Jump to content

Eichorst Out


hskr4life
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Donkey said:

No arguing Riley's qualifications.  My point is that some people are not mad at Riley per se.  They are mad Riley was offered (and accepted) the position.  Think of it as misdirected anger.

 

(Not your point, but) Hopefully the former more so than the latter. I don't know how 'you' could get mad at anyone who is qualified to accept a position somewhere, whether it's at a desk job or on the football field. My opinion, but nobody could blame Riley for taking it. If I was qualified that would be a great opportunity I couldn't pass up. But sure, people can get mad at Eichorst for offering him the job, that's fair. And it just highlights why it's so important to have an athletic director with a vision (and can act on it). That's why I'm also glad that they fired Eichorst before addressing coaches, because I wouldn't want a hot seat AD making any coaching changes for my program.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I found a gem in response to one of the kinds of people I was referring to in my earlier post.  This had me laughing out loud.  Spot on, to the point, brutally honest and well deserved smack down of someone who very much earned the description of "arrogant ass":

 

Quote

Well the present sure looks like shit, doesn’t it?

You’re butt hurt that your weird infatuation with a coach didn’t pan out.  You’ve thrown enough shit around this board at others it’s time you ate crow, but no, you gotta be a little bitch and piss and moan.  Guess what? Eichorst sucked ass as AD. He couldn’t even fire Bo right, he did it too late.  He didn’t understand traditions and lost big on the two Friday deals he pissed down his leg.  Regents shouldn’t have to step in and do his job for him.

There have been plenty of great points made on this thread about why the timing doesn’t matter, but you continue to piss and moan because you brown nosed so damn much and fanboyed riley like a teenage girl at an *NSYNC concert.  It isn’t about the coach it’s about the program and its trajectory, and this team looks like absolute shit in year three and lost to a mac team at home.  Quit trying to make the husker fan look stupid for being pissed about it and seeing the writing on the wall.

Look at the bright side Archie, now you have more phony excuses for riley, that oughta make you happy.

I’m tired of your arrogant ass looking down at people for being honest about the current state of the program.

The past? Bring it on. The present and future sure looked bright

 

What's truly funny is these people who are defending Riley would have excoriated Doc's defenders or Miles' defenders for offering the same "excuses" for our hoops coaches that they're throwing out there for our football coach.  So, I have to admit, I am enjoying this meltdown just a little bit right now. #shoeonotherfoot

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Cazzie22 said:

What top team runs a true triple option?   The service academies and Georgia Tech.   You equalize talent disparity by spreading the field to allow your athletes space.  

 

 

There isn't a "true" spread anymore.  Every team incorporates some of those concepts, just like virtually all non-pro-style offenses incorporate some sort of option and, yes, triple option football.  

GT is considered a triple option spread.  

Air Force is a flexbone offense with many complex passing schemes (Calhoun was an NFL OC).  They also use the Nebraska I fairly often.  They gave Michigan fits.  

Navy is GT's exact system.

I don't know enough about Army.  

  • You equalize talent disparity by chewing clock, not turning the ball over, and keeping your defense off the field.  
  • You create more isolation wide when you force defenses to live in the box.  Damaryius Thomas Gained almost 1200 yards his last year at GT because he was against m2m coverage every play.  We've never had a receiver go over 1000.  
  • Talent disparity is easier to compensate for in this system because the players you recruit to it are specialized.  That means you get a top 5 running quarterback, good shorter run blocking mobile linemen, the best fullbacks, and good running backs who know they are going to get carries.  Nebraska will never get an elite passer here at QB, and we will never get elite receivers either.  Not in stock, at least.  But we can get walkons willing to block and learn routes all day.  
  • Most importantly, the system is exotic for every team you play, and they have one week to prepare for it.  Easier said than done.  

I think the triple option or Nebraska I are the only offensive systems ever developed that can be championship-level successful at Nebraska in 2017.  It's too windy and the climate isn't sexy enough for everything else.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heck, Nebraska didn't run a triple option during the 90's heyday anyway (and even back to the 80's, I believe).

 

The fullback runs were all called in the huddle.  The only option was between the QB  and the IB.  We faked it to the fullback, but if it was an option play, he never even had a chance to get it.

 

To say that the triple option is the only offense Nebraska can run to have any success is misguided.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, huskercwg said:

What we had "back then" were offensive lines that were awesome.  Currently, I would not use the word awesome when describing our offensive line.

 

We were also on the forefront of the strength and conditioning programs in college and had the strongest and fastest players in nearly all positions on the field. That is no longer a differentiated position we have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HuskerFever said:

 

We were also on the forefront of the strength and conditioning programs in college and had the strongest and fastest players in nearly all positions on the field. That is no longer a differentiated position we have.

Steroids will do that. 

Edited by atskooc
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, atskooc said:

Heck, Nebraska didn't run a triple option during the 90's heyday anyway (and even back to the 80's, I believe).

 

The fullback runs were all called in the huddle.  The only option was between the QB  and the IB.  We faked it to the fullback, but if it was an option play, he never even had a chance to get it.

