The "IT" Factor - Does Bo Have it?

[bshirt]

Imo the "it" factor simply doesn't exist.

 

Good coaching & luck with recruits & how the ball bounces in games are the big factors. We've just got to hang tough with Bo for awhile. To fire "another" 10 win HC would most probably turn us into Minnesota.

[Hunter94]

Imo the "it" factor simply doesn't exist.

 

Good coaching & luck with recruits & how the ball bounces in games are the big factors. We've just got to hang tough with Bo for awhile. To fire "another" 10 win HC would most probably turn us into Minnesota.

 

 

you make your own luck through hard work and attention to detail........we are 49th in recruiting right now, who is running that side of the program, which seems pretty damn weak right now?

[r06ue1]

I think Bo is a very good defensive coordinator, I just don't believe he is head coaching material. Getting upset by Northwestern didn't even make me all that mad, getting humiliated by Wisconsin and Michigan did. Those blowouts reminded me of the Callahan days. I don't remember Osborne ever being blown out in a conference game, let alone twice in one season.

 

I would like to see the I formation come back to Nebraska. I miss the days of us pounding the other teams defense until they tire out late in the game while keeping our defense fresh. Instead, the current offense goes three and out all the time and can't seem to make a third down conversion if their life depended on it. Offensive linemen, full backs/running backs and mobile quarterbacks would be flocking to come to Nebraska if they knew that we were a mostly running football team again.

 

I just hope Tom can right the ship again.

[knapplc]

Bob Stoops runs a system too and just keeps plugging in new players and continues to win. He goes into Texas and even beats Texas at some recruits. Just because we haven't won quickly doesn't mean we can't. Bo was in the exact situation as Bob was being a top name defense coordinator. Stoops get the best recruits because he wins and players want to play for a winner and distance is no matter.

 

Bob Stoops is one NCAA appeal away from a winless 2005. Yes, Stoops has a system, and that system nearly cost him a season's worth of wins.

 

By the way - Stoops went 8-4 in 2005. He's not some paragon of infallibility. He also lost to a pretty bad Nebraska in 2009, after which some posters on Oklahoma boards went into full melt-down mode and openly talked about guys they should hire to replace Stoops. Pelini's name was mentioned.

 

Funny how that works.

[husker_99]

To Enhance and Moiraine89:

 

Ok so you point out all of the advantages and such but let me say this. I live in Texas in a recruiting hot bed. A lot of Texans pull for UT but not all. Most would think that they could get all the best talent the state has to offer and leave the scraps to the other Texas schools. You would think that the Longhorns would have tons of National and Conference Championships considering how good high school football is suppose to be. It also doesn't gets very cold and rarely snow and ice in Austin. If the Longhorns are always getting the best talent they sure don't have a lot to show for it. They've only won the Big 12 Conference 3 times, us 2. OU has managed to win at least 7. They only have 4 national championships to show for it. How could the Longhorns who have all these built in advantages have squat to show while OU has much more? Where it gets a lot colder and snows more than once in a blue moon. How does Bob Stoops manage to come into Texas to recruit to take 5 star recruits to such a desolate place like Oklahoma? I've been through Norman pretty much aint sh#t there compared to Austin. I mean why go to Norman when you can go to Austin? most college kids would think that Austin is a no brainer over Norman. It's simple, kids want to play for a winner and a chance to be winners themselves. OU has manage to outdo the Longhorns on their own turf.

 

Also how has Texas managed to have losing seasons with all their supposedly star power they have every year joining their ranks? While OU hasn't had a losing season since the mid 90's.

If you're trying to show that Mack Brown is a terrible coach but a great schmoozer, I agree.

 

Must be great to live in denial.

[husker_99]

Bob Stoops runs a system too and just keeps plugging in new players and continues to win. He goes into Texas and even beats Texas at some recruits. Just because we haven't won quickly doesn't mean we can't. Bo was in the exact situation as Bob was being a top name defense coordinator. Stoops get the best recruits because he wins and players want to play for a winner and distance is no matter.

 

Bob Stoops is one NCAA appeal away from a winless 2005. Yes, Stoops has a system, and that system nearly cost him a season's worth of wins.

 

By the way - Stoops went 8-4 in 2005. He's not some paragon of infallibility. He also lost to a pretty bad Nebraska in 2009, after which some posters on Oklahoma boards went into full melt-down mode and openly talked about guys they should hire to replace Stoops. Pelini's name was mentioned.

 

Funny how that works.

