Tangent Thread - December 2015 Edition

[teachercd]

Dang, that 3 star they got even had an offer from the SEC...

 

[GBRedneck]

Purdon't hangs 55 on the Huskers and then let the Huskers score 29 in the 4th quarter to pull within 10 , and it's not a blowout?

 

[ADS]

I would say most people who watch football and know football would say that a ten point loss is not a blowout.

 

[Pedro Guerrero]

Nope, I am talking about the UCLA game in Lincoln when NU was up big at the half and got smoked in the second half...what that a blowout win for UCLA?

UCLA ended up winning by 20 didn't they? There is no doubt that a 20 point loss is a blowout.

 

[cm husker]

Dang, that 3 star they got even had an offer from the SEC...

I wonder if that's actually true.

One of the many reasons I don't follow recruiting closely (and hate the recruitnik industry in general) is that you don't really know what offers have been made (and don't get me started on "committable offers"). That cottage industry relies entirely on the players to be truthful and accurate in their reports, something that's not realistic.

That said, he apparently took an official visit to Kentucky, so he may have an offer there.

Is Marrow still at KY?

 

[ColoradoHusk]

Nope, I am talking about the UCLA game in Lincoln when NU was up big at the half and got smoked in the second half...what that a blowout win for UCLA?

UCLA ended up winning by 20 didn't they? There is no doubt that a 20 point loss is a blowout.

Especially when UCLA ran off 38 straight points from the end of the 2nd quarter until the end of the game.

 

[ColoradoHusk]

I would say most people who watch football and know football would say that a ten point loss is not a blowout.

The final score of the game isn't exactly indicative of whether the game was a blowout or not. There is a thing called the "eye test" and actually watching the game.

 

[RADAR]

A ten point loss is only a blowout in soccer and baseball.

 

[RADAR]

I think the biggest issue with Read, is that it's literally his only job, and for $500k, we wanted VT level special teams units. Bo's special teams units were farmed out to different assistant, and were actually pretty good most of his tenure, except the disastrous 2013 season where we could barely catch a punt. IIRC, they were in Phil Steele's top 10 ST units 5 of 7 seasons (one of the few places to track that stuff), and we routinely had good kicking and coverage units. The return units were decent to good most years too. 2015 wasn't that bad, other than our kick return unit, which was non-existent until Stanly Morgan got the nod. That said, Brown got better, and we did get a bit better in the return units over the year.

That is what bothers me the most. I think we are getting very little bang for the buck with him. How is he as a recruiter?

Was going to bring this up. He appears to basically be a non-factor in recruiting - other than recruiting kickers, punters and long-snappers. Kickers are people too but that means he's probably only recruiting one guy per year (on average).

Can't remember which prominent new-hire head coach said this in the last week but he said he hires an OC, a DC and an OL coach. For the rest of the assistants, if you can't recruit, you don't work for him. Seems like a pretty good strategy to me.

That was Will Muschamp, who just got hired at South Carolina.

Damn, Bo might never make it back to D1, he does not have a single commit yet and it is mid December. Some things never change.

Based on what? This site lists 6, including a 3 star (YSU's first since at least 2010): http://ysu.247sports.com/Season/2015-Football/Commits

I don't take much on these boards seriously or personally, but it really irks me when you and others basically claim that Bo didn't recruit, because that is the same as saying "our players suck" which couldn't be further from the truth. We have a great roster of talent.

It's up to these coaches to produce wins. And if they can't produce wins with this talent, then some "recruiting upgrades" aren't going to get us to championship form. Maybe it will get us back to 8 or 9 wins a season, which is apparently a firable offense at Nebraska (and we'll be right back where we started in a few years).

Of course, because of Riley's advanced age, we may be back to square 1 in a few years no matter what.

We have a roster of GREAT talent that has always lost a least 4 games. Teams with GREAT talent do not lose 4 or more games. Ask Alabama and Clemson.

Switzer always said it is about "jimmy's and Joe's" truer words were never spoken!! You might want to look into that.

Riley will bring in some quality Jimmy's and Joes to go along with the spotty talent Bo brought in and in a couple of years you will not see the travel roster littered with 1/3 walkons.

 

[teachercd]

Riley will bring them in and coach them down! Haha

 

[teachercd]

A ten point loss is only a blowout in soccer and baseball.

Sooo..what is the magic number for it to be a blowout?

