Good story in the USA today on Nebraska football.

jlb321

Recruiting Coordinator
Aug 8, 2014
6,938
7,829
113
Is this accurate? That's tough sledding.

"Nebraska played with just 44 active scholarship players from the previous three recruiting classes, a paltry total compared to its major-conference peers."

we have effectively been on probation the last several years - most just haven't realized it

what's worse is we didn't get the opportunity to enjoy the usual success that comes from cheating in the years prior to probabtion



.
 

SilentCommit

Sophomore
Jun 19, 2013
1,145
686
113
Is this accurate? That's tough sledding.

"Nebraska played with just 44 active scholarship players from the previous three recruiting classes, a paltry total compared to its major-conference peers."
Question: How many scholarship players would be the norm for the three previous classes? Honest question, just want to know about how far off we've been. 60-65?
 

coach00036

Senior
Mar 9, 2006
2,051
204
63
Question: How many scholarship players would be the norm for the three previous classes? Honest question, just want to know about how far off we've been. 60-65?
I don't know either, but I would guess you're close with your 60-65 range.
 

Tyante

Redshirt Freshman
Sep 11, 2007
637
85
28
I don't know either, but I would guess you're close with your 60-65 range.
I'm not sure either, but I'd say an average senior class is around 17 and add in walk-on given scholarships, the 60-65 range seems reasonable.
 

Soda Popinski

First Team All-Big Ten
Gold Member
Oct 15, 2009
3,692
6,057
113
Lincoln via Moscow
Good article. I like the fact that the coaches acknowledge that they made mistakes and they're moving on with the intentions of not making the same mistakes.

This is obviously easier said than done, and it's a vague statement but I get the sense that this staff is honest about looking in the mirror and recognizing what they did right and what mistakes they made.

Next year I look forward to seeing more commitment to the run game, better QB decision making and more flexibility on defense (saw much more press coverage against UCLA). I honestly believe the coaches will improve in all these categories and I can't wait to see it.

Edit: I will also be disappointed if we don't see improvement in all three of those categories.
 

lovetheskers

Walk On
Gold Member
Oct 9, 2011
451
307
63
Is this accurate? That's tough sledding.

"Nebraska played with just 44 active scholarship players from the previous three recruiting classes, a paltry total compared to its major-conference peers."
If you pair this info with the fact that we also had something like 40 different starters( mostly do to injury)this season. Not to mention a new coaching staff and system. Things kinda take perspective. I know it sounds like an excuse for 6-7 record. But come on it was the perfect storm for what happened this season. We will be better going forward. GBR
 

big red22

Offensive Coordinator
Dec 15, 2003
8,335
1,351
113
Is this accurate? That's tough sledding.

"Nebraska played with just 44 active scholarship players from the previous three recruiting classes, a paltry total compared to its major-conference peers."
By my count there is only 44 from the previous "FOUR CLASSES" not including Riley's 2015 class. This is going off of not counting DPE, Charles Jackson, Gabriel Miller and Zack Darilington

2011 what a bust!!! GEEZUS Other than Ameer that class was almost like we didn't recruit one year!

I am officially giving Riley a pass after looking at this.

() = Number of players that did not play this year Quitting/Transferring/Juco/Graduation ect...

[ ] = Players that actually gave legit minutes this year

{ } = Number of scholarship players



2011 - (11) and {6}

Taarig Allen
Daniel Davie
Charles Jackson (Can you count him?
Givens Price
Ryne Reeves
Zach Sterup

[3]

2012 - (8) and {9}

Tommy Armstrong
Sam Cotton
Imani Cross
Greg McMullen
Alonzo Moore
Michael Rose
Paul Thurston
Vincent Valentine
Jordan Westercamp

[9]

2013 - (9) {14}

Josh Banderas
Cethan Carter
Maliek Collins
Matt Finnin
Nate Gerry
Zach Hannon
Dwayne Johnson
Boaz Joseph
David Knevel
Chongo Kondolo
Kevin Maurice
Gabriel Miller(Not Sure)
Marcus Newby
Terell Newby

