Is honesty not acceptable?

[Greatest Fan of All]

.i would expect people doing the same job (any job) to do it to the best of their abilities regardless of pay grade.

You seem to be attacking SF by saying he isn't outworking top of the line coaches, which may be your opinion, but hardly confirmed by facts.

I might add, "extraordinary pay differences" do not apply here....SF is paid well, but many, many head coaches are also paid well.

First sentence - Very few people do their job "to the best of their abilities." Most people strive for a life balance that doesn't permit this. They want some free time, some family time, vacations and more. A few people, generally single people but a few married folks with understanding spouses, go way beyond. When you make $5 million...you MUST go way beyond.

Second sentence - I am not attacking SF in any way. Go re-read what I've said and point out this fake attack, it's in your head, not mine.

Third sentence - Very few coaches are close to SF in pay...he's in the top 10% with only a few years of experience and a poor record overall. I'm hoping he fixes that, and I also expect him to. I trust him to know if he needs to work harder or smarter.

 

[winnerwinner]

Certainly tough to see the same players fail, but again.....if LR was that great of an athlete, somebody from the P5 would have found him and offered. He's a great walk-on and probably deserved a chance, but as you said, he must have shown something in practice to get the reviews he was, just not enough to actually be an option in a game.

Basically you are saying:
1. The coaches liked him in practice but didn't play him in the games because he was too good and would screw up the plan to lose??
or
2. The coaches saw him out-perform the starters in practice but didn't play him out of loyalty to the other 3 players?
or
3. Please fill in the blank.

I could argue either way, but one thing that definitely happened over and over this season was the coaching staff telling us so-and-so player would contribute significantly in the next game, only to see them come in for one snap, or as a decoy.

It could be that the player is ready, but the coaches may have simply forgotten to rotate him in at the right moment.

 

[LarstheRed]

First sentence - Very few people do their job "to the best of their abilities." Most people strive for a life balance that doesn't permit this. They want some free time, some family time, vacations and more. A few people, generally single people but a few married folks with understanding spouses, go way beyond. When you make $5 million...you MUST go way beyond.

Second sentence - I am not attacking SF in any way. Go re-read what I've said and point out this fake attack, it's in your head, not mine.

Third sentence - Very few coaches are close to SF in pay...he's in the top 10% with only a few years of experience and a poor record overall. I'm hoping he fixes that, and I also expect him to. I trust him to know if he needs to work harder or smarter.

I’m concerned you might be associating with the wrong type of people. It’s sounds as though you are associating with folks who give a lame effort.

With few exceptions, people aren’t paid based on how hard they work, but by how well they work, and that is increased by additional responsibility. If it’s all about hard work then the spaz at Starbucks who missed his ADD meds must make a ton more than the calm, cool, efficient baristas that make up the crew.

 

[CornhuskerinWI]

Certainly tough to see the same players fail, but again.....if LR was that great of an athlete, somebody from the P5 would have found him and offered. He's a great walk-on and probably deserved a chance, but as you said, he must have shown something in practice to get the reviews he was, just not enough to actually be an option in a game.

Basically you are saying:
1. The coaches liked him in practice but didn't play him in the games because he was too good and would screw up the plan to lose??
or
2. The coaches saw him out-perform the starters in practice but didn't play him out of loyalty to the other 3 players?
or
3. Please fill in the blank.

You're saying that there's no great athletes below the P5 level because they weren't offered? You're about as wrong as a human could possibly be, but that's your opinion to have.

I don't know what the coaches saw in practice or how he performed because I don't go to practice. I know they spoke highly of him in interviews, but I suppose you can take that w/ a grain of salt. I know it was "reported" that they were using Reimer in certain pass coverage sub-packages in practice. I also know that they didn't sub a ton (see almost never) on passing downs and tended to keep their base package players in the game. Perhaps, that's why he didn't see the field. It's hard to say. As I said, it was something that annoyed me and I would have liked to see him out there w/ the bullets flying. They lost a lot of close games and their ILB coverage was a major weak spot. Maybe Reimer makes a difference, maybe not.

As far as your points 1 and 2, don't be daft. I "basically" said neither of those things.

 

[Walztrent]

@LarstheRed , I think you've touched on it a couple of times in this thread. I think a large part of the issue is the attitude and temperment of the players. If you sell a recruit on the winning tradition and history of the program, he vicareously becomes a part of it without putting in the effort to match it.

When I was in Navy bootcamp in the early 80's, we had a guy go a bit stir crazy. He was lamenting he joined the Navy for the beaches and the babes. He literally complained, "Where are the babes?" Dude, you're in bootcamp. There are no babes in bootcamp.

