Epley's comments on Talent

[GBRedneck]

You said I had no chance at being as good of football players as the ones I listed

Yes I did. However, I don't ascribe it to lack of talent, and you keep missing that point. My opinion of your lack of success has more to do with your personality, attitude, a perceived propensity to give up before a real effort is made and also the fact that you would be the type to put up over 10,000 posts sitting in front of the computer in the last three years just to this one forum, which might be siphoning away time spent more profitably elsewhere.

If you have to go to the level that you're insulting not only someone's person but also their post count, perhaps it's time to be the bigger person and just step back. I'm sure there are some character traits or flaw you possess - we all have them.

Huh? You cut off the part of his post where he said he was stepping back, and then tell him he needs to step back? C'mon man. You're better than that.

 

[BRV920]

I think the players are miffed that the atheletic department put it in the paper. Think it has more to do with trying to take the heat off Riley. I personally think the numbers are just that. Numbers. There are tons of guys that put up incredible numbers at the combine that were complete busts in the NFL. Success on the field has a lot more to do with work ethic and intelligence. The atheletic ability helps but isn't the only factor. Bennington was talking about Jay Sims holding the RB record for testing at 3400 points and being their 4th string running back. It's not all about the numbers.

 

[GBRedneck]

Prominent media guy covering Huskers says it was definitely the athletic department that wanted this story out. Contacted both newspapers so they could do the interview together.

Also said it didn't go over all that well with everyone on the team.

I wonder why it wouldn't have gone over well. Not saying that these evaluations are the end-all-be-all indicator of talent and athleticism, but wouldn't athletes at that caliber want something tangible to look at and see how they compare? It doesn't make sense. Unless there are some on the team still fighting tooth and nail against the coaching staff.

They aren't upset about the testing. They're upset with the AD propaganda behind the article, which basically calls them a bunch of untalented schmucks as an excuse for poor coaching.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

You said I had no chance at being as good of football players as the ones I listed

Yes I did. However, I don't ascribe it to lack of talent, and you keep missing that point. My opinion of your lack of success has more to do with your personality, attitude, a perceived propensity to give up before a real effort is made and also the fact that you would be the type to put up over 10,000 posts sitting in front of the computer in the last three years just to this one forum, which might be siphoning away time spent more profitably elsewhere.
I am done with you, as I will not be your enabler. Go do something positive, regardless of talent level.

You can have the next and last word, I am going to work on my dog walking "talent".

I gave up with him as well in other threads. He misses the point, twists comments, cherry picks to remove context, moves the goal posts and interprets comments in a head scratching way.

Lol....I moved the goal posts? I simply asked if he is serious that I could have been a Heisman trophy RB if I just worked harder.

He thinks anyone can be that if they just work harder. Natural talent means nothing. That's laughable.

I think these 10 Commandments are awesome.

Even the ones I abuse.

 

[Elf]

Prominent media guy covering Huskers says it was definitely the athletic department that wanted this story out. Contacted both newspapers so they could do the interview together.

Also said it didn't go over all that well with everyone on the team.

I wonder why it wouldn't have gone over well. Not saying that these evaluations are the end-all-be-all indicator of talent and athleticism, but wouldn't athletes at that caliber want something tangible to look at and see how they compare? It doesn't make sense. Unless there are some on the team still fighting tooth and nail against the coaching staff.

They aren't upset about the testing. They're upset with the AD propaganda behind the article, which basically calls them a bunch of untalented schmucks as an excuse for poor coaching.

Boyd Epley points out we need talent upgrades and you jump right in with your tired, poor coaching narrative. How about instead of railing on Riley and CO. we look at the measurables Epley found and discuss those?

 

[BRV920]

I don't think anyone is saying that we have as much talent as those teams of the 90's but GBRedneck isn't wrong when he says most of out losses this year are directly related to coaching.

 

[adc7236]

Prominent media guy covering Huskers says it was definitely the athletic department that wanted this story out. Contacted both newspapers so they could do the interview together.

Also said it didn't go over all that well with everyone on the team.

Thanks Mavric.

I'm going to say this once again. You heard it... and read it here... FIRST.

The fans here figured this out instantly and the discussion has showed that. There were several members here, with great instincts, that were on top on this in a heart beat. Once again the fans were correct.

It's been very difficult for many to understand and accept the intelligence of Nebraska fans. People in authority who think they can control everything, even though they can't, just cant stand it and still refuse to swallow it.

But it's more than that. It's that we are also brutally honest. The combination of intelligence, great instincts and honesty presents a unique and top notch forum for getting accurate and hard hitting information. More accurate and more honest than what you can get anywhere else. Period.

But there's more. We (fans) simply do NOT accept being told what to think or say. That genuine freedom trumps everything else. Fans do NOT accept being told what the truth is... when we can see for ourselves that the truth being proclaimed by others, is in fact not true at all. We know the truth and we speak it. We don't take orders from above about what to think... we can think for ourselves. Again... a unique and very healthy aspect of what we do. We wouldn't want it any other way and it shouldn't be any other way.

