Barney Cotton

http://journalstar.com/sports/huske
rs/life-in-the-red/cotton-s-duties-
altered-slightly-pelini-says/articl
e_24fde2de-778e-11e2-aeb2-0019bb296
3f4.html

According to this article Barney Cotton will no longer be Nebraska's OL coach... no he's not fired.  He's shifted over to coaching TEs and Run Game Coordinator (2nd in command to Tim Beck).  I actually like this move.  Our TEs mostly only run block (which is Cotton's forte) and he has a lot of experience with the running game and how to rotate RBs effectively.  

I think this is a move to put a GA with Garrison for OL.  Make the TEs better at run blocking as well as keeping the RBs carries more evened out.  I think Bo doesn't want to see what happened to Aaron Green and Braylon Heard happen to Terrell Newby and Adam Taylor.  This is a good move for the staff IMO.  Rich Fisher will still be working with the TEs in running routes and catching drills.

I personally feel like Cotton gets more grief than he deserves.  You look at last years line and we had 3 walk-on's starting.  You can't sqeeze water from a rock.  That said, I understand why and ultimately this is probably a good move.  It sounds like Pelini leans on Cotton quite a bit and if this free's him up thats good. 

The other side of this coin is Pelini clearly has faith in Garrison.  I happen to as well and I think he'll set the right tone for this group. 

I personally feel like Cotton gets more grief than he deserves.  You look at last years line and we had 3 walk-on's starting.  You can't sqeeze water from a rock.

I'm just gonna throw this crazy idea out....... Recruiting. That way you don't have squeeze water from a rock. 

I hope it works OL under cotton hasn't been pretty so maybe this might work give our offense another boost.

I actually like this move.  Our TEs mostly only run block (which is Cotton's forte) and he has a lot of experience with the running game and how to rotate RBs effectively. 

I think this is a move to put a GA with Garrison for OL.  Make the TEs better at run blocking as well as keeping the RBs carries more evened out.

I could agree with most of the positives surrounding this move if it weren't that it makes me wonder about some overlap or impact on the RB's regarding Ron Brown.  He probably won't be around forever but practically no one has shown more impact on every single position that he ever coaches than Ron.  I am not sure of what the overall plan is on how this will work between Beck, Brown and Cotton so I am hoping for some effective outcome without affecting the development (or recruiting) of RB's. 


I guess we'll have to wait and see but I am just hoping that Barney doesn't move into another area that takes a nose dive without him being held accountable for it.  I don't mind at all that he might get out of the way of Garrison but personally I would have rather seen them move him to a more obscure position (e.g. putting him in charge of the equipment managers or the valet parking.)   


In any event less of Barney can't be a bad thing in my opinion.  GBR!!        

I think this is a move to put a GA with Garrison for OL.  Make the TEs better at run blocking as well as keeping the RBs carries more evened out.  I think Bo doesn't want to see what happened to Aaron Green and Braylon Heard happen to Terrell Newby and Adam Taylor.  This is a good move for the staff IMO.  Rich Fisher will still be working with the TEs in running routes and catching drills.


I know I will probably be accused of sour grapes, but where in his college acreer has Cotton done well?  There is a certain sense of irony that after Shawn Watson got dumped we still had many of the same offensive problems without Watson.  And now Watson has managed to in part be responsible for Louisville beating an SEC team and our Huskers still haven't managed that.

Because Cotton still has 5 miilion of his kids playing football at Nebraska, we probably won't see him gone until all his kids graduate.  Hopefully, we'll now have a coach that can effectively show our OL how to pass block.    

Disagree with your point about Watson... Nebraska was well below mediocre in Watson's final two years here... in two years Beck brought us to the #1 offense in the B1G as well as a Top 25 offense and Top 10 rushing attack (something Watson never achieved in his career).  Watson's best offensive rating in his career was with Colorado in 2004 when they had the 33rd ranked offense in the country.

Watson won with Louisville because it's easier to do well in the Big East.  And Bridgewater is a more athletic Joe Ganz (but Watson didn't recruit Ganz or Bridgewater).

Offensive line is an issue with Cotton sure, but running game hasn't been.  Our OL will improve with Garrison at the helm and our TEs will improve with Cotton at the helm IMO.  Win win. 