[8]

2014 - (6) {19}

Freedom Akinmoladun
Drew Brown
AJ Bush
Byerson Cockrell
Zack Darlington(Can you count him?)
Tanner Farmer
D.J. Foster
Nick Gates
Luke Gifford
Chris Jones
Joshua Kalu
Joe Keels
Sedrick King
Trai Mosley
Peyton Newell
Demornay Pierson-El(Can you count him?)
Mick Stoltenberg
Mikale Wilbon
Kieron Williams

[8]

We were very VERY thin this year! That 2011 class should have had some studs that would have been leaders on this years team and instead left... Aaron Green, Klachko, Tyler Moore, David Santos, Bubba Starling, Todd Peat Jr.
 
Last edited:

TruHusker

Offensive Coordinator
Sep 21, 2001
8,654
3,064
113
Good article. I like the fact that the coaches acknowledge that they made mistakes and they're moving on with the intentions of not making the same mistakes.

This is obviously easier said than done, and it's a vague statement but I get the sense that this staff is honest about looking in the mirror and recognizing what they did right and what mistakes they made.

Next year I look forward to seeing more commitment to the run game, better QB decision making and more flexibility on defense (saw much more press coverage against UCLA). I honestly believe the coaches will improve in all these categories and I can't wait to see it.

Edit: I will also be disappointed if we don't see improvement in all three of those categories.
I read the article, which mistakes are you referring to that coaches admitted to? Then those they don't intend to make again. I see the piece about a balanced attack. We need some players to improve for this to work. Our O-line is young and very inexperienced, solid around them but that is where it starts. Coaches gotta have something to work with.
 

Soda Popinski

First Team All-Big Ten
Gold Member
Oct 15, 2009
3,692
6,057
113
Lincoln via Moscow
I read the article, which mistakes are you referring to that coaches admitted to? Then those they don't intend to make again. I see the piece about a balanced attack. We need some players to improve for this to work. Our O-line is young and very inexperienced, solid around them but that is where it starts. Coaches gotta have something to work with.
They didn't go into specifics. Like I said, it was a vague statement.
 

dinglefritz

College Football Hall of Fame
Jan 14, 2011
23,863
17,485
113
Is this accurate? That's tough sledding.

"Nebraska played with just 44 active scholarship players from the previous three recruiting classes, a paltry total compared to its major-conference peers."
Glad I wasn't the only one that caught that. I even wrote the numbers down on my desk pad when I saw them. And people wonder why we struggled. Good heavens that's worse than PSU's depth chart especially considering that the lack of scholarship players was so concentrated at specific positions.
 

jlb321

Recruiting Coordinator
Aug 8, 2014
6,938
7,829
113
been posted before - most walk ons on the 2 deep roster - we're #1

 

SnohomishRed

Offensive Coordinator
Jan 31, 2005
8,484
2,350
113
Snohomish
yet in the links within this article they say:

"This is not for lack of talent. Rather, it is due to the consistent, sometimes inexplicable breakdowns that happen in the Huskers' back seven. The tape provides some examples."

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...ebraska-football-defense-mike-riley/75167128/

Look you guys are correct our talent level was down and yes it the previous staff's lazy approach to recruiting that caused for the most part. Nobody disputes that we did not compare across the board with top teams in the Big10 - however the specific reasons we lost games against 3-4 teams were coaching decisions that is the problem I have. No where in this article did Langdorf say we need to evaluate our playcalling especially to close out games instead what I read is " The kids need to get better"

I am skeptical I like the way we finished the year especially on offense but unless we get much better in many areas that have nothing to do with talent next year will be another long year
 

dinglefritz

College Football Hall of Fame
Jan 14, 2011
23,863
17,485
113
yet in the links within this article they say:

"This is not for lack of talent. Rather, it is due to the consistent, sometimes inexplicable breakdowns that happen in the Huskers' back seven. The tape provides some examples."

