Frustrating being a fan of this team.

[bleed husker red]

How many games have we won because we had Tommy Armstrong as our QB and he willed us to a win? How many games have we lost because TA was our QB.

The Williams's at safety, look like world beaters one week, and then look slow and out of place today.

I guess this is what it means to be mediocre, look great one week, piss poor the next.

I look at Iowa and their players outside of their linemen look slow and not physically imposing, yet they out play us, look faster, and perform better than us. Same with Wisconsin.

Still feel that the we made some progress this year, but the last few games have taken the wind out my sails a little bit. Here's hoping to a strong finish to the recruiting class and we flip this roster over.

 

[HudsonValleyHusker]

Agree. we need better schemes on offense and defense. Langs is NOT a good OC. Banker should also be on the hot seat. Where are the game time adjustments?

 

[shine003]

Schemes are fine. Just don't have the players to pull it off. What is he supposed to do? Our oline can't block anyone so the running game is ineffective. Our "mobile" qb looked like he was at about 60 percent. What's left? Someone that is criticizing to coaches, please god tell me, what plays were available that we didn't try to exploit? Same on defense. They just kicked our ass upfront because we had no talent. We all KNEW THAT to start the year. Banker plays a defense that sells out to stop the run. It still wasn't enough. What is he supposed to do? Please...one of you board coaching geniuses tell me. Specifics. Not just "something different" or "coach better". Sometimes the other team is just better. Iowa was just better today.

 

[dinglefritz]

How many games have we won because we had Tommy Armstrong as our QB and he willed us to a win? How many games have we lost because TA was our QB.

The Williams's at safety, look like world beaters one week, and then look slow and out of place today.

I guess this is what it means to be mediocre, look great one week, piss poor the next.

I look at Iowa and their players outside of their linemen look slow and not physically imposing, yet they out play us, look faster, and perform better than us. Same with Wisconsin.

Still feel that the we made some progress this year, but the last few games have taken the wind out my sails a little bit. Here's hoping to a strong finish to the recruiting class and we flip this roster over.

And NOW you know what it was like when Osborne started out. I actually kind of gave up watching Osborne's teams for several years because it just made me sick to see them roll through a patsy schedule, get my hopes up only to lose to the only good teams on their schedule at the end of the year.......hmmmmm kind of like what's going on now.

 

[Blackshirt30]

And NOW you know what it was like when Osborne started out. I actually kind of gave up watching Osborne's teams for several years because it just made me sick to see them roll through a patsy schedule, get my hopes up only to lose to the only good teams on their schedule at the end of the year.......hmmmmm kind of like what's going on now.

Yeah, Osborne beat five Top 20 teams in his first season, REAL patsies???? TO's main problem was beating a perennially Top 5 OU team. Far cry from where we are at now. Totally laughable comparison. Nice try though.

 

[RealHusker]

The things we need we ought to be able to get. We need offensive linemen and a QB that fits the scheme the coaches want to run. Iowa and Wisconsin are beating NU at their own game - they are laughably more physical than Nebraska. If Iowa and Wisconsin can recruit physical, functional offensive lines, then Nebraska can do. Maybe those that are currently Redshirted are the first step in that right direction.

QB - as I said in another thread...Armstrong and Riley did the best they could. Neither would be each other's first choice for a QB/Head Coach. Riley needs a QB than can effectively distribute the ball to skill position players. Armstrong was just not very good at that. Riley made some concessions to maximize the things Armstrong was good at - but it had only modest results. Armstrong's strengths were further mitigated by a patch-work and ineffective o-line.

Nebraska's offense should look 180 degrees different next year. Maybe I mean I HOPE Nebraska's offense is 180 degrees different. Whether it's Lee or O'brien as the starter, either is bound to be better at quickly swinging the ball to wide-outs outside the hashes...better at seeing the primary is covered and locating the wide open receiver that is there nearly every play...better at not panicking and chucking the ball 40 yards downfield at the first sign of trouble. He'll be worse at scrambling and moving the chains with his feet, but you figure the net improvement in other areas will more than offset the drop-off in the QB run game. Then, other teams will be less inclined to sell out to stop the run, knowing our QB is not likely to hurt them - further compromising our already damaged O-line.

 

[dinglefritz]

Yeah, Osborne beat five Top 20 teams in his first season, REAL patsies???? TO's main problem was beating a perennially Top 5 OU team. Far cry from where we are at now. Totally laughable comparison. Nice try though.

Tom took over a NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP PROGRAM WITH AN INCREDIBLE ROSTER.......Riley did NOT. Tom needed time to get over the hump. My point is we gave Tom time. Riley needs time. Heck he's already beat more top 20 teams than Pelini ever did.

 

[Blackshirt30]

I agree Riley needs time. But comparing him to Osborne to make your point probably isn't the best way to go.

 

[phoenix4nu]

The things we need we ought to be able to get. We need offensive linemen and a QB that fits the scheme the coaches want to run. Iowa and Wisconsin are beating NU at their own game - they are laughably more physical than Nebraska. If Iowa and Wisconsin can recruit physical, functional offensive lines, then Nebraska can do. Maybe those that are currently Redshirted are the first step in that right direction.

QB - as I said in another thread...Armstrong and Riley did the best they could. Neither would be each other's first choice for a QB/Head Coach. Riley needs a QB than can effectively distribute the ball to skill position players. Armstrong was just not very good at that. Riley made some concessions to maximize the things Armstrong was good at - but it had only modest results. Armstrong's strengths were further mitigated by a patch-work and ineffective o-line.

Nebraska's offense should look 180 degrees different next year. Maybe I mean I HOPE Nebraska's offense is 180 degrees different. Whether it's Lee or O'brien as the starter, either is bound to be better at quickly swinging the ball to wide-outs outside the hashes...better at seeing the primary is covered and locating the wide open receiver that is there nearly every play...better at not panicking and chucking the ball 40 yards downfield at the first sign of trouble. He'll be worse at scrambling and moving the chains with his feet, but you figure the net improvement in other areas will more than offset the drop-off in the QB run game. Then, other teams will be less inclined to sell out to stop the run, knowing our QB is not likely to hurt them - further compromising our already damaged O-line.

We also need a defense with some speed. There's a reason we give up too many long plays.

 

[TruHusker]

Agree. we need better schemes on offense and defense. Langs is NOT a good OC. Banker should also be on the hot seat. Where are the game time adjustments?

Ok coach, Specificially what would you do different? not general stuff, particulars like sets, blocking schemes, defensive alignments, etc.

 

[62_to_3]

I agree Riley needs time. But comparing him to Osborne to make your point probably isn't the best way to go.

Riley is 63 years old, for crying out loud. How much more time does he need?

 

[yort2000]

Yeah, Osborne beat five Top 20 teams in his first season, REAL patsies???? TO's main problem was beating a perennially Top 5 OU team. Far cry from where we are at now. Totally laughable comparison. Nice try though.

Let's not rewrite history. TO was 13-13 vs. OU. 5-12 when OU was ranked in the top 20 and 8-1 when OU was not ranked at time of game. And, 6-13 when OU was ranked in top 20 and 7-0 when not ranked at the end of the year.