Benning is all about the effort

[alexhortdog95]

Kids from the 90s are very different from kids today. There is a self entitlement to this current generation.

This.

There's lots of self-entitlement, yes.

Listen, I still don't think MR is the guy for the job. Only time will tell us if that is true or not. That being said - a coach can only motivate a player so much. Players must be self-motivated to do what needs to be done.

I'd agree with what Carricker said in his FB post about the team buying into MR's system, though. I'm a WCO kind of guy, and I keep going back to this one argument:

Look at the teams that have won National championships all the way back to 2000. How many ran a WCO/Pro Style offense?

2000: OU - WCO/Pro Style

2001: DA U - WCO/Pro Style

2002: Buckeyes - WCO/Pro Style

2003: LSU/USC - both WCO/Pro Style

2004: USC - WCO/Pro Style

2005: TExPN - Spread/Zone

2006: Florida - Spread/Zone

2007: LSU - WCO/Pro Style

2008: Florida - Spread/Zone

2009: Bammer - WCO/Pro Style

2010: Auburn - Spread/Zone

2011: Bammer - WCO/Pro Style

2012: Bammer - WCO/Pro Style

2013: Free Shoes - WCO/Pro Style

2014: Buckeyes - Spread/Zone

It's not that the WCO/Pro Style offense is any better than the Spread/Zone offense. But the WCO/Pro Style offense attracts players that wish to play at the next level, period, end of story.

 

[Hujan]

Sometimes I feel that us fans care more about the team and wins/losses than the players do.

Definitely. And I'd wager the fans care far more about the losses than the wins. Meaning, we win and it's "ho-hum, we should have won that game." Very little excitement, very little praise. We nitpick wins because they aren't good enough, then quickly move on and forget them.

Losses, though. Whoa boy. A loss fuels every conversation for years. We talk more about our losses to Wisconsin than our wins against Michigan. We talk more about our losses to Minnesota than our wins over Northwestern. Losses are the focus. Just look at the post counts skyrocket after a loss.

I dunno. After the Minnesota game, many were doing calculations to see if beating MSU and Iowa would get us to Indianapolis. The team was "improving," Armstrong was the best QB in the BIG, we'd turned the corner, etc.

The losses tend to bring out a little more hyperbole because I think people need to vent after a loss. It's the same reason why people who have a bad experience with a product or service are more likely to leave a review than someone who had a good experience.

 

[Hujan]

Kids from the 90s are very different from kids today. There is a self entitlement to this current generation.

This.

There's lots of self-entitlement, yes.

Listen, I still don't think MR is the guy for the job. Only time will tell us if that is true or not. That being said - a coach can only motivate a player so much. Players must be self-motivated to do what needs to be done.

I'd agree with what Carricker said in his FB post about the team buying into MR's system, though. I'm a WCO kind of guy, and I keep going back to this one argument:

Look at the teams that have won National championships all the way back to 2000. How many ran a WCO/Pro Style offense?

2000: OU - WCO/Pro Style

2001: DA U - WCO/Pro Style

2002: Buckeyes - WCO/Pro Style

2003: LSU/USC - both WCO/Pro Style

2004: USC - WCO/Pro Style

2005: TExPN - Spread/Zone

2006: Florida - Spread/Zone

2007: LSU - WCO/Pro Style

2008: Florida - Spread/Zone

2009: Bammer - WCO/Pro Style

2010: Auburn - Spread/Zone

2011: Bammer - WCO/Pro Style

2012: Bammer - WCO/Pro Style

2013: Free Shoes - WCO/Pro Style

2014: Buckeyes - Spread/Zone

It's not that the WCO/Pro Style offense is any better than the Spread/Zone offense. But the WCO/Pro Style offense attracts players that wish to play at the next level, period, end of story.

