What's with all the talk about how bad our talent is

[NikkiSixx]

Don't even know why I'm responding to this, will probably regret it, but here goes... are you brain dead? What was Oregon State's record the 30 years before Riley arrived? Riley has had more winning seasons at Oregon State than any coach in the school's history. From 1972-1996 they won 4 games in a season only 4 times... And that was the best it got! 8 of Riley's 14 seasons at OSU he had a winning record on the season. They've been to 19 bowl games in their school's history... Riley has taken them to 9 of those 19.

If you want to say Bo would have won 9 games, go ahead... You can say that. You can't prove it, but if it makes you feel better, go ahead and say it. But it is flat out ridiculous to say a winning record has never been a strength for Riley, nor will it ever be.

Be ticked off all you want, you have that right... but don't be ignorant and post garbage like that.

This is an interesting response, and I'm not the one angry, but it seems you are.

First, you shouldn't start out insulting someone, I don't go around asking people if they are brain dead, but apparently you do. It certainly shows me just what your mentality is like on the message boards. You used to actually post stuff that made sense. Lately, not so much.

Secondly, you dive into Oregon's State's record the 30 years before Riley, and this has absolutely ZERO bearing on anything going on here today or in Mike Riley's past.

Your next argument is about Mike Riley's winning seasons and how he has had more at Oregon State than any other coach in the schools history. Again, part of this equation is not relevant, as Oregon State's past history has ZERO bearing. Mile Riley has around a 55% winning percentage.

I don't really care what happened at Oregon State from 1972 to 1996, it has ZERO bearing on Mike Riley, or Nebraska. Kind of tired repeating myself here, as it seems this is your only argument.

Ok, MR has a winning record 8/14 seasons. That is 57%.. Hmmmm.. that seems to jive with his approx 55% winning percentage.

Oregon's State's bowl history has little bearing in your final argument. Which in summary seems to be that Mike is great because he did average at a program that was below average.

It's an excuse Tim. One of many we will see, hear, and discuss on this board over the next few years.

Next it is the talent, then it's the strength & conditioning, then the recruiting, and wrong players for his system, and on and on it will go.

I understand everyone wants to be positive, support the school and have something to cheer about. From my perspective, people are just reaching for excuses, and for sure they don't like someone to say that, but it's how I see it.

Now, if you want to have an intelligent discussion, by all means feel free to engage me on it, but leave the childish and immature stuff for someone else. I know you are better than that, or you used to be.

 

[dinglefritz]

Arriving at logical conclusions based on evident factors is not making excuses. FACTS: We installed a completely new coaching staff and systems. We had more injuries and less depth on defense than was logical for any team or coach to over come. TA was careless with the ball and hurt us badly. CONCLUSION: We were going to lose a lot more games than we would have liked. That's a logical conclusion to facts. Would I have liked to have seen a few different coaching moves? Sure. Would that have made much difference? Some but not much IMO.

 

[NikkiSixx]

Arriving at logical conclusions based on evident factors is not making excuses. FACTS: We installed a completely new coaching staff and systems. We had more injuries and less depth on defense than was logical for any team or coach to over come. TA was careless with the ball and hurt us badly. CONCLUSION: We were going to lose a lot more games than we would have liked. That's a logical conclusion to facts. Would I have liked to have seen a few different coaching moves? Sure. Would that have made much difference? Some but not much IMO.

Let's take a look at your FACTS:
"We installed a completely new coaching staff and systems": Now wait a minute, we were told the system was going to be geared towards the players strengths. Obviously that did not happen, so what is the logical conclusion to be drawn here? The coaches did not do what they said they would do.

"We had more injuries and less depth on defense than was logical for any team or coach to over come.": We did have an enormous amount of injuries this year. It would be logical to want to question the way the team practiced or the strength and conditioning program leading up to the season. I don't know if they played an impact, but you're basically saying this is a fluke... the kind that never really happened to our program before? I'm not buying it, but ok.

