Year 4 Expectations

[FrantzHardySwag]

I feel as if I'm beating my head against a wall. 

Riley's last team was 103rd in SP+. That sure seems like rock bottom to me!

Year 1: Up to 49th in SP+ with a veteran roster, but blow a bunch of close games early in the year so don't finish with a good record.

Year 2: Slight step back to 55th with one of the most inexperienced teams in the country as attrition hits us hard. You're correct that it's a step back but also not a massive step back.

Year 3: Up to 32nd and look significantly more competitive against our toughest competition, but record isn't good because we play one of the toughest schedules in country and decide to start a WR at quarterback for a game.

If you want to only look at the record you don't see progress. But again, there's a difference between a bad record and a bad team.

You keep posting the analytics. Analytics are great, but at the end of the day you need to win football games. No coach is given a job because their teams SP+ rankings were impressive. SP+ improved, but we stayed the same relative to our peers - t5th in the West, t5th in the West, 5th in the West. If our SP+ continues to improve, but relative to the B1G West we finish 5th the next two years Frost will be out of a job. College Football is results driven, not analytics driven. 

 

[Husker in WI]

You keep posting the analytics. Analytics are great, but at the end of the day you need to win football games. No coach is given a job because their teams SP+ rankings were impressive. SP+ improved, but we stayed the same relative to our peers - t5th in the West, t5th in the West, 5th in the West. If our SP+ continues to improve, but relative to the B1G West we finish 5th the next two years Frost will be out of a job. College Football is results driven, not analytics driven. 

I agree, but that was in response to people saying there has been no progress. At some point the progress needs to be reflected in the wins, but let's not pretend there's no evidence of improvement at all. Not all 4 win teams are created equal, and the ones with a better SP+ are the ones I'd bet on to improve from 4 wins. 

 

[FrantzHardySwag]

I agree, but that was in response to people saying there has been no progress. At some point the progress needs to be reflected in the wins, but let's not pretend there's no evidence of improvement at all. Not all 4 win teams are created equal, and the ones with a better SP+ are the ones I'd bet on to improve from 4 wins. 

I get that, they probably are a better football team than when Frost took over. But in the world of CFB, progress or success will never be measured by analytics. Could we use it as a sign of things to come, yeah, I could buy that. My point is, when the things that matter (Wins, Standings) show no progress - It's hard for me to be happy about progress in something irrelevant to our goals. Guess I'm just sick of the moral W's, improving SP+ is great, but lets see some progress relevant to what Frost is trying to accomplish. 

 

[Husker in WI]

I get that, they probably are a better football team than when Frost took over. But in the world of CFB, progress or success will never be measured by analytics. Could we use it as a sign of things to come, yeah, I could buy that. My point is, when the things that matter (Wins, Standings) show no progress - It's hard for me to be happy about progress in something irrelevant to our goals. Guess I'm just sick of the moral W's, improving SP+ is great, but lets see some progress relevant to what Frost is trying to accomplish. 

I do agree there, I'm just optimistic the wins will turn around this year because of the underlying improvements implied by SP+ and things. But yeah, this year it needs to start actually showing in the W's. And if it doesn't in the next 2 years, no SP+ rating will justify the record. 

 

[Hilltop]

I get that, they probably are a better football team than when Frost took over. But in the world of CFB, progress or success will never be measured by analytics. Could we use it as a sign of things to come, yeah, I could buy that. My point is, when the things that matter (Wins, Standings) show no progress - It's hard for me to be happy about progress in something irrelevant to our goals. Guess I'm just sick of the moral W's, improving SP+ is great, but lets see some progress relevant to what Frost is trying to accomplish. 

You were one of the ones posting so much about the effects of Covid but yet now you don't even consider it's effect on a team trying to rebuild.  I don't understand.  Shutting a program down for half a year during a rebuild is going to have a really negative impact on what you can produce on the field.  

Nobody is saying Frost should get a free pass but he sure gets more slack from me than some of the veteran programs out there that also stunk this year.  

