.

Urban Meyer would like some clarification on what a transition year is.

Urban was also handed a team that had Braxton Miller and the previous coach wasn't fired for his knack for embarrassing blowouts. He had a complete team.

Then Riley's "transition" year should be a piece of cake.

 

[Blackshirt96]

I will legit not be surprised if we go .500 next year, including an opening-day loss to BYU. Everything is up in the air. We have no idea what Riley is going to be able to do with this team.

BYU is going to come into this game with a huge chip on their shoulders, playing for their suspended teammates, all fired up to beat Nebraska in Lincoln & break that winning streak. They'll be running the same system they've always run, with players recruited to run that system, and they'll have their big-game quarterback.

Meanwhile, we're breaking in a new system, we got nothing to prove against a mid-level team like BYU, and we're going to be trying to figure out how to replace a super-stud RB.

If we win it'll be a testament to our better athletes, or Riley & Co. being damned good coaches, or BYU just having a bad game or bad breaks in the game.

yup, i see us not ready for this game........but hoping for 7-5 season.

That seems a bit pessimistic.

I'm expecting a minimum of 9 wins, no excuses.

I expect NU to be 5-0 when Wisconsin comes to town. There is no reason that NU could not be 9-0 when Michigan St comes to Memorial.

Michigan St, Wisconsin & Miami are the toughest games on the schedule, followed by BYU, Minnesota & Iowa. Even if NU goes .500 vs those 6 teams they should end up 9-3. Pretty much the Pelini story for the last several years.

 

[Count 'Bility]

With this schedule, anything less than a 9-3 regular season is a total failure. Seriously. Look at the schedule. Where do the losses come from?

It's the same argument used to disclaim the 9 wins crap. Cuz anyone's grandma could coach us to 9 wins against our recent scheds filled with Purdues, Illinoiss, Northwesterns and the obligatory FCS team.

 

[zoogs]

It makes at least some sense to predict when you have a rough idea of what the team will be. Do we, right now?

They can't lose to Michigan State, Wisconsin, Minnesota? These teams won last year.

They can't lose to Iowa? That was a very close game.

They can't lose to Northwestern? (Well, that would be surprising, I admit, but those teams are well coached, too.)

They can't lose to Miami and BYU?

If Tommy stays a 50% thrower, and the defensive front seven gets worked regularly?

I mean, they could also run the table or go 11-1. All those games are possible wins, too, of course.

 

[Count 'Bility]

It makes at least some sense to predict when you have a rough idea of what the team will be. Do we, right now?

They can't lose to Michigan State, Wisconsin, Minnesota? These teams won last year.

They can't lose to Iowa? That was a very close game.

They can't lose to Northwestern? (Well, that would be surprising, I admit, but those teams are well coached, too.)

They can't lose to Miami and BYU?

If Tommy stays a 50% thrower, and the defensive front seven gets worked regularly?

I mean, they could also run the table or go 11-1. All those games are possible wins, too, of course.

I understand your point. But based on what we have done and what we know we're capable of there's just no excuse for anything less than a 9-3 regular season. I know it's a new staff and all, but it's not really about what could happen. I'm basing it on what will probably happen, or should happen.

We could go 2-10 too, but it's not gonna happen. It just aint.

 

[ScottyIce]

So, the idea that Riley must win 9 in a total transition year, with what Bo left him with his somewhat under-recruited classes...I mean, it'd be pleasant, and a goal within reach. Not more than that.

Urban Meyer would like some clarification on what a transition year is.

Urban was also handed a team that had Braxton Miller and the previous coach wasn't fired for his knack for embarrassing blowouts. He had a complete team.

YA!

 

[RunMickeyRun02]

It makes at least some sense to predict when you have a rough idea of what the team will be. Do we, right now?

They can't lose to Michigan State, Wisconsin, Minnesota? These teams won last year.

They can't lose to Iowa? That was a very close game.

They can't lose to Northwestern? (Well, that would be surprising, I admit, but those teams are well coached, too.)

They can't lose to Miami and BYU?

If Tommy stays a 50% thrower, and the defensive front seven gets worked regularly?

I mean, they could also run the table or go 11-1. All those games are possible wins, too, of course.

Yep, it's going to be very interesting to watch from game 1.

 

[RunMickeyRun02]

just remember guys, a whole new system is being installed this spring........no one has the experience playing in Riley's system so we would be foolish to think there won't be a significant learning curve........x2 for these kids and what they need to learn and execute......as long as we see a methodical march to improvement, realistically, that should really be enough. 7-5 or 8-4 would be very good, indeed.

Kinda depends on if you believe Riley when he came in and said he would base things on what the kids already knew and what he felt they could do. I can't remember the exact quote but he's always left me with the impression that he isn't throwing everything out the window and starting over like Callahan did.

Sure their will be some learning but what I've gleaned from little changes Riley has made that he is very adaptive and innovative. The dual practice thing, the camps all over the country other things I can't remember at the moment.

I have this weird sense of optimism which I almost never get when dealing with Husker football. I'm very chicken little in that regard.

I still think we are in the 8-4,9-3 range but I think we achieve that in a less maddening more enjoyable manner than in years passed.