Looking Back ... Looking Forward

[Hunter94]

And here comes the justifications for Riley not winning. Pelini had 7 years of data for winning 9 or 10 games. Zero years of data for winning less than that. Every coach loses one or more standouts on each side of the ball every year. In different seasons, Pelini lost Suh, Crick, Amukamara, David on defense......Helu, Burkhead on offense. The schedule is not radically different. We now have ten million years of coaching experience. If Riley can't get this team to win immediately at or above Pelini's level......there are no words.

#Logic

Husker fans are now trying to convince themselves that getting a BETTER coaching staff means worse results.

If the basketball team got Brad Stephens for next year, would you expect them to be worse, better or the same?

Be excited and be positive!

but keep it real! for the players AND the coaches.

 

[teachercd]

How do people think this is a weak schedule this year? BYU and Miami this year for ooc. Then Wisconsin has always played us tough etc.

Most everything tough is at home though, most.

 

[True2tRA]

I guess I don't understand the fixation with immediate results. I think if we're all being honest with ourselves, we would agree the immediate future doesn't look particularly bright, and that has more to do with Pelini than it does Riley. Laying it all at Riley's feet reeks of Boliever logic.

I agree and don't think there has to be immediate improvement. But are you expecting the W-L record to get worse?

What if it does get worse?

What exactly would that mean?

 

[TheSker]

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.

It seems that way because of low sample size of a coach taking over for a fired coach who won at a high level percentage-wise. Nebraska is now a two time participant.

 

[Mavric]

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

There is but that's not really what I'm seeing. This is just from two threads:

Quote

If you look at our staff we have improved at every single position.

Riley > Bo

Langsdorf > Beck

Banker > Papuchis

Cavanaugh > Garrison + Cotton

Williams > Fisher

Davis > Brown (only one I went back and forth on)

Hughes > Kaz

Bray 10x> Els

Stewart > Warren

Read > Els (One of Els dozen hats)

Brandon Reilly told Coach Williams he learned more in just 3 practices than he ever learned before.

I guess that would be another example.

This is what blows my mind. Our players won 9+ games in spite of crappy coaching.

I would be surprised given the quality of this coaching staff compared to the last.

But I think we will see that this staff as a whole is a big upgrade in the teaching dept.

I also heard through the grapevine of another player speaking of the major upgrade in just straight up teaching. Not just empty yelling and big picture philosophy. The overall and extensive attention to detail and the little things are like nothing thats been experienced in 4 years there.

This new staff are teachers first. These guys are real coaches. They realize these players aren't pons on a chess board. This is football.

I believe all position coaches got upgraded. And head coach obviously. Although I still don't know about DB/Secondary yet.

 

[zoogs]

I guess I don't understand the fixation with immediate results. I think if we're all being honest with ourselves, we would agree the immediate future doesn't look particularly bright, and that has more to do with Pelini than it does Riley. Laying it all at Riley's feet reeks of Boliever logic.

I agree and don't think there has to be immediate improvement. But are you expecting the W-L record to get worse?

How about "similar"? The team can probably be expected to fight with a couple of other teams for #2/#3 in the B1G West, rather than overtaking Wisconsin right away. That could be 9 wins, or 8, or 7.

It would be surprising -- and therefore not "the expectation" -- if Nebraska got over the hump right away and took the division. Or if the wheels fell off entirely and we're .500. Would that be agreeable?

 

[Mavric]

I guess I don't understand the fixation with immediate results. I think if we're all being honest with ourselves, we would agree the immediate future doesn't look particularly bright, and that has more to do with Pelini than it does Riley. Laying it all at Riley's feet reeks of Boliever logic.

I agree and don't think there has to be immediate improvement. But are you expecting the W-L record to get worse?

How about "similar"? The team can probably be expected to fight with a couple of other teams for #2/#3 in the B1G West, rather than overtaking Wisconsin right away. That could be 9 wins, or 8, or 7.

It would be surprising -- and therefore not "the expectation" -- if Nebraska got over the hump right away and took the division. Or if the wheels fell off entirely and we're .500. Would that be agreeable?

As I said earlier, I don't think any conclusions could be drawn from an 8, 9 or 10 win season. Those would all be "similar". Seven - or fewer as I've seen a few times - would be a definite step back, imo. Especially considering we're playing a nearly identical schedule to last year.

 

[ADS]

People saying that Bo winning 9 games every year need to realize that the last 4 years we've had a fairly easy schedule. We beat up on Southern Miss and FAU. But get stomped by UCLA, Wisconsin, MSU, Ohio State, Iowa in 2012, and Minnesota. So basically any team with a pulse was coaching circles around the old staff.

