BigRedBuster

I find the discussion about how bad Badger fans are funny.

I have always been a fan of Alvarez. But, I keep going back to that he started his coaching career in Lexington Nebraska and their fans are very similar to the comments made about Wisconsin fans.

Just something I chuckle about.

I don't know what to believe right now.

Facts from Harvey's press conference:

1) TO let him know in early September that he was going to step down.

2) Eichorst toured the campus (by himself) and interviewed for the job Sept 9th.

Unless Harvey is lying about when TO told him he was going to retire, these dates line up.

3) Harvey says that he did this search by himself and he ruffled some feathers in Lincoln.

4) TO is one of the people who were upset.

5) He had TO talk to Alvarez and Alvarez gave Eichorst a thumbs up. (this happens many times with ex bosses. You would have to be a total failure for an ex boss to not say good things about you in this situation).

6) Search firm couldn't touch base with Bo.

The Bo thing doesn't make sense to me. Some say Bo is upset he didn't have a bigger part in this. If the search firm actually tried to get a hold of Bo and Bo knew what it was for, and he didn't call them back, then that's Bo's fault.

One thing that I do agree with though with Harvey, I don't like someone choosing who their successor is. TO isn't the one that has to live and work with this guy. He could pass away next week for all we know and the fans and the University are the ones that must live with the decision.

So, even though I think TO's input could be valuable and it would make a transition that much more smooth, I don't know TO in those situations. Maybe he is an over bearing person and demands his guy gets the job. I honestly don't know.

All that said, from the outside looking in right now, it appears that this could have been handled better. The last time we had someone stand up from the University and claim they did the entire search by themselves and made the decision by themselves it was a disaster.

I am extremely nervous about this hire but I will try to support him and the University as much as possible. Unfortunately, Harvey has put the new guy in a difficult situation from the beginning.

That post didn't even make a good point. Read my response.

So what? I guess I don't get your point.

The media made a big deal about these people. They were never contenders at all, just the media creating a stir.

 

 

8/14/11

Michele Bachmann Looks Ahead After Iowa Straw Poll Victory

 

9/1/11

Perry Overtakes Romney as Top GOP 2012 Pick

 

10/26/11

Herman Cain Tops New Polls

 

12/10/11

Gingrich Prepares for First Debate as GOP Front-Runner

 

1/11/12

Romney secures front-runner status with New Hampshire win

 

2/10/12

Santorum surges nationally after three-state sweep

 

4/4/12

Romney sweeps 3 primary contests, eyes general election battle

I just hope that the Romney campaign doesn't start getting too confident. There are examples of people winning the first debate then losing the race.

This is equivalent to a football team winning the first quarter of the first game of the season. Not the time for confidence and cockiness. Even if you win the election, that is only the first game of the season....go do what you said you are going to do.

I guess i just like what we have now, if Ganz becomes good enough I dont see any reason why they might not up his role...I am sure he feels pretty respected and gets alot of credit as is...but if he continues to do a good job then those things will come for him, just as alot of the coaches before him..

That's fine. But, then you have to get rid of someone.

I really am interested in knowing why guys like Jimmy Williams Paul Meyers were not considered. We will never know but honestly, I thought this was probably why Jimmy was brought here in the first place.

He was there for one year and the school is in a huge world of hurt with the NCAA for which he had nothing to do with.

 

He has nothing to do with the poor turnout in football..

does any ad? and could any ad affect NU's turnout? i say 'no' to both those questions.

Sure they can over time. But, no AD is going to turn around attendance at a sporting event in less than one year.

Many times I have to look at SCOTUS decisions and take my personal views of the individual case completely out of it. That is what the justices are supposed to do anyway.

I agree with your basic feelings on this case. I want money out of the election process and the influence that buys.

BUT, if you start banning certain people or organizations from the US contributing to campaigns or political organizations, then you need to ban ALL political donations. You can't pick and choose. If you want to ban multi billionaires from donating 100,000,000 to a campaign, then why can't someone else ban donations from anyone who is unemployed and living off of welfare? How about if someone wants to put a law in place that anyone who receives personal financial assistance from the government is banned from donating money to the political process? You see the slippery slope?

He was there for one year and the school is in a huge world of hurt with the NCAA for which he had nothing to do with.

He has nothing to do with the poor turnout in football..

Right now, I know Tim Beck is labeled as our QB Coach. I don't think all credit should go to him for Martinez's success and the success for these other QB's getting the grip of knowing how to run the offense. I think appreciation should, foremost, go to the players for their dedication, but also to Joe Ganz for what he has done to help shape Martinez. Everytime I see Martinez start to get down, you see Ganz over talking to him, and he comes in with a new found confidence.

 

I am one, who thinks it would be a great idea to hire Joe Ganz as our official QB coach, and relieve some pressure off of Tim Beck. Your thoughts?

Who would you fire?

Ron Brown!

