We've had an entire offseason under the new regime. I was expecting more noticeable results than this, especially on the O-line. Something is missing.
Strength & Conditioning
- Thread starter otismotis08
- Start date
Well, generally OLinemen dont contribute much their first few years at this level. It takes a truly special kid to contribute early.
Given that the S&C program under Riley was basically nonexistent, Im not shocked. They are all basically Sophomores strength wise.
Then there is the talent issue. But that is not the point of this thread.
Given that the S&C program under Riley was basically nonexistent, Im not shocked. They are all basically Sophomores strength wise.
Then there is the talent issue. But that is not the point of this thread.
I definitely bought in on the hype train. Colorado coach claims the weight room improved them in his first season, but maybe it takes longer at Nebraska.
what was their starting point?
Pretty sure Duval couldnt get most of us ready in a year.
We have improved no doubt, but if our baseline was lower than the rest of P5, improvement doesn’t mean we are better than the rest. I know Colorado isn’t the rest, and it’s disappointing to see that we evidently aren’t at their level... it’s a hard pill to swallow. We are getting there.
What was the issue with Colorado last year? Was it S&C, or Coaching/Leadership? My guess is the later.
Funny how the story just two weeks ago was that the team had been completely transformed in the weight room, and now looks like the championship teams of old.
Whoops...guess not. Weak, slow, and tired was more like it. They need to post a giant photo of the Colorado fans laughing at them in the weight room. Maybe it will help with motivation.
Whoops...guess not. Weak, slow, and tired was more like it. They need to post a giant photo of the Colorado fans laughing at them in the weight room. Maybe it will help with motivation.
JMO but I think the players overall looked better then last year and a few years away from carrying a physique like the 80s and 90s.
Strength, conditioning and nutrition aren't a one year deal.
Colorado played the game as a marathon started off slow and finished strong. Nebraska came out of the gates sprinting and looked dead tired by the end of the race. With the offense frost is trying to run and recruit to I'm not sure why people are surprised we can't run up the middle.
1st year Oregon St coach - Jonathon Smith took his team into Boulder last year and somehow survived the altitude and came away with a win
Colorado has only had one winning season since 2006
If the altitude was that big of an advantage the above wouldn't be true
Colorado has only had one winning season since 2006
If the altitude was that big of an advantage the above wouldn't be true
Let’s not let facts get in the way. Colorado has an impeccable record at home.
I mean, the defense was on the field for a whole 30 minutes!
Nowadays, almost every college football program has a Strength & Conditioning program that is as good or better than ours. Our guys are making strides in the weight room, but so is every team we play.
Even if we've got the strength part now we're definitely missing the conditioning part. anybody that has ever been in Denver knows that the air is definitely different. after some hard exercise you're gasping for oxygen guys. got to be in awfully good condition to play up there and evidently we're only good enough for about 2 1/2 quarters condition wise
Well, don't feel like the Lone Ranger. It's probably not just us that don't quite get it.....
That's true, but don't tell me that's an apples to apples comparison... By the time they played it was the second to last game of the season, correct? The players on Colorado saw the writing on the wall and knew there was going to be a coaching change. They had already quit 3 games earlier. Oregon State isn't hated like Nebraska is. There are so many factors that come in to play, the only common denominator in this example is playing in Boulder. Nothing else even comes close to comparing.
You're better than this...
how about these apples --
from a 2017 article that looked specifically at the altitude effect as it pertains to the Broncos
"The Broncos, those of the best home record in the NFL since 1975, have actually performed slightly below league average at home since 2002. When adjusted for strength of record per year, the Broncos have actually won two games less than league average over the past 15 seasons. The Broncos performed at a league-average rate at home in eight of the 15 seasons analyzed and only deviated from the average by more than one game once — when they lost two more home games than average in the 2011 season.
Ultimately, such a small margin of below-average performance is not going to affect the Broncos’ season-to-season performance, but the numbers demonstrate that the Broncos are a league-average team at home and that any altitude advantage they might have does not reflect itself in the wins column."
I would think the expected improvement in team performance in year 2 versus game 2 of new coaching hires would be far, far greater than some possible small advantage of altitude
That's more like it! You were baiting me, or waiting for someone to take the bait, weren't you?how about these apples --
from a 2017 article that looked specifically at the altitude effect as it pertains to the Broncos
"The Broncos, those of the best home record in the NFL since 1975, have actually performed slightly below league average at home since 2002. When adjusted for strength of record per year, the Broncos have actually won two games less than league average over the past 15 seasons. The Broncos performed at a league-average rate at home in eight of the 15 seasons analyzed and only deviated from the average by more than one game once — when they lost two more home games than average in the 2011 season.