Guys come to programs like Nebraska, make the team and get the glory without earning it. They get the parties, the babes, the attention just by going through the motions. That, to me, is the culture that has to change and Frost hints at it when he says he wants guys that prioritize football as #1. You need guys whose goals are aligned with the programs, competing with and beating the best and willing to do whatever it takes to get there. I don't think we have that right now. I suspect we're not even close, outside a couple of players.

Guess frost needs to look at his prized qb if your worried about partying

 

[Greatest Fan of All]

I’m concerned you might be associating with the wrong type of people. It’s sounds as though you are associating with folks who give a lame effort.

With few exceptions, people aren’t paid based on how hard they work, but by how well they work, and that is increased by additional responsibility. If it’s all about hard work then the spaz at Starbucks who missed his ADD meds must make a ton more than the calm, cool, efficient baristas that make up the crew.

LOL, if you can't understand that generally more is expected of, and delivered by, highly paid employees that have the same job as lowly paid employees, then you don't understand the free market that is America.

 

[scotticus]

Yes, but your ROI is much better with the 100K guy.

absolutely not. NO! What I find baffling is, the AD and University laid out the contract to make it competitive so they could attract the coach they wanted to do the job they wanted him to do. And were 2 years in, when he was given 7, because even the university could see the sharp decline coming before SF stepped foot on campus. And we are already trying to cut into the leash the University has paid for. Even SF saw the sharp decline in the program and culture from the prior administration. So his salary is a moot point and his ROI is completely inline with his salary per the University and the fanbase cheering his name when he signed the papers.

This is a rebuild process. And its apples to oranges when looking at other programs and other teams. This isn't alabama. This isn't florida. Look at Miami who has had good coaches and is located respectively in one of the top 3 hotbeds in the nation.

Some of you need to relax and let all this play out. Talk to me in year 5 when we are still 4-8 and I'll argue that you were right. Until then, the criticism is unjust and his salary is unrelated.

And fwiw, I stated at the beg of the season that its our o-line/d-line thats gonna take us as far as we go. That its gonna take 3-4 years in to start reaping the benefits of S&C since it was basically ground 0 the moment they stepped foot in here. Yes we have talent, but no we are not developed enough to capitalize on it against teams that have been doing a far better above average job a lot longer than us.

Or we could just fire our coach again. Or just fire our coach's staff members. I mean, we dont need continuity. who needs that crap. better start telling recruits they may or may not have their coach available year after year. That should really bring them on board. Its hard telling who our next splash hire is going to be and how much we will have to pay him to stick around for 3 years. We'll just call Neb Pay-U Coach University so we can pay them 6 years for 3 and piss even more money away.

 

[scotticus]

The idea that people think he has better players he just doesn’t like or isn’t smart enough to play, blows my mind. He may have more talented individuals that don’t do the right things or aren’t practicing well and this not earning playing time.

I mean, I seriously cant follow that logic. I can definitely understand why others are having that issue!

 

[Plague of Crickets]

absolutely not. NO! What I find baffling is, the AD and University laid out the contract to make it competitive so they could attract the coach they wanted to do the job they wanted him to do. And were 2 years in, when he was given 7, because even the university could see the sharp decline coming before SF stepped foot on campus. And we are already trying to cut into the leash the University has paid for. Even SF saw the sharp decline in the program and culture from the prior administration. So his salary is a moot point and his ROI is completely inline with his salary per the University and the fanbase cheering his name when he signed the papers.

This is a rebuild process. And its apples to oranges when looking at other programs and other teams. This isn't alabama. This isn't florida. Look at Miami who has had good coaches and is located respectively in one of the top 3 hotbeds in the nation.

Some of you need to relax and let all this play out. Talk to me in year 5 when we are still 4-8 and I'll argue that you were right. Until then, the criticism is unjust and his salary is unrelated.

And fwiw, I stated at the beg of the season that its our o-line/d-line thats gonna take us as far as we go. That its gonna take 3-4 years in to start reaping the benefits of S&C since it was basically ground 0 the moment they stepped foot in here. Yes we have talent, but no we are not developed enough to capitalize on it against teams that have been doing a far better above average job a lot longer than us.

Or we could just fire our coach again. Or just fire our coach's staff members. I mean, we dont need continuity. who needs that crap. better start telling recruits they may or may not have their coach available year after year. That should really bring them on board. Its hard telling who our next splash hire is going to be and how much we will have to pay him to stick around for 3 years. We'll just call Neb Pay-U Coach University so we can pay them 6 years for 3 and piss even more money away.