Double

I have been a proponent of a QB coach for a very long time. However, the situation we have working right now is going a very good job. We have an OC who is creative and I believe has a good system. We have Graduate Assistant in Joe Ganz that is fantastic with the QBs and can relate to them in practice and the side lines. We also have a QB guru that did a fantastic job with Martinez in the off season and I'm sure would love to work with more of our QBs.

So, the trick is to how do we keep this moving forward. Ganz can only be a GA for a certain period of time then he needs to be a full time coach if he is to stay. I would like to see that but not sure who he should replace. Who pays for the QB guru in the off season?

We are moving in the right direction with our QBs and I'm sure Beck and Bo have a plan. It will be interesting to see how if pans out.

Seriously. You've said enough. The crap coming from you not only makes no sense whatsoever, but your obvious agenda against Nebraska and Tom Osborne is doing nothing but pissing people off. You are NOT a Husker fan. You never were. You claim to be, but you're wrong. No true Husker fan would believe in the crap that you are assuming here. You're spewing crap that wouldnt be fit for rumorville. Just leave. Leave this entire board now and go back to your home of idiotic assumptions so we can get back to a nice discussion about the revitalizing of the greatest rivalry in college football.

The stuff I say absolutely makes no sense, that's the terrible part, at least in Osbornes case that is. Why people worship him is beyond belief but I sort of "get it" if I lower my morals especially when thinking of all the dealings between him and the Lincoln Police department regarding players. I can live with the fact that he tried his hardest to intensify the split in Husker nation since his buddy got fired for driving the Huskers off a cliff landing into a burning pile of debris called a loss in Shreveport just a few years after we were a Dynasty. ( Chicken Chit Golf Tourneys anyone?)

 

I can also see why when he took over as AD he felt the need to lie to Husker fans about how the walk-on program was destroyed, Players were shunned from Lincoln, and the culture had changed and all his other BS ramblings because he may have dementia or something but when people on here tell me OU thinks it's Nebraska Rivalry means more than it's Texas Red River Shootout..........that's where I guarantee you are delusional beyond comprehensions. Then someone tries to tell me College Football on matters starting in 1970 and that OU had a guaranteed win against Texas throughout the 70's, 80's, and 90's

 

Someone's full of crap all right but it certainly isn't me. And since you're such the "Better Fan" by shoving your head in the sand or in other orifices, let me guess Im supposed to be stoked about our new found mediocrity as well correct?

I always wondered what board Steve Pederson hung out on.

I am somewhat in favor of the decision on Citizens United. But, I am extremely uncomfortable with making that statement. Make sense???

Groups like Citizens United and Moveon.org have the right of free speech. BUT, they need to be held accountable for what they put out with that free speech. Meaning, I am all in favor of someone's ability to put out negative information about a candidate IF IT IS TRUE. It is an extremely slippery slope if we start making it illegal for someone to say something negative about a candidate.

I personally believe this needs to come from the aspect of if a group like Citizen's United chooses to put out a movie about Hillary and it is a lie during a campaign, then they should be prosecuted and prison time should be the punishment. If it is true, then they should have all the freedom to do it.

The problem is, these people can put out this propaganda and there are absolutely no consequences for their actions.

Kind of like...Where was the Obama love early in the primaries when Hillary was the front runner??? You guys are laughable sometimes.

The fact is, I am a conservative and I was watching who the Republicans would put out there. Everyone has their favorites in the group but almost all of them are closer to my view point on how the world works than Obama. That isn't an "anyone but Obama" mentality. It's a fact that this group of candidates fit my world better than Obama. So, naturally, I was going to support the one who came out from the Republican primaries. The same thing will be what you do in 2016.

I would love to vote for Ron Paul but lets face it. It would be a wasted vote, and we HAVE to get Obama out of there. Romney has leadership experience. He may not be detailing his "plans" but he has a record, and hell of a lot better one than that other guy, and regardless of what the details are, they're worth a shot compared to the road we're taking now. Romney probably won my vote last night.

So you think that Romney's business experience is a plus? I ask only because I read an article that used the statistic that 60% of American's feel that Romney's business experience is a minus. I just don't understand how business experience can be construed as a minus in a democrasy. I do think that people don't trust business right now and with the greed of the banking and housing industries, I don't blame them. But I think I will vote for Romney based on bringing the power and decisions back to the state level as that philosophy resonates well with me right now. I don't see how Washington can look after Nebraska's best interests, Louisiana's best interests, North Dakota's best interest, California's best interests, etc.

Experience as the leader of a government. Governor. Spending numerous years dealing with a majority of the opposite party, to positive results. Obama didnt do jackshit as a leader before becoming President. He's in way over his head, and the past 4 years are proof. Last nights debate was extra evidence. He had no answers when he had to think for himself and guys doing the research and writing lies about Romney to speech on the last couple months were not around., And yes I guess as a business leader is fine too. If his businesses are prospering-and I assume they are because all the whiners are bitching about how much money he makes-then that's a plus for me too, because right now this country is a business that is in the shitter going belly up, fast. Faster than we can fathom.