Last but not least "chat boards" are now THE drivers of the narrative. We lead and others follow our lead. Radio shows and other media have been coming to and referring to fan reaction and comments forever... but now more than ever. They know where the good stuff is at... even though they wont admit it. We may not have "media access" but the beautiful thing is we don't need it. We can figure things out for ourselves. We've known for 18 years that the athletic ability of our players has been way down. We can see it with our own eyes and know it with our own minds.

"Chat boards" are like healthy little children crawling all over the house. People look at them and comment on how smart they are... but they're still crawling. So the time has come to stand up. The time has come to take our place in all of this... and expect that our place be given the respect it deserves. I personally have never tolerated the criticism-jealousy-envy being thrown at chat boards. It was never anything more than petty jealousy.

And best of all. Because we are truly fans... we do it all with the best of intentions.

Message boards are becoming more mainstream and are referenced by other media sources; and carry some influence. That influence can both be good and bad at times.

As I continued to read your post, I got Braveheart flash backs as he was preparing his men for battle.

 

[Elf]

I don't think anyone is saying that we have as much talent as those teams of the 90's but GBRedneck isn't wrong when he says most of out losses this year are directly related to coaching.

Like when the coaches called a run and Tommy threw an interception instead?

 

[GBRedneck]

I don't think anyone is saying that we have as much talent as those teams of the 90's but GBRedneck isn't wrong when he says most of out losses this year are directly related to coaching.

Like when the coaches called a run and Tommy threw an interception instead?

That's a perfect example of poor coaching, but that's not what this thread is about.

 

[Elf]

I don't think anyone is saying that we have as much talent as those teams of the 90's but GBRedneck isn't wrong when he says most of out losses this year are directly related to coaching.

Like when the coaches called a run and Tommy threw an interception instead?

That's a perfect example of poor coaching, but that's not what this thread is about.

A player not doing what he is told is a good example of poor coaching.

 

[It'sNotAFakeID]

I revert back to the statement where someone said they are thinking you really have no clue what you are talking about.[/size]

Of course, that's got to be it.

Chuck Norris described himself as being un-athletic and on top of that, he broke his shoulder during his first two weeks of marital arts training. Yet he retired as undefeated Middleweight Full Contact Karate champion. Do you think that was because of some "revealed talent" or because he practiced for five hours every day?

So....
You are honestly...with a straight face....telling me that if I had only worked harder when I was younger I could have been as good as Irving Fryer as a WR or Mike Rozier as a RB or Turner Gill as a QB...Or...if I so choose, I could have been the next Dave Rimington. All I was missing is the hard work they obviously put in.

Ben Hogan always said that anyone that didn't have some sort of physical disabilty could learn to shoot scratch golf. I agree with him. But most people aren't willing to put in the amount of effort required, mostly because there are no guarantees.
So in principle, I agree with Bowfin.

It's a sliding scale. Effort can't overcome everything, but it can go a long way in reducing the disparity between a "naturally gifted" athlete and average athlete.

What's funny though is that most of your really gifted athletes also put in a ton of effort.

 

[StPaulHusker]

Based on this years level of talent graded by Boyd Epley, Mike Riley and Co did not coach the team to a better season in the 11 months they had with them installing entire new systems.

 

[Elf]

I revert back to the statement where someone said they are thinking you really have no clue what you are talking about.[/size]

Of course, that's got to be it.

Chuck Norris described himself as being un-athletic and on top of that, he broke his shoulder during his first two weeks of marital arts training. Yet he retired as undefeated Middleweight Full Contact Karate champion. Do you think that was because of some "revealed talent" or because he practiced for five hours every day?

So....
You are honestly...with a straight face....telling me that if I had only worked harder when I was younger I could have been as good as Irving Fryer as a WR or Mike Rozier as a RB or Turner Gill as a QB...Or...if I so choose, I could have been the next Dave Rimington. All I was missing is the hard work they obviously put in.

Ben Hogan always said that anyone that didn't have some sort of physical disabilty could learn to shoot scratch golf. I agree with him. But most people aren't willing to put in the amount of effort required, mostly because there are no guarantees.
So in principle, I agree with Bowfin.

It's a sliding scale. Effort can't overcome everything, but it can go a long way in reducing the disparity between a "naturally gifted" athlete and average athlete.

What's funny though is that most of your really gifted athletes also put in a ton of effort.

I agree with this. I think the people who say it is one or the other are all wrong, I believe it takes effort and natural talent to become great. Look at the effort "Rudy" put in at Notre Dame. He worked harder than anyone else, he just didn't have the physical tools to become great.

 

[beorach]

Based on this years level of talent graded by Boyd Epley, Mike Riley and Co did not coach the team to a better season in the 11 months they had with them installing entire new systems.

I'm not sure what you mean by this?

 

[StPaulHusker]

Based on this years level of talent graded by Boyd Epley, Mike Riley and Co did not coach the team to a better season in the 11 months they had with them installing entire new systems.

I'm not sure what you mean by this?

Just trying to sum up every argument that derails every Husker football thread this year.