Sporting News: Bo Pelini, Huskers confident 2012 can be their year

[kchusker_chris]

We all want an undefeated season, conference and national title. And I promise you if Bo keeps winning nine games a year then he'll have those years when everything falls into place and Nebraska will have a shot at winning it all. As saunders pointed out there was another Nebraska coach who essentially laid the blueprint for what Bo is doing and it took him over 20 years to win a national championship. We're on the right course just be patient. As Bobby Bowden has said, if you hang around the top long enough eventually you'll win it all.

But my point is Bo winning 9 games a year does not mean he is going to win a championship. Look at the list of coaches that are not on that list you keep bringing up. A bunch of them have won championships in the last 5 years. Where's Urban Meyer on that list? Or Mack Brown? The list is just a nice little stat line that guys like to use at ESPN. It means nothing and in no way predicts future success. So it's all great, and I'm glad Bo has been consistently above average...but at the end of the day it's going to take more than 9 wins eventually...so frankly I could give a rats a$$ if he's on that list. I doubt too many Ohio State fans are upset their coach isn't on that list, or Michigan fans, or Texas fans.

['SkersRule]

I'm well aware that winning nine games a year doesn't guarantee a national title. But I think winning nine games a year puts us in a far better starting position to make it happen on a yearly basis than a team who is up and down like a yo-yo.

[kchusker_chris]

So we have a better chance of winning a national title than LSU, or Michigan, or Texas, or Ohio State, or (insert whatever other highly ranked team coached by a guy that isn't on that list)...because Bo has won 9 games each of the last 4 years?

 

It's an almost BS list. It's great, I'm happy for Bo....but it's not important enough that you would dedicate 3 or 4 posts calling me out (homie) because I don't happen put a lot of faith in some stat that a media member figured out. That's like "the Royals are 20-4 in September when the average temperature is above 65 degrees" - holy crap they'll win their division this year now!! (maybe not quite that bad)

['SkersRule]

So we have a better chance of winning a national title than LSU, or Michigan, or Texas, or Ohio State, or (insert whatever other highly ranked team coached by a guy that isn't on that list)...because Bo has won 9 games each of the last 4 years?

 

It's an almost BS list. It's great, I'm happy for Bo....but it's not important enough that you would dedicate 3 or 4 posts calling me out (homie) because I don't happen put a lot of faith in some stat that a media member figured out. That's like "the Royals are 20-4 in September when the average temperature is above 65 degrees" - holy crap they'll win their division this year now!! (maybe not quite that bad)

 

Please note the following bolded and different colored text part: I said winning nine games a year puts Nebraska into a far better starting position to win a national title than a team that is up and down like a yo-yo. Please read what I actually typed as opposed to reading into it whatever you want to infer. Which means, consistently winning nine games a year will probably keep us prenneially starting in the top 25 to 15 each season and if the wins come and the Huskers take care of business each week we'll have just as good of a shot at winning it all as LSU, Ohio State, Michigan, Virginia Tech, etc. We'll certainly be in a far better position to win it all than teams from the WAC, Mountain West, or Big East. The teams in other major AQ conferences have a better shot to win it all the higher they start. It's not fool proof but it's better than starting out unranked.

[The Dude]

kchusker_chris,

 

What's up homie? Why you ducking the question I posed? Why can't you list me all the FBS coaches who have won a minimum of 9 games each of the past four seasons? You're ducking the question because you know that if you were to list all the FBS coaches who have won 9 or more games each of the past four seasons you'd realize that number one, it's a pretty darn short list and two Bo is in some pretty elite company in terms of wins over four years. And your assertion that "7 wins are built into the schedule" is so glibly stated it makes it essentially impossible to take you seriously. Any Big 10 team on our schedule outside of probably Minnesota can on any given Saturday beat Nebraska if the Huskers don't focus and prepare properly. And even the Gophers could pull off an upset if Nebraska isn't careful.

I know the list, we all know the list. Many Nebraska fans would be perfectly happy winning 9 games for the next 20 years. In that time teams like Iowa, Michigan, Wisconsin, etc will have seasons where they win 6, 7, or 8 and we'll laugh at them - but they'll also win some conference championships. I could care less about 9 wins. 9 wins does not win a championship. As we've seen in past years, 9 wins does not achieve many (if any) of the goals the team sets out to achieve. If we aren't reaching goals, then 9 wins probably isn't good enough. You sleep well at night counting your 9 sheep though. I'd much rather have a 7 win season every once in a while, with a 12 win championship season thrown int there every few years than 20 straight years of 9 win seasons without a single championship.

There's a huge difference between being "perfectly happy" and realizing it's f'ing retarded to consider putting Bo on the hot seat.