I think we need to define "Pro" style offense a little better. The hallmarks of a "pro-style" offense is not about passing to the exclusion of running. It's about QBs under center (which actually helps the run game), pocket passing, huddling, and a QB that checks into and out of plays depending on what he sees at the LOS.
A WCO is a subset of a pro system. It uses highly complex route combinations, de-empahsizes the traditional run game favoring instead short screen passes to to the WR and RB, relies on precise timing of routes, and generally throws the ball a lot.

Wisconsin runs a pro-system as traditionally defined. Stanford does too. LSU also. But all of them are power-run forms, not WCO forms, of the pro-style. I'm not sure I'd agree that Bama runs a WCO.

Point being, it's possible to run a "pro-system" without running the highly complex and difficult to execute WCO. It's also possible to run a "pro-system" that is very run dominant. I would be all for a "pro-style" run oriented system at Nebraska. But the QBs who can effectively run a WCO at the college level are rare as hens' teeth.

 

[alexhortdog95]

This right here is why some fans are so enamored with the run game and insist that is the only way to play Nebraska football.

I've never understood this. What Da Fuq is "Nebraska Football"?!?

I've always understood Nebraska Football = Winning Football.

The WCO is predicated on ACCURACY in the short/intermediate passing game. It's not a run heavy offense, but utilizes play action to setup the deep ball.

Here's an argument for those "run first" folks....

Roger Craig, former Husker. Four time Pro-Bowler, got a bunch of rings with the Niners....

How many times, in his 10 year professional career did he rush for more than 1,000 yards? Three times ('85, '88', '89).

And he went to the playoffs every single year of his career.

Now - do you think Craig went to Bill Walsh and complained about getting the ball? Hell no. He played his role and has three championship rings to show for it.

Look at Ezekiel Elliott at tOSU....

Dude broke the 1,000 yard mark during the Minnesota game last year. That was the 3rd to last regular season game.

Could anybody have predicted that he'd rush for over 200 yards in his next three games last year? Nope. Barrett had rushed for 939 yards up to the point where he got hurt in the Michigan game.

Look at Derrick Henry at Bammer....

Dude didn't even rush for 1,000 yards last year. He probably would have eclipsed the 1,000 yard mark had Kiffin not put the brakes on him in the playoff game (which they lost because he did, IMHO). He only had three games where he did rush for over 100 yards in a game. For the record, Yeldon didn't rush for 1,000 either.

If you have a disciplined quarterback that can manage the game, and take mistakes out of the picture, and is accurate with the football, nine times out of ten, you'll win football games.

 

[Hujan]

Listen to Jason Peter talk about the role the team captains played on the 95 teamThe motivation and intensity was obvious and the seniors did not tolerate anything less than 110% effort

I have a ton of respect for what the '95 Huskers did and the leadership that team had. Truly unparalleled, and by conjunction, helped lead them to be considered the single best team in college football history. That said, I'm getting sick and tired of hearing from guys like Tommie Frazier, like Jason Peter, like Matt Vrzal, in relation to how things used to be when they were playing. I have been for years. Nebraska's history is probably the biggest blessing, and greatest curse, this program has. We're so enamored with that era that it quite literally permeates every thing. It's as if we'd rather live in and operate in the mid-90's mindset than understanding that it's 2015. How the '95 team did things is how the '95 team did things. It's a great example, but not the only one. We can respect and appreciate what they did without hanging onto it at every turn for reference as the team moves forward.

This right here is why some fans are so enamored with the run game and insist that is the only way to play Nebraska football. These folks either never knew an Osborne offense that threw quite often and was considered "pro-style" or have forgotten it. That offense won 6 conference titles and 2 national titles. It even sent one quarterback to the NFL that played in the 1979 Superbowl. I loved watching Osborne's offenses, pro-style, option and power running.

Not me. When I clamor for a run-oriented offense, I'm looking at Stanford and Wisconsin. And again, "pro-style" and "power running" are NOT mutually exclusive.

