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

[kchusker_chris]

yawn*. 9 wins, 7 of them essentially built into the schedule - the other 2 favored by 4-7+. 3 blowout losses and a very discouraging home loss to an inferior team. You would be satisfied with that for the next 2 years just because it adds up to 9?

You would be satisified would completely destroying Nebraska football?

you'll really go so far as to say without Bo Pelini Nebraska football would be destroyed? I personally think it would survive, especially if the next hire wasn't a black/white variation from the prior coach like the route Peterson went. Firing a coach for winning 7, or for winning 9...at the end of the day you'll still have a new coach.

 

and like I said, if Bo wins 9 like he did last year for the next 2 years - there won't even be much of a comparison between Frank and Bo's firing. Anyone know why we played 14 in 2002? (off topic but just noticed)

[lo country]

yawn*. 9 wins, 7 of them essentially built into the schedule - the other 2 favored by 4-7+. 3 blowout losses and a very discouraging home loss to an inferior team. You would be satisfied with that for the next 2 years just because it adds up to 9?

 

First things first, please name me all the current FBS coaches who have won 9 or more games each of the past four seasons. Once you name those coaches then we'll discuss your "7 wins built into the schedule" comment.

 

Ask Michicken if their loss to App State is the same as losing to OSU? Our loss to OU or Iowa State.

 

As posted above, an L is still an L, but IMO, there are definitely some that are easier to accept than others. Getting embarrassed on national tv by Wiscky was far worse to me than losing to A&M or even UT.

 

IIRC, there are only 8 schools who have 9 wins each of the previous 5 yrs. VT, Boise St, WVA, NU, the others escape me, but it was pretty good company.

 

As much as I would love to have back to back 14-0 seasons, seeing how few teams can get back to back 9/10 wins per season shows it is harder and harder to do.

 

Every school across the nation has "built in practice games", not just NU. No school with a legit chance at the MNC is going to line up top tier BCS teams as OOC just to play a "tough" schedule. IIRC, OSU had the tougher schedule last year, but still got bumped in the MNC.

 

For me, it is not the number of losses in as much as the way we lost ie Wiscky, Michicken and Gamecocks. The blowout losses need to stop as does the losing to "inferior" teams. No more losses to teams like NW, Iowa St etc......

 

A loss is a loss whether it is by 1 or 100 points it still counts the same.

[Saunders]

yawn*. 9 wins, 7 of them essentially built into the schedule - the other 2 favored by 4-7+. 3 blowout losses and a very discouraging home loss to an inferior team. You would be satisfied with that for the next 2 years just because it adds up to 9?

You would be satisified would completely destroying Nebraska football?

you'll really go so far as to say without Bo Pelini Nebraska football would be destroyed? I personally think it would survive, especially if the next hire wasn't a black/white variation from the prior coach like the route Peterson went. Firing a coach for winning 7, or for winning 9...at the end of the day you'll still have a new coach.

 

and like I said, if Bo wins 9 like he did last year for the next 2 years - there won't even be much of a comparison between Frank and Bo's firing. Anyone know why we played 14 in 2002? (off topic but just noticed)

First, I think the blowouts are unacceptable. Not just because of the score, but because Nebraska played soooo bad, we made the other team look amazing. Wisconsin, Michigan, Northwestern, and South Carolina all capitalized on a boatload of stupid mistakes. If we simply cut down on full retard mistakes, we're going to be looking at an at least 1 win improvement. That's how close we are. But we have to stop making retarded mistakes.

 

Pelini, as a person, is irrelevant to the discussion. That said, if we fire him for anything less than a losing season, the chances of us being elite again are nigh impossible. We already fired one coach who won 9 games, if we do it again, we're done. Callahan wasn't even on the top 10 list for us after firing the last 9 win coach, if we do it again, no good coach is going to want to come here.

[It'sNotAFakeID]

I don't like the blowout losses as much as the next fan does, but a lot of the reactions from this board during those losses and during the off season are over the top. If Bo and the team keep stagnating and putting out the same results over and over again then I think it will be time to bring in a different person. But I think that stagnation is going to have to occur over multiple years (like 8 or more in a row) before the thought of firing Bo is even conceivable. He has us (the football program) in a good position right now. We'll have experience and we'll have the talent to make a run in the next couple of years.

