Early expectations for this year.

[Guy Chamberlin]

Stopped reading right there. Shawn Watson left after the 2010 season (when the defense was top 15), and few blamed the offense last year (2011).

 

Hmmm. I guess we've been reading different Husker boards.

 

Well aware when Watson left. That folks still wanted to blame him was a wee joke.

 

Point remains that when Husker fans have wanted to voice their frustration at the team, they've picked on the position coaches (preferably Callahan holdovers) and rarely the head coach. I understand why, but Nebraska's problems are largely head coaching issues.

[Saunders]

Stopped reading right there. Shawn Watson left after the 2010 season (when the defense was top 15), and few blamed the offense last year (2011).

 

Hmmm. I guess we've been reading different Husker boards.

 

Well aware when Watson left. That folks still wanted to blame him was a wee joke.

 

Point remains that when Husker fans have wanted to voice their frustration at the team, they've picked on the position coaches (preferably Callahan holdovers) and rarely the head coach. I understand why, but Nebraska's problems are largely head coaching issues.

lolwut?

[carlfense]

Stopped reading right there. Shawn Watson left after the 2010 season (when the defense was top 15), and few blamed the offense last year (2011).

 

Hmmm. I guess we've been reading different Husker boards.

 

Well aware when Watson left. That folks still wanted to blame him was a wee joke.

 

Point remains that when Husker fans have wanted to voice their frustration at the team, they've picked on the position coaches (preferably Callahan holdovers) and rarely the head coach. I understand why, but Nebraska's problems are largely head coaching issues.

lolwut?

You don't see a bit of a double standard? I know that I do. Look in this very thread. Perceived slights against Pelini are met with outright hostility. Cries of "ludicrous!" "Crazy!" Etc.

 

Watson, Cotton, and company? Burn 'em. (Not arguing that Watson didn't deserve to be fired. He did. Also, I have probably been critical of Cotton for as long as anyone on this board.)

[Guy Chamberlin]

Since we can all agree on the invincibility a 9 win season guarantees a coach, we can continue to expect a non-conference schedule of Western Kentuckys, Chattanoogas and Idaho States to help cover up the fact that the program is essentially playing .500 ball against its peers and doesn't stand a chance against the current NCAA powerhouses.

This logic doesn't hold up under scrutiny. Alabama played Kent State, Penn State, North Texas and Georgia Southern in their non-con. USC played Minnesota, Syracuse, and Notre Dame. Oklahoma played Tulsa, Florida State, and Ball State. All of these teams do the exact same thing we do. They make their schedules 6-8 years out in advance and play one (hopefully) strong oppenent with a handful of show-up-for-the-check schools. Our one "tough" team was Washington, but when you schedule these games so far out in advance there is no gurantee that a team you're banking on to be strong will be.

 

And if you look at our upcoming non-con schedule, you'll see that we've scheduled competitvely. 2015 features Southern Miss (Joe Dailey...wince) BYU, and Miami.

 

I don't like the Chattanooga type games any more than you do, so I do understand where you're coming from. But it would be idiotic to put the likes of LSU, Oklahoma, USC, and Florida State on our non-con docket when everyone else is playing patsies. One legit non-con, one Fresno-mold type, and two walkovers are perfectly acceptable to me, and, in fact, is pretty much standard operating procedure for the major BCS programs.

 

I'm not saying we shouldn't schedule patsies, just that we consider what a 9 game season means these days. The Top Ten teams schedule a couple early feel good blowouts, but they also go on to win 12 or 13 games as opposed to 9 or 10. And when we talk about a slightly tougher non-con schedule and elevate Southern Miss to legimate threat, we talk about maybe winning only 8 games. So there we are: able to manhandle an Alcorn State, but playing .500 against the major conference pack, often looking lost against top tier competition, and sometimes making a Northwestern or South Dakota State look like giant-killers.

 

And frankly, I'm willing to accept a Northwestern loss like last year if it doesn't come packaged with deer-in-the-headlights losses to Wisconsin and Michigan.

 

For the record, I thought last year's Penn State game was an outstanding piece of head coaching at all critical levels.

 

I just don't think 9 wins should be a magic number if the four losses feel particuarly sh**ty.

[Saunders]

Since we can all agree on the invincibility a 9 win season guarantees a coach, we can continue to expect a non-conference schedule of Western Kentuckys, Chattanoogas and Idaho States to help cover up the fact that the program is essentially playing .500 ball against its peers and doesn't stand a chance against the current NCAA powerhouses.

