Mission Accomplished, Nebraska is Back, & Solich

[TGHusker]

Knapp, I get what your saying about not firing an average coach. But is that what you want? I've been a staunch supporter of Bo over his time here but when you think about it do you want a coach that may go 8-4 a couple times, never gets blown out and often puts his team in contention and talk for championships? Or do you wanna stick with the quo of getting 9-wins but losing when it counts and getting blown out by lesser teams, getting beat by a weak NW last year. A good coach doesn't lose to them, or ISU. Theres more than wins and losses in this game, it's how you play the game. I've seen the CU game in 01, the TTU game, and now saturdays game. It was the worst of the three. And unfortunately it's become a norm of Pelini's tenure that I've been hoping we could get past... Up until that game I was all aboard, rose colored glasses, but now I'm remebering that this isn't the first time this team has allowed this and I don't know if he can fix it on his own. But I do know one thing, somethings gotta change.

I agree - I think this was the worse of the big game disasters.

This article by Dirk. I'm not a great Dirk fan - I think he tries to hard to make a name for himself wt Bo bashing - but this article sums up my feelings. It addresses the 'average' issue and expectations. He notes that we are in that 'no man's land' of indecision - Bo isn't bad enought to be fire but not good enough to win the big one - unless he was in the SEC - he'd been fired because of the competitiveness there.

http://sports.omaha....-chatter-dec-3/

 

[kchusker_chris]

Every coach hires their friends. Everyone. No coach hires a staff full of perfect strangers. This critique about Bo is perhaps the most foolish, and it needs to stop.

yeah - but his friends aren't very experienced as coaches - so that's where this becomes more controversial. When we went into this season with a total of 1 year of experience at the 2 coordinator levels it's going to bite us in the a$$ sometimes. i'm all for hiring your friends (or dad)...but when you're friends are basically fresh off the HS field it gets iffy. Huge risk. If you look at his history, guys like Pap, and Eckler had no experience outside of LSU. Fisher, Garrison, Stai, Beck, Marrow, etc. There just isn't much substance there.

One of his more experience hires reads like this: Northern Iowa, Nebraska-Omaha, Northern Iowa, Hastings College, New Mexico State, Ohio University. I mean that's great an all - but should that be one of our most experience staff members? Do we have anyone on staff that's worked at a BCS school as an assistant? (i'm not sure Kansas counts). Kaz/Cotton/Brown the only ones?

 

[knapplc]

Every coach hires their friends. Everyone. No coach hires a staff full of perfect strangers. This critique about Bo is perhaps the most foolish, and it needs to stop.

yeah - but his friends aren't very experienced as coaches - so that's where this becomes more controversial. When we went into this season with a total of 1 year of experience at the 2 coordinator levels it's going to bite us in the a$$ sometimes. i'm all for hiring your friends (or dad)...but when you're friends are basically fresh off the HS field it gets iffy. Huge risk. If you look at his history, guys like Pap, and Eckler had no experience outside of LSU. Fisher, Garrison, Stai, Beck, Marrow, etc. There just isn't much substance there.

One of his more experience hires reads like this: Northern Iowa, Nebraska-Omaha, Northern Iowa, Hastings College, New Mexico State, Ohio University. I mean that's great an all - but should that be one of our most experience staff members?

Of those two Coordinator hires only Papuchis has had a bad year. The offense is scoring points and racking up yards. It's the defense that is a disaster.

Fisher is looking more and more brilliant as time wears on. Stai and Garrison have done more for this line than Cotton ever did, and Marrow seems to be OK.

The problem is that Pap didn't get this defense playing at a high level consistently all year. And we had stupid, basic football errors far too often. Our front seven is mediocre at best, and our Special Teams is a disaster. So it's hit-or-miss regarding who was or wasn't a good hire, and we can't simply point to "Bo's friends" as the problem. Each coach, individually, needs to be judged on his own merits. Decrying the practice of hiring friends is missing the point.

