Sam M tweet
- Thread starter inWV
- Start date
You're cherry picking the end of his time at Oregon State. Joel Klatt is right overall. Look from 2003-2009 and you will find the majority of his success there with Pro-Style QBs. And you do know Riley was offered the Alabama job in 2002, right?
Last edited:
Nick Saban was 25-22 his first 4 years at Michigan State and Dan McCarney went 78-117 in his entire coaching career.
Any other completely irrelevant stats you'd like to throw into a Tanner Lee discussion?
There were some not so good years, but they were a team I wouldn't want NU to play in a Non-conf game during the same period. We'll take their 2006 year easily.
How about using the term tougher to beat?
Between 2003 and 2009 he won 63% of his games, while not awesome that is an above average clip. When his teams were winning 9 or 10 games they had a QB that controlled the pocket and normally had an effective running game.
In his best seasons at Oregon St, there was a tendency to play inconsistent. That typically happens when you are playing with lesser talented players or players that have to play a near perfect game to beat the more talented teams on the schedule.
I believe the biggest difference in comparing what Riley did at Oregon St to what we could potentially see at Nebraska is on the defensive side of the ball. I really like the energy and the urgency Diaco brings to the table. That has been missing for 5-7 years.
While having perfect fits on the defense is a goal, not having perfect fits across the board doesn't necessarily mean the defense will be terrible.
So many of these discussion only discuss one side of the equation. Even Klatt with his comments, totally ignores how the defense could have aided in the success of the teams, focusing solely on QB play.
Between 2003 and 2009 he won 63% of his games, while not awesome that is an above average clip. When his teams were winning 9 or 10 games they had a QB that controlled the pocket and normally had an effective running game.
In his best seasons at Oregon St, there was a tendency to play inconsistent. That typically happens when you are playing with lesser talented players or players that have to play a near perfect game to beat the more talented teams on the schedule.
I believe the biggest difference in comparing what Riley did at Oregon St to what we could potentially see at Nebraska is on the defensive side of the ball. I really like the energy and the urgency Diaco brings to the table. That has been missing for 5-7 years.
While having perfect fits on the defense is a goal, not having perfect fits across the board doesn't necessarily mean the defense will be terrible.
So many of these discussion only discuss one side of the equation. Even Klatt with his comments, totally ignores how the defense could have aided in the success of the teams, focusing solely on QB play.
Lol all types of these "analysts" make blanket statements all the time only difference is now is that everyone has twitter so we can see just how enlightening these things are in perpetuity
Can you imagine if John Madden tweeted out some of his classics?
Can you imagine if John Madden tweeted out some of his classics?
So if I compare Riley to Snyder how does the comparison come out? I think it would be impossible to argue that Oregon State was a worse place to go coach at.
Just the year before Snyder arrived I believe Sports Illustrated had done an article declaring it the worst school in NCAA Football. Approximately 12 years later he wins a conference title.
Hate KSU fans as much as anyone else, but when you are talking about coaches at bad P-5 schools who succeeded, Riley isn't in my top 10.
Just the year before Snyder arrived I believe Sports Illustrated had done an article declaring it the worst school in NCAA Football. Approximately 12 years later he wins a conference title.
Hate KSU fans as much as anyone else, but when you are talking about coaches at bad P-5 schools who succeeded, Riley isn't in my top 10.
Not a troll attempt. Just my opinion. If you need a future NFL draft pick at QB to run your offense, it will be bad if you don't have a future NFL draft pick at QB. It will also be bad until the future NFL draft pick actually develops into a NFL draft pick. So I see NU's records being an ever fluctuating sine wave, riding high with fully developed QB's, riding low with inexperience. I would guess this would apply to the overall team experience as well, hello Vegas computers. But, I see it having a greater impact when considering the QB position. This is a generality of course, as OrSU's records actually got worse as Mannion's experience increased. Maybe Banker, Read, Cav, and Langsdorf all "helped" contribute to OrSU's record in the Mannion era.
Here's wiki's 2006 season for OrSU. They were 2-3 after the first 5 games. I think Matt Moore was their transfer QB, new to the system. For the season, they got boat raced a couple times, once by a really good team and once by a good team. They lost two games to average teams (6 loss teams). But, once everything started clicking, as least by the record, they look tough to beat.
Here's wiki's 2006 season for OrSU. They were 2-3 after the first 5 games. I think Matt Moore was their transfer QB, new to the system. For the season, they got boat raced a couple times, once by a really good team and once by a good team. They lost two games to average teams (6 loss teams). But, once everything started clicking, as least by the record, they look tough to beat.
Just because Riley is no Bill Snyder doesn't mean he isn't a decent coach. He's no TO either but I will ride this horse a while longer. Who knows what the future holds.
I'm much more worried about the offensive line than QB. It won't matter if Lee is the next Tom Brady if he doesn't have time to throw.
Im high on Tanner Lee too and obviously Riley and Langsdorf will enjoy hving someone that actually fits their mold back there who they will know how to coach.
