[Husker] General Thoughts...

Tue Nov 6 13:11:31 CST 2007

--- Jeff Volk <jeffv at alphavideo.com> wrote:

> On the Relationship Between T.O. & B.C.: Why does
> every single
> interaction between the 2 need to be read into and
> dissected and
> conspiracy theorized? TO said this - BC said that.
> BC didn't shake his
> hand...bla bla bla. Who cares if he didn't shake his
> hand? None of us
> know if it intentional or not so just let it go.
> BC's fate is sealed -
> making nice with T.O. or publicly kissing his ass
> isn't going to change
> that fate one iota? Why does there have to be a
> million messages on the
> list about it? 

I've watched that video a few times and since it was
edited when it panned away from Callahan, it's nearly
impossible to judge anything from it.  Anybody reading
anything into it is just looking to create
controversy.

> On Recruiting: No matter what people want to
> believe, recruiting is the
> lifeblood of college football. Fans need to realize
> that no coaching
> staff in the nation bases their recruiting practices
> and who they target
> as recruits based on the ESPN 150 or how many stars
> Rivals have given
> them. Recruiting coordinators and coaching staffs
> use Rivals at best as
> a database of names, 40-times, etc. - all of which
> is cross checked
> against several recruiting data services that are
> not available to the
> public, as well as their own research at camps, on
> recruiting visits,
> etc. Blaine Gabbert was a key recruit not because he
> was a 4-star Rivals
> player or an ESPN 150 player - he was a key recruit
> because after film
> analysis and extensive research the coaches
> projected him as a player
> that fit into and eventually excel in our current
> system. Player
> evaluation, be it college recruiting, or any of the
> pro sports drafts is
> a highly speculative proposition because you are not
> only interested in
> the physical talents of a player today - but
> projecting how they will be
> as players in 3, 4 or 5 years from now. It is like
> looking into a very
> murky crystal ball. I just hope fans realize that
> Rivals star rankings,
> etc. are used by Sports Information Departments to
> sell and market the
> recruiting classes to the fan base, not something
> that the coaches use
> as an actual evaluation tool or basis for who they
> recruit. 

It's easy to lose the distinction between recruiting
and recruiting services.  Recruiting is important, but
it's just the first step.  You've got to develop
players and coach 'em up.  Missteps anywhere along the
line will give you subpar results.  As for recruiting
services such as Rivals, I think you've given a great
explanation as to what their purpose is.

> On the Walk On Program: Most college teams have gone
> to an invitation
> only walk-on program. Those that do have an open
> walk-on program do so
> via a tryout system. You come to an open tryout and
> if you meet the
> minimum physical criteria (40 yd dash, shuttle run,
> some agility and
> football tests) you are invited to walk on. I think
> way too much has
> been made of the changes in the walk on program,
> including by (should I
> dare say it) T.O. The days of 150 or 170 man rosters
> are over. With the
> scholarship limits and small margin for error in
> player development, a
> roster that large makes it impossible to actually
> coach during the
> limited practice time that exists. It is a simple
> matter of logistics -
> it is a lot easier to coach 120 kids than it is 150
> kids. Also, having a
> large number of walk-ons who are a part of the team
> has a large
> financial impact. You have to cloth them, feed them,
> locker them, tutor
> them, etc. All of this costs a lot of precious money
> and takes up
> valuable human resources. From coaching, logistical,
> efficiency and
> financial standpoints, it just isn't feasible nor is
> it a common
> practice in college football anymore to have huge
> walk-on programs. 

Tom Osborne has stated that he'd like the walk-on
program to be restored.  With that in mind, I'd expect
to see the next head coach expand the walk-on program
from where it is today.  It might not get back to the
175-200 player level, but I'd expect to see it
expanded.  Osborne's point about running double
stations seems valid, and I'm curious to see if that
can restore some sort of competitive advantage to the
next staff.  Certainly our current staff has been
sub-par in the area of development of players, and
this might be a possible solution.