This logic doesn't hold up under scrutiny. Alabama played Kent State, Penn State, North Texas and Georgia Southern in their non-con. USC played Minnesota, Syracuse, and Notre Dame. Oklahoma played Tulsa, Florida State, and Ball State. All of these teams do the exact same thing we do. They make their schedules 6-8 years out in advance and play one (hopefully) strong oppenent with a handful of show-up-for-the-check schools. Our one "tough" team was Washington, but when you schedule these games so far out in advance there is no gurantee that a team you're banking on to be strong will be.

 

And if you look at our upcoming non-con schedule, you'll see that we've scheduled competitvely. 2015 features Southern Miss (Joe Dailey...wince) BYU, and Miami.

 

I don't like the Chattanooga type games any more than you do, so I do understand where you're coming from. But it would be idiotic to put the likes of LSU, Oklahoma, USC, and Florida State on our non-con docket when everyone else is playing patsies. One legit non-con, one Fresno-mold type, and two walkovers are perfectly acceptable to me, and, in fact, is pretty much standard operating procedure for the major BCS programs.

 

I'm not saying we shouldn't schedule patsies, just that we consider what a 9 game season means these days. The Top Ten teams schedule a couple early feel good blowouts, but they also go on to win 12 or 13 games as opposed to 9 or 10. And when we talk about a slightly tougher non-con schedule and elevate Southern Miss to legimate threat, we talk about maybe winning only 8 games. So there we are: able to manhandle an Alcorn State, but playing .500 against the major conference pack, often looking lost against top tier competition, and sometimes making a Northwestern or South Dakota State look like giant-killers.

 

And frankly, I'm willing to accept a Northwestern loss like last year if it doesn't come packaged with deer-in-the-headlights losses to Wisconsin and Michigan.

 

For the record, I thought last year's Penn State game was an outstanding piece of head coaching at all critical levels.

 

I just don't think 9 wins should be a magic number if the four losses feel particuarly sh**ty.

While we do play patsies (like everyone else), our overall schedule is much tougher than it was 20-30 years ago. We don't have an enormous S&C advantage, don't have as good of a walk on program as we used to, and there's much more parity today than back then.

 

So, even though we're playing exactly one more game than we did 20-30-40 years ago, it's not that big of a deal.

[Saunders]

Stopped reading right there. Shawn Watson left after the 2010 season (when the defense was top 15), and few blamed the offense last year (2011).

 

Hmmm. I guess we've been reading different Husker boards.

 

Well aware when Watson left. That folks still wanted to blame him was a wee joke.

 

Point remains that when Husker fans have wanted to voice their frustration at the team, they've picked on the position coaches (preferably Callahan holdovers) and rarely the head coach. I understand why, but Nebraska's problems are largely head coaching issues.

lolwut?

You don't see a bit of a double standard? I know that I do. Look in this very thread. Perceived slights against Pelini are met with outright hostility. Cries of "ludicrous!" "Crazy!" Etc.

 

Watson, Cotton, and company? Burn 'em. (Not arguing that Watson didn't deserve to be fired. He did. Also, I have probably been critical of Cotton for as long as anyone on this board.)

Oh, there is somewhat of a double standard (not as bad as you're making it sound though). But at the same time, none of those guys are held under the same microscope as Pelini (you could say the same thing about Martinez).

 

I heard a fan a couple years ago bitch about Bo chewing gum on the sidelines, something along the lines of "it's childish." Everyone compares him to TO (good and bad) and that's the problem. He's not TO.

[Chaddyboxer]

Stopped reading right there. Shawn Watson left after the 2010 season (when the defense was top 15), and few blamed the offense last year (2011).

 

Hmmm. I guess we've been reading different Husker boards.

 

Well aware when Watson left. That folks still wanted to blame him was a wee joke.

 

Point remains that when Husker fans have wanted to voice their frustration at the team, they've picked on the position coaches (preferably Callahan holdovers) and rarely the head coach. I understand why, but Nebraska's problems are largely head coaching issues.

lolwut?

You don't see a bit of a double standard? I know that I do. Look in this very thread. Perceived slights against Pelini are met with outright hostility. Cries of "ludicrous!" "Crazy!" Etc.

 

Watson, Cotton, and company? Burn 'em. (Not arguing that Watson didn't deserve to be fired. He did. Also, I have probably been critical of Cotton for as long as anyone on this board.)

