Skeptic/Believer

[kchusker_chris]

You do realize our defense will be loaded with newcomers, right? Not sayin they arent more talented and/or athletic than 2012's group, but there could be some growing pains. Yes, 9-4 will be a failure, but frankly, when is 9-4 at Nebraska NOT a failure? 11-2 in 1996 was even a failure.

I am very curious about this year's defense and the supposed athleticism we are hearing about. We'll have to see come september. We're not gonna see enough to know anything of real substance at the spring game.

And in answering the question.

2 years ago I was a solid believer. But after the last couple season some rifts have become clearly obvious to push me to that middle ground. Doesnt mean the issues wont be fixed though.

So you're cautiously optimistic?

Every year there is going to be an excuse to be found for why we underperformed. Every team has that. I think the question at this point isn't as much if you're a believer for a skeptic - it's whether you'll accept the barrage of excuses, the constant flow of "if this", or "but such and such", or "young coach", or "without xyz injury..." - or not. Is you're patience for such excuses thinning? Mine is.

It's time to step up. 9-4 would be a failure with this schedule. I don't think Bo or anyone on the team would disagree with me...not sure why so many of the "defenders of 9" continue to.

 

[Nobody]

Whats going to suck is doing just enough to stay out of or not win the CCG with a stellar offense this year.. One of the more impressive offenses we've known, especially in recent years. Our young defense will look impressive at times but show their age when it counts.

Now the sucky part... the season after this one we really come into our own defensively. Only to realize that.... wait for it.... we've just started a new offensive era and are far from the scoring explosion we saw the year before. New leaf. Stingy defense, new offense. Polar opposites. Welcome to Lincoln folks. "/

I just have that feeling. :wasted

I think Armstrong and/or Stanton will run our offense just fine, if not better. We will still have the same receiving core, with much of the OL, while the same guys in the back. Stanton is a better Martinez. Smarter, more ball security, and a MUCH stronger arm/accuracy. Armstrong, is smart, is not as fast, but can run and has one hell of an arm. Both are great leaders from what we have been told. Only time will tell, but I don't think we will see a drop off offensively next year. Maybe less fumbles

You're basing this off of high school film right? Look, im not claiming to have a crystal ball or anything like that. But you're crazy if you think that a noob quarterback is gonna waltz into the newly expanded memorial stadium and take the reigns like he's been guiding covered wagon on the treacherous oregon trail for a good part of his adolecsense. Where have you been sir? it doesnt work like that. It CAN work like that. But nobody plans for it to turn out that way.

 

[HuskerNationNick]

You're basing this off of high school film right? Look, im not claiming to have a crystal ball or anything like that. But you're crazy if you think that a noob quarterback is gonna waltz into the newly expanded memorial stadium and take the reigns like he's been guiding covered wagon on the treacherous oregon trail for a good part of his adolecsense. Where have you been sir? it doesnt work like that. It CAN work like that. But nobody plans for it to turn out that way.

Basing my info from Armstrong on practices and reports from the players. Stanton is based off his High School playing days. If Armstrong was coming in, playing as a True Freshman, or RS Freshman, then I would have worries. Armstrong will see some playing time this season, giving him experience, and he will have 2 full years of learning the playbook under his belt. There is a difference between "waltzing" in as a RS Sophomore starting and a True/RS Freshman. If Martinez can come into our system, only playing QB for 1 year in his HS days, I am sure these two kids can do it too, especially with 2 years under them before they start. I PLAN on it to work that way. If neither of these kids can perform and run a successful offense, then Beck is not doing his job, which I would doubt that would happen.

I am a HUGE Martinez supporter, but he looks better than what he really is, because of the talent around him. This allows him to be more of a threat in the running game. The only reason he is a threat in the passing game, is because we have WR's who can catch almost anything coming their way, and manage to gain 5+ YAC.

 

[Count 'Bility]

You do realize our defense will be loaded with newcomers, right? Not sayin they arent more talented and/or athletic than 2012's group, but there could be some growing pains. Yes, 9-4 will be a failure, but frankly, when is 9-4 at Nebraska NOT a failure? 11-2 in 1996 was even a failure.

I am very curious about this year's defense and the supposed athleticism we are hearing about. We'll have to see come september. We're not gonna see enough to know anything of real substance at the spring game.

