Glendower

"It's just a layover! Leave me alone!" Harbaugh was heard to say as he threw two dollars on the counter to pay for his Snickers before storming off down the concourse. Reliable sources near the salt water aquarium in my mom's basement claim that the statements were an obvious attempt at deception and that Harbaugh didn't even look hungry in the video on my iPhone suggesting that the Snickers bar was itself part of an elaborate ruse.

What is "it" here? I'm not trying to be snarky-- do you mean a coach's name or the NU coaching hunt in general?

i really think the B1G should be happy with this move. we want to compete at a higher level. they need teams to strive for that. I understand Wisconsin's reaction (i.e. that we were a hurdle, but an easy one to clear most of the time), but they should appreciate having a consistently strong opponent to slug it out with. Yeah, TO used to struggle with Oklahoma, but that is what made the program what it was in the 90s (combine the lessons from the Oklahoma slugfests with solutions to the problems from the Flaw'duh schools and you have the 90s teams). Stomping NU isn't actually good for them in terms of building strength and getting ready for big games (and, hey, wouldn't it be awesome if Wisconsin and NU were good enough that their game became the defacto championship game?!). Anyway, being fifth in the Big Ten is pretty lame. Something had to be done... I mean, sheesh, look at how many people have taken the "this is as good as we can/should expect from now on because it's not the 90s" position. I'm STILL not sure why that is an attitude that someone would proudly express publicly. Yeah, it's not the 90s, but don't tell Wisconsin who is playing football a lot like the 90s huskers. Okay, look at our position in the Big Ten-- if this were the Big 8, where would this have us? Vying for position with Oklahoma State? I only ask because I'm trying to adjust this placement to ye olden tyme terms and to give a sense of perspective to the arguments that compare BP to TO. TO was fighting for first place and coming in second; this year we had a down-to-the-wire struggle for fifth. FIFTH. Anyway, if we get stronger the conference gets stronger. I'm cautiously optimistic.

Honestly. No coach is going to look at our schedule and think, "Oh my gosh golly! They fired a nine win coach!" A team would have to be in the bottom half of the rankings to not get 9 wins. I think McNeese State would have done okay in our division this year.

Show your work, please.

They found out in a Tweet!?! Classy...that's how real men do it...now...I guess... No, it was an email.

He has made enough money from the UNiversity to stay here for the rest of his life if he's concerned about uprooting his kids.

Same guy that said Bo wasn't getting fired... He was only wrong because nobody wrote it down, and they forgot and fired bo! If they'd written it down, they would have remembered.

Those darn "haters' who "hate" by wanting the program to do well and hold success of the program above one person (who makes 3 million dollars a year). Don't act like he's some victim.

How dare anyone expect success? I love that expecting the team to be competitive now constitutes being "spoiled" and only a real fan would accept blowouts.

You think Perlman's job hinges on the success of the football program?

The fact that the Hawkeyes couldn't win with things like the 'butt punt' says more about them than us. This was a game where both teams were trying to give it away but each was too polite or incompetent to pick it up. The whole game can be summed up with non-advanced blocked field goal. It was like two squads of Keystone Cops battling it out with slapsticks. In the end, Iowa managed to make the dumber decisions; and Nebraska walked away with the Middle of the Second Quartile of the Big Ten Trophy.

Let's be fair; we didn't give up 400-some to Wisconsin. Those were all to one guy. We gave up 627 yards to Wisconsin.

Like you said, past events don't predict future results. If they give us a hint, as you say they most probably do, then we would be getting another Callahan type because we are switching out a Solich type when we do so out of panic. Can't have it both ways. Neither of these things are based on random chance (that is the scenario where past performance can't predict future performance) where each test, so to speak, would be completely independent (think of rolling a die-- if I roll a 2, that doesn't mean that I'm more or less likely to roll a 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, or 6 on my next roll. They're all independent of each other and my 2 can't predict what the next roll will be). However, the outcomes where many of the variables that can influence the outcome are held constant (like coaches) are not independent and trends emerge and accurate predictions can be made with a margin of error. Bo is setting a trend. The people who hired Callahan aren't here any more. The important variables have changed. Besides, there aren't enough data points to make any predictions about the AD's performance in hiring coaches. We do have a lot of data points with Bo's staff, and many odd trends hold across recruiting classes. The same problems crop up year after year even when the players have been changed and the schedule has gotten increasingly lighter. The only constant has been the coaching staff.

