From Shawn Eichorst

"The D improved throughout the year and looked much better than last year."

Last year's schedule included the #11 (Georgia), #13 (UCLA), #24 (Ark State), #43 (Wisconsin x 2) offenses. The offenses we faced last year ranked an average of 64.

The highest ranked offense we faced this year was #21 (Wyoming). The next highest was #42 (UCLA). The offenses we faced this year ranked an average of 76.

Many fans perceived a supposed "improvement" after SDSU, starting with the Illinois game. Interestingly, the teams we faced before Illinois ranked an average of 59 in total offense. The teams we faced after? An average of 83. Worst of all, the one exception to our illusory "improvement" -- Minnesota -- ranks just 106 in total offense.

To conclude, we played worse offenses this year than in 2012. And the "improvement" over the course of this season nicely correlated with a downturn in the quality of offense we faced, except for the aberration in Minnesota, which absolutely ran wild on us.

"The O was decimated by injuries, but at times with TA running it, seemed very effective. Hard to really judge the O with the number of injuries, but the D was easily much improved."

The injuries have been overblown. And, in any event, saying the team was decimated by injuries does not qualify as "improvement."

"We defeated a Michigan team that is taking it to Ohio State, were in the game with a possible top 10 Michigan State despite 5 turnovers. Last year we took it to a Georgia team (for 3 quarters) that was 5 yards away from possibly being the national champion."

The transitive property does not work in college football. How do I know? Because we got boat raced by the same Wisconsin team we beat earlier that same year in 2012. Northwestern played Ohio State to a very tight game earlier this season. We beat Northwestern, which is (still?) winless in the Big Ten. Should we pat ourselves on the back?

Also, you can't "despite 5 turnovers." The turnovers happened. And they are a hallmark of this team and have been since Bo has been here. We are near the very bottom of all college football in turnovers.

"And I honestly believe without the injuries or even with a healthy TM we go 10-2 this year and are playing for a Rose Bowl birth."

Maybe. But again, this is not identifying "improvement." It is speculation. In any event, there will be no Martinez next year, nor all the offensive linemen that were supposedly "injured." So Bo is going to have to contend with those same personnel loses next year as he did this year. If what we saw this year is what we can expect next year, why should we have optimism? That was the point of this exercise, no?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
SE's statement answers the question of whether or not he had someone ready to replace Bo...it's very surprising he didn't, and gives us our first glimpse of how he handles his duties.

It's simply amazing that Bo would be retained with the damage he's done to NU's brand and it's national perception in the totality of his tenure here.

 
Hujan said:
"The D improved throughout the year and looked much better than last year."
Last year's schedule included the #11 (Georgia), #13 (UCLA), #24 (Ark State), #43 (Wisconsin x 2) offenses. The offenses we faced last year ranked an average of 64.

The highest ranked offense we faced this year was #21 (Wyoming). The next highest was #42 (UCLA). The offenses we faced this year ranked an average of 76.

Many fans perceived a supposed "improvement" after SDSU, starting with the Illinois game. Interestingly, the teams we faced before Illinois ranked an average of 59 in total offense. The teams we faced after? An average of 83. Worst of all, the one exception to our illusory "improvement" -- Minnesota -- ranks just 106 in total offense.

To conclude, we played worse offenses this year than in 2012. And the "improvement" over the course of this season nicely correlated with a downturn in the quality of offense we faced, except for the aberration in Minnesota, which absolutely ran wild on us.

"The O was decimated by injuries, but at times with TA running it, seemed very effective. Hard to really judge the O with the number of injuries, but the D was easily much improved."

The injuries have been overblown. And, in any event, saying the team was decimated by injuries does not qualify as "improvement."

"We defeated a Michigan team that is taking it to Ohio State, were in the game with a possible top 10 Michigan State despite 5 turnovers. Last year we took it to a Georgia team (for 3 quarters) that was 5 yards away from possibly being the national champion."

The transitive property does not work in college football. How do I know? Because we got boat raced by the same Wisconsin team we beat earlier that same year in 2012. Northwestern played Ohio State to a very tight game earlier this season. We beat Northwestern, which is (still?) winless in the Big Ten. Should we pat ourselves on the back?

