Riley seems very optimistic

[timnsun]

Nothing at all.
I'm saying the "first time since 97!" thing is empty, because of Iowa. Iowa was a game we were supposed to win, regardless of what the gamblers said. Am I wrong? Were you not expecting to win that game? Seriously? If not you better watch who you say is and is not a true fan.

I was worried about that game. Limping Tommy, Ryker in a cast, who wouldn't be (besides you)? I thought we could win, but obviously, after the fact, the defense we played was bad.

But to answer your question, knowing our status at QB, I can't say I was overly confident about winning that game. Not sure if you recall, the same iowa team beat Michigan 2 weeks earlier? Yeah, they aren't as bad as you are making them out to be.

 

[huskerfan1414]

I was worried about that game. Limping Tommy, Ryker in a cast, who wouldn't be? I thought we could win, but obviously, after the fact, the defense we played was bad.

But to answer your question, knowing our status at QB, I can't say I was overly confident about winning that game. Not sure if you recall, the same iowa team beat Michigan 2 weeks earlier? Yeah, they aren't as bad as you are making them out to be.

I know we disagree a lot so what I'm about to say probably won't have much effect.
But I find your entire mindset and expectations extremely disappointing.

But other than that, at the very least, I hope I was able to prove in my above post why I am not too excited about breaking the streak and don't think it's necessarily something that should be celebrated. I'd hope most Husker fans expect us to be favored against and beat 7-4 Iowa, even if it is on the road, and even if they had one good win on the season to counter their horrible losses.

 

[timnsun]

I know we disagree a lot so what I'm about to say probably won't have much effect.
But I find your entire mindset and expectations extremely disappointing.

But other than that, at the very least, I hope I was able to prove in my above post why I am not too excited about breaking the streak and don't think it's necessarily something that should be celebrated. I'd hope most Husker fans expect us to be favored against and beat 7-4 Iowa, even if it is on the road, and even if they had one good win on the season to counter their horrible losses.

It's not so much about should we, as Nebraska, beat Iowa; normally, the answer is going to be absolutely. If Tommy doesn't injure his hamstring on his last play against Minnesota, then I would have said unequivocally, yes, I believe we will beat Iowa.

It is foolishness, IMO, to say that we should beat Iowa with our top 2 QBs injured and our 3rd stringer a converted WR, but I guess you are right. We should never concede a loss to Iowa under any circumstances.

 

[timnsun]

I know we disagree a lot so what I'm about to say probably won't have much effect.
But I find your entire mindset and expectations extremely disappointing.

But other than that, at the very least, I hope I was able to prove in my above post why I am not too excited about breaking the streak and don't think it's necessarily something that should be celebrated. I'd hope most Husker fans expect us to be favored against and beat 7-4 Iowa, even if it is on the road, and even if they had one good win on the season to counter their horrible losses.

And I do get the point you are making... Our schedule wasn't exactly murderer's row. Less celebrating about 9-3, especially considering 2 of the 3 losses were in blowout fashion. Yes, this is valid, and extremely frustrating. We need to get a handle on it, the coaches need to make sure this doesn't happen again.

Just point out the last time we beat all the patsies prior to this year and I will be quiet.

 

[huskerfan1414]

It's not so much about should we, as Nebraska, beat Iowa; normally, the answer is going to be absolutely. If Tommy doesn't injure his hamstring on his last play against Minnesota, then I would have said unequivocally, yes, I believe we will beat Iowa.

It is foolishness, IMO, to say that we should beat Iowa with our top 2 QBs injured and our 3rd stringer a converted WR, but I guess you are right. We should never concede a loss to Iowa under any circumstances.

Every team has injuries, including Iowa the week we played them. And this is more than just an Iowa thing. Iowa had a good win, yes. But overall they were a mediocre football team. At 9-2 with something to play for we should expect to win.
If we lose a close one it is not as hard to swallow as the blowout. But even losing a close one, I would still say, that breaking the streak mentioned this season was not that big of a deal. That is the main thing being argued.
When looking at "Games you are supposed to win", I include Iowa.

 

[timnsun]

Every team has injuries, including Iowa the week we played them. And this is more than just an Iowa thing. Iowa had a good win, yes. But overall they were a mediocre football team. At 9-2 with something to play for we should expect to win.
If we lose a close one it is not as hard to swallow as the blowout. But even losing a close one, I would still say, that breaking the streak mentioned this season was not that big of a deal. That is the main thing being argued.
When looking at "Games you are supposed to win", I include Iowa.

But not everybody has Ohio State like injuries where their top 2 QBs are down (Most will agree Tommy shouldn't have played). I would be willing to bet that if Iowa was down their top 2 QBs, the outcome of the game would have been different. QB is the one area that can be the hardest to replace, and unfortunately, it has been magnified at Nebraska due to a lack of depth.