TA was careless with the ball and hurt us badly. That is indeed a fact. See the first point about playing to players' strengths. TA didn't go 5-7 last year. So what does logic say about that?

 

[dinglefritz]

Let's take a look at your FACTS:
"We installed a completely new coaching staff and systems": Now wait a minute, we were told the system was going to be geared towards the players strengths. Obviously that did not happen, so what is the logical conclusion to be drawn here? The coaches did not do what they said they would do.

"We had more injuries and less depth on defense than was logical for any team or coach to over come.": We did have an enormous amount of injuries this year. It would be logical to want to question the way the team practiced or the strength and conditioning program leading up to the season. I don't know if they played an impact, but you're basically saying this is a fluke... the kind that never really happened to our program before? I'm not buying it, but ok.

TA was careless with the ball and hurt us badly. That is indeed a fact. See the first point about playing to players' strengths. TA didn't go 5-7 last year. So what does logic say about that?

We had Ameer and he alone would have likely meant several more wins for us this year. We also didn't have the rash of injuries and depth issues last year on defense. We lost what 5 linebackers after the spring to either transfer, drug suspensions or grades that were expected to play? We lost a starting safety in Alexander to transfer (rumor was academics and weed). TA wasn't the only or maybe even the most important reason we lost all the games we did but his decision making was an obvious factor.

 

[NikkiSixx]

We had Ameer and he alone would have likely meant several more wins for us this year. We also didn't have the rash of injuries and depth issues last year on defense. We lost what 5 linebackers after the spring to either transfer, drug suspensions or grades that were expected to play? We lost a starting safety in Alexander to transfer (rumor was academics and weed). TA wasn't the only or maybe even the most important reason we lost all the games we did but his decision making was an obvious factor.

Ok, you got me there.. Ameer absolutely accounted for the McNeese State win, and Ron Kellog III accounted for the Northwestern win. I was wrong to think TA regressed in performance from last year to this year.

You're saying his supporting cast isn't as good. RKIII was a walk on. We didn't even use Janovich last year, so not sure it is easy to quantify, but on this very board last year, most people thought we had the talent to win right away.

All teams have injuries though, so to me, the football team is judged top to bottom, and it's the same for everyone. Injuries are like excuses, everyone has them.

 

[JHball]

Ok, you got me there.. Ameer absolutely accounted for the McNeese State win, and Ron Kellog III accounted for the Northwestern win. I was wrong to think TA regressed in performance from last year to this year.

You're saying his supporting cast isn't as good. RKIII was a walk on. We didn't even use Janovich last year, so not sure it is easy to quantify, but on this very board last year, most people thought we had the talent to win right away.

All teams have injuries though, so to me, the football team is judged top to bottom, and it's the same for everyone. Injuries are like excuses, everyone has them.

We had PLENTY of injuries the last few years. Remember our OL playing 3rd stringers and Gregory on the sideline for a good chunk of the year?

 

[timnsun]

This is an interesting response, and I'm not the one angry, but it seems you are.

First, you shouldn't start out insulting someone, I don't go around asking people if they are brain dead, but apparently you do. It certainly shows me just what your mentality is like on the message boards. You used to actually post stuff that made sense. Lately, not so much.

Secondly, you dive into Oregon's State's record the 30 years before Riley, and this has absolutely ZERO bearing on anything going on here today or in Mike Riley's past.

Your next argument is about Mike Riley's winning seasons and how he has had more at Oregon State than any other coach in the schools history. Again, part of this equation is not relevant, as Oregon State's past history has ZERO bearing. Mile Riley has around a 55% winning percentage.

I don't really care what happened at Oregon State from 1972 to 1996, it has ZERO bearing on Mike Riley, or Nebraska. Kind of tired repeating myself here, as it seems this is your only argument.

Ok, MR has a winning record 8/14 seasons. That is 57%.. Hmmmm.. that seems to jive with his approx 55% winning percentage.

