So frustrating when

[84HuskerLaw]

Can one of you numbers guys or gals please tell me exactly how many 'players' we have on the team as of last night's game? I am using the number 140 (althouogh I believe it is higher?) and maybe also tell me how many of these 'players' are really only 'uniform wearing mannequins'? We have a bowl game up next and then it will be once again time to start over in the 'rebuilding' process for next year. We are graduating 30 seniors and a bunch of them seemed to be on the field for a bunch of the time in the last few games, presumably because they are the best we've got. I hope that is what it means and not that we play seniors because they are seniors and as such have 'earned it' and it is their turn to play. You earn your spot because you are the best not because of time served.

Since they were not getting anything done in this game, the gap from the starters to the second string must be huge as we seemed to have no better luck with any subs if we had any.

I am looking for some kind of assurance that the almost empty talent cupboard is not now empty. This is my fear. Will we go O for 12? We will be the most inexperienced Nebraska team in a decade I bet.

 

[commando]

Can one of you numbers guys or gals please tell me exactly how many 'players' we have on the team as of last night's game? I am using the number 140 (althouogh I believe it is higher?) and maybe also tell me how many of these 'players' are really only 'uniform wearing mannequins'? We have a bowl game up next and then it will be once again time to start over in the 'rebuilding' process for next year. We are graduating 30 seniors and a bunch of them seemed to be on the field for a bunch of the time in the last few games, presumably because they are the best we've got. I hope that is what it means and not that we play seniors because they are seniors have 'earned it' and it is their turn to play. You earn your spot because you are the best not because of time served.

Since they were not getting anything done in this game, the gap from the starters to the second string must be huge as we seemed to have no better luck with any subs if we had any.

I am looking for some kind of assurance that the almost empty talent cupboard is not now empty. This is my fear. Will we go O for 12? We will be the most inexperienced Nebraska team in a decade I bet.

time to jump off a bridge!!!

 

[AFhusker]

Just because Nebraska gave Bo too much time, doesn't mean everyone else should get an automatic seven years. Riley was hired to get over the hump, and not get blown out.

Two years in, we're back to where we were.

Who said that he got too much time? IMO a coach should have a minimum of six years to recruit and make it his program. (Of course that is without any ethical violations) IMO people need to calm down and realize that fixing a program isn't something that can be fixed overnight.

There's been plenty on here. The grumbling started in 2010, and took off in 2011.
It doesn't take six years to build a program. Hail varsity did a piece over the summer in their magazine on top coaches. Over the past decade or so, and every one of them had their program in the mix for at least a league title in year 2, and by year 3, they had their program rolling.

To have a fast start like that you have to inherit great talent from the previous staff, unfortunately this isn't the case in our situation. We may not have anyone drafted and if we do it won't be before the 3rd for 4th round at the highest. And that IMO would be Westy as a slot receiver. That is why it will take longer with our situation, we need to get the depth and talent here first before we can realistically judge them. Also people have to consider that if they really want us to be a playoff team, we will have to play the recruiting game by the Ohio State/Alabama and the rest of the SEC/USC/Oregon rules. IDK if people want to go down that road.

As for Bo, I wasn't one of them until we got demolished by Wisky in the CCG. Bo's tenure to me was hard to describe. I didn't think he was qualified for the job in the first place, but he took the NFL talent on defense that Callahan left him and turned them into a great defense. One that almost (should have) carried us to the 2009 Big 12 Championship and I thought I was wrong about him. But once those guys were gone, his poor recruiting became obvious. Then you throw in the public embarrassments it was time to part ways.

 

[AFhusker]

Just because Nebraska gave Bo too much time, doesn't mean everyone else should get an automatic seven years. Riley was hired to get over the hump, and not get blown out.

Two years in, we're back to where we were.

Who said that he got too much time? IMO a coach should have a minimum of six years to recruit and make it his program. (Of course that is without any ethical violations) IMO people need to calm down and realize that fixing a program isn't something that can be fixed overnight.

I can understand that but let me ask...after six years how do you judge if the person is doing a good job or not?

Like, for instance, if this had been the end of year 6...what would your thoughts be?

It would all depend on what happened in the six years. It is a balance of records, recruiting, any off the field problems. You have to look at the entire picture and see if there is a clear vision/plan and how close are we to achieving our goals? To me this season is a carbon copy of 2003, now we just need to get to a mediocre bowl and win it just like we did the Alamo Bowl that year to have pretty much the same year in Franks 6th season. It would be hard for me to defend a year like this in year 6 without some hardware in the first 5 seasons.

IMO when we find the coach that will end the string of mediocrity since 2001 we won't lose games like we did to Ohio State and Iowa in his 6th year.

