Nathan Gerry

[Making Chimichangas]

Mavric said: Gerry did say something to that effect.

However, he was talking about a system that led to us having one of the worst defenses we've ever had as implemented by a coach that got fired

So perhaps the players knew what they were doing more than the coach.

Ummmm....No

This was 2015 and clearly Gerry's comments were directed towards the newly hired coaching staff.

To even suggest that Gerry was talking about the previous coaching staff is disingenuous at best.

I realize it was 2015. That was the year we finished #122 in the country in pass defense. Banker was the one implementing that defense and he has since been fired.

I'm not disputing Banker's inadequacies.

I'm talking about a specific player...Nate Gerry.

The final two years of his Nebraska career, he purposefully played half-speed, failed in his school work, sabotaged his new coaches, and lowered his own draft stock--all because he was a petulant child still "devoted" to the former coach.

 

[Mavric]

Mavric said: Gerry did say something to that effect.

However, he was talking about a system that led to us having one of the worst defenses we've ever had as implemented by a coach that got fired

So perhaps the players knew what they were doing more than the coach.

Ummmm....No

This was 2015 and clearly Gerry's comments were directed towards the newly hired coaching staff.

To even suggest that Gerry was talking about the previous coaching staff is disingenuous at best.

I realize it was 2015. That was the year we finished #122 in the country in pass defense. Banker was the one implementing that defense and he has since been fired.

I'm not disputing Banker's inadequacies.

I'm talking about a specific player...Nate Gerry.

The final two years of his Nebraska career, he purposefully played half-speed, failed in his school work, sabotaged his new coaches, and lowered his own draft stock--all because he was a petulant child still "devoted" to the former coach.

That is your intrepretation of what happened. That doesn't make it true.

 

[LumberJackSker]

Shouldn't some of the blame be on the coaches for lack of buy in? Gerry was hardly the only player that didn't buy into Riley.

True. But he was a starter, a "leader," that was supposed to set the positive, not the negative, example.

MRI was suspended along with someone else to start that year. Not saying the players should get a pass but in my opinion the lack of effort and buy in Riley's first year is more on the coaching staff.

So you're saying the coaches should be blamed, for not making the horses drink?
Listen, we can debate scheme and what ifs all day.

Ultimately, it's on the players on the field to execute the X's and O's.

To that end, the players from the former coach's regime failed...no matter how you look at it.

yes coaches should be held responsible for a player and a teams performance.

 

[Making Chimichangas]

Mavric said: Gerry did say something to that effect.

However, he was talking about a system that led to us having one of the worst defenses we've ever had as implemented by a coach that got fired

So perhaps the players knew what they were doing more than the coach.

Ummmm....No

This was 2015 and clearly Gerry's comments were directed towards the newly hired coaching staff.

To even suggest that Gerry was talking about the previous coaching staff is disingenuous at best.

I realize it was 2015. That was the year we finished #122 in the country in pass defense. Banker was the one implementing that defense and he has since been fired.

I'm not disputing Banker's inadequacies.

I'm talking about a specific player...Nate Gerry.

The final two years of his Nebraska career, he purposefully played half-speed, failed in his school work, sabotaged his new coaches, and lowered his own draft stock--all because he was a petulant child still "devoted" to the former coach.

That is your intrepretation of what happened. That doesn't make it true.

I think there's over-whelming evidence to how Nebraska has consistently under-performed the last two (to 5) years...re-watch the tape.

The last two (to 5) years more than adequately demonstrates a lazy, who gives a damn if we lose or get blown out, culture that was allowed to grow in Lincoln.

I'm not completely absolving Mike Riley, but as a new coach, he's east of the rock and west of the hard place in a situation like this. He's coming in, and he needs the existing juniors and seniors, all recruited by the former staff, to play hard for him. Clearly, they did not. They did not "buy in."

The last several years Nebraska has looked completely, ludicrously, inept against even mediocre to poor teams: McNeese State, Purdue, Illinois, Northwestern...

Last year, we were utterly stomped by Ohio State and (are you kidding me) Iowa (by 59 and 30 points respectively).

This track record, over multiple years, lends far more credence to my analysis than yours.

But in this era of #AlternativeFacts and #FakeNews...you're free to believe whatever you wish, despite all evidence to the contrary.

Look, I like you Mavric. Your posts in the recruiting forum, and how you keep us all up to date regarding recruiting, are awesome.

But sugar-coating and/or down-playing the very real problems Nebraska has had regarding effort and "want" is counter-productive.

 

[Swiv3D]

So you admit this wasn't just a Nate Gerry issue?

 

[Branno]

Mavric said: Gerry did say something to that effect.

However, he was talking about a system that led to us having one of the worst defenses we've ever had as implemented by a coach that got fired

So perhaps the players knew what they were doing more than the coach.

Ummmm....No

This was 2015 and clearly Gerry's comments were directed towards the newly hired coaching staff.

To even suggest that Gerry was talking about the previous coaching staff is disingenuous at best.

For someone that can read "didn't buy in" as "we didn't try to win", it's not surprising that you missed the fact he was talking about Banker.