Oregon's State's bowl history has little bearing in your final argument. Which in summary seems to be that Mike is great because he did average at a program that was below average.

It's an excuse Tim. One of many we will see, hear, and discuss on this board over the next few years.

Next it is the talent, then it's the strength & conditioning, then the recruiting, and wrong players for his system, and on and on it will go.

I understand everyone wants to be positive, support the school and have something to cheer about. From my perspective, people are just reaching for excuses, and for sure they don't like someone to say that, but it's how I see it.

Now, if you want to have an intelligent discussion, by all means feel free to engage me on it, but leave the childish and immature stuff for someone else. I know you are better than that, or you used to be.

I will apologize for the brain dead crack, but he rest stands. You actually claimed that Riley never has known, nor never will know, winning seasons. I posted nothing but facts to show how ignorant that comment was. And to say the 25 years prior to Riley's arrival has no bearing is ridiculous. Tell me, is a career .500 coach going to go someplace where the most games won in a season in the last 25 years is 4 games and turn things around? Do you really believe that?

Riley is a good coach. You can be all offended by my post and try to discount everything I said in it, but every part of it shows that he can coach. And even though I give you evidence, you didn't backtrack one bit on your stupid statement that Riley never has known winning seasons and never will. In a nutshell, that's what pissed me off about your post. It was ignorant and stupid.

And I am pretty sure to most objective observers who read your stupid post and my rebuttal, to a person, logic would dictate mine made much more sense than yours did. Sorry I ruffled your feathers, but facts are facts, and you obviously don't want to deal in them.

 

[NikkiSixx]

I will apologize for the brain dead crack, but he rest stands. You actually claimed that Riley never has known, nor never will know, winning seasons. I posted nothing but facts to show how ignorant that comment was. And to say the 25 years prior to Riley's arrival has no bearing is ridiculous. Tell me, is a career .500 coach going to go someplace where the most games won in a season in the last 25 years is 4 games and turn things around? Do you really believe that?

Riley is a good coach. You can be all offended by my post and try to discount everything I said in it, but every part of it shows that he can coach. And even though I give you evidence, you didn't backtrack one bit on your stupid statement that Riley never has known winning seasons and never will. In a nutshell, that's what pissed me off about your post. It was ignorant and stupid.

And I am pretty sure to most objective observers who read your stupid post and my rebuttal, to a person, logic would dictate mine made much more sense than yours did. Sorry I ruffled your feathers, but facts are facts, and you obviously don't want to deal in them.

Wrong.. Not my claim.. My claim was "Mike Riley has good points, but a winning record is not one of his strengths, never has been, never will be."

At least get your facts straight, again..

 

[timnsun]

Wrong.. Not my claim.. My claim was "Mike Riley has good points, but a winning record is not one of his strengths, never has been, never will be."

At least get your facts straight, again..

What the hell... How is that any different?

 

[NikkiSixx]

What the hell... How is that any different?

You can't quote someone using different words than what they said.. you really don't know that?

The implications are different, and you are smart enough to know that.

 

[timnsun]

Wrong.. Not my claim.. My claim was "Mike Riley has good points, but a winning record is not one of his strengths, never has been, never will be."

At least get your facts straight, again..

just admit it was a stupid post. Then we can forgive and forget and move on.

 

[timnsun]

You can't quote someone using different words than what they said.. you really don't know that?

The implications are different, and you are smart enough to know that.

so you're gonna stand by that huh? Way to word it so that you can weasel out on semantics.

The fact is you were calling Riley a loser coach and I was giving evidence to show otherwise.

 

[NikkiSixx]

just admit it was a stupid post. Then we can forgive and forget and move on.

Not at all.. my post was on the mark. It's hip for everyone else to make excuses for the staff. I am not into being hip.

 

[timnsun]

Not at all.. my post was on the mark. It's hip for everyone else to make excuses for the staff. I am not into being hip.