 

Difference is 8-4 is a down year for Bob Stoops while for us we are just great to have. I never said he was infalliable just that when he does have a down year next year it's fixed and doesn't linger on instead of the same sh#t year after year. They may have talked about firing Stoops but highly unlikely the trigger would ever been pulled. Only stupid AD's fire coaches for winning seasons see Steve Pederson.

 

Listen i supports Bo 100% and would never think about firing him but he does need to progress in HC which i think he is. This season was a pass from the beginning since we moved to the Big Ten and knew it wouldn't be a cake walk like unlike the other 90% thought we would just walk right in to the first Big Ten Championship game and win the Big Ten this year. Pure arrogance on their part. I was one of the few that knew too well that we had major problems from game 1.

[Stickney]

Bo has an interesting 2 game schedule left this season. Go 2-0 and enjoy an ok off-season. Go 1-1 and it will be far less enjoyable. Go 0-2 and it will be a long and hot wait for next Sept.

 

 

Bo is facing the loss of his best 2 defenders plus 3-4 contributors on a D that is "mediocre" at best. Look at what is coming back and ???? is all I see.

 

The O, well, I have more hope in the O, mostly because Rex is back. But it is not like the O is a dominating force even with 8 or so returners.

 

 

Does Bo have IT? I don't know.

 

He does seem to be arrogant and stubborn. Perhaps that will work out for him. Perhaps it won't. He certainly isn't the only coach with those qualities.

[knapplc]

Listen i supports Bo 100% and would never think about firing him but he does need to progress in HC which i think he is. This season was a pass from the beginning since we moved to the Big Ten and knew it wouldn't be a cake walk like unlike the other 90% thought we would just walk right in to the first Big Ten Championship game and win the Big Ten this year. Pure arrogance on their part. I was one of the few that knew too well that we had major problems from game 1.

 

Very much agree that it's time for Bo to show some growth as a Head Coach. Four years is beyond "getting your feet wet." New conference issues are one thing, but teams being completely unprepared to compete is another. That's four times this team has seemed incapable of playing quality football this year, and that's not counting other games where we ganked it up for a quarter or a half as well.

 

If we're paying the guy $2+ million as a base salary, these kinds of games are unacceptable.

 

I'm getting really tired of Bo saying all of these little coach-speak catchphrases, yet failing to produce that on the field. Talk is cheap.

 

From here on out during Bo's tenure at Nebraska, this MUST be his theme song:

 

 

[BIGREDFAN_in_OMAHA]

He does not have "IT" and there is no correlation to the MNC that he may never win. It has to do with his ability to game plan and motivate. There are three phases and he seems to be losing his grip on the D which is his bread and butter and has trouble giving direction to the offense and seems to totally neglect special teams. Having "IT" also has to do with personality and his seems wrapped in a layer of contempt. Just an average coach with a long ways to go.

[Enhance]

To Enhance and Moiraine89:

 

Ok so you point out all of the advantages and such but let me say this. I live in Texas in a recruiting hot bed. A lot of Texans pull for UT but not all. Most would think that they could get all the best talent the state has to offer and leave the scraps to the other Texas schools. You would think that the Longhorns would have tons of National and Conference Championships considering how good high school football is suppose to be. It also doesn't gets very cold and rarely snow and ice in Austin. If the Longhorns are always getting the best talent they sure don't have a lot to show for it. They've only won the Big 12 Conference 3 times, us 2. OU has managed to win at least 7. They only have 4 national championships to show for it. How could the Longhorns who have all these built in advantages have squat to show while OU has much more? Where it gets a lot colder and snows more than once in a blue moon. How does Bob Stoops manage to come into Texas to recruit to take 5 star recruits to such a desolate place like Oklahoma? I've been through Norman pretty much aint sh#t there compared to Austin. I mean why go to Norman when you can go to Austin? most college kids would think that Austin is a no brainer over Norman. It's simple, kids want to play for a winner and a chance to be winners themselves. OU has manage to outdo the Longhorns on their own turf.

 

Also how has Texas managed to have losing seasons with all their supposedly star power they have every year joining their ranks? While OU hasn't had a losing season since the mid 90's.

I'll reference what I've eluded to already. Talent isn't everything. If you want to win you need to coach as well. Guys like Carroll, Stoops, Meyer, Saban, Miles, etc., are all pretty good coaches with the best players in the country. Conversely, you need talent if you're going to win. They go hand in hand. Great coaching with bad players gets you nowhere, and bad coaching with great players gets you nowhere.