 

[The Dude]

Cry me a river. Most teams would kill for 10 wins.

Good for them. We aren't "most teams".

In what way? We appear very average these days.

Bingo.

And this is a problem.

 

[Army_Allen]

I'm not saying we need to keep Pelini.  I agree that we can't have these blowout losses ever, ever again.  I agreed with that after Ohio State, after South Carolina, after Michigan, after Wisconsin, after Oklahoma back in 2008.  These are not acceptable, ever.  We hired a "project" coach who was going to have to grow into the position.  He's growing, but the progress is slow.  So... what do we do? Do we can him after three ten-win seasons in five years?  Do we can him for the four losses a year he inevitably earns?  Do we can him for the blowouts?  Whatever reason we can him, it had better be a good reason, one that other coaches can agree with and won't get spooked by, because if we fire a coach who wins 9-10 games a year, every year, we're not going to get a decent coach to come here to replace him.  The bar would be too high.  

And to the inevitable reply from those who think we can get any coach we want, if we just offer them enough money, you're being terribly myopic about that.  The fact is, we opened up the purse strings to several coaches back in 2004 and we ended up with Bill Callahan.  Anyone wanting to repeat that mistake is crazy.

I'm not going to say I know what to do here either because I don't know myself. What i do know is that these losses the way they happen are not acceptable. If that's your grounds for the firing (even if i don't want him fired. Jury still out) then you can find that elite coach that knows we do expect conistent wins comparable to Pelini's but without the humiliating and devastating losses to lesser teams. Do i know who that guy is? Nope, but if it is Bo and he can get us out of this, by all means, next year will be your BEST oppurtunity to do so. No blowout losses, you should get 11-12 wins regular season. 12 if you want a bcs bowl with a loss to OSU. As long as its respectable loss. And finally compete with the big boy in your bowl. Next year is your last if you wanna bring this school to prominence. If you want it, it's yours. If you cower and go to Tenn, by all means goodbye and we'll find someone to get the job done. (sorry my phone doesn't do line breaks...

 

[TGHusker]

I'm not saying we need to keep Pelini. I agree that we can't have these blowout losses ever, ever again. I agreed with that after Ohio State, after South Carolina, after Michigan, after Wisconsin, after Oklahoma back in 2008. These are not acceptable, ever. We hired a "project" coach who was going to have to grow into the position. He's growing, but the progress is slow. So... what do we do? Do we can him after three ten-win seasons in five years? Do we can him for the four losses a year he inevitably earns? Do we can him for the blowouts? Whatever reason we can him, it had better be a good reason, one that other coaches can agree with and won't get spooked by, because if we fire a coach who wins 9-10 games a year, every year, we're not going to get a decent coach to come here to replace him. The bar would be too high.

And to the inevitable reply from those who think we can get any coach we want, if we just offer them enough money, you're being terribly myopic about that. The fact is, we opened up the purse strings to several coaches back in 2004 and we ended up with Bill Callahan. Anyone wanting to repeat that mistake is crazy.

But when do we bump up against the 'Peter Principle" here? It is like saying NU is destined to always be average. I can understand 2004 - Frank just went 9-3 and coaches were gun shy to come here. But I think we have better facilities now and we have shown a degree of patience with Bo - we didn't fire him after his 1st 4 loss season or after loosing 2 cc games in the Big 12. We allowed him to change the staff. I think NU should give Bo the opportunity to make some changes this year. But if we end up wt the same issues of under performance next year, a year that has a easier schedule, then we need to start looking to see if there is a rising HC star that can be lured to NU. We have to keep up wt U Meyer at OSU. He must have saw potential outside of the SEC to develope something special. He will dominate if we don't upgrade our coaching (either via better assistants or by better HC). Better staff will recruit better, develop players, and game plan and adjust better. While players win games, it is up to the coaches to put them in the right position (recurit right, develop right, execute right) to do so.