 

[commando]

a 10 point loss is a blowout only if it fits your agenda

 

[RADAR]

A ten point loss is only a blowout in soccer and baseball.

Sooo..what is the magic number for it to be a blowout?

17 or more..

 

[cm husker]

I think the biggest issue with Read, is that it's literally his only job, and for $500k, we wanted VT level special teams units. Bo's special teams units were farmed out to different assistant, and were actually pretty good most of his tenure, except the disastrous 2013 season where we could barely catch a punt. IIRC, they were in Phil Steele's top 10 ST units 5 of 7 seasons (one of the few places to track that stuff), and we routinely had good kicking and coverage units. The return units were decent to good most years too. 2015 wasn't that bad, other than our kick return unit, which was non-existent until Stanly Morgan got the nod. That said, Brown got better, and we did get a bit better in the return units over the year.

That is what bothers me the most. I think we are getting very little bang for the buck with him. How is he as a recruiter?

Was going to bring this up. He appears to basically be a non-factor in recruiting - other than recruiting kickers, punters and long-snappers. Kickers are people too but that means he's probably only recruiting one guy per year (on average).

Can't remember which prominent new-hire head coach said this in the last week but he said he hires an OC, a DC and an OL coach. For the rest of the assistants, if you can't recruit, you don't work for him. Seems like a pretty good strategy to me.

That was Will Muschamp, who just got hired at South Carolina.

Damn, Bo might never make it back to D1, he does not have a single commit yet and it is mid December. Some things never change.

Based on what? This site lists 6, including a 3 star (YSU's first since at least 2010): http://ysu.247sports.com/Season/2015-Football/Commits

I don't take much on these boards seriously or personally, but it really irks me when you and others basically claim that Bo didn't recruit, because that is the same as saying "our players suck" which couldn't be further from the truth. We have a great roster of talent.

It's up to these coaches to produce wins. And if they can't produce wins with this talent, then some "recruiting upgrades" aren't going to get us to championship form. Maybe it will get us back to 8 or 9 wins a season, which is apparently a firable offense at Nebraska (and we'll be right back where we started in a few years).

Of course, because of Riley's advanced age, we may be back to square 1 in a few years no matter what.

We have a roster of GREAT talent that has always lost a least 4 games. Teams with GREAT talent do not lose 4 or more games. Ask Alabama and Clemson.

Switzer always said it is about "jimmy's and Joe's" truer words were never spoken!! You might want to look into that.

Riley will bring in some quality Jimmy's and Joes to go along with the spotty talent Bo brought in and in a couple of years you will not see the travel roster littered with 1/3 walkons.

Switzer was being modest.

I actually think Bo cost NU in a game or 2 each of his seasons. I would say that he basically got the "proportionate" amount of wins out of the talent that he brought in, but did not do a good job getting the "extra" wins that a great coach squeezes out of his players. Personally, I was ok giving him some time because, as a first time coach, I didn't expect him to be perfect, but I did think he had upside that would be realized in years 8-10.

Frankly, if he'd gotten an average of an additional 1.5 wins out of each of his teams at Nebraska, he would be widely considered among the top 5 coaches in the country.

That's always been my issue with people wanting him (and Solich) fired. Essentially, you are saying, we should fire any coach who does not produce results equal to the top 5 or 10 coaches in the country, including coaches who are in much better situations than NU.

To me, that is pure craziness, and it will soon cause NU football to plummet in every metric imaginable.

My issue with Riley is that instead of getting even close to the "proportionate" number of wins out of his roster, he took a major step back. If this were his first time as an HC or there was evidence that he had a lot of "upside potential," I'd be less concerned. As it stands, there's no excuse for NU not grinding out at least 8 wins this year with this roster against this schedule.

My concern now is that even if all of the wishes and dreams about "better recruiting" comes true, what does that really mean? 9/10 wins instead of 5/7 wins? Is that really why we made the change (and once again destroyed TO's vision and path to success for Husker football)?

 

[RADAR]

Tom is gone and retired, he had his chance and Nebraska has moved on. I am guessing that Notre Dame does not bring up the vision of Knute Rockne.

Solich was fired because he was banging coeds and could not recruit. the program was in a down hill slide. Bo was fired because he was a psychotic prick and lazy at recruiting and as a result, handed out scollie's like candy to walkons.

Facts of history