Interim Head Coach Mickey Joseph

TheSker said:
Vokolek plays well, as does Brewington.

Beckton did fantastic with Austin Allen.

Holding off on Fidone is the right thing to do.

I realize a message board allows emotion to get in the way of fact.....but damn.
Click to expand...
Fidone is an incomplete, due to his injuries, but I doubt he does anything meaningful at NU. Beckton has also missed on getting a number of other TE recruits out of Omaha, and hasn’t done much with AJ Rollins. Beckton is an ok coach, not great. 

 
TheSker said:
Vokolek plays well, as does Brewington.

Beckton did fantastic with Austin Allen.

Holding off on Fidone is the right thing to do.

I realize a message board allows emotion to get in the way of fact.....but damn.
Click to expand...
Vokolek when healthy.  Brewington would be a great HB.  I'll agree AA.  But where is any depth at all?  One TE.  That's it.  Can hardly run 12 personnel as the DC's know we don't really have 2 TE's.  But again, just my opinion.

TheSker said:
Beckton is a good coach and I'm fully aware you enjoy pointing out the Omaha drama.
Click to expand...
A lot of the Omaha stuff comes from the Omaha HS coaches.  I guess they could just be drama filled.  

 
Nebhawk said:
Question for everyone.  Do we have top 35 talent on this roster? 
Click to expand...
Yes, definitely, for sure. 

Wouldn't say top 10-15 but....

Playing and functioning together as a top 35 team? No, not in a long, long time.  There have been a few moments here and there, sure.

Over the many years, we look like individuals on the field going through the plays that are called on Offense & Defense. 

We don't look like a good football team though. 

But yeah, there is top 35 talent.  As a team? we play like our record says what we are.  Somewhere around #70th-105th.   :hmmph

 
lo country said:
Vokolek when healthy.  Brewington would be a great HB.  I'll agree AA.  But where is any depth at all?  One TE.  That's it.  Can hardly run 12 personnel as the DC's know we don't really have 2 TE's.  But again, just my opinion.

A lot of the Omaha stuff comes from the Omaha HS coaches.  I guess they could just be drama filled.  
Click to expand...
Yes they could be.

 
lo country said:
Dawson sucks.  Ruud (another Husker who got pass after pass) sucks.  DB's seem better under BB.  But that's just my opinion.
Click to expand...
I agree with this. The front 7 is probably the worst in the conference. If we are going to play this hold your blocks on the DL then the LBs absolutely have to be elite to clean up. If the LBs are pedestrian then you have to have dominance on the DL to get into the backfield and disrupt and bust plays. We have neither, literally the worst of both worlds and it shows. That is why we have this knack for making the average QB and RB look like Heisman material against us. I am 100% confident Dawson and Ruud are gone.

 
ColoradoHusk said:
I think people point to “recruiting rankings” to show if a team has talent. But what do high school recruiting rankings mean 2-4 years after the fact?  Chubba Purdy was a “talented recruit” out of high school, but he looked like one of the worst QB’s to ever suit up and get meaningful snaps for NU.
 

Also, NU has been hit by a lot of transfers out and other attrition, so the classes of 18, 19, and 20 which were thought of as solid are no longer have very few players left from those classes.

When I watch the players on the field to me they don’t look very talented. To me, that means physically and mentally able to play their roles consistently at an above average level. There is a huge lack of consistency across the board. Finally, to borrow a phrase from baseball analytics, the most players at NU are at “replacement level” or below. This means that they could be replaced by an average player in college football (or Power 5 if I want to get more applicable) and there wouldn’t be any difference in play.  If NU has at or below replacement level players, then to me, they aren’t very talented. 
Click to expand...
A player can be talented, but if he doesn't know what he's supposed to do or doesn't put forth the effort needed, he's going to look to not have talent.  I saw a lot of both on Saturday.  A player not knowing what they are supposed to do, doesn't mean they aren't talented.  We have enough talent on the team for them to be playing better than they are.  I'm not saying conference championship level talent.  I'm talking about enough talent to be competitive and play good sound football.  There was a play where I was watching Hausman line up.  He lined up on the left side, Illinois shifted, and he had no clue what to do.  The other LB was directing him to the other side.  When he got in position, he still was looking around asking...."what am I supposed to do?".   When the ball was snapped, he had nothing to do with the play.  That's not an indication of him not having talent.  He doesn't know what to do with it to help the team.

There was another play where Illinois scored a TD from the 5 or 10 yard line.  The RB just walked into the endzone without a defender even around him and caught the ball.  Obviously, someone had no clue what they were supposed to do.  Not a lack of talent, just clueless.

Look at the play that's going around the internet where Illinois blocked our extra point and what Benhart did.  That's not lack of talent, that's complete lack of effort.