> On Bo Pelini as the Next Head Coach: As much as
> people in Lincoln pine
> away for Bo Pelini, I would be SHOCKED if he was the
> next Husker Head
> Coach. In fact, I would be shocked if Bo was given
> any type of a Head
> Coaching job at a high, high profile program. The
> problem is Bo himself
> - while he is a great defensive football mind, he
> doesn't have the
> personality required to be a Head Coach. Quite
> frankly he is very
> abrasive and is generally considered an a$$hole by
> most people in
> college football circles. A Head Coach today isn't
> as much an X & O guy
> as he is a CEO and he has to have the ability to
> engage recruits, fans &
> corporate partners. Of the elite Head Coaches today,
> most are not really
> very good with the clip board and surround
> themselves with great
> coordinators. The value of guys like Meyer, Stoops,
> Brown, Tressel comes
> in their ability to recruit kids, bring in $$$ and
> energize the fans. Bo
> Pelini does not excel, nor does he have the
> personality to excel, at any
> of those things. 

I think we've seen Bo Pelini energize the players, and
certainly he's energized fans at Nebraska.  Now, can
he recruit?  That's a question, as it doesn't sound
like he's been asked to do that much.

Urban Meyer and Bob Stoops were young coordinators who
brought great X's and O's to their teams.  Meyer made
the spread option the offense du jour  in college
football.  Stoops took Florida's defense from the
woodshed Nebraska left them behind in 1995 and made
them a championship group.

> On Turner Gill as the Next Head Coach: Because of
> the connection with
> T.O. and the fan base in Nebraska, Turner has to be
> considered the front
> runner. I don't think people realize how hard it is
> to succeed at
> Buffalo. There are an incredible amount of obstacles
> there, from
> facilities to money to talent pool that make the
> turnaround he has made
> in that program far more remarkable than people
> understand. I question
> Turner's X & O ability, but if surrounded with good
> coordinators I don't
> think that would be an issue at all. Given the
> relationship he would
> immediately have with the fans and boosters and his
> other intangibles,
> his hire could make a lot of sense. I think out of
> the gate Turner is at
> least even money or 50/50 to be the next Head Coach
> of the Huskers. 

Gill's resume at Buffalo is encouraging, but
incomplete at best.  The only reason to consider Gill
is his relationship with Tom Osborne.  I fear that
hiring Gill might be like Oklahoma's hiring of John
Blake.  Of course, Blake's problem was incompetent
coordinators.  (Remember in 1997 when they changed
offensive styles every week and a half?)

> On If Nebraska is a Quality Job: Of course it can
> be. First, a permanent
> AD needs to be put in place. Who the AD is will
> dictate in a lot of ways
> how good the job is and what the expectations for
> success will be. All
> of the other factors that determine how good a
> potential job is are all
> there in our favor. Our fans are regarded as some of
> the nation's best.
> Our facilities really are second to none. We have a
> rich tradition of
> winning and sending kids to the NFL. We have a great
> academic and
> graduation track record. All of the things are there
> - the AD is the
> final piece in how good the job is. 

Tom Osborne is the athletic director at Nebraska, and
is going to be for the forseeable future.  He'll
likely select his successor.

> On What Fan's Expectations Should Be: I think that
> in today's world of
> college football the expectation of all fans, be
> them fans of NU, OU,
> Ohio State, Michigan, Florida or whomever should be
> different than in
> the past. As a general rule I think fans of elite
> programs should have
> expectations of seasons that average 9 or 10 wins, a
> top flight bowl
> game annually, a conference championship every 2 to
> 3 years and a
> national championship every 4 to 8 years. If
> everything breaks your way
> you might see a small stretch of dominance, a la USC
> or Ohio State in
> the last several years, but that should not be the
> expectation.

You had me until you said to expect a national
championship every 4 to 8 years.  Nobody matches that
record.  Absolutely nobody.  The only thing I notice
is that championships tend to come in bunches.  So if
you win one, you're more likely to win another one in
a year or two.  But if you haven't won one lately,
you'd better not be demanding one within the next five
years or so.  Nebraska went 23 years without one. 
Heck, Bob Stoops is nearing the upper range of that 8
year range.  

Mike Jaixen
Blog: http://huskermike.blogspot.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 