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...ebraska-football-defense-mike-riley/75167128/

Look you guys are correct our talent level was down and yes it the previous staff's lazy approach to recruiting that caused for the most part. Nobody disputes that we did not compare across the board with top teams in the Big10 - however the specific reasons we lost games against 3-4 teams were coaching decisions that is the problem I have. No where in this article did Langdorf say we need to evaluate our playcalling especially to close out games instead what I read is " The kids need to get better"

I am skeptical I like the way we finished the year especially on offense but unless we get much better in many areas that have nothing to do with talent next year will be another long year
New day, same crap from you. Day after day. Week after week. Same old crap. Presented with evidence of the lack of depth AND scholarship talent you just regurgitate the same sh##.
 

Soda Popinski

First Team All-Big Ten
Gold Member
Oct 15, 2009
3,692
6,057
113
Lincoln via Moscow
How vague? Seems to be revionist interprtation to fit a narrative.
Sure; although I wouldn't say revisionist in any way. I like that they admit they've made mistakes and will try not to repeat them despite knowing the specifics. My narrative is that I support the coaches and hope they succeed despite their past and whatever mistakes they've made thus far. I'm not shy about that at all.

It seems like you're unhappy that someone other than Sipple wrote an article about the Huskers?
 

TruHusker

Offensive Coordinator
Sep 21, 2001
8,654
3,064
113
Sure; although I wouldn't say revisionist in any way. I like that they admit they've made mistakes and will try not to repeat them despite knowing the specifics. My narrative is that I support the coaches and hope they succeed despite their past and whatever mistakes they've made thus far. I'm not shy about that at all.

It seems like you're unhappy that someone other than Sipple wrote an article about the Huskers?
I could care less who wrote the article. My question is where in the article does it state that coaches "admit to mistakes and will try not to repeat them knowing the specifcs" which makes no sense bu the way. So where was their admission? They talked anout what they wanted to work on and get better at but I dont see the rest.
 

Tyante

Redshirt Freshman
Sep 11, 2007
637
85
28
yet in the links within this article they say:

"This is not for lack of talent. Rather, it is due to the consistent, sometimes inexplicable breakdowns that happen in the Huskers' back seven. The tape provides some examples."

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...ebraska-football-defense-mike-riley/75167128/

Look you guys are correct our talent level was down and yes it the previous staff's lazy approach to recruiting that caused for the most part. Nobody disputes that we did not compare across the board with top teams in the Big10 - however the specific reasons we lost games against 3-4 teams were coaching decisions that is the problem I have. No where in this article did Langdorf say we need to evaluate our playcalling especially to close out games instead what I read is " The kids need to get better"

I am skeptical I like the way we finished the year especially on offense but unless we get much better in many areas that have nothing to do with talent next year will be another long year
Maybe you'd like this link better. It is a pod cast Mike Riley did in December I believe. He mentioned losing 4 games in the last play type deal. He said "As coaches, we've got to look at all those things. We are all responsible for those situations. It's kind of haunting." It is around the 2 minute mark.

 

SnohomishRed

Offensive Coordinator
Jan 31, 2005
8,484
2,350
113
Snohomish
New day, same crap from you. Day after day. Week after week. Same old crap. Presented with evidence of the lack of depth AND scholarship talent you just regurgitate the same sh##.
use the ignore feature if it bothers you so much - I really do not want to be responsible for you clogging an artery and having a heart attack

What I said was - Look you guys are correct our talent level was down and yes it the previous staff's lazy approach to recruiting that caused

Why dont you take your pompous attitude and actually read what I said before you cut and paste a response
 
Last edited:

timnsun

Assistant Head Coach
Jan 25, 2008
9,552
11,017
113
yet in the links within this article they say:

"This is not for lack of talent. Rather, it is due to the consistent, sometimes inexplicable breakdowns that happen in the Huskers' back seven. The tape provides some examples."