 

You have seen what Bo can do when given really good talent (a la 2009 and 2010 defense). The time for patience is now.

[kchusker_chris]

First, I think the blowouts are unacceptable. Not just because of the score, but because Nebraska played soooo bad, we made the other team look amazing. Wisconsin, Michigan, Northwestern, and South Carolina all capitalized on a boatload of stupid mistakes. If we simply cut down on full retard mistakes, we're going to be looking at an at least 1 win improvement. That's how close we are. But we have to stop making retarded mistakes.

 

Pelini, as a person, is irrelevant to the discussion. That said, if we fire him for anything less than a losing season, the chances of us being elite again are nigh impossible. We already fired one coach who won 9 games, if we do it again, we're done. Callahan wasn't even on the top 10 list for us after firing the last 9 win coach, if we do it again, no good coach is going to want to come here.

But remember, Peterson was handling the hiring process - and he wouldn't be this time. Whatever he was after wasn't Nebraska...which is obvious from his hire. The guys he was after weren't a fit for Nebraska and they knew it, not because the last guy got fired for winning 9...but because the current culture/state of the program did not suit their style/vision. It was a 4 year project for 90% of the guys Peterson was after. Peterson didn't have a clue what he was doing, or what he needed to be looking for. I think he had this vision of us becoming the Colts/Patriots/Eagles/Jets of college football - when we should have been looking to become the Packers/Steelers. Blue collar football, not red carpet prima-donnas. He was more concerned with the marketability of the program, than winning...when at the end of the day a winning football team is always marketable.

 

Nebraska would still be a top destination - and for the right coach a perfect fit. I don't see someone that's a good fit being scared away by high expectations. The ones that walk away will be for a multitude of other reasons.

 

I'll support Bo's continued employment for the next 2 years. I expect an 8-9 win season this year...but I expect to see a large improvement (11 wins) the following year. 2 more uninspiring seasons and I won't blame TO (or whoever) for firing him. I hopefully won't be calling for his head, but I won't be protesting his firing either.

[Saunders]

First, I think the blowouts are unacceptable. Not just because of the score, but because Nebraska played soooo bad, we made the other team look amazing. Wisconsin, Michigan, Northwestern, and South Carolina all capitalized on a boatload of stupid mistakes. If we simply cut down on full retard mistakes, we're going to be looking at an at least 1 win improvement. That's how close we are. But we have to stop making retarded mistakes.

 

Pelini, as a person, is irrelevant to the discussion. That said, if we fire him for anything less than a losing season, the chances of us being elite again are nigh impossible. We already fired one coach who won 9 games, if we do it again, we're done. Callahan wasn't even on the top 10 list for us after firing the last 9 win coach, if we do it again, no good coach is going to want to come here.

But remember, Peterson was handling the hiring process - and he wouldn't be this time. Whatever he was after wasn't Nebraska...which is obvious from his hire. The guys he was after weren't a fit for Nebraska and they knew it, not because the last guy got fired for winning 9...but because the current culture/state of the program did not suit their style/vision. It was a 4 year project for 90% of the guys Peterson was after. Peterson didn't have a clue what he was doing, or what he needed to be looking for. I think he had this vision of us becoming the Colts/Patriots/Eagles/Jets of college football - when we should have been looking to become the Packers/Steelers. Blue collar football, not red carpet prima-donnas. He was more concerned with the marketability of the program, than winning...when at the end of the day a winning football team is always marketable.

 

Nebraska would still be a top destination - and for the right coach a perfect fit. I don't see someone that's a good fit being scared away by high expectations. The ones that walk away will be for a multitude of other reasons.

 

I'll support Bo's continued employment for the next 2 years. I expect an 8-9 win season this year...but I expect to see a large improvement (11 wins) the following year. 2 more uninspiring seasons and I won't blame TO (or whoever) for firing him. I hopefully won't be calling for his head, but I won't be protesting his firing either.

I don't disagree with pretty much anything you said. Hopefully we see a marked improvement, these discussions become history.

