Are the Huskers talking too much before the cu game?

huskerssalts

Defensive Coordinator
Oct 6, 2014
7,091
7,023
113
40
Beatrice Nebraska
We are 4-8 the last 2 years.

What talent are you talking about?
Being fair here, one of those years was on Mike Riley and his team completely quitting on him. That’s not on Frost and these players. To top that off, Colorado themselves crapped the bed and lost 7 straight games to finish the year and going a mere 5-7 (which isn’t much better then our 4-8). We at least had an excuse...Frosts first year after taking over Riley’s dumpster fire. You’re going to have some mistakes and issues in year one while trying to fix Riley’s dumpster fire.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: bshirt73

MOhusker12

Redshirt Freshman
Gold Member
Nov 22, 2010
897
1,272
93
By those standards we shouldn't beat:
Ohio State -way more talent on paper
Iowa - Coach in his 100th year. More talent consistently over the last 4 years. (Hate writing that)
Wisconsin - See Iowa.
Minnesota - Fleck had a jump on frost as far as tenure. The draft and series scores since joining the B1G indicate equal talent.
Purdue - See Minnesota
Northwestern - Former B1G coach of the year and the draft would put us more or less equal in regards to talent.

I don't agree that the above illustrates an accurate assessment...just using it to show that we don't get to win games because our coach has been here longer or we have more "talent on paper". College football just doesn't work that way. I think we'll have a much better game offensively (although the line might be a season long issue) and pull this game out but am nowhere near ready to view anything the team does as a major disappointment so early in Frost's tenure should we lose.
I agree with you, Dabo got his s*&t handed to him by Pelini and look at their career paths ever since. I believe we will win Saturday but anything can happen.
 

oldjar07

First Team All-Big Ten
Oct 25, 2009
3,877
2,336
113
By those standards we shouldn't beat:
Ohio State -way more talent on paper
Iowa - Coach in his 100th year. More talent consistently over the last 4 years. (Hate writing that)
Wisconsin - See Iowa.
Minnesota - Fleck had a jump on frost as far as tenure. The draft and series scores since joining the B1G indicate equal talent.
Purdue - See Minnesota
Northwestern - Former B1G coach of the year and the draft would put us more or less equal in regards to talent.

I don't agree that the above illustrates an accurate assessment...just using it to show that we don't get to win games because our coach has been here longer or we have more "talent on paper". College football just doesn't work that way. I think we'll have a much better game offensively (although the line might be a season long issue) and pull this game out but am nowhere near ready to view anything the team does as a major disappointment so early in Frost's tenure should we lose.
What the heck does the draft have to do with college football talent? Heck even the stupid ratings system people here obsess over is probably a better indicator of talent.
 

Hoosker Du

Nebraska Football Hall of Fame
Dec 11, 2001
19,610
6,073
113
By those standards we shouldn't beat:
Ohio State -way more talent on paper
Iowa - Coach in his 100th year. More talent consistently over the last 4 years. (Hate writing that)
Wisconsin - See Iowa.
Minnesota - Fleck had a jump on frost as far as tenure. The draft and series scores since joining the B1G indicate equal talent.
Purdue - See Minnesota
Northwestern - Former B1G coach of the year and the draft would put us more or less equal in regards to talent.

I don't agree that the above illustrates an accurate assessment...just using it to show that we don't get to win games because our coach has been here longer or we have more "talent on paper". College football just doesn't work that way. I think we'll have a much better game offensively (although the line might be a season long issue) and pull this game out but am nowhere near ready to view anything the team does as a major disappointment so early in Frost's tenure should we lose.
Yes, it absolutely is how college football works. Especially when wholesale changes are made in offensive or defensive schemes, teams almost always struggle some the first year. Throw in being able to spend 20 hours total per week for practice, meetings, weight training and conditioning, and the actual athletic events themselves, and it's more difficult becoming familiar with new schemes than in the pros. They can spend 24 hours a day on football if they want.

Why do you think Alabama went 7-6 during Saban's first year, followed by 12-2 the following season? Or why did Oklahoma go 7-5 in Stoop's first year, followed by 13-0? Why did USC go 6-6 during Pete Carroll's first year, followed by 11-2? Shoot, why did Frost go undefeated after going 6-7 at UCF? This is a recurring theme with almost every newcoaching staff.

How well a college team does in its first year is in many ways largely dependent on how similar the offensive and defensive systems are to the previous ones. Why is Ohio State's offense rolling along so well right out of the gate? Because Ryan Day didn't change much to their offense. He said he was going to make a few tweaks here and there.

We have better talent than CU on paper (recruiting classes), and much of that talent has been in the new systems for a year. And with each year in those systems, each class gets more and more comfortable. CU's offensive scheme is supposedly vastlydifferent than their previous scheme. They had a good showing their opening game, but I'll bet anything that most of that is due to CSU not being very good at all.

