The Uniqueness of Our Circumstances Continue

[Enhance]

+1 This is important to consider. I think a lot of times we take a look at x coach is in his first year at y school and he's already doing better than Bo without really considering the situation surrounding the results. And like you said, that shouldn't discredit or diminish Malzahn's accomplishments in his first year at Auburn; what he's done is incredible. Gene Chizik couldn't do anything with roughly the same players, Malzahn comes in and it's a different story. Makes you wonder if Auburn's last national championship was Chizik's doing, or if Malzahn should get even more credit.

Yep. My argument is that you always need to look at the coaching career and experience. Gus Malzahn really kicked his career off as a successful high school coach (he's an Arkansas high school football Hall of Famer). He then spent 7 years as an offensive coordinator at Arkansas, Tulsa and Auburn, one year as head coach at Arkansas State and now is the head coach at Auburn.

For this example, ignore the pre-college coordinator portions of Pelini's and Malzahn's careers. Pelini was a coordinator for five years before getting the head coaching job at Nebraska. Malzahn was a coordinator for 7 and a head coach for one before getting his current gig. To me, that's a fairly large discrepancy in coaching experience. Two extra years being a coordinator and one year completely running a whole show. While finding lightning in a bottle is possible, when Auburn hired Malzahn, that was a better hire at that point in his career than it was when Nebraska hired Pelini (in terms of experience). Pelini was still a good hire IMHO but I think many of us, myself included, overlooked the strong likelihood that it would be a growing process for Pelini as he took a job he probably wasn't quite ready for.

He's also made some decisions that held the program back a bit, one could argue. So, again, not saying a less experienced coach can't be a better coach, but it's important to maintain perspective. Hell, Hoke came into Michigan and took them to a BCS bowl win, and now they're 7-5 with people questioning his head coaching abilities.

 

[True2tRA]

It doesn't seem to be a secret that Nebraska has had a lot of....unusual or just unique circumstances surrounding our program or our media coverage over the last decade or so. There was the second put back on the clock against Texas, the Taylor Martinez flame out, the move to the Big Ten that was unprecedented when it was announced, The Big XII's gracious sendoff, Bo's sideline tirades, the completely unexpected curveball against Wisconsin in the CCG, that 'reporter' that attacked Bo because he didn't allow a former military member to call a play that he supposedly promised, Team Jack, etc. etc.

Not saying we are special or anything like that, but there have just been weird and uncommon occurrences going on. And yet it continues:

Has any other team ever only played in 3 bowls over the course of 6 bowl games?

Gator Bowl twice in 2008 and 2013

Holiday Bowl twice in 2009 and 2010

Capital One Bowl twice in 2011 and 2012

Taking it one step further, has any other team ever had to have rematches not even a year old in two of those games (Washington and Georgia)? A lot of people keep talking about fan apathy and acceptance of mediocrity... well with circumstances like this, it makes it really hard to continue with passionate optimism.

Great post!

I agree. Good post. It describes that kind of "blah" feeling I have been feeling about Husker football lately. I love Husker football, don't get me wrong. This has just been a long damn year. A disappointing one at that. I'd say probably the most disappointing season I've lived through. Tough to explain it, I just feel like I'd rather this one be over with and we move on to what's hopefully a better go of it next year.

That being said, bowl practice is great for these young guys. It will definitely be a bonus toward next season. Any owl is better than no bowl and facts, from what I hear, Georgia has had a very similar up and down season like ours. They have a lot of youth, like us. They also have been dealt the injury bug, much like us. So in reality, a rematch with a team we've played so recently could be a good measuring stick for the Huskers. If we win this one, we have to feel good about that at least.

 

[kchusker_chris]

+1 This is important to consider. I think a lot of times we take a look at x coach is in his first year at y school and he's already doing better than Bo without really considering the situation surrounding the results. And like you said, that shouldn't discredit or diminish Malzahn's accomplishments in his first year at Auburn; what he's done is incredible. Gene Chizik couldn't do anything with roughly the same players, Malzahn comes in and it's a different story. Makes you wonder if Auburn's last national championship was Chizik's doing, or if Malzahn should get even more credit.

Yep. My argument is that you always need to look at the coaching career and experience. Gus Malzahn really kicked his career off as a successful high school coach (he's an Arkansas high school football Hall of Famer). He then spent 7 years as an offensive coordinator at Arkansas, Tulsa and Auburn, one year as head coach at Arkansas State and now is the head coach at Auburn.

For this example, ignore the pre-college coordinator portions of Pelini's and Malzahn's careers. Pelini was a coordinator for five years before getting the head coaching job at Nebraska. Malzahn was a coordinator for 7 and a head coach for one before getting his current gig. To me, that's a fairly large discrepancy in coaching experience. Two extra years being a coordinator and one year completely running a whole show. While finding lightning in a bottle is possible, when Auburn hired Malzahn, that was a better hire at that point in his career than it was when Nebraska hired Pelini (in terms of experience). Pelini was still a good hire IMHO but I think many of us, myself included, overlooked the strong likelihood that it would be a growing process for Pelini as he took a job he probably wasn't quite ready for.