Also, you can't "despite 5 turnovers." The turnovers happened. And they are a hallmark of this team and have been since Bo has been here. We are near the very bottom of all college football in turnovers.

"And I honestly believe without the injuries or even with a healthy TM we go 10-2 this year and are playing for a Rose Bowl birth."

Maybe. But again, this is not identifying "improvement." It is speculation. In any event, there will be no Martinez next year, nor all the offensive linemen that were supposedly "injured." So Bo is going to have to contend with those same personnel loses next year as he did this year. If what we saw this year is what we can expect next year, why should we have optimism? That was the point of this exercise, no?
Click to expand...
Your last point is exactly spot on. The rest were too, but your last point is aimed at the direction of the program. Tat was what this is all about right?

Well next year there's no Taylor.

Those injured offensive linemen are all being replaced. Yet, I thought people were claiming how well, the new guys did stepping in. I guess not well enough. Yet somehow, they blocked for a 1500 yard rusher? Just another excuse we can use I guess.

Young defense this year huh? So a defense full of sophomores and more freshman next year won't be considered young? Well, I guess we will have that excuse to fall back on as well. Yes, they will have gained in experience, but ask that 2012 senior laden defense how great an advantage experience was for them.

I ask this question seriously Bo-ievers. What objective reasons do we have to believe things will be different next season?

 
Hannibal said:
SE's statement answers the question of whether or not he had someone ready to replace Bo...it's very surprising he didn't, and gives us our first glimpse of how he handles his duties.

It's simply amazing that Bo would be retained with the damage he's done to NU's brand and it's national perception in the totality of his tenure here.
Click to expand...
I couldn't agree more. I really have no faith in Eichorst as AD given how he's handled this season. It's time for the donors to start speaking their mind and getting the attention of SE and HP. If this were the first tirade by Bo, and he had previously won championships or showed he had the team improving from prior seasons, I would have no concern keeping him around. But he's not shown the results against tough competition, and we have now become a top 35-40 team.

 
Hannibal said:
SE's statement answers the question of whether or not he had someone ready to replace Bo...it's very surprising he didn't, and gives us our first glimpse of how he handles his duties.

It's simply amazing that Bo would be retained with the damage he's done to NU's brand and it's national perception in the totality of his tenure here.
Click to expand...
I was wary of SE when hired, and I am losing confidence.

 
Some one earlier in the thread talked about Eichorst being a sly fox. Most of us on the board either want him gone right now or want him to stay, with little room in between. I do think SE has a big picture plan. One more year of mediocre performance (with a slight chance of a big upside if things come together right) will not damage the Husker program to a noticeable extent any more than it is already damaged. Shawn E is building the foundations for future action. He did leave the option open for changes after the bowl game by being vague on "the future". I don't think he'll do anything after the bowl game unless there is clear and evident "reasonable cause" to void the contract. Delaying the firing till after the bowl game would be recruiting suicide unless there is a home run coach waiting in the wings. This gives SE a wide degree of latitude, and ample time to find the next guy. In short, he may be very displeased with Bo and the results on the field, but he is stable enough (as opposed to me and many posters here) to not make a short term, knee jerk reaction. The vagueness of the statement gives Bo a bit of reprieve but still leaves a clear message that things have to improve. I think it was a well done move.

 
"And I honestly believe without the injuries or even with a healthy TM we go 10-2 this year and are playing for a Rose Bowl birth."

Maybe. But again, this is not identifying "improvement." It is speculation. In any event, there will be no Martinez next year, nor all the offensive linemen that were supposedly "injured." So Bo is going to have to contend with those same personnel loses next year as he did this year. If what we saw this year is what we can expect next year, why should we have optimism?
Click to expand...
Optimism, the D improved over the course of the year. We have some very exciting players coming back such as Rose, Santos, Gregory and Valentine than can be game changers next year.

On offense, even with a patchwork line Tommy Armstrong showed a lot of promise. When he played well our offense moved the ball, took time off of the clock and put up some points. We have some very talented backs that will be able to make things happen next year.

The schedule next year, while tougher than this year, there are no games that we can't win. With the teams on the schedule, if we can finish 10-2 it should set us nicely for a Top 15 ranking (possibly top 10) and a shot at the Rose Bowl or automatic birth in a solid January bowl game.