 

[alexhortdog95]

Kids from the 90s are very different from kids today. There is a self entitlement to this current generation.

This.

There's lots of self-entitlement, yes.

Listen, I still don't think MR is the guy for the job. Only time will tell us if that is true or not. That being said - a coach can only motivate a player so much. Players must be self-motivated to do what needs to be done.

I'd agree with what Carricker said in his FB post about the team buying into MR's system, though. I'm a WCO kind of guy, and I keep going back to this one argument:

Look at the teams that have won National championships all the way back to 2000. How many ran a WCO/Pro Style offense?

2000: OU - WCO/Pro Style

2001: DA U - WCO/Pro Style

2002: Buckeyes - WCO/Pro Style

2003: LSU/USC - both WCO/Pro Style

2004: USC - WCO/Pro Style

2005: TExPN - Spread/Zone

2006: Florida - Spread/Zone

2007: LSU - WCO/Pro Style

2008: Florida - Spread/Zone

2009: Bammer - WCO/Pro Style

2010: Auburn - Spread/Zone

2011: Bammer - WCO/Pro Style

2012: Bammer - WCO/Pro Style

2013: Free Shoes - WCO/Pro Style

2014: Buckeyes - Spread/Zone

It's not that the WCO/Pro Style offense is any better than the Spread/Zone offense. But the WCO/Pro Style offense attracts players that wish to play at the next level, period, end of story.

I think we need to define "Pro" style offense a little better. The hallmarks of a "pro-style" offense is not about passing to the exclusion of running. It's about QBs under center (which actually helps the run game), pocket passing, huddling, and a QB that checks into and out of plays depending on what he sees at the LOS.
A WCO is a subset of a pro system. It uses highly complex route combinations, de-empahsizes the traditional run game favoring instead short screen passes to to the WR and RB, relies on precise timing of routes, and generally throws the ball a lot.

Wisconsin runs a pro-system as traditionally defined. Stanford does too. LSU also. But all of them are power-run forms, not WCO forms, of the pro-style. I'm not sure I'd agree that Bama runs a WCO.

Point being, it's possible to run a "pro-system" without running the highly complex and difficult to execute WCO. It's also possible to run a "pro-system" that is very run dominant. I would be all for a "pro-style" run oriented system at Nebraska. But the QBs who can effectively run a WCO at the college level are rare as hens' teeth.

A WCO is a subset of a pro system. It uses highly complex route combinations, de-empahsizes the traditional run game favoring instead short screen passes to to the WR and RB, relies on precise timing of routes, and generally throws the ball a lot.

Agreed up to the point where you said, "throws the ball a lot". Not necessarily - this depends on the coach and the talent level he has (see Les Miles running Jacob Hester all the time).

But the QBs who can effectively run a WCO at the college level are rare as hens' teeth.

Totally disagree. I just rattled off a bunch of teams that all had average at best QBs. They were efficient in throwing the ball. Sims was in the top 10 in Passing efficiency last year, McCarron was ninth in 2013, first in 2012, and McElroy was 4th in 2010. And I'm just looking at Bammer QBs on that stat. I'd argue that spread QBs are more rare than pocket passers are.

 

[BigWillie]

Banker said he just wants them playing fast

Are we playing faster because we're always chasing the other team's players down the field?

Not if you're Gerry. He'll just whiff within the first 10 yards, and be done with it after that.

 

[alexhortdog95]

Not if you're Gerry. He'll just whiff within the first 10 yards, and be done with it after that.

Anybody who is watching them play this year knows this team's tackling compared to last year's tackling is 80 - 90% better.

They just have problems getting to the QB and coverage.

 

[Mavric]

Not if you're Gerry. He'll just whiff within the first 10 yards, and be done with it after that.

Anybody who is watching them play this year knows this team's tackling compared to last year's tackling is 80 - 90% better.

They just have problems getting to the QB and coverage.

