This is a total roster, culture and talent flip. If anyone cannot see this either does not understand what it takes to build a program or just a troll. While I am hopefully for next year I feel like 2021 is when things really take off.
Been on this board for 16 years...
- Thread starter HBK4life_rivals100467
- Start date
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
I'm not going to get fired up anymore until we see power offensive and defensive lines with linebackers that can pass rush. Our pass rush was non-existent in 2019. NU signed some promising linemen and linebackers with speed so hopefully we are headed in the right direction.
9and4, I love you. I actually think you are a Herkie turned Husker now, you have consistently posted this way for well over what, 2 years? No BS.
My guess is you see the long-term upside. Iowa will always be Iowa. 9-something. Slow. No real upside. We rebel against 9-anything. Always will. GBR
LMAO... When did you become a Husker fan? I'm guessing right at '94. Osborne had a lot of years of 9-3.
He coached 25 years, he had 49 losses, math much?LMAO... When did you become a Husker fan? I'm guessing right at '94. Osborne had a lot of years of 9-3.
It didn't look like this staff made much of an effort to retain Riley's recruits, otherwise I'm sure they could have held onto a few if they wanted to.Disagree.
First year, extremely shortened, didnt retain any, actually, couldnt retain any of the previous staffs recruits, got in too late, it was hurried and too fast to make the right judgements.
So, we have last years class of red shirt freshmen to save us?
I agree with this. But they must have had their reasons for not wanting to, and getting your own guys in for your system must have been a priority to the staff.It didn't look like this staff made much of an effort to retain Riley's recruits, otherwise I'm sure they could have held onto a few if they wanted to.
Sure didn't. And even many of those who they did, and had potential playing time/ starter left.It didn't look like this staff made much of an effort to retain Riley's recruits, otherwise I'm sure they could have held onto a few if they wanted to.
Out of shape some, others not wanting to work that hard. Not sure the few that stuck it out wanted immediate results or what, but those players could only have been a small part of turning it around.
Some of those players needed to leave
The staff did run off a lot of guys the first year. You would think most of the "slackers" would have been gone but then we hear throughout this year rumors that we still have some cancers, some of which were starters. There have been several examples of teams having just as bad if not worse of a situation than we did, but those teams were able to turn things around quicker. It was the staff's choice to get rid of a lot of those guys. If they want to run off high 3 star players and replace them with another high 3 star player, that's up to them but you can't use having a young team as an excuse. The excuses that people keep making all seem to me to be of the coaching staff's own doing. It was the coaching staff's own choice to decide to run upperclassmen off instead of working with them and attempting to motivate them to get better. I guess time will tell if their plan works in the long term. But it obviously didn't work in the short term and the coaching staff has no one to blame but themselves.But, here's a positive, this staff has run off most the slackers from that first year, not sure if those other teams were as bad,or had as many leave. They all had more time after all, than our coaches had.
So, yes, we lose immediate growth with this, but, their replacements arent only of higher quality athletes, but teammates as well. 27 of 27 the very next year, all staying so far.
That's exactly what I see and is a major problem with this coaching staff so far. This staff has not done a good job of assessing where this team is to start the year. Then as soon as play starts, we're in panic mode trying to throw patches at things that should have been addressed in fall camp.Frost's teams at the start of the season play like they are not prepared. They get better as the season progresses, but that's too late. They need to be ready from the get go.
Anybody else on this board go through a coaching change in college? Our basketball team did after my sophomore season. It’s like oil and water for the kids who remained and the new recruits who were brought in by the new coach. New systems, new style of players, etc. It can be a disaster.
I might agree with this, but the vast majority of those gone arent starting on teams we consider less than us.The staff did run off a lot of guys the first year. You would think most of the "slackers" would have been gone but then we hear throughout this year rumors that we still have some cancers, some of which were starters. There have been several examples of teams having just as bad if not worse of a situation than we did, but those teams were able to turn things around quicker. It was the staff's choice to get rid of a lot of those guys. If they want to run off high 3 star players and replace them with another high 3 star player, that's up to them but you can't use having a young team as an excuse. The excuses that people keep making all seem to me to be of the coaching staff's own doing. It was the coaching staff's own choice to decide to run upperclassmen off instead of working with them and attempting to motivate them to get better. I guess time will tell if their plan works in the long term. But it obviously didn't work in the short term and the coaching staff has no one to blame but themselves.
Then, I can't ignore we are young.
So, I don't agree, as those players that changed out the others are not like for like to my knowledge,as yet.