 

[kchusker_chris]

Every coach hires their friends. Everyone. No coach hires a staff full of perfect strangers. This critique about Bo is perhaps the most foolish, and it needs to stop.

yeah - but his friends aren't very experienced as coaches - so that's where this becomes more controversial. When we went into this season with a total of 1 year of experience at the 2 coordinator levels it's going to bite us in the a$$ sometimes. i'm all for hiring your friends (or dad)...but when you're friends are basically fresh off the HS field it gets iffy. Huge risk. If you look at his history, guys like Pap, and Eckler had no experience outside of LSU. Fisher, Garrison, Stai, Beck, Marrow, etc. There just isn't much substance there.

One of his more experience hires reads like this: Northern Iowa, Nebraska-Omaha, Northern Iowa, Hastings College, New Mexico State, Ohio University. I mean that's great an all - but should that be one of our most experience staff members?

Of those two Coordinator hires only Papuchis has had a bad year. The offense is scoring points and racking up yards. It's the defense that is a disaster.

Fisher is looking more and more brilliant as time wears on. Stai and Garrison have done more for this line than Cotton ever did, and Marrow seems to be OK.

The problem is that Pap didn't get this defense playing at a high level consistently all year. And we had stupid, basic football errors far too often. Our front seven is mediocre at best, and our Special Teams is a disaster. So it's hit-or-miss regarding who was or wasn't a good hire, and we can't simply point to "Bo's friends" as the problem. Each coach, individually, needs to be judged on his own merits. Decrying the practice of hiring friends is missing the point.

I don't disagree. I'm just still a little bitter about the Pap hire. I'm curious how this season would have turned out if that decision has been reversed, and 750k went out to someone like Stoops. Seems like a lot of money, but I'd say UCLA was a win. Ohio State is a close game. Some of those others aren't comebacks and Saturday night doesn't happen.

And I'm not sold of this offense. I'm convinced the style of play leads to 70-30 losses. You aren't going to see Beck recognize the defensive issues, and modify the gameplan to slow the game down and keep things tight into the 4th quarter. The Ohio State game got out of control as much because of the offense as the defense. The Wisconsin game - not as much - but it still didn't give any help to a defense that was obviously flawed. They play in their own world - defense be damned.

 

[knapplc]

I don't disagree. I'm just still a little bitter about the Pap hire. I'm curious how this season would have turned out if that decision has been reversed, and 750k went out to someone like Stoops. Seems like a lot of money, but I'd say UCLA was a win. Ohio State is a close game. Some of those others aren't comebacks and Saturday night doesn't happen.

And I'm not sold of this offense. I'm convinced the style of play leads to 70-30 losses. You aren't going to see Beck recognize the defensive issues, and modify the gameplan to slow the game down and keep things tight into the 4th quarter. The Ohio State game got out of control as much because of the offense as the defense. The Wisconsin game - not as much - but it still didn't give any help to a defense that was obviously flawed. They play in their own world - defense be damned.

The offense also helps us come back when we're way down. Bottom line is, we fix this defense, and the offense is fine. This defense is atrociously bad at times, though. For whatever reason, Bo seems afraid of attempting to disrupt the opponent's play before it gets started. He seems fascinated by allowing them to set up their play, diagnosing it on the fly, and preventing it from executing (to use a Bo-ism). But Wiscy exposed the major flaw with Bo's philosophy in that, if you get into your play FAST, it's too late to diagnose and defuse it.

That jet sweep killed us because the guys weren't attacking. A rush end blasting upfield on that play totally disrupts the flow and timing, and is the best remedy to stop the runner. We never, not once, had our end get around the tackle to get to the running lane on that play. In fact, more often than not on that play, the end was crashing down into the tackle, taking himself totally out of the play.

I don't know if that's on Papuchis or Bo. I have no idea whose defense this is anymore. Does Bo scheme everything during the week and let Pap make the calls in-game, or is Bo still the de facto Defensive Coordinator? If it's Bo, the myth of his "defensive genius" has to be completely gone by now. If it's Pap, he either needs to get better as a DC fast or get out of the position.