Ultimately, such a small margin of below-average performance is not going to affect the Broncos’ season-to-season performance, but the numbers demonstrate that the Broncos are a league-average team at home and that any altitude advantage they might have does not reflect itself in the wins column."
I would think the expected improvement in team performance in year 2 versus game 2 of new coaching hires would be far, far greater than some possible small advantage of altitude
Now I feel worse. Thanks.
Everybody lifts, it comes down to how good your players really are and coaching. Damn, Mack Brown comes back after a few years off and is winning, but there is plenty of talent at NC, he's just one of those coaches that can get a team rolling, although his last few years at Texas didn't go that well
Saturday, we saw a first half Husker team that flat out kicked cu around. Second half saw Nebraska get kicked around yet they still had a chance to win. That's players and coaches who need to keep an edge to them instead of going into the locker room thinking they've won it.
We see it all the time in football, big lead at half quickly evaporates and turns into a dog fight with said big lead team losing.
Saturday, we saw a first half Husker team that flat out kicked cu around. Second half saw Nebraska get kicked around yet they still had a chance to win. That's players and coaches who need to keep an edge to them instead of going into the locker room thinking they've won it.
We see it all the time in football, big lead at half quickly evaporates and turns into a dog fight with said big lead team losing.
how about these apples --
from a 2017 article that looked specifically at the altitude effect as it pertains to the Broncos
"The Broncos, those of the best home record in the NFL since 1975, have actually performed slightly below league average at home since 2002. When adjusted for strength of record per year, the Broncos have actually won two games less than league average over the past 15 seasons. The Broncos performed at a league-average rate at home in eight of the 15 seasons analyzed and only deviated from the average by more than one game once — when they lost two more home games than average in the 2011 season.
Ultimately, such a small margin of below-average performance is not going to affect the Broncos’ season-to-season performance, but the numbers demonstrate that the Broncos are a league-average team at home and that any altitude advantage they might have does not reflect itself in the wins column."
I would think the expected improvement in team performance in year 2 versus game 2 of new coaching hires would be far, far greater than some possible small advantage of altitude
Altitude didn't get Nebraska beat, attitude did!
That's more like it! You were baiting me, or waiting for someone to take the bait, weren't you?
Now I feel worse. Thanks.
I wasn't - it was a weak argument on my part and you called out it while I was looking for some actual data and could take it down.
(No weaker argument, however, than the belief that Frost is taking over a program like Kansas or Wisconsin pre Alvarez - IMO)
I'm sure altitude plays some role -- it does in some extreme performance supports
Colorado has one of the most iconic cross country and distance programs in the country and despite it being rather common place I do not believe anyone has ever run under 4 minutes for the mile Boulder.
I am not sure how altitude plays a role in a short burst and recovery sport such as football.
So your saying that the team had already quit while they beat Arizona State? After this, they traveled to USC and #15 Washington and lost both games. They fought back and outscored USC in the 4th qtr 13-3, but that wasn’t enough to win. Washington was a 15 ranked team and were nearly tied at halftime. After this, they went on to lose to the Beavers at home.
I suppose they could be as emotionally fragile as the last several years of Nebraska teams, but I’m just not buying the “it was different” argument.
My daughter plays tennis at the collegiate level and last spring they played four matches in the Colorado Springs area. She plays at a small college in Neraska. She was in the best shape of her life, and still commented on how the elevation affected her. Granted, Tennis is a sport that requires a lot of running during the points, especially on the women's side.
I think it can be a factor, but our coaching staff should have a handle on that.
I just can’t quite explain the difference in our play for the first three quarters compared to the fourth quarter. It seems altitude would be reasonable... just don’t know how things went south so badly.
I think it can be a factor, but our coaching staff should have a handle on that.
I just can’t quite explain the difference in our play for the first three quarters compared to the fourth quarter. It seems altitude would be reasonable... just don’t know how things went south so badly.
Anybody who doesn't think altitude had anything to do with how we played has never hiked at or above 5000 ft. It's like somebody put a lead vest on you after about 15 minutes of walking let alone running.
Totally agree, but shouldn’t every team struggle? What do other teams have, like the OSU Beavers, that push them over the hump to win there?