The only thing i will concede is that Riley's winning seasons are not at the mark we expect here at Nebraska. Don't know if he will turn it around and get there but he definitely isn't there yet.

Fair?

 

[NikkiSixx]

so you're gonna stand by that huh? Way to word it so that you can weasel out on semantics.

The fact is you were calling Riley a loser coach and I was giving evidence to show otherwise.

Actually, it's something you need to learn if you are going to be a successful debater. You can't take people's words out of context, insert new words, change them, then say that's what someone else said. At least I will call you out on it.

Again, where did I say "Riley is a loser coach"? You can't just make stuff up. See, that implies that I think coach Riley is a loser, and I never said that, anywhere.. find that quote!!

What I said is: " recruits don't want to play for losers".. this comes from the viewpoint of a recruit, not my own.

Can you not see how that is different and why you can't just go making up stuff?

 

[timnsun]

Actually, it's something you need to learn if you are going to be a successful debater. You can't take people's words out of context, insert new words, change them, then say that's what someone else said. At least I will call you out on it.

Again, where did I say "Riley is a loser coach"? You can't just make stuff up. See, that implies that I think coach Riley is a loser, and I never said that, anywhere.. find that quote!!

What I said is: " recruits don't want to play for losers".. this comes from the viewpoint of a recruit, not my own.

Can you not see how that is different and why you can't just go making up stuff?

Fair enough. Yes your post pissed me off. Yes I took it one way when you evidently meant it another. Since you're so intent on Making me a better debater and pointing out how my assumptions of your meanings are wrong, you may want to practice what you preach. Point out where I said Riley will take us to national championships. You claimed that in the other thread. Guess we both have some learning to do.

 

[SnohomishRed]

Arriving at logical conclusions based on evident factors is not making excuses. FACTS: We installed a completely new coaching staff and systems. We had more injuries and less depth on defense than was logical for any team or coach to over come. TA was careless with the ball and hurt us badly. CONCLUSION: We were going to lose a lot more games than we would have liked. That's a logical conclusion to facts. Would I have liked to have seen a few different coaching moves? Sure. Would that have made much difference? Some but not much IMO.

Oh my lol

Facts:

• BYU - If the coaches had properly trained the players how to defend a hail mary most likely the hail mary does not happen - win
• Illinois - If Langsdorf calls a running play the clock runs out and we win
• Purdue - If we do not throw the ball 45 times with a backup QB against the worst rush defense in the conference - we win

Fact is that just in these three games better decisions or more attention to detail by the coaching staff would have resulted in 3 more wins and a first year record of 8-4. Then we could be discussing the positives and what could have been

 

[Husker Todd]

This is an interesting response, and I'm not the one angry, but it seems you are.

First, you shouldn't start out insulting someone, I don't go around asking people if they are brain dead, but apparently you do. It certainly shows me just what your mentality is like on the message boards. You used to actually post stuff that made sense. Lately, not so much.

Secondly, you dive into Oregon's State's record the 30 years before Riley, and this has absolutely ZERO bearing on anything going on here today or in Mike Riley's past.

Your next argument is about Mike Riley's winning seasons and how he has had more at Oregon State than any other coach in the schools history. Again, part of this equation is not relevant, as Oregon State's past history has ZERO bearing. Mile Riley has around a 55% winning percentage.

I don't really care what happened at Oregon State from 1972 to 1996, it has ZERO bearing on Mike Riley, or Nebraska. Kind of tired repeating myself here, as it seems this is your only argument.

Ok, MR has a winning record 8/14 seasons. That is 57%.. Hmmmm.. that seems to jive with his approx 55% winning percentage.

Oregon's State's bowl history has little bearing in your final argument. Which in summary seems to be that Mike is great because he did average at a program that was below average.

It's an excuse Tim. One of many we will see, hear, and discuss on this board over the next few years.