Disagree with your point about Watson... Nebraska was well below mediocre in Watson's final two years here... in two years Beck brought us to the #1 offense in the B1G as well as a Top 25 offense and Top 10 rushing attack (something Watson never achieved in his career).  Watson's best offensive rating in his career was with Colorado in 2004 when they had the 33rd ranked offense in the country.

footballnut--I love stats.  Part of my job is being a numbers cruncher, but these stats are somewhat misleading.  We still lost three games last year--ugly style.  I don't know if our statistical improvement is so much due to Beck as its been to Martinez's maturity.  Take away his running stats and what are we left with?  Are our backs getting more yardage because of anything new due to our OC or even with our OL?  Or is it because Martinez has happy feet and adds another dimension to our backfield shades of the EC era in the first part of this century. 

Watson won with Louisville because it's easier to do well in the Big East.  And Bridgewater is a more athletic Joe Ganz (but Watson didn't recruit Ganz or Bridgewater).

To and including thumping #3 Florida in a bowl?  Teams and here I'll include Nebraska whether many here or not want to accept this.  We are not Alabama--we're not 9 deep on the OL or at running back.  As such what do we do?  Set up the pass by running first or set up the run by passing first.  We don't really have the line to do either.  The only thing saving our running game now--again--is Martinez.  That is not enough to put us at the top of the B1G.  Watsons offense @ Louisville 3700 yards passing/1500 yards running.  Nebraska?  2800 yards passing/2300 yeards running.  Take away Martinez's feet and our running effort is down to 1300 years.  And quite frankly much of Martinez's running yards especiially in games where we were behind were pretty much after the fact. 

Good ol Barney is why I've pushed for dumping Bo all along.  Getting him, Barney, out of his position is a step in the right direction.  

  

Again... disagree.  Taylor Martinez had 1,000+ yards this season... over 700 of that was on designed run plays, not scrambles.  Ameer Abdullah didn't even three games and he had 1100+ yards rushing, Rex Burkhead had 675 yards and barely played this season.  Our three leading rushers all had 5+ yard per carry average.<br /><br />Passing the ball, we did our best since 2008... that's right... 2008 with Joe Ganz. Cumulatively almost 3,000 yards and 24 TDs through the air.  We nearly had a Sophomore wide receiver get 1,000 yards receiving for the first time in Husker history.<br /><br />Contrast that with Shawn Watson circa 2009-2011 and the difference is palpable.  <br /><br />As for our "blow out losses" our point totals in those losses are as follows: 30, 38, 31, 31...  Offense was not the issue.  You want heads to roll it's on the defensive side of the ball for those games, not the offense, gave up 600+ yards on defense 3 times in those 4 losses and the other loss we gave up 300+ in passing alone.<br /><br />You can't subtract Martinez as part of the offense to make your point.  He IS part of the offense.  That's why Beck recruits mobile QBs.  this offense is better without Shawn Watson running it.<br /><br />You look at Louisville's numbers like it's amazing.  they lost to Syracuse... Syracuse... 45-26.  Florida didn't want to be in the Sugar Bowl, they didn't respect Louisville at all and Louisville whooped em because of it, props to them.   

As for our "blow out losses" our point totals in those losses are as follows: 30, 38, 31, 31...  Offense was not the issue.

Offense was a huge issue.  In our bowl game we couldn't score in the second half even though overall we had the ball 5 minutes more than Georgia did.  When your "D" is on the field that much they are literally tired out.  Same way with the OSU game.  We had very little offense in the first half even though overall we had the ball longer.  If we can't score to give the "D" a breather, again they will tire out.  The Wisconsin game? We score a lousy 17 points in the first three quarters and you want to blame the defense.  The only fault the defense had was they were on the playing field far too long. 

You can't subtract Martinez as part of the offense to make your point.

I did that to prove a point.  it's shades of the Crouch era.  Granted he didn't have the throwing talent that Martinez has, but everytime we lost badly with Crouch as QB all the oppsition did was keep everyone else in check and forced Crouch to be the sole offense.  And that is happening with Martinez.  Contain the rest of our offense so that it's all about Martinez and teams beat the hell out of us.  And most of that responsibility still falls on Barneys shoulders (and a little bit Becks). 

All the improvement in stats don't mean much if you cannot affix them with a "W" at the end of the day.   
  

