Comparing Nebraska's most colorful coaches of late

[Landlord]

Depends on how you define successful. But no.

 

[carlfense]

I think you may have painted yourself into a corner.

They asked you if you would support the status quo (9-4 or 10-4) indefinitely. You said no but you would support Bo as long as he continues to win like he is. ie status quo 9-4 or 10-4.

Bo going to 6 or 7 wins would not be the status quo so of course no one expects you to support the coach.

The most charitable explanation would probably be that 74Husker thought that "status quo" meant simply that Pelini is still the head coach. That's not what I (or zoogies, I think) intended.

This is incorrect, maybe I (or someone) missed something along the way.

I thought I made it pretty clear that I'd be okay with things the way they are unless something changes, such as a losing record, probation, Bo eating live puppies for breakfast, etc.

So going back a couple dozen posts, the answer to my question is that you would support the status quo indefinitely.

Ok. Thanks.

 

[Count 'Bility]

I still dont understand why it's always 9 wins brought up. Bo's won 10 games in a year as many times as 9. Hell, he has 2 10-win regular seasons. So shouldnt this be a 9.5 win discussion?

 

[zoogs]

OK, 74, here's the confusion (emphasis and brackets mine). Hopefully it's all cleared up now and we can move past this.

True, Bo hasn't done it [win a CCG or more] yet. It doesn't mean that he won't this year or next.

I don't think that anyone has said that the bold is impossible. When is your cutoff? Will you support the status quo indefinitely?

...to which you replied, no.

But you meant, yes. And there's nothing wrong with that, disagreements or not. But, yeah. Hope it's clear.

 

[StPaulHusker]

I think you may have painted yourself into a corner.

They asked you if you would support the status quo (9-4 or 10-4) indefinitely. You said no but you would support Bo as long as he continues to win like he is. ie status quo 9-4 or 10-4.

Bo going to 6 or 7 wins would not be the status quo so of course no one expects you to support the coach.

The most charitable explanation would probably be that 74Husker thought that "status quo" meant simply that Pelini is still the head coach. That's not what I (or zoogies, I think) intended.

This is incorrect, maybe I (or someone) missed something along the way.

I thought I made it pretty clear that I'd be okay with things the way they are unless something changes, such as a losing record, probation, Bo eating live puppies for breakfast, etc.

So then you support the status quo indefinitely. Good. Now that this is settled. Lets move on.

 

[StPaulHusker]

I still dont understand why it's always 9 wins brought up. Bo's won 10 games in a year as many times as 9. Hell, he has 2 10-win regular seasons. So shouldnt this be a 9.5 win discussion?

#9.5wins

 

[TheSker]

The short list would include Nebraska x 2. I'm personally confident Eichorst will not be venturing into that territory.

 

[74Hunter]

When is your cutoff? Will you support the status quo indefinitely?

I'm not supporting Bo infinitely, and again, I'm not comparing him to Dr. Tom.

As for how long would I support him, as long as he is winning at the clip he is, running a clean program, and graduating players.

So...indefinitely, then?

I see now, yeah people should read what was said instead of trying to be smart azzing it.

 

[Landlord]

I see now, yeah people should read what was said instead of trying to be smart azzing it.

What you said was inconsistent and people were confused by it.

 

[zoogs]

I still dont understand why it's always 9 wins brought up. Bo's won 10 games in a year as many times as 9. Hell, he has 2 10-win regular seasons. So shouldnt this be a 9.5 win discussion?

Because you can't say "He's won 10+ games in a row for 6 years." The 9+ streak puts Nebraska in the company of two other schools in the country, Alabama and Oregon.

Bo very nearly lost the 9-win streak last season, but he didn't. If he had, I'll bet you there is still a fairly impressive stat that goes '8 or more wins in six straight years' that just includes more coaches or more programs. And that's what Bo would need to hang his hat on.

Because searching for arbitrarily sliced statistical peculiarities is what's necessary when there aren't concrete championship trophies to point to.

 

[carlfense]

Because searching for arbitrarily sliced statistical peculiarities is what's necessary when there aren't concrete championship trophies to point to.

This.

 

[Landlord]

Very very long story made short

Bo has shown that he can get infinitely close to the top. He has shown that he can field a team that is ready to play for four quarters. He hasn't shown that he can take that next step in both of those categories, bridging that gap towards 'elite' and having his team ready to play for all games and not just some.

Some people are absolutely convinced that he can't break through that ceiling he is smushing himself against.

Less people are pretty certain that he can break through it given the right circumstances.

Then there's the people in the middle that aren't really sure either way but are hoping he finds whatever tools he needs to demolish that thing.

 

[Count 'Bility]

I still dont understand why it's always 9 wins brought up. Bo's won 10 games in a year as many times as 9. Hell, he has 2 10-win regular seasons. So shouldnt this be a 9.5 win discussion?

Because you can't say "He's won 10+ games in a row for 6 years." The 9+ streak puts Nebraska in the company of two other schools in the country, Alabama and Oregon.

Bo very nearly lost the 9-win streak last season, but he didn't. If he had, I'll bet you there is still a fairly impressive stat that goes '8 or more wins in six straight years' that just includes more coaches or more programs. And that's what Bo would need to hang his hat on.

Because searching for arbitrarily sliced statistical peculiarities is what's necessary when there aren't concrete championship trophies to point to.

It's actually not that at all.

It's a simple fact that he averages 9 1/2 wins a year. And by mathematical law, that rounds up to 10 wins/year. It's a simple concept really.

Dont push it, or I'll find a way to spin it into 11 wins somehow.

 

[carlfense]

I still dont understand why it's always 9 wins brought up. Bo's won 10 games in a year as many times as 9. Hell, he has 2 10-win regular seasons. So shouldnt this be a 9.5 win discussion?

Because you can't say "He's won 10+ games in a row for 6 years." The 9+ streak puts Nebraska in the company of two other schools in the country, Alabama and Oregon.

Bo very nearly lost the 9-win streak last season, but he didn't. If he had, I'll bet you there is still a fairly impressive stat that goes '8 or more wins in six straight years' that just includes more coaches or more programs. And that's what Bo would need to hang his hat on.

Because searching for arbitrarily sliced statistical peculiarities is what's necessary when there aren't concrete championship trophies to point to.

It's actually not that at all.

It's a simple fact that he averages 9 1/2 wins a year. And by mathematical law, that rounds up to 10 wins/year. It's a simple concept really.

Dont push it, or I'll find a way to spin it into 11 wins somehow.

It's a lot closer to 11 than it is to zero.

Is that what you want? Zero wins?

 

[74Hunter]

I see now, yeah people should read what was said instead of trying to be smart azzing it.

What you said was inconsistent and people were confused by it.

Yeah, and apparently me going all dyslexic didn't help things....

I read "you will support Bo indefinitely," totally ignored or missed the status quo part...

My bad.