Not saying it will happen, but I believe we have the talent to make a run next year.

 
sd said:
beanman said:
Touchdown Tommie said:
I do believe Bo is the right man...I just wish some staff changes could be made. Not sure this will happen...guessing he is on very thin ice/short leash. Might not be fair, but it is what it is. Hope for a great bowl performance and they use these extra practices to continue to build for next year. GBR!
Click to expand...
He hired this staff. But he's the right man right?
Click to expand...
yeah. and frankly, if you want to keep him, you have to let him run the program as he sees fit. it is crazy to micromanage his staff and expect him to be able to work with the people that were chosen for him. you cannot undermine him and expect success, especially when he cannot succeed with the people who he wants to work with and he wants to work with. again, why does bo get a pass, but his staff are the sacrificial lambs? and it has always been the coordinators that get the surplus of the blame.
Click to expand...
How does Bo know this was going to happen? I am sure in your line of work everyone hired does a perfect job and is fired IMMEDIATELY after mistakes?? In my line of work, I have hired coaches who I thought were going to work out, but they some did not for whatever reason. It will be interesting to see if all stay or some are asked to find another job. Not sure. All I know is there need to be some adjustments made in order for this to work. Injuries really caught up with the offense...I am not sure what program could have the amount of injuries and survive the games that the Huskers did.

 
Did you look at the stands yesterday. They already have stop coming. Something that's been eluded to several weeks prior to this.

It was black Friday. People were sleeping. Yeah, I'm going with that.

 
I'm not convinced at all that this statement means Bo will be the head coach next year. But if he is I will support Husker Football like I always have. I would like to be surprised, and have this team comes out guns a blazing and finally put it together, but after watching Bo's teams I can predict a loss against a team we should've beat, and a few meltdowns on national TV. It's frustrating, but he's the guy still.

 
Somewhat disappointed because what this tells me is that we couldn't get that big hire. With all the buyout money we needed to get a homerun and not settle. So, while the percentage chances of that were low, it still would have been great and united the fanbase. I believe the chancellor and AD are not happy that our program is known for our raging coach who fights the fans, the officials, and the media.

The only thing that solves this is winning...and winning BIG. Next year it is a Big 10 Championship or bust.

 
I am I said:
MichiganDad3 said:
Hujan said:
The problem is that the Bo apologists have a quiver of excuses ready for every season. This year it was "injuries." (Though, as a factual matter, I actually don't think the injuries have been that much above average.) Next year it will (again) be a young offensive line.

The point is you can literally look at any season at any program and come up with excuses (youth, injuries, new scheme, etc.). But short of NCAA sanctions, there is rarely a legitimate excuse for a coach to underachieve. And when you factor in the counter excuses (namely the pathetic schedule), we have simply underachieved.

The real irony is that in the unlikely event Pelini does actually turn the corner and get some success, he's going to jump ship faster than you can say, "Bo don't go!" All the bizarre loyalty from the Husker fans will be rewarded with a middle finger from Pelini as he laughs all the way to the SEC.
Click to expand...
I laugh at the youth excuse on defense. Who was responsible for keeping these kids on the bench last year? Who is responsible for recruiting?
Click to expand...
Bo was. And if you didn't see VV, Moss, Curry, Collins, Banderas, Santos, Gerry, Rose, Cooper, Alexander, Gregory, and Mitchell making plays this year you're blind. Only 2 (TWO!) of those guys are upperclassman!!!!!!

Our defense is going to be great next year. Precisely because Bo gave them a year to develop.

I wholeheartedly agree we need some serious help with special teams and S&C. It's bad.

However, give Bo a break. It took two years to right the ship, 2 years to find "his guys" and now 2 years to recruit to his new conference. So lets just throw out a couple of those years as a new guy going through unthinkable change (and even through that, he's made 3 CCG) and realize this will be his first 3 year stretch (counting next year) where there wil be REAL consistency.

Turnovers, penalties, and behavior absolutely need to be cleaned up...100% agree and I have no more excuses or leash for that personally. If those can happen, I feel really good about the future.
Click to expand...
I'm a BO supporter, but for next year he but must have a top 20 O and D, top 15 punt return team, + in turnovers and not lead the big ten in penalties.

If not 7 years is enough for anybody to right the ship.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top