 

[huskerfan1414]

And I do get the point you are making... Our schedule wasn't exactly murderer's row. Less celebrating about 9-3, especially considering 2 of the 3 losses were in blowout fashion. Yes, this is valid, and extremely frustrating. We need to get a handle on it, the coaches need to make sure this doesn't happen again.

Just point out the last time we beat all the patsies prior to this year and I will be quiet.

As I said above, I am glad we won the 9 games we did, and it is certainly better than the previous year when we lost some of those games. It's also better than say the Iowa State loss awhile ago.
But this argument was about breaking the streak. I think this year was particularly easy to break the streak, especially since in most years we WOULD HAVE BEEN favored against 7-4 Iowa, and losing to them (like we did this year) would have therefore prevented this team from breaking the streak. Is this starting to make sense? In 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2007, 2010, 2014, 2015 etc. we were favored against, and lost to, teams that were much better than the 9 teams we were favored to beat this year. Does that make sense?
(Notice: I didn't look at schedules to find exact years, but I hope you get my drift)

 

[huskerfan1414]

But not everybody has Ohio State like injuries where their top 2 QBs are down (Most will agree Tommy shouldn't have played). I would be willing to bet that if Iowa was down their top 2 QBs, the outcome of the game would have been different. QB is the one area that can be the hardest to replace, and unfortunately, it has been magnified at Nebraska due to a lack of depth.

For your average team/quarterback situation you'd be right.
But if I'm not mistaken, Tommy has taken the blame for most of the poor play/losses on this forum. Am I wrong about that?
Our QBs were not strong to begin with. I expect beat 7-4 Iowa, Period. I'll even bet Mike Riley expected to beat 7-4 Iowa. Or do you think he's rationalizing it like you? If he is, he isn't the guy for the job. (I doubt he's rationalizing, if he's the competitor everyone thinks he is).
While we should have scored more than 10, giving up 40 aint Tommy's fault. You could say the defense would have played better if we had a better offense, but I'll counter that by saying the offense would have played better with a better defense.

 

[Huskerk19]

Riley will be done in two years. He will win 6y or 7 games next year and maybe the year after. He tells you what you want to hear and our fan base believes it. A good coach would of won 11 games this year. We won 9 but didn't dominate in those wins over a bunch of nobodys. Just goes to show it is a game coaches play.

I look at it like this, no one in power gives a hoot about my opinion when they hire a coach for any particular sport. When a new one is hired and the system is changed we all know it takes time to get the system implemented and the players necessary to make it run. I expect we will be in the 8 plus win category the next couple years and should be back to legitimate conference challenger by year 5. Riley gets my support just like Bo did until that time. Of course it does not matter diddle what you or I think because no one in power is going to ask either of us what we think if he makes it or not lol! Just as well chill and enjoy the ride because it's only a game and life is to short to take it any other way.

 

[Truehuskerfan]

As I said above, I am glad we won the 9 games we did, and it is certainly better than the previous year when we lost some of those games. It's also better than say the Iowa State loss awhile ago.
But this argument was about breaking the streak. I think this year was particularly easy to break the streak, especially since in most years we WOULD HAVE BEEN favored against 7-4 Iowa, and losing to them (like we did this year) would have therefore prevented this team from breaking the streak. Is this starting to make sense? In 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2007, 2010, 2014, 2015 etc. we were favored against, and lost to, teams that were much better than the 9 teams we were favored to beat this year. Does that make sense?
(Notice: I didn't look at schedules to find exact years, but I hope you get my drift)

Guess what-I did look at those schedules. Here's the list of teams we lost to in every year from 1998-2015 that we were favored against and their final records:

2015: BYU(9-4), Illinois(5-7), Northwestern(10-3), Purdue(2-10)
2014: Minnesota(8-5)
2013: UCLA(10-3), Minnesota(8-5), Iowa(8-5)
2012: UCLA(9-5), Wisconsin(8-6) Big Ten CCG
2011: Northwestern(6-7)
2010: Texas(5-7), Texas A&M(9-4), Washington(7-6) (bowl game)
2009: Texas Tech(9-4), Iowa State(7-6)
2008: Virginia Tech(10-4) Western Michigan (9-4) and Kansas (8-5)
2007: Oklahoma State(7-6), Texas A&M(7-6)
2006: Oklahoma State(7-6)
2005: Missouri(7-5)
2004: Southern Mississippi(7-5), Iowa State(7-5), Colorado(8-5)
2003: Missouri(8-5)
2002: Penn State(9-4), Iowa State(7-7), Oklahoma State(8-5), Colorado(9-5), Ole Miss(7-6)
2001: Colorado(10-3) Oklahoma(11-2) best win
2000: Oklahoma(13-0), Kansas State(11-3) Notre Dame (9-3) and Iowa State (9-3) best win.
1999: Texas(9-5)
1998: Texas A&M(11-3), Texas(9-3), Arizona(12-1). Kansas State(11-2) best win

In only 4 of those years-1998,2000,2001 and 2008 did we lose to a team that we were favored against that was better than any of the teams we were favored against and beat this year. I did not include 1999 in that list because Wyoming and Minnesota can both equal Texas's record from that year. In the 4 years that we lost to a team that we were favored against that had a better record than any of the teams we were favored against and beat this year, I gave the record of the best team we beat that year. In 1998 and 2001, we beat teams with better records than any of the teams we beat this year. In 2000, we beat two teams with records marginally better than any of the teams we beat this year and in 2008 we beat two teams with roughly the same records as the best teams we beat this year.

