Tangent Thread - Summer 2017 Edition

[Redux]

And if anybody is wondering, Mav is basically saying he wants some credit for being right that we weren't as good as the optimists hoped for. So please pat him on the back. Anthing to cheer him up really.

 

[Mavric]

Hey look at that, I was being optimistic in the middle of a 7-0 season. Who woulda thunk it?

Now that we know how it ended, it's easy to look back and see how the team was performing on a week to week basis. But please keep trying to spin your narrative.

And for the record my prediction wasn't far off. We just got Tommy Armstronged.

Like I said, revisionist.

Some of use were raising the red flags without the benefit of hind-sight. However the "optimists" largely wrote those observations off as just wanting to be negative or cheering for the staff to fail.

Maybe people wouldn't label you a pessemist if you weren't so pessemistic about everything. Just a thought.

Now wait. First you said it was "easy to look back and see" it then you accuse me of being pessimistic for what you now agree was an accurate portrayal.

I'm getting so many mixed messages......

 

[Redux]

Hey look at that, I was being optimistic in the middle of a 7-0 season. Who woulda thunk it?

Now that we know how it ended, it's easy to look back and see how the team was performing on a week to week basis. But please keep trying to spin your narrative.

And for the record my prediction wasn't far off. We just got Tommy Armstronged.

Like I said, revisionist.

Some of use were raising the red flags without the benefit of hind-sight. However the "optimists" largely wrote those observations off as just wanting to be negative or cheering for the staff to fail.

Maybe people wouldn't label you a pessemist if you weren't so pessemistic about everything. Just a thought.

Now wait. First you said it was "easy to look back and see" it then you accuse me of being pessimistic for what you now agree was an accurate portrayal.

I'm getting so many mixed messages......

Yes, it's easy to look back at the season as a whole and see what went wrong. Nothing crazy about that notion. The fact that you were negative was going to happen regardless of our season outcome. But kudos for your pessemism being kinda correct.

You want to blame it on coaching, others want to blame it solely on lack of depth and or talent. The truth is in the middle.

 

[Mavric]

Yes, it's easy to look back at the season as a whole and see what went wrong. Nothing crazy about that notion. The fact that you were negative was going to happen regardless of our season outcome. But kudos for your pessemism being kinda correct.

No, this is not correct no matter how much you want to believe it.

It would be more accurate to say that my realistic assessments proved to be true while others were more optimistic than was warranted.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

Hey look at that, I was being optimistic in the middle of a 7-0 season. Who woulda thunk it?

Now that we know how it ended, it's easy to look back and see how the team was performing on a week to week basis. But please keep trying to spin your narrative.

And for the record my prediction wasn't far off. We just got Tommy Armstronged.

Like I said, revisionist.

Some of use were raising the red flags without the benefit of hind-sight. However the "optimists" largely wrote those observations off as just wanting to be negative or cheering for the staff to fail.

Maybe people wouldn't label you a pessemist if you weren't so pessemistic about everything. Just a thought.

Now wait. First you said it was "easy to look back and see" it then you accuse me of being pessimistic for what you now agree was an accurate portrayal.

I'm getting so many mixed messages......

Yes, it's easy to look back at the season as a whole and see what went wrong. Nothing crazy about that notion. The fact that you were negative was going to happen regardless of our season outcome. But kudos for your pessemism being kinda correct.

You want to blame it on coaching, others want to blame it solely on lack of depth and or talent. The truth is in the middle.

Eh, I'm pretty sure I was excited about our 7-0 start, but couldn't help notice they were close wins against mediocre teams. I don't think I was pessimistic thinking Wisconsin and OSU would be hard for that team to beat.

 

[Redux]

Yes, it's easy to look back at the season as a whole and see what went wrong. Nothing crazy about that notion. The fact that you were negative was going to happen regardless of our season outcome. But kudos for your pessemism being kinda correct.

No, this is not correct no matter how much you want to believe it.
It would be more accurate to say that my realistic assessments proved to be true while others were more optimistic than was warranted.

Do you maybe understand why one would think that?

As to the rest, you seem to be pretty proud of your pessemism becoming reality. That's what irks people, and I think you're well aware of that.

 

[Redux]

In any case, I think I was being pretty damned realistic several posts ago. But instead of focusing on that, you chose to dig up mid season posts I made that were fairly optimistic so you could gloat about being more right than me...or something?

 

[Mavric]

Also, all of this would kind of tie back in to what saunders said: It's entirely possible that we - as Husker fans - are being too optimistic about our chances this year while others without so much of a rooting interest are taking a more objective look. It doesn't have to be true but it's sure a possibility.

Will we look back in December and see how easy it was to see trouble coming? I hope not but I won't be surprised if that's the case.

 

[Mavric]

In any case, I think I was being pretty damned realistic several posts ago. But instead of focusing on that, you chose to dig up mid season posts I made that were fairly optimistic so you could gloat about being more right than me...or something?

The "or something" is just having having an objective discussion about things.

You refuse to do that because you insist on seeing everything through the narrative of "he hates the staff", "he's just always pessimistic", etc.