 

[teachercd]

Just because Nebraska gave Bo too much time, doesn't mean everyone else should get an automatic seven years. Riley was hired to get over the hump, and not get blown out.

Two years in, we're back to where we were.

Who said that he got too much time? IMO a coach should have a minimum of six years to recruit and make it his program. (Of course that is without any ethical violations) IMO people need to calm down and realize that fixing a program isn't something that can be fixed overnight.

I can understand that but let me ask...after six years how do you judge if the person is doing a good job or not?

Like, for instance, if this had been the end of year 6...what would your thoughts be?

It would all depend on what happened in the six years. It is a balance of records, recruiting, any off the field problems. You have to look at the entire picture and see if there is a clear vision/plan and how close are we to achieving our goals? To me this season is a carbon copy of 2003, now we just need to get to a mediocre bowl and win it just like we did the Alamo Bowl that year to have pretty much the same year in Franks 6th season. It would be hard for me to defend a year like this in year 6 without some hardware in the first 5 seasons.

IMO when we find the coach that will end the string of mediocrity since 2001 we won't lose games like we did to Ohio State and Iowa in his 6th year.

You know, I think that is fair and level headed. I don't totally agree because Riley has a huge body of work that we can look at but I see your point.

One thing that is interesting. Oregon State is looking to land its highest ranked recruiting class (currently 6th in the Pac 12, where Riley was usually around 9 or 10)...makes me wonder a bit.

 

[AFhusker]

Just because Nebraska gave Bo too much time, doesn't mean everyone else should get an automatic seven years. Riley was hired to get over the hump, and not get blown out.

Two years in, we're back to where we were.

Who said that he got too much time? IMO a coach should have a minimum of six years to recruit and make it his program. (Of course that is without any ethical violations) IMO people need to calm down and realize that fixing a program isn't something that can be fixed overnight.

I can understand that but let me ask...after six years how do you judge if the person is doing a good job or not?

Like, for instance, if this had been the end of year 6...what would your thoughts be?

It would all depend on what happened in the six years. It is a balance of records, recruiting, any off the field problems. You have to look at the entire picture and see if there is a clear vision/plan and how close are we to achieving our goals? To me this season is a carbon copy of 2003, now we just need to get to a mediocre bowl and win it just like we did the Alamo Bowl that year to have pretty much the same year in Franks 6th season. It would be hard for me to defend a year like this in year 6 without some hardware in the first 5 seasons.

IMO when we find the coach that will end the string of mediocrity since 2001 we won't lose games like we did to Ohio State and Iowa in his 6th year.

You know, I think that is fair and level headed. I don't totally agree because Riley has a huge body of work that we can look at but I see your point.

One thing that is interesting. Oregon State is looking to land its highest ranked recruiting class (currently 6th in the Pac 12, where Riley was usually around 9 or 10)...makes me wonder a bit.

That is interesting about the recruiting rankings, but the point about any coach not just Riley is that we can't keep on firing guys after 2 or 3 years because then we will be the Oakland Raiders of CFB and nobody will want to come here. That is why Tom was the one who had to come back to fire BC before he got his full allotment of time. The CFB world is going to give Tom the benefit of the doubt when it comes to anything related to CFB and especially what is good for UNL.

 

[teachercd]

I wonder about that sometimes, the "no one will want to come here" part.

I see it differently. Coaches want to go to a place where they have the tools they need to win. I think Nebraska offers that.

I also think most coaches take a job knowing they are going to get fired. That is why I don't think it is that big of a deal. They are basically signing a winning lotto ticket.

 

[lo country]

So watching game day and it comes up about LSU hiring Orgeron getting hired at LSU. None were impressed. They talked about his record as a head coach which was not stellar. Said that he'd have to assemble a great staff.......

I look at Riley and Co. Riley came highly talked about. The get along gang? Not so much. His boat anchor staff is doing the same stupid crap with better everything. There needs to be changes. When your HC says in the presser we got in the trap of passing trying to catch up, thats an issue. When week in and week out he says our ST is a "mixed bag" thats an issue. When our punter is the worst in FBS thats a problem. Not to sound callous, but the kids on schollie, he should be better than he is. Regardless of the circumstances that surrounded his starting. Darlington is doing well as the holder..... DPE is on-existent. Thats a problem...

This staff is a problem.....Riley needs to make some hard decisions. If he can't, IMO he needs to be shown the door.

Its like NASCAR. If you are just a crappy driver, the best car, crew and support wont over come the bottom line that you are simply not a top tier driver.....

 

[AFhusker]

I wonder about that sometimes, the "no one will want to come here" part.