Look at the play where Grant had a good run.  But, Washington was called for an absolutely stupid hold.  That's not Washington not having talent.  It's him doing an absolutely stupid thing that he knows better not to do.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
BigRedBuster said:
A player can be talented, but if he doesn't know what he's supposed to do or doesn't put forth the effort needed, he's going to look to not have talent.  I saw a lot of both on Saturday.  A player not knowing what they are supposed to do, doesn't mean they aren't talented.  We have enough talent on the team for them to be playing better than they are.  I'm not saying conference championship level talent.  I'm talking about enough talent to be competitive and play good sound football.  There was a play where I was watching Hausman line up.  He lined up on the left side, Illinois shifted, and he had no clue what to do.  The other LB was directing him to the other side.  When he got in position, he still was looking around asking...."what am I supposed to do?".   When the ball was snapped, he had nothing to do with the play.  That's not an indication of him not having talent.  He doesn't know what to do with it to help the team.

There was another play where Illinois scored a TD from the 5 or 10 yard line.  The RB just walked into the endzone without a defender even around him and caught the ball.  Obviously, someone had no clue what they were supposed to do.  Not a lack of talent, just clueless.
Click to expand...
We are getting into semantics on what talent is.  You only want to look at measurables.  I include mental ability and knowing where to go on the field into talent.  Yes, it's not always measurable, but that's what set players apart from each other.

 
ColoradoHusk said:
We are getting into semantics on what talent is.  You only want to look at measurables.  I include mental ability and knowing where to go on the field into talent.  Yes, it's not always measurable, but that's what set players apart from each other.
Click to expand...
I firmly believe that the players I mentioned above, have the mental capacity to play better.  They just don't for some reason.  I believe it's a combination of coaching and attitude.  That's not lack of talent.  They have the ability to play better, if they have better coaching and step on the field with a better attitude.

 
I don't understand all of the hate on our LBs.

They can't ever stay healthy, but that is on S&C.

They miss some tackles, but they were put in bad situations to begin with. If we had some hogs at DT that could collapse the interior run game, the LBs would only have to contain the outside. They wouldn't have to worry about Brown, Ibrahim, or Allen straight up the gut.

From being a Walk-On to a competent starter on D, I am impressed by Reimer. He makes plays when he has to. He is not extremely consistent, yet is still one of the most consistent on our D. We just need to improve everything, but these LBs don't deserve all the hate they get.

 
THROW_DEM_BONES said:
I don't understand all of the hate on our LBs.

They can't ever stay healthy, but that is on S&C.

They miss some tackles, but they were put in bad situations to begin with. If we had some hogs at DT that could collapse the interior run game, the LBs would only have to contain the outside. They wouldn't have to worry about Brown, Ibrahim, or Allen straight up the gut.

From being a Walk-On to a competent starter on D, I am impressed by Reimer. He makes plays when he has to. He is not extremely consistent, yet is still one of the most consistent on our D. We just need to improve everything, but these LBs don't deserve all the hate they get.
Click to expand...
Reimer is a very solid LB.  Nothing against him, but he shouldn't be on a D where he's the best player on the field.  He's too small to hold up in the rigors of the Big Ten, and that forces him to miss a game or 2 during the season.  That's not a knock on Reimer, he needs more around him.

Henrich has been decent, but has issues staying healthy and has not progressed since his freshman year.  That's a combination of S&C, poor coaching by Ruud, and bad luck.

Koralevic isn't very talented (slow and undersized) and has shown he's a FCS or G5 level talent, Matauga-Clements looks small to me, and Hausmann is being asked to do too much as a true freshman.  Ruud has done very poorly recruiting, retaining, and developing the LB's.  I don't know why they have continuously gone into the season with 2 or 3 viable LB's, especially when you can expect injuries to happen.

 
ColoradoHusk said:
Reimer is a very solid LB.  Nothing against him, but he shouldn't be on a D where he's the best player on the field.  He's too small to hold up in the rigors of the Big Ten, and that forces him to miss a game or 2 during the season.  That's not a knock on Reimer, he needs more around him.

Henrich has been decent, but has issues staying healthy and has not progressed since his freshman year.  That's a combination of S&C, poor coaching by Ruud, and bad luck.

Koralevic isn't very talented (slow and undersized) and has shown he's a FCS or G5 level talent, Matauga-Clements looks small to me, and Hausmann is being asked to do too much as a true freshman.  Ruud has done very poorly recruiting, retaining, and developing the LB's.  I don't know why they have continuously gone into the season with 2 or 3 viable LB's, especially when you can expect injuries to happen.
Click to expand...


Completely agree. Thank you for expanding on my initial post. We have devoted so much of our recruiting on Edge rushers that we lack depth at Inside LB.

For example, this year we recruited Ashley Williams, Cameron Lenhardt, Noonan, and Rogers (who I thought was LB but 247 has as Edge).

We have one LB commit (Hayden Moore, who I actually really like, think he is underrated) who is our lowest rated commit.

Yes, Edges might be LBs in some regard, but they aren't Inside LBs, a position we desperately need depth at.

 
Back
Top