 

[Redux]

In any case, I think I was being pretty damned realistic several posts ago. But instead of focusing on that, you chose to dig up mid season posts I made that were fairly optimistic so you could gloat about being more right than me...or something?

The "or something" is just having having an objective discussion about things.

You refuse to do that because you insist on seeing everything through the narrative of "he hates the staff", "he's just always pessimistic", etc.

So we're supposed to read between the lines of a majority of your posts and assume their is some optimism buried in there? Sorry, just have rarely seen you say anything but pessemistic perspective.

I basically called the Riley hire a fall guy situation earlier and you ignored that completely to try and prove you are more realistic than me. So whether or not you think you accomplished that, kudos either way.

I don't think you hate the staff. I think you respect their capabilities when it comes to recruiting. I don't think you respect their play calling decisions or scheme strategies. I think you want them to win games, but I think you would rather pull the plug on the whole thing and get a headstart because you don't expect us to improve as a program as far as on field results are concerned. That about sum it up?

 

[Mavric]

So we're supposed to read between the lines of a majority of your posts and assume their is some optimism buried in there? Sorry, just have rarely seen you say anything but pessemistic perspective.

The reason a lot of my posts are "pessimistic" is because - oddly enough - the results we've seen on the field have been historically bad. There is simply no arguing that point. Worst record. Near-worst blowout. Etc. That doesn't lead to sunshine and rainbows for most people. That doesn't mean things can't get better. But the "pessimistic" predictions have been much closer to reality than the optimistic one so far. So who's going more out of their way to look at what's going on?

I basically called the Riley hire a fall guy situation earlier and you ignored that completely to try and prove you are more realistic than me. So whether or not you think you accomplished that, kudos either way.

I honestly have no idea what you're talking about here. But I don't think you're concept of a "fall guy" is quite fitting this situation. If you'd like to point out what you meant, I would respond to it.

I don't think you hate the staff. I think you respect their capabilities when it comes to recruiting. I don't think you respect their play calling decisions or scheme strategies. I think you want them to win games, but I think you would rather pull the plug on the whole thing and get a headstart because you don't expect us to improve as a program as far as on field results are concerned. That about sum it up?

Yes, this does about sum it up - mostly. See, when you don't insist on taking everything to the extreme, you (not just you specifically - "you" as people in general) can actually take a more objective look at things and have a rational discussion.

I don't think we had the instant recruiting uptick most predicted but things are definitely trending up now. A lot of that is due to finally getting rid of some of the dead weight Riley originally brought with him - which, not coincidentally - is part of the reason that many, myself included, were skeptical to start with. I think our schemes have been below-average to terrible. Riley firing two coordinator lends credence to that view. I'm far from sold on Langsdorf as a good fit here but I've always said I'd reserve judgement until he got a QB to run his system. I've never called for Riley or Langsdorf to be fired, despite my skepticism. I still allow them to have some time but a down-turn this season would not help. The coaches I've been most critical of have been fired. Again, it wasn't blind pessimism. It was being able to look at things and realize there is a fundamental problem, not just hope things get better or make excuses.

As I just mentioned, I don't necessarily thing the plug needs to be pulled. Had Riley not made some changes this year, I would probably be close to that point. But I think he's made some major upgrades. The biggest one no one wants to admit is getting Devaney here to provide a different view of things. I think he had A LOT of input in the changes and so do several media guys.

And the biggest thing you're wrong about is that I don't have any optimism or don't think we'll get any better. The snark in me says things almost have to get better because they can't get a lot worse.

But seriously, there are a lot of places that I give credit and look for things to improve. It's just that you - and a couple others - have made up your minds and basically ignore anything that doesn't fit your narrative. As one example, he's what I said about the Direction of the Program recently:

For me, I thought we have generally under-achieved for two years in most areas. On the field we had a disaster of a season and one that was OK record-wise but the level of play was lacking. On the recruiting side we had one full class that was pretty much more of the same and one that was a small step forward but nothing special.

However, I feel a lot better than I have with the staff changes we've seen. I feel we have more the type of staff that we should have had from the beginning - better late than never I suppose. Parrella and DWilliams are huge upgrades and I'm optimistic about Diaco - definitely an upgrade with the chance to be really good. Plus all three of those guys are huge recruiting upgrades from their predecessors.

Still not sure about Langsdorf. I don't think he's necessarily a bad coordinator but I'm not sure he's a great fit. But it will be interesting to see what he can do with some different players. I think all three phases should see a noticeable improvement this year. How much that improvement translates into winning more game and winning bigger games will be fun.

Not that I expect you to remember everything that I post but it would be handy if you could put the pitchfork down for long enough to take an objective look at what I'm saying. You don't have to agree. But don't just dismiss it because you're convince that I won't say anything positive. And don't make it a point to have to argue everything just because you don't like it (in fairness, that last point is not nearly so much you as a couple others).