Mavric said: Gerry did say something to that effect.

However, he was talking about a system that led to us having one of the worst defenses we've ever had as implemented by a coach that got fired

So perhaps the players knew what they were doing more than the coach.

Ummmm....No

This was 2015 and clearly Gerry's comments were directed towards the newly hired coaching staff.

To even suggest that Gerry was talking about the previous coaching staff is disingenuous at best.

I realize it was 2015. That was the year we finished #122 in the country in pass defense. Banker was the one implementing that defense and he has since been fired.

I'm not disputing Banker's inadequacies.

I'm talking about a specific player...Nate Gerry.

The final two years of his Nebraska career, he purposefully played half-speed, failed in his school work, sabotaged his new coaches, and lowered his own draft stock--all because he was a petulant child still "devoted" to the former coach.

That is your intrepretation of what happened. That doesn't make it true.

I think there's over-whelming evidence to how Nebraska has consistently under-performed the last two (to 5) years...re-watch the tape.

The last two (to 5) years more than adequately demonstrates a lazy, who gives a damn if we lose or get blown out, culture that was allowed to grow in Lincoln.

I'm not completely absolving Mike Riley, but as a new coach, he's east of the rock and west of the hard place in a situation like this. He's coming in, and he needs the existing juniors and seniors, all recruited by the former staff, to play hard for him. Clearly, they did not. They did not "buy in."

The last several years Nebraska has looked completely, ludicrously, inept against even mediocre to poor teams: McNeese State, Purdue, Illinois, Northwestern...

Last year, we were utterly stomped by Ohio State and (are you kidding me) Iowa (by 59 and 30 points respectively).

This track record, over multiple years, lends far more credence to my analysis than yours.

But in this era of #AlternativeFacts and #FakeNews...you're free to believe whatever you wish, despite all evidence to the contrary.

Look, I like you Mavric. Your posts in the recruiting forum, and how you keep us all up to date regarding recruiting, are awesome.

But sugar-coating and/or down-playing the very real problems Nebraska has had regarding effort and "want" is counter-productive.

I don't understand this blame the players at all costs mindset. If it was that simple Banker and Read wouldn't have been fired. All evidence, other than you reading "didn't buy in" as "I didn't try" and applying it to every loss for 5 years, points to a failure at the coaching level. But please, do continue telling us how the kids on the field are the problem and not the adults making millions.

This idea that there is any evidence to your claims is ludicrous. You are asserting your idiotic opinion as fact. It's like following Donald Trump on Twitter.

 

[Mavric]

But in this era of #AlternativeFacts and #FakeNews...you're free to believe whatever you wish

I definitely agree with this part of your post. It is astutely observed.

So you're going to take all the bad play over the last two (to five) years and pretty much blame Gerry for it. Or at least take it as evidence that no one on the team was even trying. That's quite a blanket to throw.

So despite playing half-speed, intentionally sabotaging the team and missing at least parts of several games, Gerry over the last two years was still only one tackle from leading the team over that time and and had 60% more interceptions than anyone else on the team?

Imagine how good of a player he'll be now that he isn't actually trying to be bad.

 

[teachercd]

But in this era of #AlternativeFacts and #FakeNews...you're free to believe whatever you wish

I definitely agree with this part of your post. It is astutely observed.
So you're going to take all the bad play over the last two (to five) years and pretty much blame Gerry for it. Or at least take it as evidence that no one on the team was even trying. That's quite a blanket to throw.

So despite playing half-speed, intentionally sabotaging the team and missing at least parts of several games, Gerry over the last two years was still only one tackle from leading the team over that time and and had 60% more interceptions than anyone else on the team?

Imagine how good of a player he'll be now that he isn't actually trying to be bad.

I can't wait for the nonsense stop about how the team was tanking. And why did Gerry become the scapegoat?

 

[MyBloodIsRed16]

But in this era of #AlternativeFacts and #FakeNews...you're free to believe whatever you wish

I definitely agree with this part of your post. It is astutely observed.
So you're going to take all the bad play over the last two (to five) years and pretty much blame Gerry for it. Or at least take it as evidence that no one on the team was even trying. That's quite a blanket to throw.

So despite playing half-speed, intentionally sabotaging the team and missing at least parts of several games, Gerry over the last two years was still only one tackle from leading the team over that time and and had 60% more interceptions than anyone else on the team?

Imagine how good of a player he'll be now that he isn't actually trying to be bad.

I can't wait for the nonsense stop about how the team was tanking. And why did Gerry become the scapegoat?

It will never stop. Gerry intentionally became friends with underclassmen so he could infect them so the bad attitudes will continue and the team will tank season after season. It will he anarchy

 

[teachercd]

But in this era of #AlternativeFacts and #FakeNews...you're free to believe whatever you wish

I definitely agree with this part of your post. It is astutely observed.
So you're going to take all the bad play over the last two (to five) years and pretty much blame Gerry for it. Or at least take it as evidence that no one on the team was even trying. That's quite a blanket to throw.