I've watched and it's definitely not that much better. Somewhat better maybe. I'd say about the same.

 

[ColoradoHusk]

Benning has a cool story near the end of Segment 2 of today's Benning and Sharp show. In the '93 UCLA game, Benning got the start at I-Back after Calvin Jones got hurt the week before. Benning had a bad first quarter against UCLA, with a fumble or two. He was benched for LP, and Benning went and pouted on the sideline bench. Donta Jones from the defense went over to Damon and told him to get up off the bench and they have work to do. That's leadership and players playing for each other. That's why Damon gets upset when he sees 20-30 players sitting on the bench with disinterested look with 5 minutes left in a close game. Players aren't playing for each other, and there is a huge lack of leadership.

 

[Elf]

Listen to Jason Peter talk about the role the team captains played on the 95 teamThe motivation and intensity was obvious and the seniors did not tolerate anything less than 110% effort

I have a ton of respect for what the '95 Huskers did and the leadership that team had. Truly unparalleled, and by conjunction, helped lead them to be considered the single best team in college football history. That said, I'm getting sick and tired of hearing from guys like Tommie Frazier, like Jason Peter, like Matt Vrzal, in relation to how things used to be when they were playing. I have been for years. Nebraska's history is probably the biggest blessing, and greatest curse, this program has. We're so enamored with that era that it quite literally permeates every thing. It's as if we'd rather live in and operate in the mid-90's mindset than understanding that it's 2015. How the '95 team did things is how the '95 team did things. It's a great example, but not the only one. We can respect and appreciate what they did without hanging onto it at every turn for reference as the team moves forward.

This right here is why some fans are so enamored with the run game and insist that is the only way to play Nebraska football. These folks either never knew an Osborne offense that threw quite often and was considered "pro-style" or have forgotten it. That offense won 6 conference titles and 2 national titles. It even sent one quarterback to the NFL that played in the 1979 Superbowl. I loved watching Osborne's offenses, pro-style, option and power running.

Not me. When I clamor for a run-oriented offense, I'm looking at Stanford and Wisconsin. And again, "pro-style" and "power running" are NOT mutually exclusive.

Agreed.

 

[NebraskaShellback]

We have not played any top 25 teams, yet.

Iowa currently sits at #10 undefeated and MSU at #8 and we have these games at home. What effort will our team have on those days? Do we upset MSU or Iowa? I do not know but we may keep it close or will it be blowouts? It will be answered on those Saturdays for sure. I will not count on wins in the next 4 games, play the games and we will see.

I guess the 3 year rule for a coach to establish his philosophy and see how he does. How will it turn out

 

[Hujan]

Kids from the 90s are very different from kids today. There is a self entitlement to this current generation.

This.

There's lots of self-entitlement, yes.

Listen, I still don't think MR is the guy for the job. Only time will tell us if that is true or not. That being said - a coach can only motivate a player so much. Players must be self-motivated to do what needs to be done.

I'd agree with what Carricker said in his FB post about the team buying into MR's system, though. I'm a WCO kind of guy, and I keep going back to this one argument:

Look at the teams that have won National championships all the way back to 2000. How many ran a WCO/Pro Style offense?

2000: OU - WCO/Pro Style

2001: DA U - WCO/Pro Style

2002: Buckeyes - WCO/Pro Style

2003: LSU/USC - both WCO/Pro Style

2004: USC - WCO/Pro Style

2005: TExPN - Spread/Zone

2006: Florida - Spread/Zone

2007: LSU - WCO/Pro Style

2008: Florida - Spread/Zone

2009: Bammer - WCO/Pro Style

2010: Auburn - Spread/Zone

2011: Bammer - WCO/Pro Style

2012: Bammer - WCO/Pro Style

2013: Free Shoes - WCO/Pro Style

2014: Buckeyes - Spread/Zone

It's not that the WCO/Pro Style offense is any better than the Spread/Zone offense. But the WCO/Pro Style offense attracts players that wish to play at the next level, period, end of story.