So your contention above that "In 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2007, 2010, 2014, 2015 etc. we were favored against, and lost to, teams that were much better than the 9 teams we were favored to beat this year" is wrong in most of the cases. Next time, actually check the record before you make a statement that is provably wrong.

So if what we did this year is so easy, why did we lose to a 7-7 Iowa State team in 2002? Or an 8-5 Missouri team in 2003? Or a 7-5 Iowa State or Southern Mississippi team in 2004? Or a 7-5 Missouri team in 2005? Or a 7-6 Oklahoma State team in 2006? Or 7-6 Oklahoma State and Texas A&M teams in 2007? Or a 7-6 Iowa State team in 2009? Or a 5-7 Texas team in 2010? Or a 6-7 Northwestern team in 2011? Or get blown out by an 8-6 Wisconsin team in the 2012 B1G CCG that we beat earlier in the year? Or get beat by 8-5 Iowa and Minnesota teams in 2013? Or lose to an 8-5 Minnesota team in 2014? That is 12 years I listed where we lost to at least one team that we were favored against with an equal or worse record than any of the teams we beat this year.

 

[huskerfan1414]

Guess what-I did look at those schedules. Here's the list of teams we lost to in every year from 1998-2015 that we were favored against and their final records:

2015: BYU(9-4), Illinois(5-7), Northwestern(10-3), Purdue(2-10)
2014: Minnesota(8-5)
2013: UCLA(10-3), Minnesota(8-5), Iowa(8-5)
2012: UCLA(9-5), Wisconsin(8-6) Big Ten CCG
2011: Northwestern(6-7)
2010: Texas(5-7), Texas A&M(9-4), Washington(7-6) (bowl game)
2009: Texas Tech(9-4), Iowa State(7-6)
2008: Virginia Tech(10-4) Western Michigan (9-4) and Kansas (8-5)
2007: Oklahoma State(7-6), Texas A&M(7-6)
2006: Oklahoma State(7-6)
2005: Missouri(7-5)
2004: Southern Mississippi(7-5), Iowa State(7-5), Colorado(8-5)
2003: Missouri(8-5)
2002: Penn State(9-4), Iowa State(7-7), Oklahoma State(8-5), Colorado(9-5), Ole Miss(7-6)
2001: Colorado(10-3) Oklahoma(11-2) best win
2000: Oklahoma(13-0), Kansas State(11-3) Notre Dame (9-3) and Iowa State (9-3) best win.
1999: Texas(9-5)
1998: Texas A&M(11-3), Texas(9-3), Arizona(12-1). Kansas State(11-2) best win

In only 4 of those years-1998,2000,2001 and 2008 did we lose to a team that we were favored against that was better than any of the teams we were favored against and beat this year. .

We are obviously not looking at the same list. I have no idea how you came to this conclusion, but it looks like we aren't going to agree.
We're going to disagree if this is how biased you're going to be, no matter what.
Here's the difference between me and you right now.
You are celebrating the fact that we weren't favored against Iowa. Really, that's what it comes down to. Congrats. Because if we had been good enough to be favored against 7-4 Iowa, which we weren't, we would not have broken the streak.
Sorry if I can't get excited about breaking a streak that should have an asterix next to it in the first place.
You must not think Iowa is a team we should have beaten. I do, because I actually have standards, and the goal posts don't move over here. You Rose-colored-glasses-wearing Riley apologists obviously learned NOTHING from the "9 wins!" Pelini crowd....

 

[Truehuskerfan]

We are obviously not looking at the same list. I have no idea how you came to this conclusion, but it looks like we aren't going to agree.

What in my list is wrong? Those are the teams we lost to that we were favored against in the years provided and their final records. What "list" are you looking at? There's nothing biased about what I wrote-it's facts. I'm sorry if the facts don't back up what you want them to say, but those are the facts.

 

[huskerfan1414]

So if what we did this year is so easy, why did we lose to a 7-7 Iowa State team in 2002? Or an 8-5 Missouri team in 2003? Or a 7-5 Iowa State or Southern Mississippi team in 2004? Or a 7-5 Missouri team in 2005? Or a 7-6 Oklahoma State team in 2006? Or 7-6 Oklahoma State and Texas A&M teams in 2007? Or a 7-6 Iowa State team in 2009? Or a 5-7 Texas team in 2010? Or a 6-7 Northwestern team in 2011? Or get blown out by an 8-6 Wisconsin team in the 2012 B1G CCG that we beat earlier in the year? Or get beat by 8-5 Iowa and Minnesota teams in 2013? Or lose to an 8-5 Minnesota team in 2014?

