TheSker

Yeah, he thinks all the fans showing him support are just "great." (And he sounded so convincing about that too!) Pelini's comments have more to do with the media agenda than anything else. I'd really like to believe that. But I kind of feel like a jilted lover when hearing those statements in combination with that stupid audio tape coming out this year. I'm long over that audio. And one reason Pelini was ranting was because of a media reporter.....well, actually two media reporters. Editorials sell more papers and advertising than news evidently.

Yeah, he thinks all the fans showing him support are just "great." (And he sounded so convincing about that too!) Pelini's comments have more to do with the media agenda than anything else.

It's highly likely Eichorst has better info on this than we do.

Perception from national media as well @RapSheet: Out of pocket Fri, catching up. Holy cow, Nebraska AD's statement on Pelini offers the least support I've ever read: http://t.co/yJRenxVGTa The media also kept speculating after Jeremy Foley issued a statement of support for Muschamp. That's the role of the media. Eichorst's statement includes the words "unfounded speculation". That seems fairly strong to me. Also, Pelini's fire me comment was directed toward a media member who asked him about it. I do not believe it was a "dare" to Eichorst. My guess is Eichorst and Pelini might have a better relationship than we know.

I voted somewhat unlikely because I looked at it how I thought Eichorst might look at it. $7 mil is a lot of money and he is responsible for that as AD. And we can minimize 9+ wins all we want to, but it's a fairly big deal and I'm confident that the coaching community believes it's a big deal. I simply think from an ADs point of view that change brings heavy cost and risk when Pelini is getting some of his earlier mistakes on track. That's my opinion.

I hope you have some clone of TO/Bear Bryant growing in your basement, because who are you gonna get, that is better than Bo? Dude, you have posted this like 5 times in different threads. It reads the only coaches better than Pelini, ever, were Tom Osborne and Bear Bryant. Stop it. A check of the ranking shows there are approximately 30 coaches better than Pelini right now. Surely, one of them would come to NU for a fat raise. And a contract buyout a few years later.

I would agree. The search firm thing is always happening.

Exactamundo......and the media will not even send us a commission check or a thank you note.

That could be said for the past 40 years

What does bowl game record have to do with anything?

ESPN is not looking for positive spins. Like all media, they are looking for ratings. A "fresh start" does not mean ESPN will look at us positively, it means they will look for wherever the next train wreck is........though we are becoming pretty good at self created train wrecks......and the media licks their chops for that type of thing.

A simple YouTube search might show you otherwise.

the negative publicity Bo has brought to Nebraska could be something that could hurt his standing with those 7 million reasons. i believe they are probably trying to negotiate away about 5 or 6 million of those reasons. That's nothing I would be in the know about. Is it anything other than speculation on your part, or do you have something to back that up? just speculation. i am not an insider, nor do i claim to have any friends who are insiders. that is why i used words like "could be" and "i believe" I understand and figured as much.

Good post with valid points......Nebraska may still have lessons that need learned.

the negative publicity Bo has brought to Nebraska could be something that could hurt his standing with those 7 million reasons. i believe they are probably trying to negotiate away about 5 or 6 million of those reasons. That's nothing I would be in the know about. Is it anything other than speculation on your part, or do you have something to back that up?

What is happening is more of a Nebraska problem than a Pelini problem. There are about 7 million reasons why Pelini isn't concerned. There are plenty of reasons for concern about Nebraska football.

The article said nothing about not letting Bo - or Frank - go. It talked about the method used. It's obvious you want Pelini gone. But actually read the stuff you're commenting on before you comment. It'll make for better conversation. No knapp. Maybe its you missing the point of the article or my point in general. I read the article last night or early this morning for your info. Frank clearly did not have the support of Steve Pederson or Perlman. As wrong as it was, Frank was let go. So what is this mistake Sipple is referring to Knapp? It was a mistake to let Frank go? Or it was a mistake not to support him while he was in his role as HC? Let me ask you this. If you as a Athletic Director don't believe in the current football coach, why would you vocally and publicly show him support? Why would you come out and lie to people? If Shawn Eichorst does support Bo, what good would it have done him to come out weeks ago and state that? If this team melts down afterward does he change his mind? Wouldn't that then make him look like an ass? Put the story together Knapp. What mistake should we not make again? You tell me. The way I took it was Sipple saying the Athletic director and Perlman should not make the mistake of letting this coach go. Support this coach AD and Perlman! What else are you get hearing from it that I am not? If they don't support Bo, they don't support him, why should they publicly state the opposite if this is actually the case. I agree. Sipple isn't capable of viewing this objectively or of engaging in actual journalism. He's a Pelini fanboy who's actively campaigning for his buddy to keep his job. Sipple isn't alone in what he wrote.

