FriscoTXHusker

You can bet there's more going on than just Pederson making a lone cowboy decision. These decisions were probably discussed before Pederson was hired. Maybe the coach has something on the Chancellor.

Well one reason would be sustaining the competitiveness of the program over time. One way to put it is this --- if you can still win next year with Witt or Lee then the 2009 and 2010 seasons NU will have an experienced QB leading the charge --- three years with the same QB means that year 3 is likely going to be outstanding. If you go with Ganz next year you might win a game more (maybe not) but the next year you rebuild AGAIN. If we go with Ganz, then NU will have had 4 different QB's in 4 years --- Taylor, Keller, Ganz, Lee or Witt. 4 years of new QB's means 4 rebuilding years in a row, Programs do not progress that way. Being too short-sighted can really hurt long term sustained growth. The endless cycle of 1st year QB's has to stop. The first year of a QB is always their worst. If NU wants to rebuild, they should go with all youth next year and feature players with potential that have three seasons (or at least two) to play. That is tough on seniors, but rebuilding is a tough process. I do not advocate abandoning seniors, but I do say that the freshman and sophomores especially need to be featured and juniors as well --- seniors everywhere else, but QB. I repeat once more that every year you have a new QB is by definition a rebuilding year. Four years in a row with new QB's is not a good thing. well, if you support that argument, you must also agree Keller should never have played a down this year, we should have been grooming Ganz for 2008...... I do indeed think that since Cally was endeavoring to rebuild a team to have competitiveness with continuity he should not have brought in a guy for one year. It was a crapshoot and he lost. He bet on one seasons hopeful results (that did not come to fruition) and did so at the expense of the future. If Keller had not gotten hurt, Ganz would not have played a down this year. Next year would have again been a year with a QB w/o any experience. That was a foolish plan. NU got lucky, in an odd sense, that Keller got hurt --- this way at least one QB has some experience next year. I would have played Ganz from the beginning in hopes that this year he would have worked out the kinks so that next year he would be great. He did, by complete accident (not by design) get some experience this year because of an injury. I would have never brought in Keller (nothing personal, I actually like the kid). But it is not wise to bring in a 1 year QB to a team trying to rebuild. In direct answer to your question, since we had Keller and Ganz last year --- I would have played Ganz as the starter and Keller in mop-up. Next year will be a new system and we have 3 QB's --- a senior, a sophomore, and a freshman. At the very least, for the sake of continued competitiveness the better of the younger two should (so long as they are viable players for the future --- which they may or may not be) play as much as is possible. If they are relatively close to Ganz in effectiveness then start the young one and have Ganz play some as well. But you really need a QB that will have 2 -3 years of continual play to expect the offense to really have a shot at excellence. whoever. Bringing in a QB for one year was foolish. But I surmise that Cally We didn't give up 4/500 yards a game because Callihan brought in Keller. However, I agree that 1 year is a very short stint for a QB. The difference a 2nd year made to Z. Taylor was significant.

yeah, i was supposed to be working when I wrote that. trying to hurry

TO made himself assistant coach so he can recruit. Link

I just read the same thing on sportsillustrated.cnn.com Link

All good points. But, and this is a tough one --- there is a rule of thumb in coaching --- "never launch the rebuilding of a program with a senior at QB." The next coach has a quandry to contend with --- it is not as simple as start the one who is playing the best at the momnet, but rather start the one that is most likely to take you to the goal the quickest. If the goal is to be competitive and remain competitive ASAP, starting the senior at QB may get you there sooner, but will that just then move to yet another rebuilding year the following year when a new QB is broken in. I hate to say this, but if I were the HC, if either Lee or Witt are within striking distance of Ganz next year then I go with the young QB so as to ensure that the next three years are with the same QB. One of many problems with NU has been lack of continuity at QB. You do not want to rebuild with seniors at key positions, for continuity is critical to long termed SUSTAINED competitiveness. Interesting points. It might be smart for the new coach to think about what the team will look like in year 4 rather than next year if he wants to keep his job. Year one will be ancient history 4 years from now, especially if it's a crap year 4.

The final salary and incentives are negotiated and may not have much to do with smarts. The university has their financial and legal people to work out these things but it's tough to be stingy when you're trying to lure someone. In my business negotiation begins only after the applicant accepts. If the candidate isn't satisfied it may be easier for them to walk than it is for the company to let them get away. It could be embarrassing for the university to loose a candidate during negotiations and could affect the interest of other candidates.

Yep. I'll add that a lot of young guys more than likely thought that as well, but just havent said anything. Yeah, and Harrison Beck thought he should be on the field rather than Taylor. Every player thinks they should be on the field. If they don't maybe they should be in class.