First, some of those teams you mention were definitely better than our best win this year...c'mon man.
Secondly, 10 of those years are represented by Bill Callahan and Bo Pelini, so that's why.
Thirdly, I love how you conveniently left off our hideous year in 2015.

 

[huskerfan1414]

What in my list is wrong? Those are the teams we lost to that we were favored against in the years provided and their final records. What "list" are you looking at?

Your list isn't wrong. Your reading of the list is obviously skewed. I said in many of those years we lost to teams who were better than our best win this year, in pointing out our weak schedule of teams we beat. That list obviously proves my statement correct. Obviously.

 

[huskerfan1414]

What in my list is wrong? Those are the teams we lost to that we were favored against in the years provided and their final records. What "list" are you looking at?

Lets just agree to do this.
I'll go have high expectations for the Nebraska football team, just as I did under Callahan and Pelini. Like a true husker fan would.
You can go do your thing where have low expectations for this team and staff, and move the goal posts. You can also celebrate that we weren't favored against 7-4 Iowa this season. Because we obviously aren't going to come to an agreement.
P.S. is it okay if I expect Nebraska to win their bowl game..or should I expect a loss and then if we win it's just a bonus? I don't want to get to ahead of myself here...

 

[Truehuskerfan]

First, some of those teams you mention were definitely better than our best win this year...c'mon man.
Secondly, 10 of those years are represented by Bill Callahan and Bo Pelini, so that's why.
Thirdly, I love how you conveniently left off our hideous year in 2015.

Who? I'm going by records. If you want to try to prove why some of those teams were better than our best win this year despite having a worse record, than go ahead. I didn't need to talk about 2015 to prove to you anything-you already pretty clearly don't think much of Mike Riley. Wins over 8 win teams that we are favored against apparently don't mean anything now, but losses against 7 win teams that we were favored against in past years were perfectly OK I guess.

 

[Truehuskerfan]

Lets just agree to do this.
I'll go have high expectations for the Nebraska football team, just as I did under Callahan and Pelini. Like a true husker fan would.
You can go do your thing where have low expectations for this team and staff, and move the goal posts. You can also celebrate that we weren't favored against 7-4 Iowa this season. Because we obviously aren't going to come to an agreement.
P.S. is it okay if I expect Nebraska to win their bowl game..or should I expect a loss and then if we win it's just a bonus? I don't want to get to ahead of myself here...

There's a difference between having high expectations and refusing to see positives because they don't fit your narrative. I'm sure deep down you want Riley to fail because he wasn't your pick. Of course, you'll use the usual "I don't want him to fail" lie like all of you haters do. Just once I wish you people would have the guts to admit that you want someone to fail instead of always claiming you don't when it's clear by all of your comments that you do.

 

[timnsun]

We are obviously not looking at the same list. I have no idea how you came to this conclusion, but it looks like we aren't going to agree.
We're going to disagree if this is how biased you're going to be, no matter what.
Here's the difference between me and you right now.
You are celebrating the fact that we weren't favored against Iowa. Really, that's what it comes down to. Congrats. Because if we had been good enough to be favored against 7-4 Iowa, which we weren't, we would not have broken the streak.
Sorry if I can't get excited about breaking a streak that should have an asterix next to it in the first place.
You must not think Iowa is a team we should have beaten. I do, because I actually have standards, and the goal posts don't move over here. You Rose-colored-glasses-wearing Riley apologists obviously learned NOTHING from the "9 wins!" Pelini crowd....

This is rich, you calling us rose-colored glasses wearers... who is the one in this thread adamant we should have beaten Iowa no matter who started at QB and what his injury was? Take off the rose colored glasses and you will see more than just vegas picked Iowa to beat us. They finished the year way stronger than we did... I wasn't embarrassed to lose to Iowa this year. The manner in which we lost was embarrassing, but losing to an Iowa team that played their best ball at the end of the season? I'm not embarrassed to lose to them this year. Losses to good teams on the road shouldn't surprise anyone, considering the last 15 years.

Now before you get all twitchy and tell me I have lowered my standards, let me say the losses to Iowa can't continue. I'm not settling for 9-3 regular season. We should be regularly representing the west in CCG, and winning them occasionally as well.

But considering what we had to work with this year, I'll take what we got. And before you remind me that Iowa lost to NDSU, let me remind you that was game two or three... in game 10 they beat undefeated Michigan. Excuse me if I think they are better than you think they are.