I think you’re forgetting that not all of the players were run off. Many left of their own accord. I don’t believe that the coaches had a list of people they didn’t want on the team and made life difficult for them to get them to move on. That may have happened, but not to all who left. Many liked Club Riley and didn’t want to work under Frost. Guys like Spielman, Morgan, Ozigbo, Mo Barry, Lamar Jackson and others who are still around decided to stay and work harder than before.The staff did run off a lot of guys the first year. You would think most of the "slackers" would have been gone but then we hear throughout this year rumors that we still have some cancers, some of which were starters. There have been several examples of teams having just as bad if not worse of a situation than we did, but those teams were able to turn things around quicker. It was the staff's choice to get rid of a lot of those guys. If they want to run off high 3 star players and replace them with another high 3 star player, that's up to them but you can't use having a young team as an excuse. The excuses that people keep making all seem to me to be of the coaching staff's own doing. It was the coaching staff's own choice to decide to run upperclassmen off instead of working with them and attempting to motivate them to get better. I guess time will tell if their plan works in the long term. But it obviously didn't work in the short term and the coaching staff has no one to blame but themselves.
If the player was willing to work, they stayed. Would it have been better for these guys who didn’t want to put in the work to still be on the team right now as opposed to bringing in guys who will work hard to get better? I don’t think that would have been good either.
It was a crappy situation no matter how you slice it.
He coached 25 years, he had 49 losses, math much?
Gonna take a wild guess and say the schools in "northwood" aren't too great huh? I'll count them for you but that is 10 seasons Osborne had with 9 wins, or 40% of the time.
1973 Nebraska 9 2 1 .792
1974 Nebraska 9 3 0 .750
1976 Nebraska 9 3 1 .731
1977 Nebraska 9 3 0 .750
1978 Nebraska 9 3 0 .750
1981 Nebraska 9 3 0 .750
1985 Nebraska 9 3 0 .750
1990 Nebraska 9 3 0 .750
1991 Nebraska 9 2 1 .792
1992 Nebraska 9 3 0 .750
Come on math whiz, at least try to do the slightest bit of research since you don't have real Husker football knowledge so you know what you are talking about. Were you 2 geniuses "rebelling" against Osborne for a large chunk of his career? Wouldn't surprise me.
Last edited:
I know this isn’t my battle, but that shows 5 times in 18 years... the 70s weren’t kind to Tom, but still 60% of his seasons were 10 or more wins... not sure what your point is...Gonna take a wild guess and say the schools in "northwood aren't too great huh? I'll count them for you but that is 10 seasons Osborne had with 9 wins, or 40% of the time.
1973 Nebraska 9 2 1 .792
1974 Nebraska 9 3 0 .750
1976 Nebraska 9 3 1 .731
1977 Nebraska 9 3 0 .750
1978 Nebraska 9 3 0 .750
1981 Nebraska 9 3 0 .750
1985 Nebraska 9 3 0 .750
1990 Nebraska 9 3 0 .750
1991 Nebraska 9 2 1 .792
1992 Nebraska 9 3 0 .750
Come on math whiz, at least try to do the slightest bit of research since you don't have real Husker football knowledge so you know what you are talking about. Were you 2 geniuses "rebelling" against Osborne for a large chunk of his career? Wouldn't surprise me.
I know this isn’t my battle, but that shows 5 times in 18 years... the 70s weren’t kind to Tom, but still 60% of his seasons were 10 or more wins... not sure what your point is...
He had 9 win seasons in the 70's, 80's and 90's... So it happened all his career. My original post was to the guy that can't handle his beer saying "we rebel against 9-anything" at NU. It's a pretty stupid thing to say when our legendary coach did it 10 times in his 25yr career unless you were "rebelling" 40% of the time Osborne was here. Wouldn't surprise me, there's a lot of fanboys on here who think we are entitled to something.
Nothing wrong with a 9 win season, those were all very good years IMO. He went undefeated 3 times and you'd think by reading the posts on here that going undefeated is something we should expect at NU.
2 times in 80s, 3 times in 90s... the rest were 10 or more. 9 wins was our floor under Osborne. Except for a handful of times, 9 wins is the ceiling for Iowa.He had 9 win seasons in the 70's, 80's and 90's... So it happened all his career. My original post was to the guy that can't handle his beer saying "we rebel against 9-anything" at NU. It's a pretty stupid thing to say when our legendary coach did it 10 times in his 25yr career unless you were "rebelling" 40% of the time Osborne was here. Wouldn't surprise me, there's a lot of fanboys on here who think we are entitled to something.
Nothing wrong with a 9 win season, those were all very good years IMO. He went undefeated 3 times and you'd think by reading the posts on here that going undefeated is something we should expect at NU.