 

[FrantzHardySwag]

You were one of the ones posting so much about the effects of Covid but yet now you don't even consider it's effect on a team trying to rebuild.  I don't understand.  Shutting a program down for half a year during a rebuild is going to have a really negative impact on what you can produce on the field.

Referring to my posts on the medical effects of covid, and it's impact on society (generally curious if that's what you're referencing)? Either way, I stated I'm judging Frost on his progress relative to our peers - in this case our peers were dealt the exact same s#!tty hand we were dealt this season. Whatever you attribute last season to, the time for tangible progress is here. 

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

I feel as if I'm beating my head against a wall. 

Riley's last team was 103rd in SP+. That sure seems like rock bottom to me!

Year 1: Up to 49th in SP+ with a veteran roster, but blow a bunch of close games early in the year so don't finish with a good record.

Year 2: Slight step back to 55th with one of the most inexperienced teams in the country as attrition hits us hard. You're correct that it's a step back but also not a massive step back.

Year 3: Up to 32nd and look significantly more competitive against our toughest competition, but record isn't good because we play one of the toughest schedules in country and decide to start a WR at quarterback for a game.

If you want to only look at the record you don't see progress. But again, there's a difference between a bad record and a bad team.

There is a difference between a bad record and a bad team, but the truth is Nebraska was both the last two seasons.  The record, the metrics and the eyeball test tend to support this. The Huskers entered this unprecedented pandemic year with more returning starters than most, including its top 2 quarterbacks, running backs, tight end and receiver, coaching staff and scheme, and they generally played like the 101st ranked scoring offense in the NCAA. When a surprisingly healthy Nebraska team played a COVID decimated Minnesota squad down to its third and fourth stringers, the Gophers not only played like a better team, but like the team that wanted it more. SP+ doesn't address the fact that at the end of the year we were slightly better than Rutgers in head-to-head competition. 

It's also hard to see progress when the team plays worse in the second half of the game, which Nebraska did almost every game. There appeared to be no adjustments or motivation coming out of the locker room.

I don't count the first season against Frost, as the team that finished 4-2 actually did show a lot of promise. That's the main reason 2019 was a disappointment.

If you're tired of beating your head against the wall, think of it this way: If Mike Riley hadn't been fired, and proceeded to coach these exact same players to the exact same results for the past three seasons, would you still call that 2017 season rock bottom? 

 

[Husker in WI]

If you're tired of beating your head against the wall, think of it this way: If Mike Riley hadn't been fired, and proceeded to coach these exact same players to the exact same results for the past three seasons, would you still call that 2017 season rock bottom? 

I would, absolutely. These past 3 teams have been incredibly frustrating with their ability to shoot themselves in the foot, 2017 (at least the second half) just didn't even look like they belonged or wanted to be on the field. 2018-2020 were not good teams. 2017 was an abomination, despite ending up with a similar record.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

I would, absolutely. These past 3 teams have been incredibly frustrating with their ability to shoot themselves in the foot, 2017 (at least the second half) just didn't even look like they belonged or wanted to be on the field. 2018-2020 were not good teams. 2017 was an abomination, despite ending up with a similar record.

Yeah, that was definitely a dead man walking team, but if the question is "progress" I think Nebraska is still shuffling around on the same rock bottom and we're quibbling about inches. 

The reason I brought up last year's Minnesota game is because it felt so much like a 2017 game.  I can't pretend it's about a bare cupboard anymore. 

Like I said earlier: good recruiting class, clean slate, super reasonable expectations and optimism, but I need a little more forward and upward motion in year four.  

 

[TheSker]

2017 was just a showcase of what Mike Riley can do for a program.  It was his 3rd season after taking over for Pelini, a .700 winning percentage coach at Nebraska.

In 2017 the last three games were lost by a total of 87 points, including a 42 point drubbing by Iowa.

"Rock bottom" may be more than one season, although metrics show progress.

We will only know "rock bottom" when it's I'm the rear view mirror.