 

[huskerfan1414]

There's a difference between having high expectations and refusing to see positives because they don't fit your narrative. I'm sure deep down you want Riley to fail because he wasn't your pick. Of course, you'll use the usual "I don't want him to fail" lie like all of you haters do. Just once I wish you people would have the guts to admit that you want someone to fail instead of always claiming you don't when it's clear by all of your comments that you do.

Just once i wish you thought police wouldnt be so insecure and would hold riley to the same standard as you do everyone else. Believe it or not this team and program are bigger than riley and i want it to do well. Im guessing you also wanted bo out...did it mean you wanted him to fail and lose games? So dumb. You are butthurt when facing reality. I said many times the 9 wins were good, but the streak you mention was empty this season. The fact that you still hold your view of that list is glaring.
Face it, you care more about Riley than you do the team and program. I wanna hear you admit it
Have a Merry Christmas.

 

[huskerfan1414]

This is rich, you calling us rose-colored glasses wearers... who is the one in this thread adamant we should have beaten Iowa no matter who started at QB and what his injury was? Take off the rose colored glasses and you will see more than just vegas picked Iowa to beat us. They finished the year way stronger than we did... I wasn't embarrassed to lose to Iowa this year. The manner in which we lost was embarrassing, but losing to an Iowa team that played their best ball at the end of the season? I'm not embarrassed to lose to them this year. Losses to good teams on the road shouldn't surprise anyone, considering the last 15 years.

Now before you get all twitchy and tell me I have lowered my standards, let me say the losses to Iowa can't continue. I'm not settling for 9-3 regular season. We should be regularly representing the west in CCG, and winning them occasionally as well.

But considering what we had to work with this year, I'll take what we got. And before you remind me that Iowa lost to NDSU, let me remind you that was game two or three... in game 10 they beat undefeated Michigan. Excuse me if I think they are better than you think they are.

Records themselves do not tell the whole story (as we were reminded many times last year and also rightly so when Bo was winning 9) and we got blown out twice including by 7-4 iowa, our best win a minnesota team who beat nobody.
Did I say how bad I thought Iowa was this year? just how good would you say Iowa was? where would you rank them in relation to us?
You say you arent settling, ok ill believe you. Seriously im not being smart, ill believe you have higher standards as you say you do. But if you do i have no idea why you take such offense to me not jumping up and down for joy about breaking this streak by being bad enough to not be favored against iowa.

 

[timnsun]

Records themselves do not tell the whole story (as we were reminded many times last year and also rightly so when Bo was winning 9) and we got blown out twice including by 7-4 iowa, our best win a minnesota team who beat nobody.
Did I say how bad I thought Iowa was this year? just how good would you say Iowa was? where would you rank them in relation to us?
You say you arent settling, ok ill believe you. Seriously im not being smart, ill believe you have higher standards as you say you do. But if you do i have no idea why you take such offense to me not jumping up and down for joy about breaking this streak by being bad enough to not be favored against iowa.

Right about now we are talking past each other I think...

Normally I would like to think we are always going to be favored over Iowa. I expect to be favored over them next year. But when your top 2 stringers at QB are injured, that does change things.

How many on this board were saying we don't stand a chance if Fyfe starts because of Tommy's injury? And that was against Maryland... this team hasn't instilled a lot of confidence in the fans yet. We need to recruit and draft more talent, especially on the lines. We hopefully are going to see better talent at QB (for what the coaches want to run), but the lines need to improve. A lot are saying it will be noticeable next year with the redshirted players... We are seeing if that is happening... if not, these coaches will be gone.

I totally get that every team has injuries. But it sure seems as if other teams have the depth and development to withstand those injuries. It seems like we at Nebraska play that up more than most maybe... but as each year passes, these will be more of an excuse than an explanation. It is the coaches' job to build depth. It seems as if the coaches are trying to do that, but next year will be even more telling if this is indeed the case.

My expectation is to win every game. I hope that in the very near future my faith in believing that will also improve. I hope this doesn't make me bad fan, any more than you... in the end, we both want the same thing.

 

[huskerfan1414]

Right about now we are talking past each other I think...

Normally I would like to think we are always going to be favored over Iowa. I expect to be favored over them next year. But when your top 2 stringers at QB are injured, that does change things.

How many on this board were saying we don't stand a chance if Fyfe starts because of Tommy's injury? And that was against Maryland... this team hasn't instilled a lot of confidence in the fans yet. We need to recruit and draft more talent, especially on the lines. We hopefully are going to see better talent at QB (for what the coaches want to run), but the lines need to improve. A lot are saying it will be noticeable next year with the redshirted players... We are seeing if that is happening... if not, these coaches will be gone.

I totally get that every team has injuries. But it sure seems as if other teams have the depth and development to withstand those injuries. It seems like we at Nebraska play that up more than most maybe... but as each year passes, these will be more of an excuse than an explanation. It is the coaches' job to build depth. It seems as if the coaches are trying to do that, but next year will be even more telling if this is indeed the case.