He's also made some decisions that held the program back a bit, one could argue. So, again, not saying a less experienced coach can't be a better coach, but it's important to maintain perspective. Hell, Hoke came into Michigan and took them to a BCS bowl win, and now they're 7-5 with people questioning his head coaching abilities.

Sure, that explain his first year or two. How do you value the 6 years of head coaching experience Bo has gotten since his hire? How do you explain his last 2-3 years?

I'm just getting tired of this "inexperienced" coach thing. Bo has as much or more head coaching experience than a large number of BCS head coaches. That excuse worked in years 1-3. He's gonna be here another 10 years and people will still be saying he's a "first time" head coach

 

[Enhance]

Sure, that explain his first year or two. How do you value the 6 years of head coaching experience Bo has gotten since his hire? How do you explain his last 2-3 years?

I'm just getting tired of this "inexperienced" coach thing. Bo has as much or more head coaching experience than a large number of BCS head coaches. That excuse worked in years 1-3. He's gonna be here another 10 years and people will still be saying he's a "first time" head coach

That's why I threw in the line "he's also made some decisions that held the program back a bit, one could argue." Those decisions would include his staff make-up, promoting from within and a failure to land some recruits that could have really helped the program. The recruiting part isn't so much a decision failure as it is a failure to land those commits. I guess you could also argue that their wasn't enough attention paid to recruiting early on, which is a huge part of the whole equation.

The only reason I compared Pelini and Malzahn was, specifically, to reference the early portions of the career and why some coaches have more success early on. As far as the later years, I still think this is because of his staff decisions and a lack of talent at key positions.

 

[Peoriahusker]

If we lost those 3 games by a small margin (like I said, 3, 3, and 7), would we be satisfied with "just another 9-3 season"?

This is tough. I'm going to lean towards no, because it'll mean that for 4 years, we've lost to almost every decent (ranked) team we've played. It'll further solidify the fact that we've peaked under Pelini. Especially if there are a boatload of turnovers mingled into those 3. Clean football where we just get beat by a better team...maybe, but it's a stretch.

We've become a fan base wondering if we will be OK with three losses next year....exciting! We've become the old Missouri.

 

[It'sNotAFakeID]

If we lost those 3 games by a small margin (like I said, 3, 3, and 7), would we be satisfied with "just another 9-3 season"?

This is tough. I'm going to lean towards no, because it'll mean that for 4 years, we've lost to almost every decent (ranked) team we've played. It'll further solidify the fact that we've peaked under Pelini. Especially if there are a boatload of turnovers mingled into those 3. Clean football where we just get beat by a better team...maybe, but it's a stretch.

We've become a fan base wondering if we will be OK with three losses next year....exciting! We've become the old Missouri.

I hate this argument. The question wasn't really asking whether we would be OK with 3 losses next year. The context behind the question was whether we could view that as some sort of trend upward for Bo.

I don't think anyone would be satisfied with 3 losses. I know I want us to win them all every year.

 

[BigRedBuster]

There is not one Husker fan that would be "satisfied" with three losses.

 

[kchusker_chris]

Sure, that explain his first year or two. How do you value the 6 years of head coaching experience Bo has gotten since his hire? How do you explain his last 2-3 years?

I'm just getting tired of this "inexperienced" coach thing. Bo has as much or more head coaching experience than a large number of BCS head coaches. That excuse worked in years 1-3. He's gonna be here another 10 years and people will still be saying he's a "first time" head coach

That's why I threw in the line "he's also made some decisions that held the program back a bit, one could argue." Those decisions would include his staff make-up, promoting from within and a failure to land some recruits that could have really helped the program. The recruiting part isn't so much a decision failure as it is a failure to land those commits. I guess you could also argue that their wasn't enough attention paid to recruiting early on, which is a huge part of the whole equation.

The only reason I compared Pelini and Malzahn was, specifically, to reference the early portions of the career and why some coaches have more success early on. As far as the later years, I still think this is because of his staff decisions and a lack of talent at key positions.

This, 100% - I could be the head coach if Malzahn was coordinating the offense, and Pelini the defense. Pelini's biggest problem IMO is his assistants. You don't have to be a great HC if you've got great assistants. Conversely, you'd better be a pretty damn good one if you're hiring GA's, golf pros, and guys out of Hastings, NE and the lower tier divisions. (Fisher turned out great, but that was a HUGE gamble on Pelini's part IMO).

If you remove Cotton, because who knows what the heck he does...and added up the experience of our assistants I'd venture it's one the lower end in the B1G. 3-4 guys on the staff, that's fine. 7 of 9, including both coordinators...that's a problem.

 

[Enhance]

There is not one Husker fan that would be "satisfied" with three losses.