I agree ... move on. There's no great pleasure in wallowing in the mud.

As another poster said, TO stated that the coaching staff is the responsibility of the head coach.

I don't take any pleasure in BC getting fired because this failure puts the program at risk, potentially for a long while. However, it was inevitable. I wanted BC to succeed but the likelihood of that was rapidly going down the tubes. There were some bright spots in BC's experiment but all in all I think TO is right about there being a loss of identity and a systemic problem. I think the problems have become so serious that the best course of action is to give someone else a chance. I hope the new coach succeeds but it is going to be tough. I think TO was left with little choice. I think BC's biggest mistake was not taking care of the defense situation. I almost feel like he conducted himself like the quarterback's coach or the offensive coach. The demise of the defense is just unbelievable and unacceptable. I can see no way to rationalize away the fact that we have on of the worst defenses in the country and give up four- or five-hundred yards per game. That's about the only consistent aspect of BC's team. I think Pederson was also a weight around his neck. That's not his fault, but that's just the nature of the situation.

I'd think any prospective coach would think twice if they thought their hiring manager was about to be replaced. I think NU needs to have TO on board for at least a few years, otherwise they need a new AD and coach.

You ever read any of those stories about Japanese soldiers living in the jungles of the Philippines for 20 or 30 years after the end of WWII not knowing Japan had surrendered? You're living in an alternate reality.

For 99% of Husker fans this would go without question under a new coach. I think for the long haul, "we" should expect the minimum to be 10 wins with 12 regular season games, a shot at CCG, and a bowl game. Anything less, and "we" might as well not expect anything and just give a coach a 25 year contract so that he can retire at NU with no worry of job performance. I dont want to settle for mediocre. I have no faith that Cally could have consistently kept NU above mediocre. 9-4 isnt much of above mediocre in the grand scheme of things imo. This is why Nebraska will become a revolving door for coaches!! ...and the alternative is to "accept mediocrity."

For awhile we can all blame Callahan, but how many years will that last? Hopefully that won't determine when we get the next coach in about 3/4 years.

Another whole dynamic is going to enter into this situation. TO may choose a new coach but there's going to be a new AD coming in at some point. Who knows how that will all play out. Hiring someone and then later hiring their boss can get real interesting.

now that's optimism.....hope TO doesn't feel that way. I have the utmost respect for TO and all he accomplished at Nebraska. He probably deserves a second chance at choosing a Husker coach. Oh come on...not this again... TO chose FS because he wanted continuity in the staff and Frank was the logical sucessor...was it a mistake??? Yeah...maybe...who really knows??? FS wasn't given a chance with his new staff... You can't blame TO for FS's inability to evaluate talent...to recruit... TO gave him the blueprint for success..he failed to execute with the staff he was given but wasn't given a chance to succeed with his own staff... You're reading into the comment and illustrating my point. There's only so much TO can do and he only has limited control of the outcome. TO doesn't walk on water and there are no guarantees. I don't disagree with you on FS, in fact maybe his last season suggested he could turn things around. Although everyone has opinions we'll never know. Will anyone be given the chance to succeed? It was very difficult to follow in the footsteps of the Devaney/Osborne dynasty. It will be even more difficult to establish a new dynasty.

now that's optimism.....hope TO doesn't feel that way. I have the utmost respect for TO and all he accomplished at Nebraska. He probably deserves a second chance at choosing a Husker coach.

I hope I'm wrong but I think we're heading for a series of turnovers in coaching about every 4 years. Years capped with 9 wins are hardly what Husker fans are looking for. I think we're in for a long period of mediocrity characterized by inconsistency. I think it will be a long time before we finish in the top 15 for 3 years in a row.

you can't hire a coach and tell them how they should coach. if that would work they could hire me. i'd do whatever they wanted for 2 mill a year.

Like my sister says... don't insult girls! The Huskers volleyball team is much better than these guys.

are you saying nebraska fans are delusional?

Hey Buff......I am not a CU fan based only on my bad experiences at the games with your fans but I will still offer my congrats. Well I appreciate the congrats, it just really turned around in the 3rd quarter, I am just as stunned as anyone else. Good luck to your next coach, for I believe the Big 12 North is turning into a very balanced division, much more so then the South. you obviously haven't watched any of our games this season. couldn't be. this has become typical

So was that stupid comment by Hawkin's about the worst day being a Buff is better than be a Husker prophetic after all???

WOW. we are really good at scoring in the last couple minutes when behind by 30 points.