And in answering the question.

2 years ago I was a solid believer. But after the last couple season some rifts have become clearly obvious to push me to that middle ground. Doesnt mean the issues wont be fixed though.

And here we have the great divide between Bolievers and the opposition: whose fault is that? The young, inexperienced defense this year is largely a reflection of poor roster management and awful recruiting a few years ago. I understand there are naturally going to be up and down years, and we still have a lot of talent on defense, but there's going to be way too many growing pains this year for what there should be in a coach's 6th year.

You completely missed the point.

 

[Husker_x]

This topic is great but also tough. Nebraska gives you every reason to be skeptical about our chances of accomplishing anything--turnovers, penalties, and shoddy run defense being my top three (with honorable mention to STs). Nevertheless, we are loaded with experience and talent on offense, our defense should be seeing an upgrade in overall athleticism, and our schedule bodes well.

I also agree with what a lot of you are saying. If we end up losing four games again, the excuses have plain run dry. This is year six. Year three in the B1G. Football is, as they say, a results-oriented business. If the defense doesn't get any better Bo will, I think, find himself on a warming seat.

 

[HuskerShark]

I'm still a Boliever but I have to say, with every embarrassing loss, that belief takes a hit. This season, I expect plenty of growing pains from a young group of defenders, and the year after that, I expect a few growing pains from a new starting QB, even though I'm confident that Armstrong or Stanton will fill in for Taylor well. I'm looking at contending for a conference title the next 2 years, and potentially the National Championship in 3 years. If Armstrong turns out to be a stud and the defense progresses this year, then we could compete in 2014 for a NC.

I still think Bo can take us there, and I love how he runs the team like a family instead of a business, as well as how he stresses character development so we are turning out quality men from our football team. We will just have to wait and see if some of the skeptics are right by saying that 9 and 10 win seasons coupled with embarrassing losses is the best we can hope for.

 

[NUance]

 

[Nobody]

You're basing this off of high school film right? Look, im not claiming to have a crystal ball or anything like that. But you're crazy if you think that a noob quarterback is gonna waltz into the newly expanded memorial stadium and take the reigns like he's been guiding covered wagon on the treacherous oregon trail for a good part of his adolecsense. Where have you been sir? it doesnt work like that. It CAN work like that. But nobody plans for it to turn out that way.

Basing my info from Armstrong on practices and reports from the players. Stanton is based off his High School playing days. If Armstrong was coming in, playing as a True Freshman, or RS Freshman, then I would have worries. Armstrong will see some playing time this season, giving him experience, and he will have 2 full years of learning the playbook under his belt. There is a difference between "waltzing" in as a RS Sophomore starting and a True/RS Freshman. If Martinez can come into our system, only playing QB for 1 year in his HS days, I am sure these two kids can do it too, especially with 2 years under them before they start. I PLAN on it to work that way. If neither of these kids can perform and run a successful offense, then Beck is not doing his job, which I would doubt that would happen.

I am a HUGE Martinez supporter, but he looks better than what he really is, because of the talent around him. This allows him to be more of a threat in the running game. The only reason he is a threat in the passing game, is because we have WR's who can catch almost anything coming their way, and manage to gain 5+ YAC.

Right. Because we were contending for super bowls when taylor took over. You are muddling the line between being on the field taking snaps and being successful. What was your original point again?

 

[RedRedJarvisRedwine]

It's a lot more fun being optimistic.

I don't know about that!

 

[walksalone]

I can't hate on either side of the equation, since we sh*t the bed on the CCG and the Bowl game, but the cliched "hope springs eternal" crap with the coming of spring ball...

 

[HuskerNationNick]

Right. Because we were contending for super bowls when taylor took over. You are muddling the line between being on the field taking snaps and being successful. What was your original point again?

Because we have ever contended for a Super Bowl? Man that would be the day when Nebraska plays in one of those things!!! I think you meant BCS Bowls? If so, I think every year we are contending for them. In order to be successful, you need to take snaps right? What is your point? I think I made mine completely clear. If not, I can break it down further for you.

I believe we won't skip a beat on offense when Taylor leaves.... Why? We are surrounded with PURE talent. From the RB position, to our WR's. Also, I believe Armstrong and Stanton, overall, are more talented than Martinez, in a QB stance.