I think we need to define "Pro" style offense a little better. The hallmarks of a "pro-style" offense is not about passing to the exclusion of running. It's about QBs under center (which actually helps the run game), pocket passing, huddling, and a QB that checks into and out of plays depending on what he sees at the LOS.A WCO is a subset of a pro system. It uses highly complex route combinations, de-empahsizes the traditional run game favoring instead short screen passes to to the WR and RB, relies on precise timing of routes, and generally throws the ball a lot.

Wisconsin runs a pro-system as traditionally defined. Stanford does too. LSU also. But all of them are power-run forms, not WCO forms, of the pro-style. I'm not sure I'd agree that Bama runs a WCO.

Point being, it's possible to run a "pro-system" without running the highly complex and difficult to execute WCO. It's also possible to run a "pro-system" that is very run dominant. I would be all for a "pro-style" run oriented system at Nebraska. But the QBs who can effectively run a WCO at the college level are rare as hens' teeth.

A WCO is a subset of a pro system. It uses highly complex route combinations, de-empahsizes the traditional run game favoring instead short screen passes to to the WR and RB, relies on precise timing of routes, and generally throws the ball a lot.

Agreed up to the point where you said, "throws the ball a lot". Not necessarily - this depends on the coach and the talent level he has (see Les Miles running Jacob Hester all the time).

But the QBs who can effectively run a WCO at the college level are rare as hens' teeth.

Totally disagree. I just rattled off a bunch of teams that all had average at best QBs. They were efficient in throwing the ball. Sims was in the top 10 in Passing efficiency last year, McCarron was ninth in 2013, first in 2012, and McElroy was 4th in 2010. And I'm just looking at Bammer QBs on that stat. I'd argue that spread QBs are more rare than pocket passers are.

I'm not sure we agree what a "West Coast Offense" is. There's probably no more than 10 college teams running it, if even that many. You seem to think that "not spread" equals "WCO." That's wrong. There is no way in hell Ohio State's offense would even remotely be considered a WCO.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Coast_offense

 

[BigWillie]

Not if you're Gerry. He'll just whiff within the first 10 yards, and be done with it after that.

Anybody who is watching them play this year knows this team's tackling compared to last year's tackling is 80 - 90% better.

They just have problems getting to the QB and coverage.

Gerry is a horrendously bad open field tackler. He was last year, and it has carried over this year.

 

[BigRedBuster]

I didn't feel like starting another thread for this and since this thread is about effort, I thought I'd put it here.

Honestly, at this point, I'm not that concerned about winning or losing on Saturday. Yes, it would really suck if we lost to Purdue and I will be happier with a win than a loss. However, what I want to see on Saturday is effort across the board. I want to see players demolishing the other side. Purdue is a team that Nebraska should be able to do that to. Understand what you are supposed to do and do it. We saw some of that in the Minnesota game. I want to see the players pumped up and ready to play.

The more I think about it, I think this is the biggest thing that we are missing and we have been missing this for a very very long time. I think Callahan brought in the NFL attitude where...."This is your job, go out and do it, no need to be emotional about it". That is the absolute opposite of what college football is all about. The entire game is an emotional game and many times, the team that comes to play jacked up (but disciplined) and on fire wins the game. Bo was a hot head on the side lines getting in people's faces. He took it too far and was an embarrassment and in large part, that's why he wasn't as effective as he could have been. That fire needs to come from the team. The HC needs to be the calming influence on the side lines when in the heat of battle. I think that is what Riley is looking for. He wants the fire to come from the team, not from him and that's the way it should be.

These players need to be there excited to be on that field and destroy the other team. We need that on this team. Until that part of the culture on the team changes, I'm not sure the results get much better. BUT, that can't come from the HC. It needs to come from within the team.

I want this team to come out with emotion in this game and be the team with the most energy.