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...ebraska-football-defense-mike-riley/75167128/

Look you guys are correct our talent level was down and yes it the previous staff's lazy approach to recruiting that caused for the most part. Nobody disputes that we did not compare across the board with top teams in the Big10 - however the specific reasons we lost games against 3-4 teams were coaching decisions that is the problem I have. No where in this article did Langdorf say we need to evaluate our playcalling especially to close out games instead what I read is " The kids need to get better"

I am skeptical I like the way we finished the year especially on offense but unless we get much better in many areas that have nothing to do with talent next year will be another long year
Snohomish, i believe using an article from a game that, by all accounts, we should have won, and using that to define what next year will look like is a little unfair. At the time we were still beset with injuries, and the buy in from the team was said to be in question (even mentioned in OP's linked article somewhat).

There really is no comparison from that game to the rest of the season. The breakdowns that happened in Purdue seemed to get better from that point forward. We finished 3-1 with wins against Michigan state and ucla and a good showing against Iowa in spite of the turnovers.

I understand your reticence to give yourself hope for next year, but really, the way we finished and the way our coaches are talking, things do appear better in the future.
 

SnohomishRed

Offensive Coordinator
Jan 31, 2005
8,484
2,350
113
Snohomish
Snohomish, i believe using an article from a game that, by all accounts, we should have won, and using that to define what next year will look like is a little unfair. At the time we were still beset with injuries, and the buy in from the team was said to be in question (even mentioned in OP's linked article somewhat).

There really is no comparison from that game to the rest of the season. The breakdowns that happened in Purdue seemed to get better from that point forward. We finished 3-1 with wins against Michigan state and ucla and a good showing against Iowa in spite of the turnovers.

I understand your reticence to give yourself hope for next year, but really, the way we finished and the way our coaches are talking, things do appear better in the future.
I dont disagree and I hope next year is a break out year - I am skeptical as I said, I believe I have good reason to be. That does not mean I am not hopeful for next year.

I am really tired of the board police shouting down any opinion that does not align with the herd mentality. I realize that most feel that if you keep insulting people then the natural tendency is to be left with only people who think like you do. But I have followed Nu football for a very long time, I think my opinion is reasonable and logical. It would be nice to have reasonable discussion to allow different points of view without insults flying - I have been on this board or RSS for over ten years and it seemed to have less insulting posts in the past than it does now but again, just my opinion
 
  • Like
Reactions: nebcountry

SnohomishRed

Offensive Coordinator
Jan 31, 2005
8,484
2,350
113
Snohomish
Timsun to address your last post - I simply quoted an article I read that was linked in the article provided. Yes that was after Purdue and the team did get better - however defense still struggled in the remaining games outside of Rutgers. I thin the narrative that we had a losing season due to lack of talent ignores what actually happened in the games themselves. Was our talent level down - yes, but it was not the specific cause of the losing season imo
 
  • Like
Reactions: timnsun

big red22

Offensive Coordinator
Dec 15, 2003
8,335
1,351
113
use the ignore feature if it bothers you so much - I really do not want to be responsible for you clogging an artery and having a heart attack

What I said was - Look you guys are correct our talent level was down and yes it the previous staff's lazy approach to recruiting that caused

Why dont you take your pompous attitude and actually read what I said before you cut and paste a response
What you are failing to see is it is the "Biggest Reason" why we were down this year. You could add in first year coaching too, but look at what he had to work with?

The 2011 class should of had the majority of the leader on this team and instead it was 4 Juniors and a Senior transfer(Alex Lewis) along side a Senior Walk On(Jack Gangwish). Senior leadership is a big deal in finishing out games, and we had little to none.

Next year should be much better, but there will still be a lack of personnel. Stop calling for Riley's head, it getting old and ridiculous at this point!
 

SnohomishRed

Offensive Coordinator
Jan 31, 2005
8,484
2,350
113
Snohomish
What you are failing to see is it is the "Biggest Reason" why we were down this year. You could add in first year coaching too, but look at what he had to work with?