To pin the losses on the offense completely ignores the absolute dismantling of our defense.  Shouldn't give up 45 points to Georgia, or 70 to Wisconsin, 36 to UCLA or 56 against OSU.

Martinez has much more help around him than Crouch did by the way.  Abdullah, Bell, Enunwa, Turner... the list goes on.  This offense is better than it ever was with Watson.  Watson's doing well at Louisville, means nothing about his time with Nebraska.

We do have some of the same offensive line problems as before, but that's because we have the same OL coach.  Our WRs are better, our RBs are just as good if not better... We had a 2nd team all-american on OL, something we've never had under Watson.  If you couple this offense with the 2009 or 2010, heck even 2011 defense this team will have won two BCS bowls by now.  

The only fault the defense had was they were on the playing field far too long.

  

True statement.  Well, except for they couldnt' tackle either.  And they took bad angles.  And they lacked speed.  And they didn't produce any pressure on the qb.  And they had too many dumb penalties.  And they failed to make plays on the ball.  And...well...pretty much anything else bad that you can think of.  But yeah other than that their only fault was being on the field for too long. "sigh"    

but personally I would have rather seen them move him to a more obscure position (e.g. putting him in charge of the equipment managers or the valet parking.)

  

bwahahahahhaha!  You stole the words right out of my mouth Run! 

To pin the losses on the offense completely ignores the absolute dismantling of our defense.  Shouldn't give up 45 points to Georgia, or 70 to Wisconsin, 36 to UCLA or 56 against OSU.

You are correct in the three big losses we scored over 30 points in each game.  We averaged well over 400 yards offensively.  But let's take a look at how that scoring happened.  In the Georgia game as well as the Ohio State game we scored some in the first half and little in the second.  What does that tell you?  Our defense was on the field far to long especially in the second half.  In CCG with Wisky, we scored a mere/measly through the first three quarters and you wonder why a defense under those conditions plays poorly?  We either need a team that can score at will (like Oregon) again and agian or we need a team that can just grind out the yardage and the points on the ground--we have neither.  When we score thirty points a game, gain over four hundred yards offense and control the clock, and still lose games by huge margarins and you want to say it's the defense?  

I'm aware that we need improvement on the defensive side of the ball as well (especially in the direction of speed/quickness), but all the numbers you've thrown out for the offense pretty much states the obvious problem--we can move the ball, we just ain scoring.  If you leaver your defense out on the field sometimes up to 2/3 of the game, they aren't going to be nearly as effective if the offense is doing its job and gives the defense a breather once in awhile.

Where our offense has failed is to effectively take control of games from the start. 

Bo Pelini is a defensive head coach.  The defense should be setting the tone for this team.  It failed.  Let's take a look at first half scoring in those games:

UCLA - 24 points... Nebraska's offense controlled the ball for the most part but UCLA sliced us up.   What would have happened if the defense had held UCLA to even... 17 points in that first half?  We would have won.  Granted the offense layed a bomb in the second half, and much of that was on Tim Beck for that game I agree.  But giving up 24 points in a half for a team with a defensive coach is ludicrous.

Ohio State - 35 points... Nebraska's offense was actually humming along.  Martinez did throw the pick-6 so that would lower it to 28 points.  But after the pick-6 the offense responded by going up 17-7 early in the second quarter.  We were controlling the clock and the ball.  Then our defense just stopped playing.  In three plays OSU goes up 21-17 and by half time it's 35-24.  Start the second half, Nebraska drives the length of the field EASY and scores a TD... 35-31, we're back in it.  All we need is for a well rested defense to get a stop and we have Ohio State back on their heals.  Then OSU scores on an easy drive to go up 42-31 and they never looked back.

Wisconsin - First drive of the game... before the offense can even get on the field is a 3 play 75 yard TD drive.  Martinez throws a pick-6 again and we're down 14-0.  (I don't fault Tim Beck for that).  Then our defense gives up 4 straight TD drives.  How giving up 42 (35) points in one half can't be pinned on the defense is beyond me.  Then they scored on every posession in the third quarter too... another 21 points.  All that scoring is on the offense?  really?  the defense couldn't even get one stop, because they were too tired?

Georgia - Nebraska gives up 300+ yards passing... after every big play Nebraska gets on offense, the defense gives the play right back to Georgia.  Nebraska scored on their first possession of the 3rd quarter to go up 31-23... it could have ended there.  Then the defense gives up a long drive and a TD and 2 point conversion.  