My expectation is to win every game. I hope that in the very near future my faith in believing that will also improve. I hope this doesn't make me bad fan, any more than you... in the end, we both want the same thing.

I addressed the quarterback thing above. Its funny to me that everyone blames tommy for our losses but when hes hurt its the end of the world. I was not worried about ryker against maryland and frankly i think he could surprise in the bowl game but thats moot.
I think part of building depth is coaching...actual tuteledge, not just recruiting. Practice style, etc. i felt the same under Bo. As would have you.
I think its telling about a teams schedule and performance against a great team when a 9-2 team is the underdog to a 7-4 team that was unranked. If the michigan win was so big why didnt they jump into the rankings at least? Because it was a lucky game. Further, it proves that iowas one big win was more big ins than we had on our schedule. None. Why this matters is because of my initial argument that started this whole thing, as the only reason the streak ended was because we werent favored against a 7-4 team like we should have been. Thats the argument, the streak breaking was hollow.
Further, we didnt win all the games we should have, i dont care whos favored by oddsmakers. (Already noted that you disagree that we should have beat iowa because of qb injury).
Lets just go win the damn bowl game and let tennessee fans hash it out.
Ive not called for rileys head, btw. I do think we need to change philosophy, hes capable of that.

 

[B1G RED RULES]

This is rich, you calling us rose-colored glasses wearers... who is the one in this thread adamant we should have beaten Iowa no matter who started at QB and what his injury was? Take off the rose colored glasses and you will see more than just vegas picked Iowa to beat us. They finished the year way stronger than we did... I wasn't embarrassed to lose to Iowa this year. The manner in which we lost was embarrassing, but losing to an Iowa team that played their best ball at the end of the season? I'm not embarrassed to lose to them this year. Losses to good teams on the road shouldn't surprise anyone, considering the last 15 years.

Now before you get all twitchy and tell me I have lowered my standards, let me say the losses to Iowa can't continue. I'm not settling for 9-3 regular season. We should be regularly representing the west in CCG, and winning them occasionally as well.

But considering what we had to work with this year, I'll take what we got. And before you remind me that Iowa lost to NDSU, let me remind you that was game two or three... in game 10 they beat undefeated Michigan. Excuse me if I think they are better than you think they are.

I realize that Iowa beat Michigan this year. Do you think there was any chance that Michigan was overlooking Iowa (seriously - what had they really done up to that point)? Michigan had destroyed most teams all year and had one key game left - and it wasn't Iowa. There was so much respect for Iowa after their pummeling of us that they did not make the top 25 of the championship poll - as we did not either. Sorry that I cannot feel good about a team the playoff committee didn't feel represented the 25 best programs at the end of the year beating the piss out of us.

 

[dinglefritz]

I realize that Iowa beat Michigan this year. Do you think there was any chance that Michigan was overlooking Iowa (seriously - what had they really done up to that point)? Michigan had destroyed most teams all year and had one key game left - and it wasn't Iowa. There was so much respect for Iowa after their pummeling of us that they did not make the top 25 of the championship poll - as we did not either. Sorry that I cannot feel good about a team the playoff committee didn't feel represented the 25 best programs at the end of the year beating the piss out of us.

Anybody that thought we were beating Iowa with a one legged TA and a one armed RF at QB was delusional. Secondly, Iowa got healthy at the end of the season and their O line play got significantly better as that happened. Teams don't stay stagnant throughout the year and at the end of the year, Iowa was just plain better than us with a crippled TA.

 

[cecilB]

Why does the fact that Armstrong was playing with a torn hammy and Fyfe played with a broken wrist not factor into the Iowa loss at all for some people.

I think it does from a final score perspective. Maybe not.

However, it's not like we were the only team banged up in that game. I'm sure the Iowa staff was quaking in their boots at the thought of facing Ryker, and come to think of it, after the two prior years I'm not so sure a healthy Tommie enacted much fear either. Sure they would have had a healthy dose of respect for his off-script plays and letting him out of the pocket....but really guys, think back to 7 of the 8 quarters of TA vs Iowa before the 4 quarters this year.

End of the year Iowa>end of the year Nebraska. Early and mid part...objectively a draw, maybe slight edge to Nebraska

 

[cecilB]

Secondly, Iowa got healthy at the end of the season and their O line play got significantly better as that happened. Teams don't stay stagnant throughout the year and at the end of the year, Iowa was just plain better than us with a crippled TA.

No they didn't. They were down to their 4th corner, back up saftey w/2 starts over a 5 year career, Receivers-nope, TE- nope kittle played maybe a 1/4 of the plays, O-Line 7th different starting lineup of the year against us, DT - nope, QB-nope(but healthier than TA). As units, Iowa was health at LB, DE and RB.

Yes their Oline was coached up and played really well down the stretch.... and I agree, teams don't stay stagnant. Too many don't realize this

 

[Tuco Salamanca]

I think it does from a final score perspective. Maybe not.

