Skutts' Matt Turman and all Nebraska coaches should be brought in to make Nebraska what it once was.It is a special place for those that want to play at Nebraska. It aint Oregon Florida Alabamas et al.Recruits wont see the beautiful sunset babes weather etc,They will be kids that WANT to play and win and have the toughness and drive to do so.Until Nebraska goes back to its roots this will get WORSE.Does Riley look like a NEbraska coach on the sideline?He looks befuddeled old and not caring Nebraska needs to bring in kids with inner drive ones that didn't get recruited to Ohio State USC etc. AND BRING BACK THE OPTION..
Matt Turman
- Thread starter HuskerMB
- Start date
Good post I'm not totally sold on going back to the option but I would like to see some of it implemented.
I bet he would if you gave him all the sauce he could handle and a partnership in your business!
Truth spoken.. People think it can't work but they're wrong. TO put in place a system that was tailored for N. It not only embodied the recipe for success in a state with little talent but also tapped into the states culture creating a mind state of hard work and reward. This is what made me a fan of N and I'm from Texas. I've said it many times that until N returns to its roots I don't see a return to glory. Bad thing is teams like Bama, LSU, OSU, Stanford and other physical teams are using N blueprint for success. Why can't Nebraska see this?
Love the sentiment. On the other hand, not sure that Gill, Rozier, Fryar etc "didn't get recruited" by any other name programs.
The choice isn't between power and option. They go together with play action as the holy trinity of TO's offense. TO's offense became transcendent when all these elements were present along with attacking defense and aggressive special teams. The synergy of getting the ball back quickly in good field position so the pounding could resume was the ultimate formula.
I had a friend who was a coach in Oklahoma high school. He said the difference between Fairbanks/Switzer's teams and us is that we were much more power oriented even as we evolved to option.
I had a friend who was a coach in Oklahoma high school. He said the difference between Fairbanks/Switzer's teams and us is that we were much more power oriented even as we evolved to option.
The truth is it's better to admit a mistake now than later.Does anyone in their heart of hearts after watching this season and especially Purdue,think that this coaching staff can turn this around even in several years? It is apparent and much smarter posters have said it Eichorst(or however you spell it) Is not the right football administrator and a change should be made there as well.
I don't have enough stock to issue. But it is a thought.I bet he would if you gave him all the sauce he could handle and a partnership in your business!
The key question is does anyone in their heart of hearts think Perlman or eichorst is going to make a change by 30 June?
The answer should be no which means even if you were hardcore staff change no compromise you are looking at shopping next year the earliest
Do you see any way that happens this offseason? I don't think anyone disagrees with that sentiment
No, Eichorst won't have Perlman to fall back on when he is gone and that is the only reason he was hired because of his lawyer background.
Personally I could really care less what offense we run, we need to recruit playmakers and speed on defense. If you score 45 on Purdue you should win that game. Maybe their QB can run a 4.4 40, but if not then that shows how slow our D is that they had 50+ yards to run him down and couldn't do it.
He is career NFL. They don't recruit in the NFL.
Career history
As Player
As Coach
- San Francisco 49ers (1997–2002)
- Detroit Lions (2003–2005)
- Oakland Raiders (2006–2008)
- San Francisco 49ers (2009–present)
The answer is no, and whoever mentioned bringing in high school coaches to take over is just plain silly.
I must have missed all the national titles Georgia Tech has won since Paul Johnson took over. He is the best option coach in the country and he doesn't win more than 8-9 games per year. It doesn't work there and it won't work here any more. We just fired a coach that was winning that many games.
You guys are so full of it. First off, Osborne ran a pro style offense and won with it. Second, even OU doesn't run the wishbone any longer. Things change. This team is a mess and most of it falls on Pelini.
I know you Bo-ners will never publicly admit it, but the damage to our reputation, our depth and teaching fundamentals was all on the last staff. Year ONE folks. Riley gets time to clean up Bo's mess whether you like it or not.
Silly threads like this one will not change a thing. MR will be here another year minimum, most likely 3-4 years.
I know you Bo-ners will never publicly admit it, but the damage to our reputation, our depth and teaching fundamentals was all on the last staff. Year ONE folks. Riley gets time to clean up Bo's mess whether you like it or not.
Silly threads like this one will not change a thing. MR will be here another year minimum, most likely 3-4 years.
Osborne's offense was pro style but its identity was run heavy. It evolved over time to become more diverse but It was always run first with power, counter and option sprinkled in to set up the play action pass. Everything looked like a run even the passing plays. MR offense is pass heavy with the run sprinkled in which means you need a pass first QB. N doesn't have one and you can't lean on a running game that isn't practiced and rep enough..
Ummm.... Nebraska needs to use the blueprint that Alabama, LSU, and OSU are using... It's called recruiting elite talent.
Who is saying that he's going to get 3-4 years irrespective of performance? If he gets 5 wins and misses a bowl next year, he's likely gone.
LMAO Matt Turman? are you kidding me? The guy is a very average high school coach, who gets by on having more talent than everyone else. If kids didn't want to play for Nebraska they wouldn't sign to play for Nebraska. Nebraska needs elite players to compete and you're delusional if you think we can get by with lesser talent just because of the option. Solich ran the option and Texas and OU started to pass us by towards the end of his tenure, why? They had better players than us because Frank couldn't recruit. A good salesmen can sell ice to an eskimo, if we can recruit we'll be just fine. I'll put more chalk into how Riley recruits for a couple of years than the product on the field because Bo's recruits have mediocre talent and horrible drive/want to.
Good luck with that.. N will never recruit on that level year in and out.. Just not going to happen unless they hire a elite coach..
No clue what to take from this other than "I wish it was 1995 again."
It's not. Osborne is retired and has been for several years now. We aren't going to "rah rah" our way back to relevance again but I do think Riley knows the game of football and will get the team there. My biggest fear is the lack of a tenacious defense. No news here - everyone knows this, but I don't get what Skutts' Matt Turnman or "all Nebraska coaches" have to do with any of this.
Also, the option is next to impossible to recruit to these days. A) all the best athletes don't want to play an option offense and b) back in the day, highschools ran the option, so we could get guys who were playing this style. Now high school teams are playing spread attacks.
I'm not saying the system itself wouldn't work, but I'm saying that in practice, it's hard to because of what I mentioned before.
Smh. Why does playing physical football have to be" I want the glory days back" The recipe for success has not changed as much as you new wave people think it has. Just look at your last 10 NC's.. It's basically been a physical running team with a nasty defense that has taken the trophy home. Why people are so offended by what won N 5 titles is beyond me. Football will remain unchanged in the fact that the team that's blocks and tackles the best will win. If that's 95 its that year in Bama, LSU and OSU right now.. Gtfoh with the hate because we want physical play..
Because 98% of threads that talk about a strong running game are connected within two sentences to some rant about sending someone from the glory days down to Lincoln until its fixed. Be it Alberts, Rimington, Frost, Turman, Rathman, or the ghost of Bob Devaney.
BTW I'm all for your points on the blueprint, just pointing out that rarely are the topics decoupled on the board.
This would mean we have to alter our approach in recruiting. As long as we get away with it like they do,fine
Similar threads