Next it is the talent, then it's the strength & conditioning, then the recruiting, and wrong players for his system, and on and on it will go.

I understand everyone wants to be positive, support the school and have something to cheer about. From my perspective, people are just reaching for excuses, and for sure they don't like someone to say that, but it's how I see it.

Now, if you want to have an intelligent discussion, by all means feel free to engage me on it, but leave the childish and immature stuff for someone else. I know you are better than that, or you used to be.

Here's some intelligent discussion for ya, why don't you go F yourself and find anther team to root for. Because your not a true fan your one of those POS fans who only supports his team when things are going good.

We don't have the talent we once had and the team chemistry was shit this year. And if you don't understand team chemistry then there are only a few options:

1) You never played organized sports
2) Your just plain stupid and you know what they say, can't fix stupid
3) Or you just have a hard on for this coaching staff and if that's the case then we might as well give up because you really can't fix enraged stupidity.

 

[litespeedhuskerfan]

 

[Husker Todd]

Let's take a look at your FACTS:
"We installed a completely new coaching staff and systems": Now wait a minute, we were told the system was going to be geared towards the players strengths. Obviously that did not happen, so what is the logical conclusion to be drawn here? The coaches did not do what they said they would do.

Okay, now that I've had time to take a deep breathe, just a little annoyed with the Riley bashers. They are tMB equivalent of mob rule and they are always throwing out the phrase intelligent discussion. When has mob rule and intelligence ever been uttered in the same sentence? Mob rule is the paralysis of the brain, resulting in temporary retardation.

Now Nicki, I saw you jump in timnsun's shit for changing your words. You MR bashers keep spreading this lie that they were going to change the offense to suit the players skill set. Not true, they said they would add some plays that played to their strengths while still implementing their system. And they did this they ran some spread and some designed QB runs.

 

[big red22]

I have been hearing a lot on message boards and Omaha radio about Neb having more talent than Iowa.

O Line. No
RB No
QB No
TE No
LB No
D Backs No
DL Yes
WR Yes

So what is the basis of this arguement? Star rating? Recruiting class rank? Neither of those helps you on the field. Being Neb, Mich, Penn State, etc does not give you more talent by default.

Dear God, I feel like I'm doing you wrong here by saying this, but I agree with this Hawkeye poster. The only place I would argue is TE.

 

[leodisflowers]

Dear God, I feel like I'm doing you wrong here by saying this, but I agree with this Hawkeye poster. The only place I would argue is TE.

I somewhat agree. Talent vs. what is done on the field is a lot different. I think if you really looked at it we have more talented RB's, LB's, a more talented TE, and I think our QB has more talent than Iowas. With that said, they were very well coached this year and didn't make mistakes. We were the polar opposite. Just my take. Iowa was the better team, but I still think talent wise we are superior.

 

[HuskerTimOmaha]

BYU - If the coaches had properly trained the players how to defend a hail mary most likely the hail mary does not happen - win

You're dumber than I thought.

 

[TheBeav815]

Here's some intelligent discussion for ya, why don't you go F yourself and find anther team to root for. Because your not a true fan your one of those POS fans who only supports his team when things are going good.

We don't have the talent we once had and the team chemistry was shit this year. And if you don't understand team chemistry then there are only a few options:

1) You never played organized sports
2) Your just plain stupid and you know what they say, can't fix stupid
3) Or you just have a hard on for this coaching staff and if that's the case then we might as well give up because you really can't fix enraged stupidity.

This post had EVERYTHING. You're not a real fan, find another team, you never played sports, go f yourself...truly something for everyone in this gem.

 

[HuskerTimOmaha]

How many all Big 12 players did we have in 2007 @rrthusker?

That team had no talent too, right?

Maybe we don't have much talent right now, but the all conference teams don't mean much when your coaching sucks.

Who's our Suh in 2015?

Who's our Dillard in 2015?

Who's our Potter in 2015?

Who's our Turner in 2015?