I agree, 9 wins was the minimum number needed for the season to be considered a success. But I think you are missing the point that fans for 9 win Iowa are much happier than fans for 9 win Nebraska, traditionally speaking... not as much now, since we’ve really struggled, 9 wins would look good. But obviously, we want more than 9 wins... we want championships.
It’ll be interesting to see what happens moving forward... @jlb321 contends we will be satisfied with 9 wins a season, just like Iowa. Maybe we will, but I’d like to think we won’t be satisfied until we win championships again.
TBF, it wasn't all sweetness and light with TO's 9 win seasons. In the 70s, he seriously considered leaving. In the late 80s/early 90s, we were modern-day Wisc, couldn't win the big one or beat anyone of note. We lost a whole shitload of bowl games while I was there.
Other programs have done the same thing in less time. Most programs if they do improve with a coaching change are well on their way by year two. Some coaches have even been able to turn around a total **** show in only 1 year. I don't think our situation or program is any different or harder than the problems those programs faced.This is a total roster, culture and talent flip. If anyone cannot see this either does not understand what it takes to build a program or just a troll. While I am hopefully for next year I feel like 2021 is when things really take off.
If only we got that coach that took UCF team from 0-13 to 13-0 by his second year... what a **** show that was when he took over.Other programs have done the same thing in less time. Most programs if they do improve with a coaching change are well on their way by year two. Some coaches have even been able to turn around a total **** show in only 1 year. I don't think our situation or program is any different or harder than the problems those programs faced.
What was his name again?
And lots of them fail as well. It isn't exactly a given that programs all turn around in 1-2 years. At any rate, to me it is all moot. We are where we are. We have who we have as players and coaches. I just want them to all get better and learn from their mistakes.
8 seasons losing 3, 17 seasons, over twice as many, losing 2, 1 or none.Gonna take a wild guess and say the schools in "northwood" aren't too great huh? I'll count them for you but that is 10 seasons Osborne had with 9 wins, or 40% of the time.
1973 Nebraska 9 2 1 .792
1974 Nebraska 9 3 0 .750
1976 Nebraska 9 3 1 .731
1977 Nebraska 9 3 0 .750
1978 Nebraska 9 3 0 .750
1981 Nebraska 9 3 0 .750
1985 Nebraska 9 3 0 .750
1990 Nebraska 9 3 0 .750
1991 Nebraska 9 2 1 .792
1992 Nebraska 9 3 0 .750
Come on math whiz, at least try to do the slightest bit of research since you don't have real Husker football knowledge so you know what you are talking about. Were you 2 geniuses "rebelling" against Osborne for a large chunk of his career? Wouldn't surprise me.
Thats not many. 32%
That's why I disagree with people saying 2018 was a throwaway class. Frost went after and got a lot of the guys he wanted. Adrian, Mo Washington, Cam Jurgens, Deontai Williams. That's four guys who have the potential to be major playmakers and there were other decent players as well.I agree with this. But they must have had their reasons for not wanting to, and getting your own guys in for your system must have been a priority to the staff.
2 times in 80s, 3 times in 90s... the rest were 10 or more. 9 wins was our floor under Osborne. Except for a handful of times, 9 wins is the ceiling for Iowa.
I agree, 9 wins was the minimum number needed for the season to be considered a success. But I think you are missing the point that fans for 9 win Iowa are much happier than fans for 9 win Nebraska, traditionally speaking... not as much now, since we’ve really struggled, 9 wins would look good. But obviously, we want more than 9 wins... we want championships.
It’ll be interesting to see what happens moving forward... @jlb321 contends we will be satisfied with 9 wins a season, just like Iowa. Maybe we will, but I’d like to think we won’t be satisfied until we win championships again.
LMAO, yes 15 of the 25 seasons were 10 or more... But no matter how we say it he still had 9 wins 40% of the time!! And to me none of those years were seasons to "rebel" against, only someone with no sense of history would say that. NU had back to back legendary coaches for 36 years but still 17 of those seasons were 9 wins or fewer, nearly half. The Huskers started playing in 1890 and only 5 seasons have been undefeated.Let's keep things in perspective and know our history before making ridiculous comments to fans of other schools, that makes us all look bad. That is all I'm saying.
And I'm not saying we have to be content with that EVERY year. 9 wins is a good season for anyone including Iowa, but that is the pinnacle for them.
I think they went after, took what little time they had, but it was still a crapshoot, other than AM, they really didnt know them.That's why I disagree with people saying 2018 was a throwaway class. Frost went after and got a lot of the guys he wanted. Adrian, Mo Washington, Cam Jurgens, Deontai Williams. That's four guys who have the potential to be major playmakers and there were other decent players as well.