However, it's not like we were the only team banged up in that game. I'm sure the Iowa staff was quaking in their boots at the thought of facing Ryker, and come to think of it, after the two prior years I'm not so sure a healthy Tommie enacted much fear either. Sure they would have had a healthy dose of respect for his off-script plays and letting him out of the pocket....but really guys, think back to 7 of the 8 quarters of TA vs Iowa before the 4 quarters this year.

End of the year Iowa>end of the year Nebraska. Early and mid part...objectively a draw, maybe slight edge to Nebraska

I don't care what he did against Iowa in years past that isn't the point. The fact that is that if you took Bethhard's ability to throw and made him strictly a runner Iowa would struggle to win.

If Bethard's back up had a broken wrist and was unable to take a snap under center, and the 3rd option was to move McCarron to QB, I seriously doubt Iowa wins the game. But whatever.

 

[B1G RED RULES]

No they didn't. They were down to their 4th corner, back up saftey w/2 starts over a 5 year career, Receivers-nope, TE- nope kittle played maybe a 1/4 of the plays, O-Line 7th different starting lineup of the year against us, DT - nope, QB-nope(but healthier than TA). As units, Iowa was health at LB, DE and RB.

Yes their Oline was coached up and played really well down the stretch.... and I agree, teams don't stay stagnant. Too many don't realize this

The injury excuse always makes me smile. You're exactly correct – Iowa was injured and playing reserves in many positions. In the area of the stadium I was sitting in pre-game, every Iowa fan wanted Tommy Armstrong to play. His nickname was Tommy Armpunt and he had zero respect from Iowa fans. When his first pass went directly to an Iowa player – who dropped it fortunately – they were laughing their asses off. Iowa fans kept telling me their biggest fear against Nebraska was their offense – who had not been impressive all year, but ended up having a career day against us. During the third quarter, the fans genuinely had pity for me and the other Nebraska fans in the area. We had discussions if any coaches since Osborne had won a conference championship, had a top 10 final ranking, etc. etc. Embarrassingly, we discussed how it happened nearly 15 years ago (no – I did not embarrass myself with a ridiculous comment about a national championship two decades ago). Walking out of the stadium, I received many pats on the back telling me to keep my head up - we had a better year than last year. I'm sure none of this has to do with my bitterness over being humiliated by Iowa.

 

[B1G RED RULES]

I don't care what he did against Iowa in years past that isn't the point. The fact that is that if you took Bethhard's ability to throw and made him strictly a runner Iowa would struggle to win.

If Bethard's back up had a broken wrist and was unable to take a snap under center, and the 3rd option was to move McCarron to QB, I seriously doubt Iowa wins the game. But whatever.

You do realize that Bethard was banged up a decent portion of the season and did not have near the year he had the previous season. But whatever.

 

[brnred58]

I think the QB play can completely change games though, especially for running the ball.

If our QB consistently hits open receievers and sometimes covered receiveros, the defense will back off from stacking the box, which will improve our chances of gaining yards on the ground.

That can be as simple as increasing the passing completion % from 54-59% up to 60-65%. Especially if they can keep from dropping below the 60% bar in every game. Hell, could you imagine what would happen if our QB averaged 68% for the season?

TA ran the ball very well and was only so-so in the passing game. He had some great games passing, but mostly not.

One way to look at it is that his running ability trumped his passing, therefore defenses knew they could stack the box more often than not and play one-on-one coverage and be successful.

Starting next year, if our QBs can complete 60%+, the defenses (even the good ones) will be less likely to stack the box, thus opening up the running game.

Better QB play in the passing game makes me more optimistic for sure.

Injuries on the o-line,lackluster running game,losing Carter for some games and untimely injuries at wide receiver plus T.A with a couple of bad reads = loses

 

[brnred58]

The injury excuse always makes me smile. You're exactly correct – Iowa was injured and playing reserves in many positions. In the area of the stadium I was sitting in pre-game, every Iowa fan wanted Tommy Armstrong to play. His nickname was Tommy Armpunt and he had zero respect from Iowa fans. When his first pass went directly to an Iowa player – who dropped it fortunately – they were laughing their asses off. Iowa fans kept telling me their biggest fear against Nebraska was their offense – who had not been impressive all year, but ended up having a career day against us. During the third quarter, the fans genuinely had pity for me and the other Nebraska fans in the area. We had discussions if any coaches since Osborne had won a conference championship, had a top 10 final ranking, etc. etc. Embarrassingly, we discussed how it happened nearly 15 years ago (no – I did not embarrass myself with a ridiculous comment about a national championship two decades ago). Walking out of the stadium, I received many pats on the back telling me to keep my head up - we had a better year than last year. I'm sure none of this has to do with my bitterness over being humiliated by Iowa.

Did they had the injuries on the o-line?

 

[Tuco Salamanca]

Did they had the injuries on the o-line?