Who's our Slauson in 2015?

Who's our Murtha in 2015?

Who's our Lucky in 2015?

Who's our athletic RB'er from 2014 that could switch to LB'er in 2015?

There's some similarities though, specifically DB's with young potential.

2008 all B12 team had the same number of Huskers as the 2007 all B12 team did. 2 second teamers, but less honorable mentions. When was the last time Nebraska didn't have a senior drafted? The 2016 draft quite possibly will be the first time since ____.....

 

[nu2u]

Facts:

• BYU - If the coaches had properly trained the players how to defend a hail mary most likely the hail mary does not happen - win
• Illinois - If Langsdorf calls a running play the clock runs out and we win
• Purdue - If we do not throw the ball 45 times with a backup QB against the worst rush defense in the conference - we win

Those are clearly opinions. You are suggesting probable outcomes related to proposed hypothetical events -- an opinion. It is sort of amazing how posters can so easily confuse what is fact and what is opinion.

 

[HuskerTimOmaha]

Here's some intelligent discussion for ya, why don't you go F yourself and find anther team to root for. Because your not a true fan your one of those POS fans who only supports his team when things are going good.

We don't have the talent we once had and the team chemistry was shit this year. And if you don't understand team chemistry then there are only a few options:

1) You never played organized sports
2) Your just plain stupid and you know what they say, can't fix stupid
3) Or you just have a hard on for this coaching staff and if that's the case then we might as well give up because you really can't fix enraged stupidity.

 

[Husker.Wed.]

Oh my lol

Facts:

• Illinois - If Langsdorf calls a running play the clock runs out and we win

It was a running play.

 

[headcard]

Oh my lol

Facts:

• BYU - If the coaches had properly trained the players how to defend a hail mary most likely the hail mary does not happen - win
• Illinois - If Langsdorf calls a running play the clock runs out and we win
• Purdue - If we do not throw the ball 45 times with a backup QB against the worst rush defense in the conference - we win

Fact is that just in these three games better decisions or more attention to detail by the coaching staff would have resulted in 3 more wins and a first year record of 8-4. Then we could be discussing the positives and what could have been

BYU- We practice it, like everyone else. Sometimes crap happens. Look at Westerkamps TD against NW, or at the NFL almost every week.

Illinois- A run was called and I'm pretty sure you know this.

Purdue- Probably right, but we were playing from behind and did have over 400 yards passing.

 

[jeans15]

Does anyone have a still shot of that play in the Illinois game? I was on another site, and it look as if everyone on the field was running a pass play. With the RB looking back to make a catch instead of looking to block. They specifically debating about how Cethan Carter was lined up on the wrong side, which is why their was immediate pressure in Armstrong's face.

I still think if we hand the ball off, regardless of the outcome, we win that game.

 

[jeans15]

Besides that was 3rd down. Didn't we come right back and throw it again on 4th down instead of pooch kicking it.

Funny thing is we just over look how a horrible offense went 75 yards at the end of the game to win it. Basically excusing the defense for losing the game. If the coaches had managed the game right, they would had only one play to make after that huge gain. As we saw it took them multiple attempts to score a TD.

All we ever here is defense wins championships, until it doesn't fit your agenda.
Same thing after the Wisconsin game. After TA saves our hide by converting 3rd and 18, then we score the next play...the defense let them go down the field in 3 plays to set up a game winning TD.

What TA made us score too quickly ......lmao....

 

[HuskerTimOmaha]

Does anyone have a still shot of that play in the Illinois game? I was on another site, and it look as if everyone on the field was running a pass play. With the RB looking back to make a catch instead of looking to block.

Doesn't matter, Tommy was told to keep the ball. I do agree though, hand the damn thing off and let another 35+ seconds run off the clock.

 

[HuskerTimOmaha]

All we ever here is defense wins championships, until it doesn't fit your agenda
.