8 seasons losing 3, 17 seasons, over twice as many, losing 2, 1 or none.
Thats not many. 32%
His comment was "we rebel against 9-anything". Damn bro you need to work on math AND reading comprehension. Or just mind your own business if you don't know what you are talking about.
32% does not equal 40%, math much?LMAO, yes 15 of the 25 seasons were 10 or more... But no matter how we say it he still had 9 wins 40% of the time!! And to me none of those years were seasons to "rebel" against, only someone with no sense of history would say that. NU had back to back legendary coaches for 36 years but still 17 of those seasons were 9 wins or fewer, nearly half. The Huskers started playing in 1890 and only 5 seasons have been undefeated.Let's keep things in perspective and know our history before making ridiculous comments to fans of other schools, that makes us all look bad. That is all I'm saying.
And I'm not saying we have to be content with that EVERY year. 9 wins is a good season for anyone including Iowa, but that is the pinnacle for them.
32% does not equal 40%, math much?
LOL you are an idiot but keep trying to change my words to make yourself feel better! I'm embarrassed for you, math whiz.
32% does not equal 40%, math much?
So you rebelled against Osborne 32% of the time? Lol you are a goof! Get some knowledge cool guy.
32% or, 8 seasons of 25.He had 9 win seasons in the 70's, 80's and 90's... So it happened all his career. My original post was to the guy that can't handle his beer saying "we rebel against 9-anything" at NU. It's a pretty stupid thing to say when our legendary coach did it 10 times in his 25yr career unless you were "rebelling" 40% of the time Osborne was here. Wouldn't surprise me, there's a lot of fanboys on here who think we are entitled to something.
Nothing wrong with a 9 win season, those were all very good years IMO. He went undefeated 3 times and you'd think by reading the posts on here that going undefeated is something we should expect at NU.
Sure some left on their own. But it's not like the staff tried too hard to retain some of those guys. They would put in the effort to keep a guy like JD though and now be says he will stay.I think you’re forgetting that not all of the players were run off. Many left of their own accord. I don’t believe that the coaches had a list of people they didn’t want on the team and made life difficult for them to get them to move on. That may have happened, but not to all who left. Many liked Club Riley and didn’t want to work under Frost. Guys like Spielman, Morgan, Ozigbo, Mo Barry, Lamar Jackson and others who are still around decided to stay and work harder than before.
If the player was willing to work, they stayed. Would it have been better for these guys who didn’t want to put in the work to still be on the team right now as opposed to bringing in guys who will work hard to get better? I don’t think that would have been good either.
It was a crappy situation no matter how you slice it.
Exactly. I guess the question is, should they have tried harder to keep the players and team intact, or was it better to flush the system and start new?Sure some left on their own. But it's not like the staff tried too hard to retain some of those guys. They would put in the effort to keep a guy like JD though and now be says he will stay.
They chose the latter method, rather than cozying up to players just to keep them in the fold. I’m not saying one way is better than the other, that’s just what happened.
Didn't we see that cuddling up to under MR? Our D line left early or switched teams or just quit playing.Exactly. I guess the question is, should they have tried harder to keep the players and team intact, or was it better to flush the system and start new?
They chose the latter method, rather than cozying up to players just to keep them in the fold. I’m not saying one way is better than the other, that’s just what happened.
Having a ball on the sidelines in blowouts was common.
I say, this is how it is, if you want some of it, stay here and work, if not, got nuthin for ya
Youre right, was looking at 3 losses, not nine wins.His comment was "we rebel against 9-anything". Damn bro you need to work on math AND reading comprehension. Or just mind your own business if you don't know what you are talking about.
Sorry zrob, my bad.
But, TO is still the fastest to get to 250 wins as a 1A coach
Latest
-
01
Inside Nebraska Football
Nebraska OC Dana Holgorsen, DC Rob Aurich, RB Jamal Rule + more review win over Bowling Green, preview North Dakota
-
02
UGASports Football Recruiting
Georgia making a move for 4-star Nebraska commit Corey Hadley
-
03
Inside Nebraska Football
Takeaways from Matt Rhule, Anthony Colandrea & Owen Chambliss as Nebraska starts season 2-0
-
04
Inside Nebraska Football
Postgame Notes: Anthony Colandrea matches Tommy Armstrong, Nebraska WRs end 16-year program drought
-
05
Inside Nebraska Football
Nebraska 56, Bowling Green 7: Matt Rhule, Husker players break down blowout win