I agree that it’s silly to be talking about his salary and terms. We paid what we had to, for the duration we had to, in order to get the coach we wanted. I don’t agree that the criticism is unjust. Yes, some of it is way over the top, but people are rightly disappointed (as I’m sure the staff is as well). And I’d rather have a mob of passionate fans voicing their disappointment than a sea of apathetic shrugs. We care, so we vent.

 

[alabamahusker]

What should he do, create a circle around the campfire and sing songs? Those players HAVE to know they haven't met the expectations for a player at the University of Nebraska. The staff has made plenty of mistakes, but this is about the players and their accountability. A coach can call the wrong play, and that's not good, but players are the guys missing blocks, lanes or reads that cause plays to fail more often than not. If Scott called every play perfectly, that's still not going to change players executing at an abysmal level.

There are people who rise to a challenge, and those who shrink, and we seem to think we need to coach solely for the shrinkers on the roster. If there was any mistake in messaging, it was not conveying to the team that they all have the ability to become contributing players (though we know that isn't true). When you see how some made dramatic improvements to the players they were originally, you have to feel that message was understood by at least some of the players. Those that have chosen to feel a victim instead of rising to the challenge might be guys we just aren't going to be rehabilitating, but running off. Remind us again just how well they handled the positive environment of Riley? Did they push themselves? Did they act disappointed in their failures? It seems we have some folks that think we need to continually adapt our program around the whim and moods of the players, which I'm not seeing as having had great success in the past.

 

[solesrfr]

I have an opinion, but I am an idiot.




C

 

[alabamahusker]

I have an opinion, but I am an idiot.

C

Not going to lie, that made me chuckle a lot...

 

[Bleed Red]

You're saying that there's no great athletes below the P5 level because they weren't offered? You're about as wrong as a human could possibly be, but that's your opinion to have.

I don't know what the coaches saw in practice or how he performed because I don't go to practice. I know they spoke highly of him in interviews, but I suppose you can take that w/ a grain of salt. I know it was "reported" that they were using Reimer in certain pass coverage sub-packages in practice. I also know that they didn't sub a ton (see almost never) on passing downs and tended to keep their base package players in the game. Perhaps, that's why he didn't see the field. It's hard to say. As I said, it was something that annoyed me and I would have liked to see him out there w/ the bullets flying. They lost a lot of close games and their ILB coverage was a major weak spot. Maybe Reimer makes a difference, maybe not.

As far as your points 1 and 2, don't be daft. I "basically" said neither of those things.

Go read the thread in the recruiting forum on the kid from Scottsbluff. One of the most respected posters on this sight has said that if he was that great of an athlete and worthy of being offered at NU, some other P5 school would have noticed and offered. I'm simply using the same standards for someone who is already at NU. There may be great athletes at non-P5 schools, but few of them are true freshmen.

As for points 1 and 2...well, you are the one saying the coaches refused to play someone you believe could have helped. So, if they also felt that player could have helped, feel free to share your opinion of why that player didn't play in those situations. Everyone seems eager to blame coaches for play calling, personnel decisions, injuries, etc......I'm just asking you what possible explanation in your mind is the reason for someone not playing IF they were a better option?

 

[Bleed Red]

I could argue either way, but one thing that definitely happened over and over this season was the coaching staff telling us so-and-so player would contribute significantly in the next game, only to see them come in for one snap, or as a decoy.

It could be that the player is ready, but the coaches may have simply forgotten to rotate him in at the right moment.

Or maybe the right moment didn't occur in the game? That is a pretty harsh assessment of the staff to say they "forgot" to play a player. I guess if that is true (please, someone, show us that was the reason) then those calling for firing of coaches are probably correct.

 

[winnerwinner]

Or maybe the right moment didn't occur in the game? That is a pretty harsh assessment of the staff to say they "forgot" to play a player. I guess if that is true (please, someone, show us that was the reason) then those calling for firing of coaches are probably correct.

that's certainly possible as well. unfortunately, it does happen. doesn't necessarily mean the coaches need to be fired though. you'll never get a coach to admit that.

we saw this season on a few occasions where players being planned for redshirting were put in the game for only one play, only to regret it later. there was at least one time this season when they had to wave a player off the field who was meant to be part of a specific play package, but then a senior player had stayed on.

point is, if you are going to get young players involved in games which are not complete blowouts, then you will have to be particularly intentional about it, especially if you feel they are "ready". there will never be a "right moment" if its not a blowout.