Looking Back ... Looking Forward

[Guy Chamberlin]

Remember, Ron Kellogg III was the better percentage passer, the pure drop back guy, the stay in the pocket guy and a really nice guy, but that didn't make him a better quarterback or leader, which is really the job description.

Ronnie never got called on until injury at the position so with Bo the genius that he was running things pretty sure Ron never got the playing time he probably deserved. T Mart was definitely not what I would I call a leader by any stretch of the imagination either that's for sure.

That's an odd way to remember the 2013 season.

It was clear to most folks that the coaching staff considered Armstrong too green and Kellogg too limited to anoint as undisputed starter when Martinez went down. So both perfectly healthy quarterbacks were alternated by series or by quarter for several games, to fairly good results initially. When it became apparent that Armstrong's passing skills weren't that much worse than Kellogg's, and his elusiveness was far superior, Armstrong largely took over the job. When Armstrong was out for the Iowa game, the offense was 100% Ron Kellogg's. At home. On Senior Day. As the hero of the Northwestern miracle. At which point Ron Kellogg III proved why he didn't deserve more playing time.

So the losses with Taylor at QB including the thrashing at Wisconsin proved Taylor Martinez deserved more playing time?!!?!! Kind of hard for a QB to develop chemistry and rhythm also when you come off the bench in the middle of the season like Ron did.

Let it Bo.

Another weird way to read this.

I thought the question was whether Ron Kellogg deserved more playing time. Both Kellogg and Armstrong had to come cold off the bench. For that matter, Taylor Martinez was asked to start the 2010 season with zero game experience and an experienced senior on the bench. Cardale Jones came in cold, too. Leaders can't wait to get the ball.

Ron Kellogg III never looked like that guy to me. Iowa had everything stacked in his favor. Kellogg responded weakly in every facet.

No amount of reps would have changed it.

I'm willing to blame Bo for a lot, but not playing Ron Kellog III more doesn't make the list.

Pretty sure a lot of successful athletes would completely disagree with this notion. Scott Frost was mentioned just a few posts ago. There's just one example of a Nebraska QB who definitely got better the more reps he got. Not everyone is Cardale Jones. Most athletes need more reps to get better. To become more comfortable with what they're asked to do and as far as quarterbacks to develop timing and chemistry and to develop just plain ol' experience among other things. Some guys (Steve Taylor, Tommie Frazier, Turner Gill) can step right in and hit the ground running. Others definitely need time to develop and just because they do doesn't mean their not capable of becoming good or even great players.

Oh I think 100% of successful athletes would say reps make you better.

And at the same time, many wouldn't consider Ron Kellogg III a starter at the major conference level.

 

[zoogs]

Well, if the argument is about whether Bo's getting a fair shake from the fans or not, then let's talk about Bo, rather than set arbitrary benchmarks for Riley's first year. How many successful coaches don't win 10+ games in year one? When Ohio State fired .700 coach John Cooper after going 8-4, and Jim Tressel went 7-5, for example, how did that turn out? No program is built in a day. We'll see how good Riley is...eventually, and in review.

I agree that Bo was far from inept. Don't think he did a very good job as a head coach, though, either. Although not talking football, but professionalism -- yeah, that was kind of a clownshow. The difference there is night and day already and I'd expect it to continue.

 

[Saunders]

Well, if the argument is about whether Bo's getting a fair shake from the fans or not, then let's talk about Bo, rather than set arbitrary benchmarks for Riley's first year. How many successful coaches don't win 10+ games in year one? When Ohio State fired .700 coach John Cooper after going 8-4, and Jim Tressel went 7-5, for example, how did that turn out? No program is built in a day. We'll see how good Riley is...eventually, and in review.

I agree that Bo was far from inept. Don't think he did a very good job as a head coach, though, either. Although not talking football, but professionalism -- yeah, that was kind of a clownshow. The difference there is night and day already and I'd expect it to continue.

But it's not about Bo. It's about going forward. We'll even skip 2015 for the "transition year" bumps. If the baseline for Bo and co was X, with a staff of amateurs, then the new baseline because of the staff change/upgrade should be???