 

To say that the triple option is the only offense Nebraska can run to have any success is misguided.

 

 

 

The fact that you think the fullback can’t be part of the option because he’s not chosen as the ball carrier after the snap is.....interesting. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, CrazyforNUHOOPS said:

The fact that you think the fullback can’t be part of the option because he’s not chosen as the ball carrier after the snap is.....interesting. 

He never said that... Or I didnt read it that way.

 

He said nothing more than we didnt run a triple option in our heyday.

 

 He is correct.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, CrazyforNUHOOPS said:

The fact that you think the fullback can’t be part of the option because he’s not chosen as the ball carrier after the snap is.....interesting. 

 

Didn't Cory Schlesinger score two TDs against Miami in the Orangebowl on options?

 

I mean, that's the whole point of the scheme, isn't it?  Tommie reads what Warren Sapp is doing and if it's one read, he keeps it and if it's the other read, he slips the ball to Schlesinger and continues down the line as though he kept the ball.

 

Either read, the play sets up the same with the fullback running off the QB's back hip, whether he gets the ball or not. Otherwise, you can't surprise the defense when the fullback ends up with the ball. Right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Norm Peterson said:

 

Didn't Cory Schlesinger score two TDs against Miami in the Orangebowl on options?

 

I mean, that's the whole point of the scheme, isn't it?  Tommie reads what Warren Sapp is doing and if it's one read, he keeps it and if it's the other read, he slips the ball to Schlesinger and continues down the line as though he kept the ball.

 

Either read, the play sets up the same with the fullback running off the QB's back hip, whether he gets the ball or not. Otherwise, you can't surprise the defense when the fullback ends up with the ball. Right?

No, he did not score those touchdowns on options. Those were both fullback traps. There was no other option on those plays other than to give the ball to the fullback. 

 

“We practiced those trap plays, just for Miami, for a month, and when they called it in the huddle, I didn’t think a thing about it because I knew it would be blocked perfectly,” Schlesinger said in 2014.

 

http://journalstar.com/drawing-it-up-cory-schlesinger-traps-miami/article_3d7df390-f0eb-55d5-832b-cfe930364e45.html

Edited by atskooc
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, CrazyforNUHOOPS said:

The fact that you think the fullback can’t be part of the option because he’s not chosen as the ball carrier after the snap is.....interesting. 

How you comprehended my comment is...interesting. 

 

What I'm saying is the fullback wasn't chosen as the ball carrier on an option play in the huddle.  If Osborne called an option, the fullback had no chance of getting the ball (though I do think I remember hearing we did run a true triple option play twice in a bowl game, so the fullback had a chance on those two plays).

 

If the fullback got the ball up the middle in our offense, it was a fullback trap.  Not an option.

Edited by atskooc
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, atskooc said:

Heck, Nebraska didn't run a triple option during the 90's heyday anyway (and even back to the 80's, I believe).

 

The fullback runs were all called in the huddle.  The only option was between the QB  and the IB.  We faked it to the fullback, but if it was an option play, he never even had a chance to get it.

 

To say that the triple option is the only offense Nebraska can run to have any success is misguided.

 

 

 

I didn't say that, to be clear.  I said either the Nebraska I or triple option.  I don't think it's splitting hairs to separate the two.  I wouldn't mind Frost as HC because he understands those principles and incorporates a lot option into his spread schemes.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, LK1 said:

I didn't say that, to be clear.  I said either the Nebraska I or triple option.  I don't think it's splitting hairs to separate the two.  I wouldn't mind Frost as HC because he understands those principles and incorporates a lot option into his spread schemes.  

 

Yep.   I wanted Frost the last go round.   Still hoping (pry unrealistically) that Riley can figure it out...but if not...all aboard the Frost train

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, LK1 said:

I didn't say that, to be clear.  I said either the Nebraska I or triple option.  I don't think it's splitting hairs to separate the two.  I wouldn't mind Frost as HC because he understands those principles and incorporates a lot option into his spread schemes.  

I hadn't read the entire thread.  I saw Cazzie22's mention of the triple option when you quoted him, so I figured someone had been asking for Nebraska to run it.

 

My comment was more in general (not specifically in regard to your post) to those who I thought were calling for Nebraska to "bring back" the triple option (that wasn't ever really here to begin with).  And now looking back at the thread, I see those people didn't really exist in this discussion.  ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, 49r said:

 

I would imagine that since it's the offseason @hhcdimes is giving us a little leeway here.  But, I agree - all the football talk might be suited for somewhere else.

 

It's pretty hard to separate because the athletic department is driven by football.  If we went to the tourney last year and even won a game, would Eichorst still have a job? Maybe but probably not. The hire is going to be driven by football. It's hard to get away from it and obviously most of us are fans of all of the Nebraska teams here. I personally just gloss over the discussion of what offense the next football coach might run at the point we might need another coach because what does that even matter here and now? But it's the offseason and everyone here is pretty good about moderating themselves without requiring much input from me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...