The cupboard left by Riley was embarrassingly bare.  Though I doubt he's embarrassed at all.  The chart posted earlier in the thread shows how small we were in 2017 compared to now.

As the offensive line continues to move in the right direction with size and talent, progress in the win column will happen.

It's been a long time since talent like Benhart and Corcoran have been signed.  As guys like that mature and get experience, we'll be fine 

 

[Mavric]

I get that, they probably are a better football team than when Frost took over. But in the world of CFB, progress or success will never be measured by analytics. Could we use it as a sign of things to come, yeah, I could buy that. My point is, when the things that matter (Wins, Standings) show no progress - It's hard for me to be happy about progress in something irrelevant to our goals. Guess I'm just sick of the moral W's, improving SP+ is great, but lets see some progress relevant to what Frost is trying to accomplish. 

The things that matter are showing progress.  The thing that matters most isn't.  Those aren't the same thing.  And the thing that matters most isn't the only thing that matters.

 

[Canadian Fan]

I'm really looking forward to seeing a full year of Lubick with more say in the offense.  I remember calling it out in a game thread where I saw when the playcalling changed mid-game and my recollection was that immediately you could see "his" called plays were more in the players comfort zone. My sincere hope being more of the offensive book next year is built as a result of assessing what our kids are naturally good at, as opposed to forcing "favourite plays" which require physical traits and skills that they struggle with.  Example: If your offensive guards are strong but with slow feet, asking them to reach block while moving laterally is not setting your players up for the highest likelihood of success.  Fingers crossed.

 

[NUance]

This is the most ridiculous falsehood in this entire thread.  Bo had way better freaking players then anything remotely put on the field by this staff.  I am not even going to get into the D Line he had ready to go when he was fired.  He had identified that and recruited beasts to that position.  2 of them were the most underutilized players in Nebraska history.  Ahh that's right though, that wouldn't have continued right?  That's always the stupid narrative?  He couldn't recruit right?  As far as I've seen this staff hasn't even come close to being even in the running for guys of Bos classes calibur.  Riley's and Frosts best players were still Bo recruits.  There's no revisionist history here.  This dumping on the guy who was clearly a superior coach of the last 4 is crazy.  I liked winning, we won, we were never more then a game out of the top of the division.  Big game comment right?  I'll take all those big game blowouts to the desecrations of Memorial stadium that occurred after he left.  

Pelini didn't get fired because he was a bad coach.  He got fired because he was a hot headed a$$h@!e who embarrassed the university on a regular basis.  

 

[J-MAGIC]

You keep posting the analytics. Analytics are great, but at the end of the day you need to win football games. No coach is given a job because their teams SP+ rankings were impressive. SP+ improved, but we stayed the same relative to our peers - t5th in the West, t5th in the West, 5th in the West. If our SP+ continues to improve, but relative to the B1G West we finish 5th the next two years Frost will be out of a job. College Football is results driven, not analytics driven. 

I am aware that winning football games matters. It's also a s#!tty way to judge the quality of a team. I have to keep posting the analytics because people keep saying we've made no progress. I would love to stop posting them if people would stop saying dumb stuff.

 

[Husker in WI]

Yeah, that was definitely a dead man walking team, but if the question is "progress" I think Nebraska is still shuffling around on the same rock bottom and we're quibbling about inches. 

The reason I brought up last year's Minnesota game is because it felt so much like a 2017 game.  I can't pretend it's about a bare cupboard anymore. 

Like I said earlier: good recruiting class, clean slate, super reasonable expectations and optimism, but I need a little more forward and upward motion in year four.  

I don't think I really agree with the bold, although I guess it just depends on which 2017 game you're talking about. Minnesota last year felt like a lot of 2018-2020 games - letting a team we should have beat handily build a lead and not being able to work our way all the way back. My lasting memory of 2017 will always be letting a QB who was essentially cut and couldn't even get a QB job at a Juco run rampant.

100% agree on the last piece though. I don't think I differ that much from the more pessimistic (realistic?) fans on what I need to see this year - I just do believe we'll see it. I have been wrong before.