The 2011 class should of had the majority of the leader on this team and instead it was 4 Juniors and a Senior transfer(Alex Lewis) along side a Senior Walk On(Jack Gangwish). Senior leadership is a big deal in finishing out games, and we had little to none.

Next year should be much better, but there will still be a lack of personnel. Stop calling for Riley's head, it getting old and ridiculous at this point!
The 2011 class was rated pretty high but did not pan out but most at the time were very happy with that class. Gangwish was recruited to that class also but recruited as a walkon - I think the issue I have is that somehow being a walkon means you are less talented - I disagree. There were 11 walkons taken that year one rose to the top - its supposed to work that way and gives us an advantage having walkons - yes our talent level was down and the 2011 class did not pan out - that is why you recruit walkons in the first place

So I agree talent level alone meant we should have had a down year - what I disagree with is having a losing season - The losing season was not due to talent level

PS. please show me where " I called for his head"
 

big red22

Offensive Coordinator
Dec 15, 2003
8,335
1,351
113
The 2011 class was rated pretty high but did not pan out but most at the time were very happy with that class. Gangwish was recruited to that class also but recruited as a walkon - I think the issue I have is that somehow being a walkon means you are less talented - I disagree. There were 11 walkons taken that year one rose to the top - its supposed to work that way and gives us an advantage having walkons - yes our talent level was down and the 2011 class did not pan out - that is why you recruit walkons in the first place

So I agree talent level alone meant we should have had a down year - what I disagree with is having a losing season - The losing season was not due to talent level

PS. please show me where " I called for his head"
I'm guessing here as I don't want to go back and look, but probably sometime after the Purdue game
 

Antwill

Blackshirt
Dec 18, 2004
3,274
1,690
113
Most telling paragraph for me:

"Trust between Nebraska’s roster and its new staff was slow to develop, as many players accustomed to the previous regime pushed back against a change in direction; Riley called the development of a new bond “our biggest hurdle.”

I know there was a lot of talk of the dissention on the team due to loyalties to the previous staff, but for someone as professional and positive as Riley to identify it as "our biggest hurdle" is very telling to me.

Add to that the fact that these coaches didn't lose the team despite the tough losses and poor record, and I think that gives you an idea of this coaching staff's ability to lead young men.

Yes, there were some head scratching coaching moments, but I think good things are to come once they get in some better talent and get rid of some of the negative players from the previous regime.
 

dinglefritz

College Football Hall of Fame
Jan 14, 2011
23,863
17,485
113
use the ignore feature if it bothers you so much - I really do not want to be responsible for you clogging an artery and having a heart attack

What I said was - Look you guys are correct our talent level was down and yes it the previous staff's lazy approach to recruiting that caused

Why dont you take your pompous attitude and actually read what I said before you cut and paste a response
I read what you posted including the part where you launched in to the same crap you've posted for the past 4 months. New day. Same crap. Day after day. Week after week. Month after month. Same negative crap.
 

bigboxes

College Football Hall of Fame
Sep 4, 2004
22,785
8,039
113
Arlington, TX
I read what you posted including the part where you launched in to the same crap you've posted for the past 4 months. New day. Same crap. Day after day. Week after week. Month after month. Same negative crap.
Sorry SR. Regurgitating your contempt for the coaching staff for the entire year is not discourse. It's tiresome. So, yeah, expect to be shouted down for negative posting. It's year one. Gripe here and there, as we all do, but creating the same thread day after day, week after week, month after month... it gets very old. You said your opinion on the coaching staff. Now, let it rest on that. Barring total collapse, MR will get another 2-3 years minimum.
 

