Nexus Posted February 7, 2011 Share Posted February 7, 2011 I remember last year around this time when Oregon was in the national headlines for off-the-field issues. Masoli and the stolen laptop fiasco. LaMichael James assaulting his girlfriend which led to being suspended for the 1st game of the 2010 season. Their kicker was critically injured and hospitalized after getting beat up at a party. Each incident occurred within a week's time. They managed to prove their doubters wrong when it was thought that the loss of Masoli would hurt their chances to contend for a national title. Sometimes national controversies can make or break a team. How they come out of it falls on the staff that leads it. Oregon came out of it just fine. Bo can do the same with Nebraska. We'll know how this all turns out once 2011 comes to a close. I guess the point is, winning big makes people forget the controversies that came before it. At least momentarily. You can bet if Nebraska were to have an Oregon-like season in 2011, the national pundits will be the first to jump on the bandwagon and these present controversies like this one will be a fart in the wind long forgotten. While I hope you are right, I think we all have to remember the 1995 season. We won the friggin title and nobody forgot about the controversies. I think timing is the key here. The examples I've cited above happened shortly after college football season ended. 6 months from now when fall camp begins, this controversy will barely register on anyone's radar, if at all. The '95 season controversies were happening while the season was in full effect. Most of the pundits disagreed with the handling of LP's situation and felt he should've been dismissed from the team altogether. It put a sour taste in their mouth when LP got the nod to start in the Fiesta Bowl blow out against Florida and they never let up on it afterwards. Quote Link to comment
RedDenver Posted February 7, 2011 Share Posted February 7, 2011 Does a blog really count as "going national"? Myerberg is an alright blogger, but all he did is read a few OWH articles and then form an opinion. Not exactly the highest caliber of reporting. He mentioned Dirk's article about an upset recruit but didn't follow up with any of the aftermath suggesting that the one article might be misleading. I give this no more weight or consideration than any post on this message board which, quite frankly, are generally better informed opinions. 2 Quote Link to comment
carlfense Posted February 7, 2011 Author Share Posted February 7, 2011 Does a blog really count as "going national"? Myerberg is an alright blogger, but all he did is read a few OWH articles and then form an opinion. Not exactly the highest caliber of reporting. He mentioned Dirk's article about an upset recruit but didn't follow up with any of the aftermath suggesting that the one article might be misleading. I give this no more weight or consideration than any post on this message board which, quite frankly, are generally better informed opinions. Isn't this a spinoff of the NYTimes "The Quad" sports section? If so I think it qualifies as going national. Not to mention the stories on College Football Live, espn.com, etc. Quote Link to comment
carlfense Posted February 7, 2011 Author Share Posted February 7, 2011 But Charles' dad, on the other hand, didn't even take issue with it... Which seems like a wise PR move considering his lack of other options. Quote Link to comment
captain obvious Posted February 7, 2011 Share Posted February 7, 2011 Just because it's an uninformed hit piece, it doesn't mean it doesn't have a national audience. Quote Link to comment
captain obvious Posted February 7, 2011 Share Posted February 7, 2011 But Charles' dad, on the other hand, didn't even take issue with it... Which seems like a wise PR move considering his lack of other options. Speaking of making assumptions... Quote Link to comment
The Dude Posted February 7, 2011 Share Posted February 7, 2011 But Charles' dad, on the other hand, didn't even take issue with it... Which seems like a wise PR move considering his lack of other options. I'm sure some kid's dad cares soooo much about public relations. Quote Link to comment
carlfense Posted February 7, 2011 Author Share Posted February 7, 2011 I don't have a problem with firing coaches. Heck, I've been calling for the firing of Watson for as long as anyone on this board. My problem is that recruits apparently signed with Nebraska without being informed that their position coaches would not be here. I do not think that is fair to them, in fact I think it reeks of dishonesty and a lack of integrity. If my son had signed with Nebraska to be coached specifically by Marvin Sanders, and the coaches hid the fact that he would not be here until after he signed his LOI, I would be disgusted. Maybe I just expect a higher standard of conduct. YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED. Here's what we DO know. Charles Jackson believed/was led to believe that Marvin Sanders would be his position coach after signing his LOI with Nebraska. That information was absolutely incorrect. Where we differ is the conclusions that we draw from those facts. Quote Link to comment