 

[RedSavage]

Well, if the argument is about whether Bo's getting a fair shake from the fans or not, then let's talk about Bo, rather than set arbitrary benchmarks for Riley's first year. How many successful coaches don't win 10+ games in year one? When Ohio State fired .700 coach John Cooper after going 8-4, and Jim Tressel went 7-5, for example, how did that turn out? No program is built in a day. We'll see how good Riley is...eventually, and in review.

I agree that Bo was far from inept. Don't think he did a very good job as a head coach, though, either. Although not talking football, but professionalism -- yeah, that was kind of a clownshow. The difference there is night and day already and I'd expect it to continue.

But it's not about Bo. It's about going forward. We'll even skip 2015 for the "transition year" bumps. If the baseline for Bo and co was X, with a staff of amateurs, then the new baseline because of the staff change/upgrade should be???

#9Wins

 

[zoogs]

But it's not about Bo. It's about going forward. We'll even skip 2015 for the "transition year" bumps. If the baseline for Bo and co was X, with a staff of amateurs, then the new baseline because of the staff change/upgrade should be???

That is still entirely about Bo, or more accurately, about a perceived unjust judgment that this staff were amateurs, right?

I guess it's pretty simple. Riley will get 5-7 years to win a conference championship. If he doesn't in that timespan, he'll be dismissed. Although perhaps he could stick around longer, provided he recruits at a high level and represents at a high level (Nebraskans being about "more than winning."). Without a B1G title, though, he'd probably need some high finishes (Top 15? Top 10?) to justify that. If he does extremely poorly, he won't even reach Year 5, although he'll probably get a Year 4 (to avoid doing what Michigan did with RichRod, but you never know...) I think this is pretty standard.

Bo didn't just flunk some baseline number of wins. And a handful of heroic plays that got what was clearly a second-tier B1G West Division team in the last two years shouldn't be a feather in his cap just because he got to the magic '9' number in both of them.

 

[Hedley Lamarr]

Staffs goals, within 5 years win conference championship and finish in top 10.

 

[Mavric]

I wouldn't find it surprising at all to see a team that loses by far its best players on offense, doesn't have a quarterback, inherits a shaky situation at DE & LB, and is changing schemes on both sides of the ball along with every single coach, might win fewer games this year than last year. Considering last year was a pretty flat performance that was closer to 8 than 10 wins.

I don't necessarily disagree, but of those things you listed, two of them are unchanged from last year, we did lose our best player on both sides of the ball but we lost about as few guys as imaginable overall not to mention the players our opponents also lost and, again, changing the coaches is said to be an extreme upgrade in every case.

What I find silly is the idea that if Riley doesn't win 10? 11? games in Year One, it would somehow prove something one way or another. That's a standard that seems to be applied only to Mike Riley.

I don't think a one game plus or minus would mean anything. But if #9wins didn't really mean anything under the previous staff because it was so easy to do and it was the staff holding us back, why would any of those people expect a worse season against basically the same competition?

 

[zoogs]

I think there's a difference between being very happy about the new coaches and saying every single change is an extreme upgrade.

For example, how many people are that excited about Banker as DC, or expect him to be an upgrade over Bo? Maybe some, but there's probably some irrational devaluing of Bo's abilities as DC there. Or Hughes for Kaz? Most of us wanted Warren and Brown retained, too, so even if we're happy with the new guys, it seems like a huge stretch to say people consider that an "extreme upgrade."

9 wins wasn't easy to do. Bo Pelini coached teams had great difficulty and no small amount of luck in achieving it in 2013 and 2014. Long term, with better coaches, should we expect much more of a B1G contender? Yes. In year one, with a lot of shakeup and schemes being changed -- do you really think it's reasonable to expect 9 wins to become easy where it hasn't been lately? Refer to your own comments about the likely starting QB, for example. And that's no reflection on Riley.

I guess there's still an element of "a good coach works his magic in year one, or else he isn't a good coach" that I don't understand how anyone can truly feel.

So, again. I see this as more about "Just wait. You guys who are optimistic now, you'll find out Bo wasn't as bad as some of you are saying." or "Riley isn't as good as your ridiculous hyperbole." The first, I'd agree. The second, time will tell, not 2015.

 

[teachercd]

Mav is on fire today and 100% correct.