[RedDenver]

There's a huge difference between being "perfectly happy" and realizing it's f'ing retarded to consider putting Bo on the hot seat.

+1

It's almost like someone does NOT have to take an extreme view. I know that's an unpopular position in an election year, but I've got to think it's at least possible.

[lo country]

I will also mention the simple glaring fact that we were able to win 9 games that past 4 yrs with two of the most anemic offenses the BCS has ever seen in 2009 and 2010. Not to also mention we did it by running four different offenses, with guys recruited (offensively) to play a different scheme, with a carousel of a coaching staff, a new league in 2011 and a great "fair" farewell screwing by the BigXII refs in 2010, not too shabby.

 

Hopefully this year, with better depth, coaches who actually want to be here and the first time under Bo with the same O (even though I have no idea what it is).

[bshirt]

kchusker_chris,

 

What's up homie? Why you ducking the question I posed? Why can't you list me all the FBS coaches who have won a minimum of 9 games each of the past four seasons? You're ducking the question because you know that if you were to list all the FBS coaches who have won 9 or more games each of the past four seasons you'd realize that number one, it's a pretty darn short list and two Bo is in some pretty elite company in terms of wins over four years. And your assertion that "7 wins are built into the schedule" is so glibly stated it makes it essentially impossible to take you seriously. Any Big 10 team on our schedule outside of probably Minnesota can on any given Saturday beat Nebraska if the Huskers don't focus and prepare properly. And even the Gophers could pull off an upset if Nebraska isn't careful.

I know the list, we all know the list. Many Nebraska fans would be perfectly happy winning 9 games for the next 20 years. In that time teams like Iowa, Michigan, Wisconsin, etc will have seasons where they win 6, 7, or 8 and we'll laugh at them - but they'll also win some conference championships. I could care less about 9 wins. 9 wins does not win a championship. As we've seen in past years, 9 wins does not achieve many (if any) of the goals the team sets out to achieve. If we aren't reaching goals, then 9 wins probably isn't good enough. You sleep well at night counting your 9 sheep though. I'd much rather have a 7 win season every once in a while, with a 12 win championship season thrown int there every few years than 20 straight years of 9 win seasons without a single championship.

There's a huge difference between being "perfectly happy" and realizing it's f'ing retarded to consider putting Bo on the hot seat.

 

Exactly.

[gin_32]

I'm starting to get sick of this. Taylor has proven to be a gum flapper and it doesn't translate on the field. Don't you think talking like this to the media is a characteristic of a young team? I do. My theory is that huge heads like this and feeling sorry for yourself when you get down a few scores in Wisconsin go hand in hand. getting on guys behind closed doors (or in a game for that matter) for high expectations is one thing... Shouting national championship from the highest mountain is another.

 

It doesn't help that I feel like I'm in the twilight zone this season... All signs point to this season being Bo's worst in my eyes (im not mad about it, ive accepted it at this point, just how it works out)... and it just so happens to be the year everyone is drunk on kool aid. I just don't see it. And I'm "Mr. Bold prediction" when it comes to Husker seasons.

 

I can't honestly see Nebraska winning a national championship this year either. But I definitely think a division and Big 10 title are within reach. We play a pretty weak out of conference slate and Wisconsin, Michigan, and Penn State all come to Lincoln. Theoretically that leaves Ohio State and Michigan State as the two* potential road losses. Playing Ohio State in Columbus is probably going to be a loss. I see 11-1 as posible but 9-3 again as more likely. The biggest key will be to see what happens when this team faces adversity in '12. Will they give up like they did last season or will they fight through it? That's the 64 million dollar question.

 

* The Huskers wouldn't lose to Northwestern again would they?

I really hope you're right though...but Little Michigan hasn't beaten us since football was invented... and going to the Shoe wil be tough, but I think, Bo going home - will be a trojan horse to Mr. Meyer........I think he will bring the DEFENSE that no one ever one imagined....

[Saunders]

So we have a better chance of winning a national title than LSU, or Michigan, or Texas, or Ohio State, or (insert whatever other highly ranked team coached by a guy that isn't on that list)...because Bo has won 9 games each of the last 4 years?

 

It's an almost BS list. It's great, I'm happy for Bo....but it's not important enough that you would dedicate 3 or 4 posts calling me out (homie) because I don't happen put a lot of faith in some stat that a media member figured out. That's like "the Royals are 20-4 in September when the average temperature is above 65 degrees" - holy crap they'll win their division this year now!! (maybe not quite that bad)

Every single one of those schools is coached by a guy who is on at least their 2nd or third coaching gig. Looking at the W/L records for those guys for their first 4 years. Now look at Bo's first 4 years. (Bo's is better). They all started their HC careers at directional schools. He started his career here. I'll look to see if I can find the post, but out of all the coaches that finished in the top 10 last year, and only 2 had a better w/l record in their first 4 years as HC, (Chip Kelly and Chris Peterson) and they walked into jobs that were alread rolling. He's a young HC who's starting out at one of the toughest gigs in the nation. Am I happy with just 9 wins? No. But, when you look at the big picture, there's something there to get excited about. It simply boggles my mind that people don't see that.