Whoo hoo! That makes us pre-season champs!! To that lot of people, anyway. High fives all around! Exciting game, though.

Is paps having a sick day? Where is he? It looks like Bo has fully taken the reins of the D.

I understand that this is your point. And it probably is most fair to say both sides of the ball are struggling, terribly. But this is my point: Against MSU, we scored 16 points of offense (because one TD was from Demornay running back a punt). Against Minnesota, we scored 17 points on offense (because again another TD came from special teams - a miracle in and of itself). We did muster 24 points of offense against Wisconsin, but had some real gifts on field position that gave us 17 of those. But 16 and 17 against MSU & Minnesota? Piss poor. Our offense is a huge problem. And I'd say that Beck is trying to run a "score rapidly" offense. We generally don't huddle, we snap the ball quickly; it's up-tempo. It's not a Leach style offense - I get your point there. But it's nevertheless of a version of what we're currently trying to (and failing miserably to) do. Timmy Beck - just ******* change something. Do something different. Okay, so we are basically in agreement I think we're both addressing the mootness of simply going after one side of the ball or the other.

I disagree. See also: Michigan State. As in, the Michigan State that went 11-1 last year, beat Ohio State, and then beat Stanford in the Rose Bowl. Read the whole post. The point is that our defense is the real problem. If we can't stop a ground game, and the OP is only concerned about changing the offense, then the solution is to change to a Leach-style offense that is designed to score rapidly. MSU could do what they did because their defense could stop (almost) anybody from doing (almost) anything. If our D is going to give up ten trillion points to power running teams, we had better find a way to score ten trillion and one points on defenses that are designed to control teams like Wisconsin. If they hold our offense to the normal number of points one would expect to see in a run vs run game (mid 20s?) while they shred our D by, you know, running at them, we're in trouble every single time. My point was really that the offense is, while not great, not the primarily problem. It would be "easier" to find a DC who has a good scheme to stop the run than it would be to find an offense that can answer a 50+ point outing from Wisconsin with 60+.

An offensive change would save this team only if it were changed to a fast scoring scheme to overcome the deficits caused by the defensive scheme. If running teams can hang 50+ points on the defense, then a slow grinding power game against good Big Ten defenses that have been built to stop other power run teams is not going to work. We'd have to be Mike Leach's Texas Tech of the Big Ten... does anyone want that?! The offense usually scores "enough," but the D really needs some major changes.

Seriously what the hell is up with Gopher fans? I work with a bunch of them and they talked some pretty hardcore crap all day. A couple of them were even putting their fingers in my chest telling me "how it is." I don't even talk football at work. Just weird. It was like I kicked their dogs or something. This is new to them.

With that logic, makes ya wonder what's wrong at UNL now doesn't it? Not sure what you mean, please explain. I think you meant to make the implication in the first post that bo should move to a lesser division of college football or a lesser conference or that Nebraska would be successful with Bo at another school; however, what you said is that he would be successful anywhere (by implication) else, suggesting that the problem lies with UNL not with Bo. Marf was responding to your post literally either to be funny or because Marf was legitimately confused about your point. Explication!

The defensive problem is particularly offensive.

Would Bo's ego let him hire a DC who was experienced and competent (or even an OC, for that matter)? I have a hard time imagining him letting anything go, but if he could change on such a fundamental level (and coach DBs and LBs), I think he could do a lot better.

I know at least one regent is getting flooded.

Not entirely sure I believe that... Okay-- how about this-- "Chill out boys and girls. Yes, it sucks, but we will grow more accustomed to this sort of thing and it won't be a big deal anymore. We won't even play 'remember when and how do we get back to that?' any more because it will be like talking about bringing our favorite dog back to life and sound crazy. Someday, we'll be a trivia question, and when people hear the answer, they'll say 'oh yeah, Nebraska used to be good, I forgot about that.' So just hold out a little longer!"