11 wins...if that clown Bo could get 9/10 each year than a professional like Riley with a staff that has like 200 years of coaching experience can get us fans 1/2 more wins.

 

[zoogs]

Mav is on fire today and 100% correct.

11 wins...if that clown Bo could get 9/10 each year than a professional like Riley with a staff that has like 200 years of coaching experience can get us fans 1/2 more wins.

Another poster just waiting for Riley to not win 10 or 11 games in his first year so he can either say "See? Bo wasn't a clown" or "See? Riley isn't that good." I just don't understand this.

Separate your desire to show other posters how wrong they were this offseason to be optimistic and really explain why Riley ought to be expected to win 10/11 games here in 2015. Would you have given Scott Frost, Jim Tressel, or Jim Harbaugh the same 1-year ultimatum?

 

[StPaulHusker]

Mav is on fire today and 100% correct.

11 wins...if that clown Bo could get 9/10 each year than a professional like Riley with a staff that has like 200 years of coaching experience can get us fans 1/2 more wins.

Another poster just waiting for Riley to not win 10 or 11 games in his first year so he can either say "See? Bo wasn't a clown" or "See? Riley isn't that good." I just don't understand this.

Separate your desire to show other posters how wrong they were this offseason to be optimistic and really explain why Riley ought to be expected to win 10/11 games here in 2015. Would you have given Scott Frost, Jim Tressel, or Jim Harbaugh the same 1-year ultimatum?

Riley is taking over a 9-4 team with a good crop of returning players. It should not be unreasonable that fans expect him to go better than 9/10-4 in year one. He is supposed to be the coaching upgrade. And I would venture to guess that when you upgrade coaching on a winning team, they should win more.

 

[admo]

Quick summary of Langsdorf following yesterday's practice (on QBs)

In this offense the QBs need to recognize where the safeties are lining up; See how deep corners are lined up; Based on that (as the starting point) it lets them know which side/who is the 1st read, 2nd, 3rd; From there, they need to know each route within the route tree of the play. Within the play, it's timing, accuracy, and getting rid of it quickly. Similar to a baseball pitcher throwing strikes - if they are not hitting their target, it is tougher to complete balls.

(mentioned several times "accuracy" and "completing passes")



What would he like to see in Spring Game?

- have some poise, handle the pressure, and complete some passes. (simply stated)

How about the Offseason?

need a ton of work in spring & summer

coaches have it all planned out in detail for them (what to go over and practice)

it's up to QBs to organize and run offseason practices

work on individual routes with receivers; accuracy

know where to go & what to focus on - it's all structured

work on timing with receivers

work on the weekly installs they've been practicing

be ready to go by fall

you're team is formed in the summer - no question

 

[Landlord]

Well, if the argument is about whether Bo's getting a fair shake from the fans or not, then let's talk about Bo, rather than set arbitrary benchmarks for Riley's first year. How many successful coaches don't win 10+ games in year one? When Ohio State fired .700 coach John Cooper after going 8-4, and Jim Tressel went 7-5, for example, how did that turn out? No program is built in a day. We'll see how good Riley is...eventually, and in review.

I don't think anyone is actually making that argument, they're just arguing the point from that framework to highlight the absurdity of the way certain people are thinking, because that's the line of reason that people are slamming our former staff.

I don't think it matters whether or not Riley gets 9-10 wins in year one. But, what you keep hearing is that Bo and co. were so out of their depths and incompetent because of x, y, and z, so I take that and say, "Okay then, per your reasoning, it should be a no-brainer that our new staff is better at those things, because HOW COULD THEY BE ANY WORSE, so by your standard we should easily see a better team."

 

[admo]

I know it's offseason and I've been concerned and critical with the QBs during the spring. I know there is a lot going on with them and it can be tough at first. But I also have a little bit of hope and trust that these Husker QBs will put in the work during spring & summer. And with that, eventually two or three guys will "get it" by the time fall camp gets here. Having said this, I hope they enjoy playing some football again and do the best they can in the Spring game.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

I want to see a team that makes successful in-game adjustments.

Physical and psychological.

That's the level of improvement I demand.

Hopefully more good stuff falls out of that.