 

[junior4949]

Every coach hires their friends. Everyone. No coach hires a staff full of perfect strangers. This critique about Bo is perhaps the most foolish, and it needs to stop.

yeah - but his friends aren't very experienced as coaches - so that's where this becomes more controversial. When we went into this season with a total of 1 year of experience at the 2 coordinator levels it's going to bite us in the a$$ sometimes. i'm all for hiring your friends (or dad)...but when you're friends are basically fresh off the HS field it gets iffy. Huge risk. If you look at his history, guys like Pap, and Eckler had no experience outside of LSU. Fisher, Garrison, Stai, Beck, Marrow, etc. There just isn't much substance there.

One of his more experience hires reads like this: Northern Iowa, Nebraska-Omaha, Northern Iowa, Hastings College, New Mexico State, Ohio University. I mean that's great an all - but should that be one of our most experience staff members?

Of those two Coordinator hires only Papuchis has had a bad year. The offense is scoring points and racking up yards. It's the defense that is a disaster.

Fisher is looking more and more brilliant as time wears on. Stai and Garrison have done more for this line than Cotton ever did, and Marrow seems to be OK.

The problem is that Pap didn't get this defense playing at a high level consistently all year. And we had stupid, basic football errors far too often. Our front seven is mediocre at best, and our Special Teams is a disaster. So it's hit-or-miss regarding who was or wasn't a good hire, and we can't simply point to "Bo's friends" as the problem. Each coach, individually, needs to be judged on his own merits. Decrying the practice of hiring friends is missing the point.

I don't disagree. I'm just still a little bitter about the Pap hire. I'm curious how this season would have turned out if that decision has been reversed, and 750k went out to someone like Stoops. Seems like a lot of money, but I'd say UCLA was a win. Ohio State is a close game. Some of those others aren't comebacks and Saturday night doesn't happen.

And I'm not sold of this offense. I'm convinced the style of play leads to 70-30 losses. You aren't going to see Beck recognize the defensive issues, and modify the gameplan to slow the game down and keep things tight into the 4th quarter. The Ohio State game got out of control as much because of the offense as the defense. The Wisconsin game - not as much - but it still didn't give any help to a defense that was obviously flawed. They play in their own world - defense be damned.

Have you watched OU's defense this year? I don't watch a lot of their games, but it seemed like everytime I did OU's offense got into a trackmeet because OU's defense couldn't stop anything. I don't know what the answers are, but I don't believe we need to overhaul the staff. Our defense last year was very frustrating to watch at times as well. It might help a lot if we didn't have the player leading the FBS in fumbles the past three years running the offense.

 

[kchusker_chris]

Have you watched OU's defense this year? I don't watch a lot of their games, but it seemed like everytime I did OU's offense got into a trackmeet because OU's defense couldn't stop anything. I don't know what the answers are, but I don't believe we need to overhaul the staff. Our defense last year was very frustrating to watch at times as well. It might help a lot if we didn't have the player leading the FBS in fumbles the past three years running the offense.

our defense would look better - but our offense would look a whole lot worse

 

[Landlord]

Have you watched OU's defense this year? I don't watch a lot of their games, but it seemed like everytime I did OU's offense got into a trackmeet because OU's defense couldn't stop anything. I don't know what the answers are, but I don't believe we need to overhaul the staff. Our defense last year was very frustrating to watch at times as well. It might help a lot if we didn't have the player leading the FBS in fumbles the past three years running the offense.

Revisionist history. Here's how the OSU game played out.

Halftime - down 35-24.

First drive of the 2nd half - drive the length of the field to score, 35-31. Ohio State answers back down the field, 42-31.

Then, our offense had a 3 and out, but we gave up a 72 yard punt return. 49-31.