 

The bold gets a +1 from me. Romney's explanation of the constitution in the "role of gov't" portion was an absolute kick to Obama's head, because all Barack has done in four years is trample, burn, chew and spit out, and wipe his ass with our constitution.

Completely agree.

I haven't always been a Romney fan but the one thing that has always struck me as a positive is that he is a business man and we need one BADLY.

Something I think we saw last night is that this is the first time EVER that Obama has had to defend his own record. He did absolutely nothing before he was elected to the Senate. (Sorry, I should mention he was a "community organizer"). Right after he was elected to the Senate, he voted on very few bills and started running for President. He ran for President pretty much entirely on "Hope and Change"....(which makes me laugh when Obama supporters claim Romney hasn't given out specifics).

This is the first time that he has held an office and has his own record that he has to defend and as many commentators said last night, he isn't used to someone talking about his record like that.

I was waiting for him to start talking about "Hope and Change" every sentence again but he was stammering too much.

Did any of you even listen to the exchange between Bo and the reporter talking about going back to OSU? Because it doesn't sound like it.

I listened to it live and there wasn't anythig snotty at all with Bo's responses to the questions. In fact, my first reaction was....."wow....Bo handled that well." He wasn't upset. He didn't snap at him. He never raised his voice. He simply answered the question several times and finally asked almost in a confused manner...."What do you want me to say?" He wasn't upset, he was confused as to why he kept asking the question over and over again.

Get over this the Bo trashing about his temper. I haven't seen anything this year that even comes close to being a problem.

As far as the Military spending goes, I would like to see us shift emphasis on force multipliers, combat drones, exoskeleton research, and missile defense work. Also a reduction of forces in non essential countries and a stabilization plan for long term assistance for both Iraq and Afghanistan. Also more money spent on Intel of all types, but mostly HumInt as it tends to be the most effective in finding out attacks in the planning stages. Reduce spending on obsolete tech like main battle tanks, spy planes, and to an extent blue water navy ships.

I agree with you up to the point of navy ships.

My goal for the military is to shut down most of the over 700 military installations around the world and move that function to mobile installations on ships. We have technology to touch every part of the world if we need to from a very very long distance. In my eyes, we don't need boots on the ground in every country in the world. Put that technology into mobility and we will be in international waters where we won't piss off so many locals in countries around the world.

Believe me, I agree that if someone can pull that off, it's TO.

BUT, also believe me in that I have personal experience in dealing with older retired legends in their positions being replaced by younger energetic people. Sometimes that works and sometimes it doesn't. Both may be very good at what they do and have their individual strengths. But, if their style of work is very different, they can clash.

I'm trying to picture how this is going to work. TO said he is sticking around till January 1st. That is three months away. If this guy has already resigned from his present post, it sounds like an announcement of his hire here could be within the next few days. How will this work between him and TO over the next 90 days?

Not necessarily.

 

When you have a large organization that can pool HUGE amounts of money and hire lobbyists...etc, that is totally different than an individual donating $100 or even a couple thousand to a candidate.

 

The fact is, when you put large amounts of money in the hands of any organization for the intent to influence an election or candidate it isn't good for the country. That doesn't matter if you agree with the union, corporation or special interest group. It is not good when a candidate feels that he owes a certain group something after they get into office.

 

I agree with this. This is a bad thing. But allowing foreign corporations to influence domestic elections with their money is an even worse thing.

Completely agree. It absolutely makes me sick to think that foreign interests can donate and influence our elections. Someone from another country doesn't have the freedom of speech in our elections that the constitution says.

Dear Mr. Eichorst.....I beg you.....PLEASE embrace our culture/history/traditions and use them to build an even better athletic department. Please don't come in and think the entire organization needs to be changed to be "yours".

Not disagreeing with you. But, that still won't change much in my opinion. For instance, everyone knows the corporations and big organizations that give to candidates and nothing changes.

And, a big part of all of this is the PACs that operate outside the campaigns. Both sides use them and they pretty much are free do say and do what ever they want without abiding by any election laws. Constitutional freedom of speech is a big part of why these are allowed to exist. BUT, I believe there needs to be some legal pressure put on these organizations when they flat out lie about a candidate and put out flat out wrong information.

I know a change is needed. I know TO is getting old and we need younger energy.

But, I'm nervous. I believe right now we have good coaches in most sports at Nebraska. People like Miles are new and trying hard to build programs and I think he is doing a great job. People like Cook and Pelini are heads of good programs or have come a long ways building their programs.

A new AD can cause changes in coaches if they don't get along.

Pardon me if I'm shell shocked from the Peddy hire. I know nothing about this guy but I'm just nervous about the change in general.

Not necessarily.

When you have a large organization that can pool HUGE amounts of money and hire lobbyists...etc, that is totally different than an individual donating $100 or even a couple thousand to a candidate.

The fact is, when you put large amounts of money in the hands of any organization for the intent to influence an election or candidate it isn't good for the country. That doesn't matter if you agree with the union, corporation or special interest group. It is not good when a candidate feels that he owes a certain group something after they get into office.