So despite playing half-speed, intentionally sabotaging the team and missing at least parts of several games, Gerry over the last two years was still only one tackle from leading the team over that time and and had 60% more interceptions than anyone else on the team?

Imagine how good of a player he'll be now that he isn't actually trying to be bad.

I can't wait for the nonsense stop about how the team was tanking. And why did Gerry become the scapegoat?

It will never stop. Gerry intentionally became friends with underclassmen so he could infect them so the bad attitudes will continue and the team will tank season after season. It will he anarchy

Haha! Love this

 

[Nebfanatic]

I think it is fair to say the players who didn't buy in should share some blame with the coaches. To someone else's post prior saying the players could see bankers scheme was bad so they do their own thing and that's understandable I'd complete BS. Whether you believe in the scheme or not you have to do your job within the scheme or its going to look terrible. So basically, if you think the coach has a bad scheme so you decide to freelance you are instantly causing the scheme to look much worse than it might if players were doing their proper jobs. Freelancing on D except in very few situations usually results in some pretty poor defense

 

[Mavric]

Yeah, Nebraska tried Gerry at LB...he's not tough, or physical, enough to play LB.

He's Charmin. A soft, weak, half-speed, player.

Sorry fellow Nebraska fans, I'm just not a Nate Gerry fan. I think he embodied and carried forward for two years, every thing wrong about the former coach.

If he excels with the Eagles, terrific, I'll congratulate him. But I'll never root for, or like, him as person or player.

dude, you have a grudge problem, this kid is the sh#t!....he will play a role for the Eagles!

I'm not saying he won't.

I'm saying not a fan of his. His words, after the loss to Purdue in 2015, still rankle me. He flat out admitted that they hadn't "bought in." The extremely poor play we saw against BYU, Illinois, Purdue, etc, painfully highlighted the lack of "buy in."

In football speak, not "buying in" means you go half speed, you don't care, and you're holding a grudge because the coach who recruited you got fired.

And then he didn't do his school work and wasn't eligible for the bowl game his senior year--which was 100% inexcusable.

So yeah...not a fan of the former #25.

The lack of buy-in was on Riley. His job was to coach and inspire this team to win games.

We lost most of those games because of a poor scheme, not because the players weren't trying hard enough. If it was that easy, we wouldn't have just hired two new coordinators.

It's 100% understandable to be upset that his inability to go to class resulted in his suspension, but that kid played hard for us.

Dude, buy in is on the kids...not the coaches. The coaches are already bought in to their program and how they run things. Kids have to step on the bus. You can't make kids you coach do anything...they have to want to do it. You can't force kids you coach to do anything more than I could force a liberal to 'buy in' on conservatism.

We lost those games because the players lacked focus because they didn't care enough....they were still pissed that Pelini was gone...and they admitted they did that.

.... and because our defensive coordinator and special teams coordinator were terrible.

 

[Mavric]

https://twitter.com/eagles/status/858410879771181060

Yeah, Nebraska tried Gerry at LB...he's not tough, or physical, enough to play LB.

He's Charmin. A soft, weak, half-speed, player.

Sorry fellow Nebraska fans, I'm just not a Nate Gerry fan. I think he embodied and carried forward for two years, every thing wrong about the former coach.

If he excels with the Eagles, terrific, I'll congratulate him. But I'll never root for, or like, him as person or player.

dude, you have a grudge problem, this kid is the sh#t!....he will play a role for the Eagles!

I'm not saying he won't.

I'm saying not a fan of his. His words, after the loss to Purdue in 2015, still rankle me. He flat out admitted that they hadn't "bought in." The extremely poor play we saw against BYU, Illinois, Purdue, etc, painfully highlighted the lack of "buy in."

In football speak, not "buying in" means you go half speed, you don't care, and you're holding a grudge because the coach who recruited you got fired.

And then he didn't do his school work and wasn't eligible for the bowl game his senior year--which was 100% inexcusable.

So yeah...not a fan of the former #25.

The lack of buy-in was on Riley. His job was to coach and inspire this team to win games.
We lost most of those games because of a poor scheme, not because the players weren't trying hard enough. If it was that easy, we wouldn't have just hired two new coordinators.

It's 100% understandable to be upset that his inability to go to class resulted in his suspension, but that kid played hard for us.

Dude, buy in is on the kids...not the coaches. The coaches are already bought in to their program and how they run things. Kids have to step on the bus. You can't make kids you coach do anything...they have to want to do it. You can't force kids you coach to do anything more than I could force a liberal to 'buy in' on conservatism.

We lost those games because the players lacked focus because they didn't care enough....they were still pissed that Pelini was gone...and they admitted they did that.

.... and because our defensive coordinator and special teams coordinator were terrible.

Were they terrible because they were terrible or were they terrible because the kids didn't buy in?

What you said isn't a fact...it's just an opinion. Just like what I said.

Well, my opinion was apparently shared by Riley so.....

 

[teachercd]

And I guess all of Riley's teams at Oregon state didn't care...because he had the same winning %.

 

[Nebfanatic]

^I swear that is the worst argument