We went 4-8 two straight years because we had a much more difficult schedule last year than '17. We all know that the two 4-8 seasons are not equal. Not even remotely equal. We lost 5 games by 5 points or less last year. And at least 3 of those games (Colorado, Northwestern, Troy) were mostly because we shot ourselves in the foot. That includes familiarity with offensive and defensive schemes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bshirt73 and jlb321

jlb321

Recruiting Coordinator
Aug 8, 2014
6,948
7,839
113
Yes, it absolutely is how college football works. Especially when wholesale changes are made in offensive or defensive schemes, teams almost always struggle some the first year. Throw in being able to spend 20 hours total per week for practice, meetings, weight training and conditioning, and the actual athletic events themselves, and it's more difficult becoming familiar with new schemes than in the pros. They can spend 24 hours a day on football if they want.

Why do you think Alabama went 7-6 during Saban's first year, followed by 12-2 the following season? Or why did Oklahoma go 7-5 in Stoop's first year, followed by 13-0? Why did USC go 6-6 during Pete Carroll's first year, followed by 11-2? Shoot, why did Frost go undefeated after going 6-7 at UCF? This is a recurring theme with almost every newcoaching staff.

How well a college team does in its first year is in many ways largely dependent on how similar the offensive and defensive systems are to the previous ones. Why is Ohio State's offense rolling along so well right out of the gate? Because Ryan Day didn't change much to their offense. He said he was going to make a few tweaks here and there.

We have better talent than CU on paper (recruiting classes), and much of that talent has been in the new systems for a year. And with each year in those systems, each class gets more and more comfortable. CU's offensive scheme is supposedly vastlydifferent than their previous scheme. They had a good showing their opening game, but I'll bet anything that most of that is due to CSU not being very good at all.

We went 4-8 two straight years because we had a much more difficult schedule last year than '17. We all know that the two 4-8 seasons are not equal. Not even remotely equal. We lost 5 games by 5 points or less last year. And at least 3 of those games (Colorado, Northwestern, Troy) were mostly because we shot ourselves in the foot. That includes familiarity with offensive and defensive schemes.
Agree. After year 1, elite coaches produce elite results very quickly - often year 2-3. We do not need to be elite to win the west this year or really most years.

We beat Colorado and their year 1 staff - an L would be very concerning. You give a mulligan in year 1 because you expect big improvement in year 2 and that begins with beating a bad Colorado team. Otherwise we could have just kept Riley and gone at least 4-8 last year with a toss up game at Colorado in year 2.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Hoosker Du

Hoosker Du

Nebraska Football Hall of Fame
Dec 11, 2001
19,610
6,073
113

Redondo

Sophomore
Oct 7, 2012
1,112
727
113
I'm still your daddy Redondo- you came from my ballsack. And I would never say anything as stupid as above.
Get some mental health help, sicko, Thorazine might be too mild for you, though, a lobotomy might be too mild. I guess now I could see an argument for euthanasia in your case. I am sure it would be a relief for your family, as I can tell you have no loved ones to speak of.
 

Pacoytaco

Newbie
Dec 22, 2004
32
23
8
Get some mental health help, sicko, Thorazine might be too mild for you, though, a lobotomy might be too mild. I guess now I could see an argument for euthanasia in your case. I am sure it would be a relief for your family, as I can tell you have no loved ones to speak of.
Wrong again sweet child o' mine! I'm leasing out space in Redondo's head if anyone is interested
 

Redondo

Sophomore
Oct 7, 2012
1,112
727
113
Wrong again sweet child o' mine! I'm leasing out space in Redondo's head if anyone is interested
I think you are the stupid lame azz that tried to argue a few weeks ago and got humiliated because you are soooooo stupid. I would have never realized you even had enough brain power to remember that far back.

Amazing you have enough neurons to be able to sign up under another name.

What happened? Did they throw you out of this sight under that other name or did your mommy find out and promise to give back your pacifier if you wouldn't embarrass her anymore?

In reality, I am in your head rent free, dumbazz, and there is plenty of room in there as I don't see any sign that you ever had a brain, let alone a functioning one.

What an embarrassing idiot you are. Have your parents asked you to change your last name, yet?
 
Last edited:

Pacoytaco

Newbie
Dec 22, 2004
32
23
8
I think you are the stupid lame azz that tried to argue a few weeks ago and got humiliated because you are soooooo stupid. I would have never realized you even had enough brain power to remember that far back.

Amazing you have enough neurons to be able to sign up under another name.

What happened? Did they throw you out of this sight under that other name or did your mommy find out and promise to give back your pacifier if you wouldn't embarrass her anymore?

In reality, I am in your head rent free, dumbazz, and there is plenty of room in there as I don't see any sign that you ever had a brain, let alone a functioning one.

What an embarrassing idiot you are. Have your parents asked you to change your last name, yet?
Grrrrr you are a mad lil boy! How many times did you have to edit that and why are you up thinking about me at 2am if I don't own you?? You are my property, that's why and you require discipline!
 

Redondo

Sophomore
Oct 7, 2012
1,112
727
113
Grrrrr you are a mad lil boy! How many times did you have to edit that and why are you up thinking about me at 2am if I don't own you?? You are my property, that's why and you require discipline!
My Dad was right, again. Idiots like you aren't worth a small bottle of piss. Bye-bye, weed.
 

Latest posts