Riley will do fine. Everyone just needs to give him a chance. Let him install his systems and see what happens. But I can guarantee that we won't see Jerry Kill make him look like a fool.

 

[True2tRA]

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

There is but that's not really what I'm seeing. This is just from two threads:Quote

If you look at our staff we have improved at every single position.Riley > BoLangsdorf > BeckBanker > PapuchisCavanaugh > Garrison + CottonWilliams > FisherDavis > Brown (only one I went back and forth on)Hughes > KazBray 10x> ElsStewart > WarrenRead > Els (One of Els dozen hats)

Brandon Reilly told Coach Williams he learned more in just 3 practices than he ever learned before.I guess that would be another example.

This is what blows my mind. Our players won 9+ games in spite of crappy coaching.

I would be surprised given the quality of this coaching staff compared to the last.

But I think we will see that this staff as a whole is a big upgrade in the teaching dept.

I also heard through the grapevine of another player speaking of the major upgrade in just straight up teaching. Not just empty yelling and big picture philosophy. The overall and extensive attention to detail and the little things are like nothing thats been experienced in 4 years there.

This new staff are teachers first. These guys are real coaches. They realize these players aren't pons on a chess board. This is football.

I believe all position coaches got upgraded. And head coach obviously. Although I still don't know about DB/Secondary yet.

Look at the last staff vs. this staff's experience? How the hell does that not count for something? Experience should count for something in any job, even if it's something like working at McDonalds......not that there's anything wrong with that.
So even the fact that the coaching upgrade is obvious even to the most obtuse dummy you can find, how does that translate to immediate improvement on the win/loss record?

 

[zoogs]

There is but that's not really what I'm seeing. This is just from two threads:

That's a lot of quoting, but most people there are comparing the quality of the coaching staff as a whole. Not saying every change made was an extreme upgrade.

To my point specifically, this group could be much better as teachers specifically, but when you lose Bo you also lose a ton of knowledge and that can't be expected to not be a loss on defense. Although for all of Bo's expertise, it didn't seem to get taught all that well, no?

So, what is it you're trying to say here?

"You guys are wrong. The last staff was not as bad as you think"? OK.

"You guys are wrong. The new coaches are not as great as you say"? We'll see.

"You guys are crazy, because the only way your optimism about the new coaches will turn out to be warranted is if Riley wins strictly more than 9 games in 2015"? ...I don't see the logic in that.

 

[teachercd]

Good question...which games in the recent seasons was Bo out-coached in where NU lost?

UCLA

Minnesota (twice)

MSU

Iowa?

Just a few that I kind of think the old staff might have been out-foxed in...So, would Riley and his staff not be out-foxed in those games? I think so, so in my mind that is how that experience would translate to wins/losses

 

[True2tRA]

Every other team we play works just as hard as we do to get better each season.

We could be a better football team this year than we were last year and still lose more games.

Watch the damn games. If we get blown out looking like the clusterf#@k bunch we have looked like in the past, then I'd say we still have some work to do........

My hope is that even if we do lose, we look like we knew what we were doing.

 

[TheSker]

But I can guarantee that we won't see Jerry Kill make him look like a fool.

I've known Jerry Kill for nearly 30 years and would offer caution about such a guarantee. Kill's background, knowledge and resume are excellent. He's from the Dennis Franchione/Gary Patterson coaching lineage.

 

[Mavric]

Look at the last staff vs. this staff's experience? How the hell does that not count for something? Experience should count for something in any job, even if it's something like working at McDonalds......not that there's anything wrong with that.

So even the fact that the coaching upgrade is obvious even to the most obtuse dummy you can find, how does that translate to immediate improvement on the win/loss record?

That's fine. I don't fault anyone for that conclusion.

What I find interesting is the insistence of the improvement of the staff, blaming the previous staff for every loss we had, then not expecting the new staff to do at least as well on the field.

 

[Mavric]

There is but that's not really what I'm seeing. This is just from two threads:

That's a lot of quoting, but most people there are comparing the quality of the coaching staff as a whole. Not saying every change made was an extreme upgrade.

To my point specifically, this group could be much better as teachers specifically, but when you lose Bo you also lose a ton of knowledge and that can't be expected to not be a loss on defense. Although for all of Bo's expertise, it didn't seem to get taught all that well, no?

So, what is it you're trying to say here?

"You guys are wrong. The last staff was not as bad as you think"? OK.

"You guys are wrong. The new coaches are not as great as you say"? We'll see.

"You guys are crazy, because the only way your optimism about the new coaches will turn out to be warranted is if Riley wins strictly more than 9 games in 2015"? ...I don't see the logic in that.

All those are possibilities. I just can't figure out why at least the baseline isn't "This new staff is a significant upgrade so we should at least expect the product on the field to be no worse than what we've seen the last seven years."