And I'm not pointing out past things just to brag about how I was right. But it seems necessary to some extent to try to prove that my "pessimism" was a lot closer to reality that many like to admit. Like I said, so far the pessimists have been must closer to right than the optimists. If people could realize that admitting they were wrong and others were right about past things doesn't mean they can't still be hopeful about future thing, it would go a long way. It doesn't have to be one or the other. And it doesn't have to be a fight to see who can catch each other in a "gotcha" more often.

 

[Redux]

1) Yeah, the results have been pretty damn meh. I alluded to that. Not sure what you're trying to compete over here.

2) Personally, I feel like the Riley hire was intended to for two things. A) Change the perception of Husker football because of angry pants and B) if he fails over x amount of time, at least he will have recruited well enough to hand over the reigns to Scott Frost if the scenario plays out that way. I'm happy to elaborate this notion, conspiracy theorish as it may be.

3) Here's the thing. You want eveyone to accept your approach for what it is. I understand that. But you have to understand how that is going to come across. I also think you are still sold on the idea that I'm uber optimistic so you missed a lot of what I've said concerning direction of the program wise, I think you'll find you and I are a lot closer to the same line of thinking than you assume.

 

[Mavric]

1) Yeah, the results have been pretty damn meh. I alluded to that. Not sure what you're trying to compete over here.

I'm not competing over anything. I'm trying to get you to understand that the "pessimism" is in line with the results. Not because of any hope that the staff will fail.

2) Personally, I feel like the Riley hire was intended to for two things. A) Change the perception of Husker football because of angry pants and B) if he fails over x amount of time, at least he will have recruited well enough to hand over the reigns to Scott Frost if the scenario plays out that way. I'm happy to elaborate this notion, conspiracy theorish as it may be.

I don't think there's any doubt that A is true. B is a pretty low expectation for a hire like this.

3) Here's the thing. You want eveyone to accept your approach for what it is. I understand that. But you have to understand how that is going to come across. I also think you are still sold on the idea that I'm uber optimistic so you missed a lot of what I've said concerning direction of the program wise, I think you'll find you and I are a lot closer to the same line of thinking than you assume.

Yes, that would be nice. Like I said, people don't have to agree. But it's not like I'm trashing everything at every opportunity, which is how a few people seem to respond to a lot of posts. Such as just accusing me of stirring the pot.

I think you generally have been pretty supportive of the staff. Which is fine. And you may have come down from Cloud 9 somewhat as last season wound down. But I think you're kidding yourself if you think you weren't doing backflips in the middle of last season.

 

[Redux]

But your pessemism was well in place before we had any results. You just come across like you're gloating because of the results. Maybe that's just me.

Just my take on part of the reasoning behind the hire.

That original comment came off very much like an "I told you so!" jab meant to stir the pot,again maybe it's just me. Yes I have been supportive off this staff. Partly because like it or jot he is our coach. Hell, if POS Bret Bielma ended up getting the gig I woulf have ended up supporting him. But also because I think before he retires he will have succeeded in his goal to be as successful as he possibly can be here. And you're damn right mid season I was optimistic. We wait months for the season to come, I'm going to enjoy it as much as possible. Our record was awesome, our performances were not. We all knew that, but I was enjoying the season too much to dwell on it. That and I ended up having to work through most the games so I listened to them on the radio and didn't have to watch out struggles live. Pre-Season I was highly critical of Armstrong. I vhanged my tune a bit as the season approached. But sure enough he did nothing to ultimately change my opinion of him once the season was over. But you don't see me on here pointing out how I was right about him.

 

[Mavric]

You're mistaking skepticism for pessimism. And it wasn't before any results, just results here. I didn't buy into the "he'll do better at a bigger football school" line. Oregon State had been in decline for several years. Not that they didn't have high points, but generally declining for eight years. That's not the track record of most (any?) guys who get a big Power 5 gig, no matter where they coach.

And it literally took me less than a half of ACTUALLY WATCHING THE GAMES to know that Banker's scheme wouldn't work. That's not pessimism before any results. That's just knowing what good football looks like and not buying in to the crazy conspiracy theories about why it might get better.

Again, I'm not trying to gloat over being right. I'm trying to point out that it would be nice if people didn't just automatically revert to the "you're just being pessimistic" line instead of having an actual discussion about what's going on. Thus the first comment. I'm not going to deny that it was on the snarky side. But you're ignoring the context of it. We had years of people complaining about "only" winning 9 games and getting blown out here and there. There were a bunch of comments where people were trying to rationalize only winning five games by saying "at least we weren't getting blown out." That was stupid from the get-go because we were losing to bad teams, but people didn't want to admit that part so they tried to waive off those who were "pessimistic" as just wanting to complain about anything. Then we found out the following year that all that turned out to be a mirage.

And yet some still try to act like those who are pessimistic have no reason to be that way. Even though we've been through two years of some of the worst results in program history. Again, that's not saying that people aren't entitled to have their own opinion and optimism. But don't act like those who aren't as optimistic are just wanting to complain or wanting the staff to fail or wanting an old coach back or whatever. Just state your own case for why you think it will get better. Get off the high horse of thinking you're a better fan. You're far from the worst at this. In fact, I don't think you do it a whole lot at all - at least not lately. But it crops up here and there.