['SkersRule]

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.

[Count 'Bility]

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.

 

What's up homie?

 

yawn*. 9 wins, 7 of them essentially built into the schedule - the other 2 favored by 4-7+. 3 blowout losses and a very discouraging home loss to an inferior team. You would be satisfied with that for the next 2 years just because it adds up to 9?

You would be satisified would completely destroying Nebraska football?

you'll really go so far as to say without Bo Pelini Nebraska football would be destroyed? I personally think it would survive, especially if the next hire wasn't a black/white variation from the prior coach like the route Peterson went. Firing a coach for winning 7, or for winning 9...at the end of the day you'll still have a new coach.

 

and like I said, if Bo wins 9 like he did last year for the next 2 years - there won't even be much of a comparison between Frank and Bo's firing. Anyone know why we played 14 in 2002? (off topic but just noticed)

 

I know seasons were 12 games as they are now, plus we played in one of those "preseason classics" they had back then. I thinkg the Eddie Robinson Classic? Heck, i coulda been 15 games if we make Big 12 title game>

['SkersRule]

What's up homie?

 

[kchusker_chris]

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.

[Hunter94]

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.

 

 

hell, just playing in the B1G championship game would be good enough for most of us, given what we are used to now.....seriously, that would be a great achievement, consistently being in the B1G game at end of season each year, being consistantly relevant would be an achievement all it's own, considering paraody in the the leagues.

[Saunders]

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.

Nobody disagrees with winning a MNC or CCG. But if Bo builds a consistent winner, then takes the next step forward to start winning Conference championships and a National Title, he'll be following the pattern of TO. IIRC, Tom Osborne didn't win his first outright title for 9 years, and that's after inheriting a team that had won 2 MNC. He had 2 shared titles that he got because he had the benefit of not playing in a CCG.

 

Look at Bob Stoops. Guy comes in, and wins a MNC in year 2, and has owned the Big 12 since. Last year, OU was #1 pre-season, and finished 9-3 and got beat by little brother (OSU) who had their best season ever. People were actually calling for him to be fired. Fans are stupid.

 

The "you're satisfied with only winning 9 games" is a strawman argument that just isn't true. I think it's safe to say that everyone here wants to see Nebraska winning titles. The greatest coach in the history of the program built us up via a steady and consistent model while making tweaks to his approach, all while having enormous advantages that we don't have today. Bo has things to work on to get the team better, just like TO did. We've won at least 9 games the last 4 years. Less than 5% of the teams in D1 CFB can say that.

['SkersRule]

Nobody disagrees with winning a MNC or CCG. But if Bo builds a consistent winner, then takes the next step forward to start winning Conference championships and a National Title, he'll be following the pattern of TO. IIRC, Tom Osborne didn't win his first outright title for 9 years, and that's after inheriting a team that had won 2 MNC. He had 2 shared titles that he got because he had the benefit of not playing in a CCG.

 

Look at Bob Stoops. Guy comes in, and wins a MNC in year 2, and has owned the Big 12 since. Last year, OU was #1 pre-season, and finished 9-3 and got beat by little brother (OSU) who had their best season ever. People were actually calling for him to be fired. Fans are stupid.

 

The "you're satisfied with only winning 9 games" is a strawman argument that just isn't true. I think it's safe to say that everyone here wants to see Nebraska winning titles. The greatest coach in the history of the program built us up via a steady and consistent model while making tweaks to his approach, all while having enormous advantages that we don't have today. Bo has things to work on to get the team better, just like TO did. We've won at least 9 games the last 4 years. Less than 5% of the teams in D1 CFB can say that.

 

Can I respond with a simple, "This guy gets it" followed by a gif of someone clapping or has that jumped the shark already?

 

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.

[jsneb83]

Can I respond with a simple, "This guy gets it" followed by a gif of someone clapping?

No.

[Hunter94]

and i think hanging around in the top 10 teams at the end of each season is what we should be shooting for at this time, trouble is right now we are having a tough time closing out in the top 25.......yep, it is a process, pipelines for linemen, qbs, etc. have to be renewed, new coaches have to grow and learn, this is going to be a sloooooooooooooooooow process.