Recruiting momentum, their social media presence and general buzz around the program is playing a significant role. However, I would personally be supportive of the staff and program moving forward regardless.I'd be curious to know how much of the vote is swayed by the 2017 class. If "Calibraska" hadn't happened would everyone feel the same?
I can agree with your comment, in that they weren't experienced in the QB run game, therefore they weren't confident in applying it to their play calls as often as necessary. I guess I was expecting more designed runs because we know Tommy isn't a stand in the pocket passer like Mannion, kinda figured college coaches would identify that too, and not be too stubborn with their identity - like Mav was getting at in his post about Langs. Tommy is a threat in the run game, just think they should have used him more, and it took 4-5 games before they started tried increasing his designed runs. The UCLA was a great mix. The spring game showed more promise because IIRC TA had a number of designed runs in that scrimmage. Hopefully this season they find the right mix. I know defense wins championships, but I think the season hinges on TA's productivity.Agree with your whole post except for the above line. To be fair to the staff, the run game they did with TA was way more than anything that they did at OSU.Last year was teased with "looking at using the QB run game" and that wasn't used as much until UCLA.
Not at all on my part. I don't pay much attention to recruiting because a) there is no guarantee that they sign with Nebraska and b) many that do sign don't pan out for one reason or another.I'd be curious to know how much of the vote is swayed by the 2017 class. If "Calibraska" hadn't happened would everyone feel the same?
To me, it's hard to get excited about a group of players who won't be making big contributions to the team until the 2018 or 2019 season at the earliest. Riley and staff has to do things to improve the team in '16 and '17 first.Not at all on my part. I don't pay much attention to recruiting because a) there is no guarantee that they sign with Nebraska and b) many that do sign don't pan out for one reason or another.I'd be curious to know how much of the vote is swayed by the 2017 class. If "Calibraska" hadn't happened would everyone feel the same?
I think game planning and in-game management are two things undeniably in need of improvement. The staff is made up of a good "coaches," in the sense that they're good teachers of the game. You would hope and think year two would result in more of the team being on the same page and the staff better understanding their strengths/weaknesses.I'm supportive of the coaches and the program, but I selected "indifferent". The on-field results are what matters the most for me and the 2015 season was ridiculously bad. Riley is a nice person and a good offensive mind, but his in-game management stinks. It will be interesting if Langsdorf is truly interested in committing to running the ball this year. I understand that the WR's are a strength of the offense, but Armstrong shouldn't be throwing the ball more than 30 times a game.
Callahan might have been nice, especially early on. I probably would describe him as arrogant and condescending.It looks like people are willing to put up with crappy on-the-field results as long as the coach and the staff are nice and they are strong at recruiting. I just hope it's not Bill Callahan 2.0.
This is what makes me skeptical. I've seen West Coast in Lincoln before. Was the BC staff just that bad, or was it the style in a place that is super windy/blistering hot/chilling cold most of the time during August-November.It looks like people are willing to put up with crappy on-the-field results as long as the coach and the staff are nice and they are strong at recruiting. I just hope it's not Bill Callahan 2.0.