But what coach isnt better with a pro prospect pocket passer at the helm? If a coach needs NFL talent to be effective, what makes that coach better than any other coach? Bos defense took a spill after losing the NFL talent, remember?
Superior NFL caliber talent on the roster should equate to national championships, not potential division championships. (No I dont think we have that level of talent now nor do i think we should be competing for a national champ this season so calm down, im just speaking generally.)
But what coach isnt better with a pro prospect pocket passer at the helm? If a coach needs NFL talent to be effective, what makes that coach better than any other coach? Bos defense took a spill after losing the NFL talent, remember?
Superior NFL caliber talent on the roster should equate to national championships, not potential division championships. (No I dont think we have that level of talent now nor do i think we should be competing for a national champ this season so calm down, im just speaking generally.)
True, Suh and Dorsey made Bo look like a defensive genius. The biggest difference here is that Riley actually recruited Lee, while Bo could not capitalize recruiting-wise after being handed one of the best defensive linemen ever.
At the college level, recruiting is often what separates the great coaches from the good coaches. Does anyone really think Dabo Swinney is a coaching genius? No, but he's surrounded himself with talented assistants who are great recruiters.
A
anon_umk0ifu6vj6zi
Guest
Ha. Thanks for the laugh. Yup, you are TOTALLY behind Riley and the team.... sure...
Since when did "guy who can control the pocket" = "Superior NFL talent"?
Joel Klatt basically said the offense is going to look much better with a guy like Lee as opposed to TA (who struggled in the pocket). And people are arguing this point?
Wow... What some people will do to discredit Riley and company...
Joel Klatt basically said the offense is going to look much better with a guy like Lee as opposed to TA (who struggled in the pocket). And people are arguing this point?
Wow... What some people will do to discredit Riley and company...
I'm not all that up on NFL history, so with the help of google... Starting with Johnny Unitas (maybe YA Tittle) in the mid to late 1950's. It may have taken until the 1970's for pretty much every NFL team to embrace it. So to answer the question:
Since when did "guy who can control the pocket" = "Superior NFL talent"?
My answer would be circa 1970's.
Ok... so it's a given then. If you can control the pocket you are an automatic NFL talent.
Are you for real? Zac Taylor and Joe Ganz say hello.
Oh, which NFL teams did they play for again?
Sense of humor? And actually, from Klatt, "When he’s got a guy who can control the game from the pocket, he’s tough to beat."
So who is Klatt referring to? Is it Tanner, one-and-done, future NFL QB, every analyst that's ever watched him throw the ball says he great, Lee that Klatt is referring to?
I'm making light of it, meaning no disrespect to Lee. But if Lee is THAT good and we only win 7 or 8 games, then there's a problem.
I think you have to be both. So many examples of coachs who could recruit but results didn't happen on the field.
Do you see my point though? I picked 2 lightly recruited QBs that played at Nebraska in the last 15 years, and both of them controlled the pocket well. We won 10 games under Taylor, and 9 under Ganz. Neither of them are in the NFL. You can control the game from the pocket and still not be good enough for the NFL.
So to those claiming it's only NFL talent that can control the pocket, I have given 2 examples off the top of my head that says otherwise. I would imagine with the use of google, I could probably find many more...
Edit: Taylor won 8 and 9 games his 2 seasons at QB. Ganz won 1/3 in 07, then 9 games in 08.
Last edited:
IMO what's really been lacking is a higher completion percentage and lower turnovers, should be easy to improve on TA's numbers in those categories.
I not sure what makes you think you know anything about me or what I think, but you are wrong. If someone says something that doesn't match reality, like Klatt and now you, I will point it out. Show me where I'm wrong.
So we are given to understand that you have extensive expertise in things that are "hard to beat"?
The key is defense. Since 2000 many different styles of offense have won the national title, but with only a few exceptions all of the national champs had top 10-15 defenses. So run the ball, pass the ball or mix it up, slow down the other team and you have a chance, shut the other team out and you can run Wing T and win.
People are conveniently ignoring that the DC for OSU for all of those losing seasons is no longer Riley's DC. BIG difference.
Please read again... LIGHTLY. I didn't edit my post above, I said lightly all along. You read highly, and had I said that, it would definitely be an LOL.
Defense, Defense, Defense. we'll never be a conf title type program until we again play top level defense. Diaco and Williams were two very positive steps in the right direction.
I'll throw in my two cents on the whole Tommy leaving being an upgrade. I remember getting frustrated numerous times because TA would extend and drive on third down with his legs. Now you don't have that. Will a higher throwing percentage and a few less turnovers compensate for that?
Do you think that our team playing a 3-4 will cause issues for Tanner in preparing for opposing teams defenses?
Tanner will face the scout team, who is mimicking the opposing team's defenses, correct? So I don't think so.
You mean having an accurate QB who, if you give him all day, on 3rd and long can actually hit the open receiver? Yes. That'll compensate. At least that's how it's supposed to play out. If he can't do that, then we're screwed. So we'll see.