I see it differently. Coaches want to go to a place where they have the tools they need to win. I think Nebraska offers that.

I also think most coaches take a job knowing they are going to get fired. That is why I don't think it is that big of a deal. They are basically signing a winning lotto ticket.

I agree with the bold with one exception, that is we are now with the talent level it is going to take longer than a few years to get us to be a legit top 10 team. That is the point, they don't want to come here just to be unjustly fired because they didn't win a conference or MNC in their first two years. Now if the cupboard was stacked or at least close to it, then I can see a top HC coming in to take us over the top. But that is the point, we will never become a top 10 team if we keep on firing HC's, it will hurt recruiting and we will have all of the tools except the most important part, the talent level of the team.

That is why I am hoping that as a WORST case scenario that Riley gets fired or retires after his fair amount of time with a higher talent level than with what he was left. Then you throw in all of the "tools" that NU has and we will be able to get a HC to takes back to where we were used to being at.

 

[lo country]

I wonder about that sometimes, the "no one will want to come here" part.

I see it differently. Coaches want to go to a place where they have the tools they need to win. I think Nebraska offers that.

I also think most coaches take a job knowing they are going to get fired. That is why I don't think it is that big of a deal. They are basically signing a winning lotto ticket.

Peterson wasn't going to leave...... (but he always wanted to go to Washington)

Harbaugh won't leave (but UM is his alma mater)

I agree with you. Show them money and they will leave. The two above are examples, but the nay sayers will say they only left because its where they always wanted to go. I'd guarantee we offered Saban enough money, he would come to NU.

 

[lo country]

Double post

 

[grandpasknee]

People just saw how dark it can get last year, now we're supposed to be like "oh man just be happy with 9 wins don't even talk about firing another 9-3 coach"

We can definitely talk about firing a 9 win coach, but not after year 2. Pelini was given 7 years.

Why repeat the same mistakes?

Right...don't repeat the mistake of firing a 9-3 coach. i agree.

 

[teachercd]

So watching game day and it comes up about LSU hiring Orgeron getting hired at LSU. None were impressed. They talked about his record as a head coach which was not stellar. Said that he'd have to assemble a great staff.......

I look at Riley and Co. Riley came highly talked about. The get along gang? Not so much. His boat anchor staff is doing the same stupid crap with better everything. There needs to be changes. When your HC says in the presser we got in the trap of passing trying to catch up, thats an issue. When week in and week out he says our ST is a "mixed bag" thats an issue. When our punter is the worst in FBS thats a problem. Not to sound callous, but the kids on schollie, he should be better than he is. Regardless of the circumstances that surrounded his starting. Darlington is doing well as the holder..... DPE is on-existent. Thats a problem...

This staff is a problem.....Riley needs to make some hard decisions. If he can't, IMO he needs to be shown the door.

Its like NASCAR. If you are just a crappy driver, the best car, crew and support wont over come the bottom line that you are simply not a top tier driver.....

Ed O, I think, get the very best staff he can.

He is already going after Kiffen and will probably keep Aranda.

 

[theknife]

Year 2 and we are back to Pelini level. I'm as confident we will reach levels above this that I am we won't. It was obvious to me most of the year we severely lacked in the trenches. It seems clear the staff weathered all the injuries on the Oline and and red shirted all of the class. Prior poor roster management doesn't excuse the failures on offense and defense yesterday. A lot of that is coaching. How much of the former is affecting the latter is unclear.

Moving forward this staff must land some of the top prospects we still have on our board. Riley also has to decide if he is going to ride or die with the current staff. I think Armstrong was a square peg in the round hole of this offense. He was the best we had and the staff made best with what they could tailor to him. Next year, we have three QBs who fit the mold of their prototypical QB. No excuses on identity; we must realize if we are pass first or run first team and then double down on that approach. Defensively, I don't know. Maybe this scheme works a lot better if we have a pass rush and DEs that can play the run. I doubt that, but at this point it seems like the only area we lack talent. Hopefully we get a favorable bowl game and we finish at 10-3 and close the class strong.

 

[irafreak]

People just saw how dark it can get last year, now we're supposed to be like "oh man just be happy with 9 wins don't even talk about firing another 9-3 coach"

We can definitely talk about firing a 9 win coach, but not after year 2. Pelini was given 7 years.

Why repeat the same mistakes?

remember when urban meyer was asked about coaching Nebraska? he said no because they fire 9-3 coaches there. so...what mistake should we not repeat?

I remember hearing that from people But I never actually saw the quote... Do you have a link?

Times have changed. BIG programs fire winning coaches now. You hit a ceiling and demand more. Nebraska just needs to be willing to bid on the hot names...