Suhness Posted February 7, 2011 Share Posted February 7, 2011 If Beck is seriously the best we can do..... wow, just wow. "Wow, just wow" would have been sticking with Watson. The offense under him failed at an alarming rate during the season. There are a lot of other OC's that can and/or are willing to make the necessary changes when things aren't going right. Watson couldn't or wouldn't make those changes at almost an obsessive-compulsive level. The offense, along with the rest of Husker Nation, had no absolutely no confidence in his abilities. Granted, getting Taylor Martinez to listen or make better decisions was like getting a 15 year old boy to not pleasure himself. It may not be an "improvement" but I doubt it will be more of a let down than this season. Quote Link to comment
carlfense Posted February 7, 2011 Author Share Posted February 7, 2011 But Charles' dad, on the other hand, didn't even take issue with it... Which seems like a wise PR move considering his lack of other options. I' sure some kid's dad care's soooo much about public relations. As opposed to pissing off a passionate fan base who will be examining every action of his son? Yeah. I think he cares about public relations. If he doesn't he has some severe mental deficiencies. Quote Link to comment
captain obvious Posted February 7, 2011 Share Posted February 7, 2011 Where we differ is the conclusions that we draw from those facts. No, where we differ is that you have already passed judgement. 2 Quote Link to comment
RedDenver Posted February 7, 2011 Share Posted February 7, 2011 Where we differ is the conclusions that we draw from those facts. No, where we differ is that you have already passed judgement. +1 Not sure there's evidence or even argument to be made that would sway anyone's opinion either way. Quote Link to comment
The Dude Posted February 7, 2011 Share Posted February 7, 2011 But Charles' dad, on the other hand, didn't even take issue with it... Which seems like a wise PR move considering his lack of other options. I' sure some kid's dad care's soooo much about public relations. As opposed to pissing off a passionate fan base who will be examining every action of his son? Yeah. I think he cares about public relations. If he doesn't he has some severe mental deficiencies. You calling him a liar then? Did you even listen to the podcast? He made it perfectly clear his son's words were taken out of context, and this whole thing was blown way out of proportion. Why not just take him at his word? Quote Link to comment
Skull&Bones Posted February 7, 2011 Share Posted February 7, 2011 I don't have a problem with firing coaches. Heck, I've been calling for the firing of Watson for as long as anyone on this board. My problem is that recruits apparently signed with Nebraska without being informed that their position coaches would not be here. I do not think that is fair to them, in fact I think it reeks of dishonesty and a lack of integrity. If my son had signed with Nebraska to be coached specifically by Marvin Sanders, and the coaches hid the fact that he would not be here until after he signed his LOI, I would be disgusted. Maybe I just expect a higher standard of conduct. YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED. Here's what we DO know. Charles Jackson believed/was led to believe that Marvin Sanders would be his position coach after signing his LOI with Nebraska. That information was absolutely incorrect. Where we differ is the conclusions that we draw from those facts. From what I've heard Pelini couldn't talk due to legal reasons. If that was the case I think Pelini made lemon shots out of lemons. If your told by the University lawyers to keep your trap shut I think Pelini did the right thing by focusing on doing his job and and getting his class signed. Quote Link to comment
zoogs Posted February 7, 2011 Share Posted February 7, 2011 But Charles' dad, on the other hand, didn't even take issue with it... Which seems like a wise PR move considering his lack of other options. I'm sure some kid's dad cares soooo much about public relations. The whole point of Charles' dad going on the radio and doing that, was to clear the air. It was a PR move. And a good one. I will just say that it seems to indicate CJ and his family are in Bo's corner and it's good between them now. That's good news. 2 Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.