Armstrong= has a MUCH better arm and far better accuracy than Taylor, 2 years under Beck's system, learning plays. RS Freshman year he will take snaps under center, gaining the on field experience he will want/need. He is a great leader in practice drills with the 2nd team. You wouldn't have seen him taking a RS last season if it wasn't due to him having his knee cleaned out and redone.

Stanton- If Armstrong falls short on starting role, it will come down to Stanton being far more talented. Stanton, once again, has a better arm and accuracy than Martinez. The kid can run, and YES this is something you can judge off his HS films. The kid is also a leader, something that doesn't go away just because you go to college.

Both of these kids were superior players, playing in TOUGH divisions in HS and have won state as their JR year. Stanton would have taken his team again most likely, if it wasn't due to an ACL tear, which is recovering and ahead of schedule.

 

[4skers89]

I'm still a Boliever but I have to say, with every embarrassing loss, that belief takes a hit. This season, I expect plenty of growing pains from a young group of defenders, and the year after that, I expect a few growing pains from a new starting QB, even though I'm confident that Armstrong or Stanton will fill in for Taylor well. I'm looking at contending for a conference title the next 2 years, and potentially the National Championship in 3 years. If Armstrong turns out to be a stud and the defense progresses this year, then we could compete in 2014 for a NC.

I still think Bo can take us there, and I love how he runs the team like a family instead of a business, as well as how he stresses character development so we are turning out quality men from our football team. We will just have to wait and see if some of the skeptics are right by saying that 9 and 10 win seasons coupled with embarrassing losses is the best we can hope for.

This is where I'm at. I believe if this could be researched I doubt you'd find too many teams that graduated as many seniors as we did on a defense that turned in some of the worse performances in program history and then put together a top 25 defense the following year. I don't have high expectations for a young defense trying to execute a complicated scheme. The embarrassing losses are a problem and perhaps we should stop boasting about the 9+ wins and think in terms of doing better then 4 losses each season. I'm not sure we will this year.

 

[Creighton Duke]

I don't think Pap will ever be as good as Beck, but his year 2 may see similar degrees that our offense did in year 2 of Beck. I think the young talent/speed on D will actually be an upgrade than how things have been. There will be bonehead mistakes, but athletic ability will hide this. Lots of time to figure stuff out, (aside from UCLA who I think we'll beat this time) a hyper-offense that Big 10 Ds won't be able to deal with...

That being said, I'm generally a skeptic, but think that this will be an excellent team. I'd be surprised if it wasn't 8-0 or at least 7-1 before hitting the murders row at the end (and we should win at least 2 if not 3 of those).

 

[The Dude]

Every year there is going to be an excuse to be found for why we underperformed. Every team has that. I think the question at this point isn't as much if you're a believer for a skeptic - it's whether you'll accept the barrage of excuses, the constant flow of "if this", or "but such and such", or "young coach", or "without xyz injury..." - or not. Is you're patience for such excuses thinning? Mine is.

April 6th, 2011

That was the day we found out 2013 was the year to make a run. The coaches have had 2 years to figure it out. There's simply no more good excuses.

 

[KJ.]

You do realize our defense will be loaded with newcomers, right? Not sayin they arent more talented and/or athletic than 2012's group, but there could be some growing pains. Yes, 9-4 will be a failure, but frankly, when is 9-4 at Nebraska NOT a failure? 11-2 in 1996 was even a failure.

I am very curious about this year's defense and the supposed athleticism we are hearing about. We'll have to see come september. We're not gonna see enough to know anything of real substance at the spring game.

And in answering the question.

2 years ago I was a solid believer. But after the last couple season some rifts have become clearly obvious to push me to that middle ground. Doesnt mean the issues wont be fixed though.

And here we have the great divide between Bolievers and the opposition: whose fault is that? The young, inexperienced defense this year is largely a reflection of poor roster management and awful recruiting a few years ago. I understand there are naturally going to be up and down years, and we still have a lot of talent on defense, but there's going to be way too many growing pains this year for what there should be in a coach's 6th year.

You completely missed the point.

Then what exactly is the point of you saying "we're loaded with newcomers" in response to Headly saying "there aren't any excuses"? Sure sounds like an excuse to me. One that Bo is responsible for creating.