SnohomishRed

Offensive Coordinator
Jan 31, 2005
8,484
2,350
113
Snohomish
Sorry SR. Regurgitating your contempt for the coaching staff for the entire year is not discourse. It's tiresome. So, yeah, expect to be shouted down for negative posting. It's year one. Gripe here and there, as we all do, but creating the same thread day after day, week after week, month after month... it gets very old. You said your opinion on the coaching staff. Now, let it rest on that. Barring total collapse, MR will get another 2-3 years minimum.
I understand I have been vocal about whether or not I liked the hire and their performance so far - I find myself in strange spot - I have generally over the years defended whatever the coaching staff of the day was doing. I also wondered how some posters could continually be what I deemed negative. Now I see that most likely they were just pushing back against insults. When someone does not agree with the another view then all to often it becomes who can hurl the most insults wins. That entrenches posters into their view and makes things either one way or another when in reality that is not how things are. For example:

* One side believes in Riley ( or wants to believe) so now it becomes the players fault or the overall talent fault - when in reality it is some of both

* If you do not support Riley you are still supporting BO - I puzzle over this one
* If you did support Bo there is no way you can support Riley

Insults shape the opinions on this board. In this thread for example I responded back when it was clear the narrative was going to the reasoning " We lost because no talent and Walkons suck" I disagree with that talent was lacking but it still was not the reason in my opinion we had a losing record.

I did not bring up this line of thought others did - I just expressed my opinion. I have not started ever( to my recollection) a thread that said Riley must go - of course he will get a fair shot here.

If this board is just for rah rah only and discussion ( rational) is not allowed let me know
 

SilentCommit

Sophomore
Jun 19, 2013
1,145
686
113
I understand I have been vocal about whether or not I liked the hire and their performance so far - I find myself in strange spot - I have generally over the years defended whatever the coaching staff of the day was doing. I also wondered how some posters could continually be what I deemed negative. Now I see that most likely they were just pushing back against insults. When someone does not agree with the another view then all to often it becomes who can hurl the most insults wins. That entrenches posters into their view and makes things either one way or another when in reality that is not how things are. For example:

* One side believes in Riley ( or wants to believe) so now it becomes the players fault or the overall talent fault - when in reality it is some of both

* If you do not support Riley you are still supporting BO - I puzzle over this one
* If you did support Bo there is no way you can support Riley

Insults shape the opinions on this board. In this thread for example I responded back when it was clear the narrative was going to the reasoning " We lost because no talent and Walkons suck" I disagree with that talent was lacking but it still was not the reason in my opinion we had a losing record.

I did not bring up this line of thought others did - I just expressed my opinion. I have not started ever( to my recollection) a thread that said Riley must go - of course he will get a fair shot here.

If this board is just for rah rah only and discussion ( rational) is not allowed let me know
I bet we all feel isolated in our opinions at times on this board. I know I do. What's happening is that we become entrenched in our opinions, and end up repeating the same bullet points to each other. Eventually that becomes an unproductive palaver, and we grow tired of hearing the opposite side's arguments. At the end of the day it's all good, as we all want the team to succeed.

The hard part for me, as of late, is my own doubt. I support Riley and staff, and I'm hopeful for the future. Depending on what day of the week it is, however, I'm not sure if the future looks bright or if it looks like the end of days.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SnohomishRed

c2o

Defensive Coordinator
Aug 28, 2009
7,518
4,877
113
Uptown
A new study says that listening to negative people can make you dumb.
Something to do with neurons and some shit I don't understand.
It doesn't matter if you read it or expierence it.
Your brain will process it the same.

I believe some of you have assaulted my intelligiance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dinglefritz

Lincoln100

Defensive Coordinator
Jun 16, 2010
7,154
3,858
113
The 2011 class was rated pretty high but did not pan out but most at the time were very happy with that class. Gangwish was recruited to that class also but recruited as a walkon - I think the issue I have is that somehow being a walkon means you are less talented - I disagree. There were 11 walkons taken that year one rose to the top - its supposed to work that way and gives us an advantage having walkons - yes our talent level was down and the 2011 class did not pan out - that is why you recruit walkons in the first place

So I agree talent level alone meant we should have had a down year - what I disagree with is having a losing season - The losing season was not due to talent level

PS. please show me where " I called for his head"
If you don't think every single one of the losses had something to do with talent level, then there is no hope for you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dinglefritz