[Hunter94]

So we have a better chance of winning a national title than LSU, or Michigan, or Texas, or Ohio State, or (insert whatever other highly ranked team coached by a guy that isn't on that list)...because Bo has won 9 games each of the last 4 years?

 

It's an almost BS list. It's great, I'm happy for Bo....but it's not important enough that you would dedicate 3 or 4 posts calling me out (homie) because I don't happen put a lot of faith in some stat that a media member figured out. That's like "the Royals are 20-4 in September when the average temperature is above 65 degrees" - holy crap they'll win their division this year now!! (maybe not quite that bad)

Every single one of those schools is coached by a guy who is on at least their 2nd or third coaching gig. Looking at the W/L records for those guys for their first 4 years. Now look at Bo's first 4 years. (Bo's is better). They all started their HC careers at directional schools. He started his career here. I'll look to see if I can find the post, but out of all the coaches that finished in the top 10 last year, and only 2 had a better w/l record in their first 4 years as HC, (Chip Kelly and Chris Peterson) and they walked into jobs that were alread rolling. He's a young HC who's starting out at one of the toughest gigs in the nation. Am I happy with just 9 wins? No. But, when you look at the big picture, there's something there to get excited about. It simply boggles my mind that people don't see that.

 

 

Day in day out, I don't see us competing very well with LSU, Michigan,Texas, or Ohio State. It simply boggles my mind that people don't see that.

[It'sNotAFakeID]

You know what boggles my mind. The fact that you can't seem to not take an extreme position on ANYTHING

[Saunders]

So we have a better chance of winning a national title than LSU, or Michigan, or Texas, or Ohio State, or (insert whatever other highly ranked team coached by a guy that isn't on that list)...because Bo has won 9 games each of the last 4 years?

 

It's an almost BS list. It's great, I'm happy for Bo....but it's not important enough that you would dedicate 3 or 4 posts calling me out (homie) because I don't happen put a lot of faith in some stat that a media member figured out. That's like "the Royals are 20-4 in September when the average temperature is above 65 degrees" - holy crap they'll win their division this year now!! (maybe not quite that bad)

Every single one of those schools is coached by a guy who is on at least their 2nd or third coaching gig. Looking at the W/L records for those guys for their first 4 years. Now look at Bo's first 4 years. (Bo's is better). They all started their HC careers at directional schools. He started his career here. I'll look to see if I can find the post, but out of all the coaches that finished in the top 10 last year, and only 2 had a better w/l record in their first 4 years as HC, (Chip Kelly and Chris Peterson) and they walked into jobs that were alread rolling. He's a young HC who's starting out at one of the toughest gigs in the nation. Am I happy with just 9 wins? No. But, when you look at the big picture, there's something there to get excited about. It simply boggles my mind that people don't see that.

 

 

Day in day out, I don't see us competing very well with LSU, Michigan,Texas, or Ohio State. It simply boggles my mind that people don't see that.

Your post has no point, but it's expected. You completely missed the point of my post, but then again, I'm not surprised. At least bring a compelling argument to the table. Congrats on bringing nothing to the table.

['SkersRule]

Day in day out, I don't see us competing very well with LSU, Michigan,Texas, or Ohio State. It simply boggles my mind that people don't see that.

 

You don't "see" it because you walk around with your eyes closed.

 

Let's recount some facts. In 2010 against Texas our receivers dropped 8 passes, 4 of which would have been touchdowns, and Nebraska lost by 7.

 

In 2011 Nebraska beat Ohio State, after being down 21 points, or did you forget that?

 

In 2011 we were very much in the game at halftime against Michigan. Then in the 3rd quarter a blocked punt, fumble, lame roughing the punter, and other stupid self-inflicted mistakes did this team in and admittedly they lost bad.

 

We didn't play LSU in 2011.

 

So by my count Nebraska has competed very well with all the teams you mentioned until numerous self-inflicted mistakes did them in.

[Enhance]

I think the Ohio State and Northwestern games were probably Nebraska's worst, even though we ended up winning one. We looked out of our element for three quarters against tOSU and just played an overall bad game against NW. While against USC, Wisconsin and Michigan, we started those games pretty well and then just laid giant eggs. We could have won those games had it not been for the characteristic meltdowns. I take relief in knowing this, because if we can overcome that mental hump, I think the other things won't be so difficult to fix.