I'm not saying the offense was partly culpable (especially the turnovers... I think you can point to turnovers in the OSU and Georgia games as turning points) but the defense was the major problem a season ago.  Not the offense.  Even in our wins we were giving up 28 to Northwestern, 21 to MSU,  23 to PSU, 27 to Wisconsin.  Our offense had to score 27+ a game to get us to where we were. 

We had a team last year that didn't have any depth on the DLine and as a result often wore down. We were going to have to outscore teams to win and we did that quite a bit. 

Nut gave a great breakdown of the places where that didn't happen. In some cases, mistakes by the offense made things worse. I believe part of that was knowing they had to outscore the other team, Taylor pushed some things too hard trying to make a play. That happens.

I hope that as the redshirts come off and Bo moves to get some of the new recruits more time in the rotation, we could see an uptick there. It won't be like the days of Mr. Suh, but we shouldn't be getting run right over. 

I'm not saying the offense was partly culpable (especially the turnovers... I think you can point to turnovers in the OSU and Georgia games as turning points) but the defense was the major problem a season ago.  Not the offense.  Even in our wins we were giving up 28 to Northwestern, 21 to MSU,  23 to PSU, 27 to Wisconsin.  Our offense had to score 27+ a game to get us to where we were.

footballnut--double check the  number of plays we had before turnovers and the number of plays we had before we had to punt in all three of the big losses.  Most involved three plays or less.  When you average between the three games almost 5 turnovers/game plus the plays we averaged before we had to punt, our defense was on the field far too much.  I'm not saying there isn't room for defensive improvement, but Beck and co. is going a long way in wearing our defense out when they have to be on the field that much. 

When a player like Burkhead tears off an 60 yard run and then play number two we fumpble the ball, the rushing stat looks good, but the defense suffers because of the efumble.  Amd issues like that happened far too often in our losses.  Our RBs & QB got happy feet because they had no protection--boom we are either puning or we've made a turnover.  And I don't fault the kids...Cotten is Rotten.   

Defense wins games and championships.

End of story 

Sorry bigred... our offense was near the bottom of the Big 12 and the nation statistically in 09 and 10 but we won games because of the DEFENSE.  Defense has more than a little room to improve.  They were flat out porous against the run last year.  We averaged more 3 and outs in 09, and 10 than we did in 2011 or 2012... look it up.  It's true that the offense is partly culpable... but my whole premise is that Beck is and has been better than Watson.  The stats don't refute that, they can't, because Beck has done more in two years than Watson did in 4.

Beck knows how to adjust, change on the fly and identify weaknesses during games.  Watson, has (in all his stops) lived by the game plan and died by the game plan.  When the game plan is working he looks great, when the defense has adjusted and snuffed it out the offense more than sputters.  His entire career has been that way.  Watson has been a Coordinator since 2000... his offenses never did better than 33rd and he had never been to much less won a BCS bowl intil 2012... Beck is on the verge of doing it in his 3rd year as an OC, in a much tougher conference, with much better defenses.

I'll put it this way.  If Nebraska's offense plays the exact same in 2013 as it did in 2012, but if the Defense improved from giving up 27 ppg (58th) to just giving up 24 ppg and improved from being 90th (that's right... 90th) against the run giving up close to 200 yards per game to giving up about 150 (50th) I guarentee we win at least 11 maybe 12 games in 2013.

It's a two way street the way I see it. If you turn the ball over or have a lot of 3 and outs, then "Yes" the defense will be tired. On the other hand, if the defense doesn't make stops and has the offense playing from behind, then turnovers and 3 and outs will most likely happen. I think it was clearly obvious what side of the ball was the weak link all year long, including last year as well. Our defense sucked and everyone knows it. If we are scoring a lot of points, then there must have been some sustained drives, right? Most teams don't score anywhere near what we did, but they didn't get blasted like we did. If we were marginally good on defense, we would have beaten UCLA, OSU and Georgia. The B1G championship game was a loss from the opening kick-off. Even a marginal defensive effort would not have stopped that loss. If we improve on defense and our offense stays productive like this past year, I see us having a darn good season this coming year. 

Damn, Nut. You must have been thinking the same thing at the same time I was. That's spooky!