There are going to be growing pains when your interior offensive line is so young. Take the lumps now and hopefully next year they look completely different. I have faith in the offensive line coach to get this sorted out.
That said, I also didn't buy into the preseason hype and was expecting a 7-5 or 6-6 type of season.
That said, I also didn't buy into the preseason hype and was expecting a 7-5 or 6-6 type of season.
2018 Spring practice session
2018 Summer supervised S&C program
2018 Fall Camp
2018 13 week football season
2018-19 Winter supervised S&C program
2019 Spring practice session
2019 Summer supervised S&C program
2019 Fall Camp
At this point, strength and conditioning is a very weak excuse - really no excuse - and to the extent it is substandard, HC Frost is to blame. All indications from the coaching staff (for more than 18 months now) is that the new protocols and workouts are not substandard but excellent and the players have uniformly praised the program's results.
College S&C player development is an ongoing challenge but let's not pretend that the same challenges are not faced by every college S&C coach. No matter what you have heard or think about the S&C program under Riley (much of which is exaggerated IMO) sufficient time has elapsed to correct the deficiencies.
It seems to me that many Husker fans are pointing to "strength and conditioning" as a subtle way to continue to shift blame to Mike Riley, who was last in charge in 2017, for bad game performances in 2019. Like I said - weak.
2018 Summer supervised S&C program
2018 Fall Camp
2018 13 week football season
2018-19 Winter supervised S&C program
2019 Spring practice session
2019 Summer supervised S&C program
2019 Fall Camp
At this point, strength and conditioning is a very weak excuse - really no excuse - and to the extent it is substandard, HC Frost is to blame. All indications from the coaching staff (for more than 18 months now) is that the new protocols and workouts are not substandard but excellent and the players have uniformly praised the program's results.
College S&C player development is an ongoing challenge but let's not pretend that the same challenges are not faced by every college S&C coach. No matter what you have heard or think about the S&C program under Riley (much of which is exaggerated IMO) sufficient time has elapsed to correct the deficiencies.
It seems to me that many Husker fans are pointing to "strength and conditioning" as a subtle way to continue to shift blame to Mike Riley, who was last in charge in 2017, for bad game performances in 2019. Like I said - weak.
Saw a tweet where a dude who has worked CU games at Folsom for 35 years said he sees what happened to NU every now and again. He called Saturday an altitude game. The team came in jacked up and played their *** off for a half, then got punched in the mouth and got gassed in the second.
People can open a vein about what happened, but there is no magic fairy dust to sprinkle on the program. The program was pretty much hollowed out two years ago and the team would win generally only when the talent and general opponent match-ups were favorable.
People can open a vein about what happened, but there is no magic fairy dust to sprinkle on the program. The program was pretty much hollowed out two years ago and the team would win generally only when the talent and general opponent match-ups were favorable.
Not shifting blame at all. Read the original post. SF&co have had enough time to drill the work ethic into these guys. I'm not seeing it.
My post was not a direct reply to your OP but a response to the casual chatter I hear from time to time,
The problem is we don't know exactly how far back the Riley years put us in S&C. I do know when Frost and Duval first arrived they said they had to "dumb" down the weight program because guys were so out of shape they couldnt do the initial workouts. They didn't have to do that at UCF. Im guess Tucker didn't have to do that at Colorado either. I would bet this offseason pretty well just got us back to average from where we should have been when Riley was fired. Now it will take an additional year or so to start getting equal with other BIG10 programs.
Or Colorado had a NFL QB and some NFL WR's that made plays on Saturday. It was an even match between two average teams, nothing more or less. It sucks worse because we had the game under control early, but the margin for error was small, defensive breakdown or a bad read or an injured K, doesn't have to turn into an indictment on any and everything. If Cam Taylor stayed home on the flea flicker and we rolled to victory would we be talking about Colorado's S&C or superior coaching? CU didn't win because of S&C or Mel Tucker's magic, they won because they have a big time QB and some big WR's that made some plays. When Montez and Shenault are gone next year, I bet CU will look pretty rough, because they don't yet have the depth to deal with those kind of loses, not because S&C got worse or Tucker got dumber.
We had a more decorated QB than Montez last year and both a WR and RB currently in the NFL and we road those horses to 4 wins last year
Ugh. I know you are trying to be the voice of reason to this husker fan board and you do present thought provoking posts, but do you always have to be Lee Corso and say “not so fast...”
It does get old...