Who should our next HC be?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Mudhen said:
View attachment 20222
Click to expand...
You said the key word Blueblood. Yes this program has fallen on hard times and gave shot themselves in the foot way to many times then I can count but the very word you mentioned is the reason why Trev will hire a great coach to bring us back. He knows what it takes and coaches out there know what Nebraska has represented to the game of college football. Just bc you lowered your expectations to think that Nebraska can't win another championship I don't as long as they finally figure it out. I don't expect National Championships every year but what I expect is to be better then certain schools. If or when Nebraska decides to be better by hiring the best guy possible then we will. But nothing takes away that Nebraska is a blue blood even if you don't like where they have been for the last 20 years or so.

 
if it's rhule/urban/o'brien/patterson we should know by next sunday. no reason to wait.

if it's a current HC, we probably won't know until the end of the season

 
BoSolich said:
if it's rhule/urban/o'brien/patterson we should know by next sunday. no reason to wait.

if it's a current HC, we probably won't know until the end of the season
Click to expand...


And if that current HC plays in a CCG we may not know until December 4 or later.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Undone said:
But here's the thing with that: I'm going to say that we did try to "get back to running the ball" this season. We actually brought in a good running back and scheme-wise, we did try.

I just always read these statements as people being upset with the play call mix.

Really what we need is a recruiting staff that prioritizes the offensive line, IMO.
Click to expand...


Having an offensive line is the most important part. Not sure we tried to run the ball this year with Whip as OC who threw a lot at Pitt. I never liked Chinander and his defense here. 

 
Lorewarn said:
We did that with Pelini and Frost.

Your whole perspective is that we are entitled to success because we're soo important. We're not, and we aren't owed or guaranteed anything. 
Click to expand...
Sadly, Callahan was probably also the best we could get at that time.

 
I've been seeing way too much stuff over-hyping Mark Stoops lately. Like yesterday Mike Farrell put out a list of his top ten best coaching fits for us, with Stoops at #2. Stoops has a .400 record in conference play, and has had a grand total of two seasons with a conference play record above .500 after a decade at Kentucky. Stoops would be an OK hire if our goal is to battle it out with Purdue and Minnesota for the middle of our division. (Brohm has a .479 conference record, Fleck has a .490 record. And don't feed me that 'MUH SEC' s#!t, please.)

Incidentally, Farrell also has Matt Campbell at #5 on his list, which makes me question pretty much everything he says...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Toe said:
I've been seeing way too much stuff over-hyping Mark Stoops lately. Like yesterday Mike Farrell put out a list of his top ten best coaching fits for us, with Stoops at #2. Stoops has a .400 record in conference play, and has had a grand total of two seasons with a conference play record above .500 after a decade at Kentucky. Stoops would be an OK hire if our goal is to battle it out with Purdue and Minnesota for the middle of our division. (Brohm has a .479 conference record, Fleck has a .490 record. And don't feed me that 'MUH SEC' s#!t, please.)

Incidentally, Farrell also has Matt Campbell at #5 on his list, which makes me question pretty much everything he says...
Click to expand...
It doesn’t surprise me that we are getting “meh” coaches on the lists being put out there by some media. In the eyes of some, this isn’t the destination that some in the State and on this board believe it is. Parity has caught up and even passed us by. My nephew is on the bb team and he even said this weekend that our all around facilities are behind a lot of place’s…now, he did mention that our new facility is friggin awesome, but that only brought us up to par in some cases. The media members putting out “meh” lists are thinking that those guys are the best we can do right now.

 
BIG ERN said:
Having an offensive line is the most important part. Not sure we tried to run the ball this year with Whip as OC who threw a lot at Pitt. I never liked Chinander and his defense here. 
Click to expand...


We have run the ball 54% of the time.  Only 21 teams run it over 60% and only 8 of those are Power 5 teams.  Considering how much of the season we've spent playing from behind and how much the line has struggled to run-block, I don't think that's a bad percentage.

 
BIG ERN said:
Not sure we tried to run the ball this year with Whip as OC who threw a lot at Pitt. I never liked Chinander and his defense here. 
Click to expand...


-This year's run play percentage: 51.16

-Last year's run play percentage: 55.44

Now admittedly, a 4.28% difference is actually a big jump. So I guess I'd sort of agree with your pushback.

But I think the trajectory was trying to go more with Grant as the workhorse until it was apparent just how terrible the offensive line really was once we got to the stretch of decent opponents (meaning starting with Oklahoma).

No way we put up the yards & points we did against Purdue if the plan had been to just hand it off to Grant a bunch.

At any rate we agree that without a decent line it's all a bit moot anyway, but I still have to argue that with a good offensive line your scheme is less of a question (even in the B1G West). I think the reason teams run that scheme in this division is because they can't recruit the skill players.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top