I can't speak for the whole fan base obviously, but for myself, I can handle three losses if they aren't embarrassing or in blowout fashion. If we lose to a better team or have a minor slip up against a team we should beat, oh well, it happens. That even happens to great teams every year. But, when I look at Nebraska's losses over the last several years, I often feel they did more to lose a lot of those games than the other team did to beat them. MSU this year is a perfect example. I'm not trying to take away what those other teams did but Nebraska has a lot of self-inflicted, stupid mistakes that tend to crop up.

 

[husker_99]

maybe the bowl selection committee took pity on us and selected another team that was beat up as well. It's not like we need another a$$ kicking on national tv.

 

[Enhance]

This, 100% - I could be the head coach if Malzahn was coordinating the offense, and Pelini the defense. Pelini's biggest problem IMO is his assistants. You don't have to be a great HC if you've got great assistants. Conversely, you'd better be a pretty damn good one if you're hiring GA's, golf pros, and guys out of Hastings, NE and the lower tier divisions. (Fisher turned out great, but that was a HUGE gamble on Pelini's part IMO).

If you remove Cotton, because who knows what the heck he does...and added up the experience of our assistants I'd venture it's one the lower end in the B1G. 3-4 guys on the staff, that's fine. 7 of 9, including both coordinators...that's a problem.

To add on, I think Nebraska coaches are "good", but certainly not great. The question is how long we want to give these coaches to develop into better ones. We've given a lot of leash to two guys (Beck and Papuchis, specifically) that have never been full-fledged coordinators in their life before coaching at Nebraska. Heck, Papuchis was doing little more than watching film a few years back and now he's the DC at Nebraska.

Some disagree with me on this notion, but I believe Nebraska is not a job for people to learn on the fly. It's one of the 15 best jobs in the country IMHO, top 20 at worst. It's not a place to slap the training wheels on half the staff and baby-step them through the process. By the time you get to Nebraska you should have a pretty damn good idea what you're doing. We took that risk with Pelini since he wasn't terribly experienced, but you can make up for those deficiencies by hiring smart around you. I would certainly agree with you and say we haven't, and as I said earlier, the big question is how long do we allow the assistants time to get better. I don't think they're bad coaches, just inexperienced and not working well together at times.

 

[husker_99]

This, 100% - I could be the head coach if Malzahn was coordinating the offense, and Pelini the defense. Pelini's biggest problem IMO is his assistants. You don't have to be a great HC if you've got great assistants. Conversely, you'd better be a pretty damn good one if you're hiring GA's, golf pros, and guys out of Hastings, NE and the lower tier divisions. (Fisher turned out great, but that was a HUGE gamble on Pelini's part IMO).

If you remove Cotton, because who knows what the heck he does...and added up the experience of our assistants I'd venture it's one the lower end in the B1G. 3-4 guys on the staff, that's fine. 7 of 9, including both coordinators...that's a problem.

To add on, I think Nebraska coaches are "good", but certainly not great. The question is how long we want to give these coaches to develop into better ones. We've given a lot of leash to two guys (Beck and Papuchis, specifically) that have never been full-fledged coordinators in their life before coaching at Nebraska. Heck, Papuchis was doing little more than watching film a few years back and now he's the DC at Nebraska.

Some disagree with me on this notion, but I believe Nebraska is not a job for people to learn on the fly. It's one of the 15 best jobs in the country IMHO, top 20 at worst. It's not a place to slap the training wheels on half the staff and baby-step them through the process. By the time you get to Nebraska you should have a pretty damn good idea what you're doing. We took that risk with Pelini since he wasn't terribly experienced, but you can make up for those deficiencies by hiring smart around you. I would certainly agree with you and say we haven't, and as I said earlier, the big question is how long do we allow the assistants time to get better. I don't think they're bad coaches, just inexperienced and not working well together at times.

the problem now with getting experienced OC and DC is they aren't going to put up with Bo yelling at them consistently during the game.

 

[QMany]

Yelling is bad, mmmk.

 

[skersfan]

Some how this topic seems oh so familiar to me, like 6 years of it. Was never qualified, still isn't and that is really sad.

He is not going to change, we need to quit worrying about it and move on. If we get it together fine, if not it is up to the AD to decide if this is where we want to be. Right now the administration is fine with where we are, so buckle up for the ride

 

[BigRedBuster]

There is not one Husker fan that would be "satisfied" with three losses.

I can't speak for the whole fan base obviously, but for myself, I can handle three losses if they aren't embarrassing or in blowout fashion. If we lose to a better team or have a minor slip up against a team we should beat, oh well, it happens. That even happens to great teams every year. But, when I look at Nebraska's losses over the last several years, I often feel they did more to lose a lot of those games than the other team did to beat them. MSU this year is a perfect example. I'm not trying to take away what those other teams did but Nebraska has a lot of self-inflicted, stupid mistakes that tend to crop up.

Satisfied means that you are perfectly happy and see no reason for improvement. Is that you?