 

You may not realize it, but given what you just said, we agree. The point I'm trying to make to you, however, is that we do have disadvantages in comparison to OU as I have already elaborated on. Stoops says to a recruit - "I have a championship along with the tons of others the university has, we have better climate, I can guarantee a game in Texas, more conference championships, great track record of getting kids to the NFL, look at my overall record, top notch facilities..." etc. The OU's, LSU's, and USC's of the world are more attractive than (stereotypically) middle of the corn field Nebraska.

 

And Texas sucks because Mack Brown isn't a great coach. Good coach? Yeah. But he obviously has lost his touch the last couple of years. He won a MNC because of Vince Young and average performances at every other position.

[sd'sker]

i think enhance89 is saying, and i agree, is that NU does not have the 'it' factor. we are like ND without the admissions qualifications. we lost something that gave us the edge; we seem to play with a lack of intensity on 'd' (other than david, who quite frankly deserves better). this team still suffers from a lack of confidence. i do not get it though because the 2009 season had so much promise and BO has shown flashes of brilliance when he was out-manned, yet still competed.

 

nebraska can not play from behind, they seem to panic and compound their problems. BO is a defensive mind and he created a team that has to be anchored by good defensive performance. this year we did not have it and the offense is not good enough to support the team. if the defense gets back on track, we will be a formidable foe. BO still needs to figure out mobile qb's.

[junior4949]

I don't get this "It" factor. A lot are claiming that TO gained it. Do coaches also lose it? I mean let's take a look at some coaches. Carr was forced into early retirement at Michigan even though he won a NC. Did he lose it? Coker was fired from Miami. Did he lose it? Fulmer was forced into retirment at Tennessee. Did he lose it? To those saying guys like Pete Carroll always had it, do you only get it when coaching college ball? For all those claiming Bob Stoops has it, why have they been destined for losses ever since brother Mike left? A Venebles defense is good for at least one loss per year, yet Bob Stoops keeps him around.

 

I don't think coaches per se have it. What they do have is maintaining a cohesive staff through several years. This is really what got TO through it all. He had a great staff that pretty much knew what all the other assistants were thinking. Today's college football just really doesn't allow for this as assistants get plucked annually from the successful teams.

[Enhance]

i think enhance89 is saying, and i agree, is that NU does not have the 'it' factor. we are like ND without the admissions qualifications. we lost something that gave us the edge; we seem to play with a lack of intensity on 'd' (other than david, who quite frankly deserves better). this team still suffers from a lack of confidence. i do not get it though because the 2009 season had so much promise and BO has shown flashes of brilliance when he was out-manned, yet still competed.

 

nebraska can not play from behind, they seem to panic and compound their problems. BO is a defensive mind and he created a team that has to be anchored by good defensive performance. this year we did not have it and the offense is not good enough to support the team. if the defense gets back on track, we will be a formidable foe. BO still needs to figure out mobile qb's.

Well, I'm actually trying to downplay this idea of the "it" factor, although I agree with most of what you said here. My point, more or less, it isn't easy for Nebraska to gain that edge and that swagger like some of the other top tier programs in the country because of some of our disadvantages. That's not to say it's impossible, just more difficult.

[JJ Husker]

The question places the cart before the horse. "IT" comes from being successful and winning games. A person doesn't simply show up possessing "it". So, to answer your question; No, Bo doesn't have "it". Hopefully he acquires "it" soon.

[sd'sker]

i think enhance89 is saying, and i agree, is that NU does not have the 'it' factor. we are like ND without the admissions qualifications. we lost something that gave us the edge; we seem to play with a lack of intensity on 'd' (other than david, who quite frankly deserves better). this team still suffers from a lack of confidence. i do not get it though because the 2009 season had so much promise and BO has shown flashes of brilliance when he was out-manned, yet still competed.

 

nebraska can not play from behind, they seem to panic and compound their problems. BO is a defensive mind and he created a team that has to be anchored by good defensive performance. this year we did not have it and the offense is not good enough to support the team. if the defense gets back on track, we will be a formidable foe. BO still needs to figure out mobile qb's.

Well, I'm actually trying to downplay this idea of the "it" factor, although I agree with most of what you said here. My point, more or less, it isn't easy for Nebraska to gain that edge and that swagger like some of the other top tier programs in the country because of some of our disadvantages. That's not to say it's impossible, just more difficult.

yeah, i was most rambling. that was a stream of conscious post. but i do agree, the 'it' factor is a stupid concept. it comes down to confidence and resolve. BO has produced defenses with it and i think beck and produce an offense with it. i do worry that this offense could never succeed in a late game drive for a win, but that is neither here nor there.