Down goes Northwestern....
- Thread starter HuskAir
- Start date
Absolutely I have never understood why so many people have us behind NW, MINN and Wisc. I get that 2/3 of them beat us last year, but looking at all the talent we have, only MICH, and OHIO S have more talent than us in the BIG. If Tommy is even marginally better this year, (10 int's) we win at least 9 games and playing in IND.
I hear constantly on here how we lack talent. It is the reason we supposedly lost a lot of games last year. I agree, we have top 3-4 talent in the BIG. We have the most talent in the west for sure.
I haven't heard that we lack talent, which is why we lost. What I remember hearing is we lack depth at certain positions, which is why we lost games last year.
I think when the discussion of talent comes up, or the lack of it, it's not so much saying we have no talent, the problem more lies in two things:1)experienced talent and 2)depth of talent; or you could combine those two together and say depth of experienced talent.
As stated, when looking at it from a pure talent of starters standpoint, Nebraska is either tops or right up there with the other top teams in the West. The problem comes in the form of experience for one thing. Take the d-line for instance, there is some pretty good talent, but very little experience there, and also not a whole lot of depth. Also in the secondary, when Nate Gerry was lost for his BS targeting penalties, his backup was a true freshman, there is lack of experienced talent. Regardless of how talented his backup might be athletically, his is a position where experience is a big deal, and it showed.
Last edited:
We do lack depth at certain positions. Nebraska fans for the most part are so infatuated with their team they don't take into account other teams in the west do too. We had enough talent and depth to win the west last year, but for whatever reason had a poor year. It's a new year though. We should be able to take the west, or at worst case finish second.
If they can't be playing for the division vs Iowa...There needs to be a change
Wisconsin has a tough schedule, but they could play a big part in shaping the race, and Iowa will be there. It's not a given we will make the top two, but with Wisconsin's schedule we should.
I agree. Riley was brought in for a reason. It's time to prove it. The honeymoon ended last year.
That looks like sarcasm, but until Nebraska proves something this year, it's sadly the truth.
I'm just glad we don't have an embarrassing A-hole as a coach anymore. To me, that's a start!
Ah yes, the annual opening weekend of thinking that teams are going to be the same in week 6 as what they are in week 1. It's college football season again..
Good call. A lot of P5 teams who have hopes of winning their division will lose nonconference games to the likes of Western Michigan.
Either that, or they have some work to do. I'll let you decide.
Yup, let's put the NW game in the books as a win, just like last year. Oops..
Yup, let's make a huge leap and assume that's what I was saying...
Last year northwestern upset Stanford the first game. Or second game, I can't remember... They were a good team. I never put them in the books as a win last year because they showed something early on.
It's still early and they are better than what they showed today, but would you not agree that there's a difference from last year?
BS, that's about the only thing people talked about last year for why we were losing was because our talent was so bad.
My apologies for making the leap then. But we both know that teams playing in their first game don't look what they are going to look like during the middle of the conference season.
Look at us today. We looked pretty sloppy the first half, and cleaned things up much better in the 2nd half. Look at us last year against Illinois, and we looked much better against UCLA.
BS, it was the lack of talent at key positions. We can go back and forth here all day, but the lack of talent at key positions was glaring. You disagree?
What do you consider a key position? Every position can be a key position. "We lack talent" and "We have no talent" were the most common phrases I heard on this board last year and it was almost never followed by "at key positions".
For starters, 3 scholarship linebackers is what I remember hearing. On the entire team.
Our starter at Defensive end was a former walk on. His back up? A walk on. Our other starter at defensive end was a Redshirt freshman. This is what I'm talking about. Surely you remember this?
This will definitely affect how we play defense. Which was our biggest problem last year, followed by our quarterbacking, which had a square peg in a round hole in Armstrong, followed by a former walk on... What else do you need to hear?
You stated that nobody on this board blamed our losses last year on having a lack of talent. That is completely false because many people on this board blamed the losses on a lack of talent across the board.
Our linebackers were one of the best units last year, so obviously they had talent. Our CB's were our worst position group, and a lot of those guys were 4 stars. Armstrong is a 4 star qb. Fyfe was ahead of 2 other 4 star qb's. The walk-on defensive end was one of our better players last year. The walkon's who played a lot last year were among our best players. So you can either say the walkon's were talented or we lacked talent across the board. Which one is it?
Fine, you're right, there were those who blamed a lack of talent. My read of that, rightly or wrongly, was that the lack of talent was most noticeable in areas where we were thin. The linebackers did not start off being among our best units, and Fyfe, Gangwish and Dzuris still were walkons.
They have some talent if they rise to certain positions, but, again, the biggest factor, IN MY OPINION, was a lack of depth. Throw in square peg at QB, and those are some pretty big obstacles to overcome.
And I am calling BS on your assertion that the only thing people were claiming was a lack of talent. Total BS. Many on here were talking about lack of depth as well. Both and, not either or. I don't care of you accept it or not, but it's the truth.
I never said that was the ONLY thing people were claiming was a lack of talent. I said it was probably the most common theme I heard though. And was refuting your statement that NOBODY said there was a lack of overall talent last year
Yes, some people blamed depth, some people blamed talent, and some both. I disagree that's the reason we lost so many games however as I think we had the talent and depth to be at least a 9 win team last year.
Sorry, I forgot to post this one as well. Still, you say nothing about people complaining about depth... only lack of talent. My argument was in relation to this.
The ball is in your court now... I can't wait to see your response.
Sorry, should have said most common and not only. People always complain about depth every year. Complaining of lack of talent is not usually a consistent theme for the problems we have year to year, but it was last year and it was constant.
There were tons of people blaming things on the coaches and saying we had plenty of talent. I find you gracious and a very level headed poster - its hard to discuss some things, where many can't see more than their post.
We won the first game and that has limited the coaching critics some; but there was plenty rehashing of them pre-season. The lb coaching last year was nothing short of miraculous; I like to joke, they were grabbing freshmen off planes. Can't be helped that some don't like the way you phrase things.
I was in the camp that coaching was more the problem, and I was definitely in the minority on this board.
I think we both misunderstood some things and weren't as clear as it could have been, but I thought it was a good discussion. And I agree he's a level headed poster.
I've watched both of their games. They have no passing game, at all. We should beat them by 3 TD's if we show up to play, if.
I'll have to disagree. I felt the most common theme was lack of depth over lack of talent (from our starters).
It's possible I could be remembering incorrectly but I feel pretty confident that was the case.
Similar threads