This was essentially the backbreaker. The offense was not perfect, but the defense and special teams couldn't answer the call early on.

 

[TGHusker]

I don't disagree. I'm just still a little bitter about the Pap hire. I'm curious how this season would have turned out if that decision has been reversed, and 750k went out to someone like Stoops. Seems like a lot of money, but I'd say UCLA was a win. Ohio State is a close game. Some of those others aren't comebacks and Saturday night doesn't happen.

And I'm not sold of this offense. I'm convinced the style of play leads to 70-30 losses. You aren't going to see Beck recognize the defensive issues, and modify the gameplan to slow the game down and keep things tight into the 4th quarter. The Ohio State game got out of control as much because of the offense as the defense. The Wisconsin game - not as much - but it still didn't give any help to a defense that was obviously flawed. They play in their own world - defense be damned.

The offense also helps us come back when we're way down. Bottom line is, we fix this defense, and the offense is fine. This defense is atrociously bad at times, though. For whatever reason, Bo seems afraid of attempting to disrupt the opponent's play before it gets started. He seems fascinated by allowing them to set up their play, diagnosing it on the fly, and preventing it from executing (to use a Bo-ism). But Wiscy exposed the major flaw with Bo's philosophy in that, if you get into your play FAST, it's too late to diagnose and defuse it.

That jet sweep killed us because the guys weren't attacking. A rush end blasting upfield on that play totally disrupts the flow and timing, and is the best remedy to stop the runner. We never, not once, had our end get around the tackle to get to the running lane on that play. In fact, more often than not on that play, the end was crashing down into the tackle, taking himself totally out of the play.

I don't know if that's on Papuchis or Bo. I have no idea whose defense this is anymore. Does Bo scheme everything during the week and let Pap make the calls in-game, or is Bo still the de facto Defensive Coordinator? If it's Bo, the myth of his "defensive genius" has to be completely gone by now. If it's Pap, he either needs to get better as a DC fast or get out of the position.

That last paragraph is so true. :confucius or :dunno or :ahhhhhhhh Not sure how to react.

 

[robsker]

Regarding Papuchis... I feel sorry for him... he was hired for a position that he was unprepared to take on, was w/o experience, and was ill prepared for. He should have never even been remotely considered for the position. So now... here he is getting wildly exposed. That is unfortunate. Those above him should have never made the mistake of promoting him so early...

It is like the prize fighter who is really young and has great potential... if his manager is wise enough to to be patient and crafts his opponents cleverly, he can develop that fighter into a great boxer over time --- but if the manager makes the mistake of putting him into the ring with a foe that he is not ready for --- if he is impatient and promotes the guy too early... then his guy gets thumped and may never be the caliber guy he would have been had his manager waited. In the case of Papuchis, a guy with perhaps some potential for the future... he was mistakenly promoted probably 5-6 years (or more) too early... and he is getting pummeled. It is his manager's fault. He should never have been even considered as a DC.

 

[TGHusker]

Regarding Papuchis... I feel sorry for him... he was hired for a position that he was unprepared to take on, was w/o experience, and was ill prepared for. He should have never even been remotely considered for the position. So now... here he is getting wildly exposed. That is unfortunate. Those above him should have never made the mistake of promoting him so early...

It is like the prize fighter who is really young and has great potential... if his manager is wise enough to to be patient and crafts his opponents cleverly, he can develop that fighter into a great boxer over time --- but if the manager makes the mistake of putting him into the ring with a foe that he is not ready for --- if he is impatient and promotes the guy too early... then his guy gets thumped and may never be the caliber guy he would have been had his manager waited. In the case of Papuchis, a guy with perhaps some potential for the future... he was mistakenly promoted probably 5-6 years (or more) too early... and he is getting pummeled. It is his manager's fault. He should never have been even considered as a DC.

Sounds like Management 101 to me.

 

[FriendlyLurker2007]

10 WINS NO EXCUSES!!!! =Dan Hawkins