Of course they did. Kirk Ferentz pulled 5 guys out of the stands for the game.

Mr No Excuse guy is the best. He always has the answers after the game on how he would have done it. Can always tell you how you should have recruited two years ago.

Bethard was banged up most of the year does not equal playing on a torn hammy and a backup with a broken wrist.

 

[timnsun]

Of course they did. Kirk Ferentz pulled 5 guys out of the stands for the game.

Mr No Excuse guy is the best. He always has the answers after the game on how he would have done it. Can always tell you how you should have recruited two years ago.

Bethard was banged up most of the year does not equal playing on a torn hammy and a backup with a broken wrist.

Couldn't like this anymore… Absolutely spot on!

They act as if an injury is an injury, no matter who it happens too. Who cares that it was Armstrong and it happened to be something that hampered his ability to run…

Yes Beathard was best up a bit too… But was he able to pass effectively against us? Absolutely. The issue isn't just injuries... what do you have behind those injured players?

Will someone tell me how we were supposed to beat Iowa with an injured Tommy and Ryker?

If you want to complain about how our defense played, I can't dispute that they had their worst game of the season, easily. But please tell me how we were to score with our offense?

 

[steelclaw]

Riley will be done in two years. He will win 6y or 7 games next year and maybe the year after. He tells you what you want to hear and our fan base believes it. A good coach would of won 11 games this year. We won 9 but didn't dominate in those wins over a bunch of nobodys. Just goes to show it is a game coaches play.

Lmao 11 games with this roster. The most delusional thing I've ever read on this board. Pathetic.

 

[TarheelHuskerFan]

Ohio State won a national championship with a third string QB. We just don't have the depth yet to be able to continue winning this late in the season. Hopefully soon.

 

[Hoosker Du]

Why does the fact that Armstrong was playing with a torn hammy and Fyfe played with a broken wrist not factor into the Iowa loss at all for some people.

Amen. I don't care what anyone says...If Tommy were healthy, it completely opens up the playbook. As it was, Iowa could key on our RB the entire day, because they knew there was no risk of Tommy doing much running the ball. With Tommy at less than 30%, we were done before we even took the field.

 

[nordakotahusker]

No they didn't. They were down to their 4th corner, back up saftey w/2 starts over a 5 year career, Receivers-nope, TE- nope kittle played maybe a 1/4 of the plays, O-Line 7th different starting lineup of the year against us, DT - nope, QB-nope(but healthier than TA). As units, Iowa was health at LB, DE and RB.

Yes their Oline was coached up and played really well down the stretch.... and I agree, teams don't stay stagnant. Too many don't realize this

And with Armstrong hobbled like he was with the hammy, that's all it took to win. Ferentz had no fear of Armstrong's arm last year. He basically sold out to stop the run and dared TA to throw (haven't seen that before -YOLO), knowing the turnovers would likely happen. It worked last year, don't think he changed his game plan much for this year. In addition, the lack of even a ground threat from TA this year made their job that much easier.

 

[suhnami]

The difference in the 2015 season and the 2016 season record was as TO said in his interview- we were unlucky at the end of games in 2015 and we won those same situations in 2016. Still lost to or got completely blown out by the better teams we played. I want to be optimistic but we haven't made as much progress as it might look ( and then only because the bar was set so low in 2015). Getting blown out is a better indicator of where we are at than squeaking by lessor teams. Talk is cheap and Riley was "optimistic" about running the ball this year about this time last year.

It wasn't unluckiness in 2015, it was piss poor coaching. 2016 was coached in a completely different way.

 

[dckchusker]

Riley will be done in two years. He will win 6y or 7 games next year and maybe the year after. He tells you what you want to hear and our fan base believes it. A good coach would of won 11 games this year. We won 9 but didn't dominate in those wins over a bunch of nobodys. Just goes to show it is a game coaches play.

Have to disagree. The consistent domination of the fourth quarter this season, with the exception of Ohio State and Iowa, shows that this team had poise, conditioning, and perseverance. That's coaching. NU was only marginally more talented, especially when the injuries set in, than the fair to middling teams in the Big Ten. Because of defections in the off-season (Thurston, McMullen, Collins, Valentine, Kevin Williams), this team was desperately thin in the lines. When completely healthy, NU can compete with most non-playoff teams. When the injuries set in, the margin for error was razor thin.

Hell, with a healthy Tommy (or even a healthy Fyfe), NU probably scores a couple of TD's in the first three quarters of the Iowa game and makes it look more like the Wisconsin game. People don't want to admit that NU essentially played that game without a QB.

IF Riley can finish this recruiting cycle with quality linemen on both sides of the ball, the foundation of 9-10 wins per year is set. From that foundation, he's only a couple of playmakers away from consistent runs at 11-12 wins, trips to Indy, and chances at playoff spots.

 

[bigboxes]

9-3, folks. 9-3