2010 and 2011 Nebraska football agrees. Wait, no they don't, but that's just an agenda.

 

[mwulf]

I still wish we would go back to some form of the option...its a bitch to prepare for and better utilizes the local talent ...Watching Georgia Southern right now and love that offense...plus if run correctly keeps the defense off the field

 

[WIHAWK]

I somewhat agree. Talent vs. what is done on the field is a lot different. I think if you really looked at it we have more talented RB's, LB's, a more talented TE, and I think our QB has more talent than Iowas. With that said, they were very well coached this year and didn't make mistakes. We were the polar opposite. Just my take. Iowa was the better team, but I still think talent wise we are superior.

I think that a lot of times people confuse athletisism or perceived potential with football talent. I don't think there is anyone outside of Neb that thinks armstrong is a more talented qb than CJ. Even with his medioce play in the last few games. Can you honestly say you would rather have TA going into next year? If Neb WRs ARE actually better, what if the two QBs had to switch WRs? I think that is why CJ and Rudock both looked good this year. Jake was a good QB, but needed to be surrounded by stud WRs. CJ can put it, as Gus Johnson would say, in a shoe box and did what Jake couldn't at Iowa.

 

[WIHAWK]

Dear God, I feel like I'm doing you wrong here by saying this, but I agree with this Hawkeye poster. The only place I would argue is TE.

And I MIGHT agree with this, but you have to use him!

 

[jeans15]

2010 and 2011 Nebraska football agrees. Wait, no they don't, but that's just an agenda.

OU's defense created turnovers and shut us out the 2nd half. Their defense won thm the 2010 Big 10 championship.....don't you remeber the INT in the redzone, the fumble by Roy on their end of the field.
The fumble by Rex that led to their go ahead TD.

Bottom line is. It's a team game and both sides of the ball need to do their job. When one doesn't, the other needs to step up their game.

You have a lead with 1 minute to go, and the other teams has to go 75 yards(should have been 80 to 90) the defense needs to step up and do it's part. Vice Versa, the offense needs to find a way to get the ball down field ala Michigan St.

But you know this already.

 

[HuskerTimOmaha]

OU's defense created turnovers and shut us out the 2nd half. Their defense won thm the 2010 Big 10 championship.....don't you remeber the INT in the redzone, the fumble by Roy on their end of the field.
The fumble by Rex that led to their go ahead TD.

Bottom line is. It's a team game and both sides of the ball need to do their job. When one doesn't, the other needs to step up their game.

You have a lead with 1 minute to go, and the other teams has to go 75 yards(should have been 80 to 90) the defense needs to step up and do it's part. Vice Versa, the offense needs to find a way to get the ball down field ala Michigan St.

But you know this already.

First off, meant 09 and 10...

OU's defense won that game? Weird, we had a double digit lead, couldn't hold on. I say OU's offense won that game, and their opponent (us) couldn't seal it when the (many) opportunities were there. You say successful defense, I say inept offense and good defense. A combination of the two are equal to blame.

Weird though, no response about the other season (although I did have the wrong year) where we had a better defense. After all, defense wins championships and the defensive guru couldn't deliver.

Agendas, sometimes they're obvious.

 

[nebcountry]

Oh my lol

Facts:

• BYU - If the coaches had properly trained the players how to defend a hail mary most likely the hail mary does not happen - win
• Illinois - If Langsdorf calls a running play the clock runs out and we win
• Purdue - If we do not throw the ball 45 times with a backup QB against the worst rush defense in the conference - we win

Fact is that just in these three games better decisions or more attention to detail by the coaching staff would have resulted in 3 more wins and a first year record of 8-4. Then we could be discussing the positives and what could have been

Strange, before this year I would have laughed in anyone's face if they would say we would lose to BYU, Illinois, and Purdue in the same year. And here we are, left trying to "explain" away those losses.

 

[jeans15]

2011 defense wasn't a great defense...and we got cheated in 2009 Cool