Sure they want to win every week. The question is how much do they want it. Some teams want it more than others and are more inspired and put everything they have into being great. I'm not sure we're there yet. We have the talent to be a top 15 team but I don't know if the drive is there. Nah, man. I'd say it's there. We saw a couple of Call**an teams quit. We know what that looks like. We have talent to be 10-1 or 9-2 right now, but as OP stated, we have been a patchwork. VV was blocking on PAT and FG against PSU for crying out loud. They have the will and the drive. 3 years from now, while people are still bitching--like you--we'll look back at the records and say we were 10-3 in 2013. I likes that a lot. I like watching this team. We dominate at the line of scrimmage, check MSU for that fact. We suck at special teams, yet they won the game at PSU. We had no business winning against NW, but we still did. The fans have still shown up despite all the crap that has happened this year, and we have a combine full of memories from this year. Kudos to the team and coaches for wanting to win all the games and fighting tooth and nail. Go Big Red Good post.......

Good stuff

My point exactly.

You can word things to fit an agenda, but Osborne was catching heat for more than not being able to win MNCs. There were times Osborne didn't win the 8 team conference and lost in a blow out.

Where do people come up with this crap? Go back and look at our schedules. In 1980, we played a ranked FSU and a ranked Penn State team before we started conference play. Same thing in 1981. In 1982 we played a ranked Penn State team and a ranked Auburn team before our conference play started. Florida State several more times, UCLA several times, ranked ASU teams, etc. There was more to our season than just OU and people need to start realizing it. OU was just the team that we had a heckuva time getting past. The bottom line is we played 2 ranked opponents prior to conference play 5 times in the 80s and played at least 1 ranked non-conference game 4 of the other 5 years. We averaged about 4 ranked teams per year played. Not any different than what Bo faces now. The reason we couldn't win bowl games is because we were playing top 5 teams every year because we won most of the matchups vs. ranked opponents during the season. And again, even with Osborne's accomplishments, there were still those who wanted him gone. That's part of the reason why my concern about Pelini is low. There's always going to be a certain number who want any coach gone. And for those who throw the term "progress" out as a reason for wanting to change coaches, how is it possible Osborne's program progressed every year since he was coach for 25 years? It could be said Osborne regressed immediately since we were winning national championships when he took over.......yet we didn't win the next one until 1994. There were years during Osborne's tenure when we obviously regressed. And yes, I agree we were consistent in the rankings under Osborne. We should have been......he took over a back to back national championship program. Can't say that for Pelini, can we? When you're a perennial top 5 team you're going to have to regress once in awhile. What traits do Pelini's teams have that Osborne's did? In year 15 of Bo's tenure are you still going to be using Callahan as an excuse? People calling for TO's job back then were idiots. You know why? Because we were on a ride of unparalleled success prior to him taking over and people were spoiled. Pelini took over a team with a losing record. He had a pretty long leash coming in. We're far from spoiled anymore. He's shown no progress. The same mistakes. The same mental breakdowns. Are you sure you're not an Iowa fan? Because you sure remind me of them. I don't see where I mentioned Callahan's name in my post, so Callahan is not an excuse. The direction the football program went was on more shoulders than Callahan's. I'm not even comparing Pelini and Osborne. Like I wrote in my post, the program was vastly different for each of them when they took it over. Pelini has done a good job with the program since taking it over. Could someone else do better? Possibly.....don't know......and while some would be willing to give it a try.....my guess is our AD is more careful about risk than that when talking about a machine just under $100 million in revenue. That's not something you roll the dice about. Not sure what the Iowa fan comment has to do with the Husker program.

Where do people come up with this crap? Go back and look at our schedules. In 1980, we played a ranked FSU and a ranked Penn State team before we started conference play. Same thing in 1981. In 1982 we played a ranked Penn State team and a ranked Auburn team before our conference play started. Florida State several more times, UCLA several times, ranked ASU teams, etc. There was more to our season than just OU and people need to start realizing it. OU was just the team that we had a heckuva time getting past. The bottom line is we played 2 ranked opponents prior to conference play 5 times in the 80s and played at least 1 ranked non-conference game 4 of the other 5 years. We averaged about 4 ranked teams per year played. Not any different than what Bo faces now. The reason we couldn't win bowl games is because we were playing top 5 teams every year because we won most of the matchups vs. ranked opponents during the season. And again, even with Osborne's accomplishments, there were still those who wanted him gone. That's part of the reason why my concern about Pelini is low. There's always going to be a certain number who want any coach gone. And for those who throw the term "progress" out as a reason for wanting to change coaches, how is it possible Osborne's program progressed every year since he was coach for 25 years? It could be said Osborne regressed immediately since we were winning national championships when he took over.......yet we didn't win the next one until 1994. There were years during Osborne's tenure when we obviously regressed. And yes, I agree we were consistent in the rankings under Osborne. We should have been......he took over a back to back national championship program. Can't say that for Pelini, can we?

Still not a valid excuse with this schedule as it falls on him to have adequate depth too. Our depth has been very good and a key reason we are winning.

Harvey's been a tremendous asset to the university as a whole, so this is funny. And it's clearly based only on feeling that he might not support Bo very much, something which may very well prove to be fears unfounded....as opposed to based on any actual, objective consideration of the job he's done as Chancellor. Bo is taking heat because of Bo, nobody else. If he wants less heat, all he has to do is win and it'll evaporate. Exactly. Bo basically has been trolling for a vote of confidence in the last three interviews he's done for newspapers. Pelini's vote of confidence most likely comes from his communication with Eichorst. The media has their own agenda.