Oh, there is somewhat of a double standard (not as bad as you're making it sound though). But at the same time, none of those guys are held under the same microscope as Pelini (you could say the same thing about Martinez).

 

I heard a fan a couple years ago bitch about Bo chewing gum on the sidelines, something along the lines of "it's childish." Everyone compares him to TO (good and bad) and that's the problem. He's not TO.

Chewing gum!??? WOW....talk about being stupidly critical. Who cares!? Obviously that jabroni.

[Saunders]

You don't see a bit of a double standard? I know that I do. Look in this very thread. Perceived slights against Pelini are met with outright hostility. Cries of "ludicrous!" "Crazy!" Etc.

 

Watson, Cotton, and company? Burn 'em. (Not arguing that Watson didn't deserve to be fired. He did. Also, I have probably been critical of Cotton for as long as anyone on this board.)

Oh, there is somewhat of a double standard (not as bad as you're making it sound though). But at the same time, none of those guys are held under the same microscope as Pelini (you could say the same thing about Martinez).

 

I heard a fan a couple years ago bitch about Bo chewing gum on the sidelines, something along the lines of "it's childish." Everyone compares him to TO (good and bad) and that's the problem. He's not TO.

Chewing gum!??? WOW....talk about being stupidly critical. Who cares!? Obviously that jabroni.

Yup. I've also heard (and seen) people complain about him wearing sweatshirts during games and whine that he looks like a bum. People bitch just for the hell of it.

[Guy Chamberlin]

I haven't run the numbers and could certainly be wrong, but it's always felt like Pelini is given the benefit of the doubt on this board, that the Pelini-bashers are a minority who get marginalized as cranks and that hardly anyone steps in to defend the position coaches who are absorbing blame that would go to the head coach on any other team.

 

Again, I'm no knee-jerk Pelini basher, but think he deserves more credit/blame than the position coaches or underperforming players because that just comes with the head-coaching position.

 

I like that Pelini's no Osborne. I like a little gum chewing, swearing and ass-kicking. I'm just not yet convinced that Bo Pelini is a great motivator of young men. You'd want to see lesser recruits playing out of their mind even in a losing effort and fewer athletic studs looking lost and/or underperforming.

['SkersRule]

You don't see a bit of a double standard? I know that I do. Look in this very thread. Perceived slights against Pelini are met with outright hostility. Cries of "ludicrous!" "Crazy!" Etc.

 

Watson, Cotton, and company? Burn 'em. (Not arguing that Watson didn't deserve to be fired. He did. Also, I have probably been critical of Cotton for as long as anyone on this board.)

 

Getting rid of a coach who has won 9.5 games average every season, or even "hypothetically" discussing it, is ludicrous. It continually amazes me at just how many Husker fans there are out there who think that since we're Nebraska winning is our birthright. Not just winning, but winning by 70+ points each week. It's not. Scholarship reductions, combined with the mass proliferation of strength and conditioning programs have leveled the college football playing field like no other time in history. Factor in Nebraska's move from the old Big 8 (where essentially Oklahoma at season's end was our only real tough opponent every season) to the Big 12 (where Texas and Texas A&M came onto the schedule) to the Big 10 and our competition, especially in our division, has become dramatically more difficult.

 

Point of emphasis: Bo isn't above being criticized or questioned, but honestly, let's not set the program back another 10+ years because a few insane squeaky wheels want grease.

[True2tRA]

You don't see a bit of a double standard? I know that I do. Look in this very thread. Perceived slights against Pelini are met with outright hostility. Cries of "ludicrous!" "Crazy!" Etc.

 

Watson, Cotton, and company? Burn 'em. (Not arguing that Watson didn't deserve to be fired. He did. Also, I have probably been critical of Cotton for as long as anyone on this board.)

 

Getting rid of a coach who has won 9.5 games average every season, or even "hypothetically" discussing it, is ludicrous. It continually amazes me at just how many Husker fans there are out there who think that since we're Nebraska winning is our birthright. Not just winning, but winning by 70+ points each week. It's not. Scholarship reductions, combined with the mass proliferation of strength and conditioning programs have leveled the college football playing field like no other time in history. Factor in Nebraska's move from the old Big 8 (where essentially Oklahoma at season's end was our only real tough opponent every season) to the Big 12 (where Texas and Texas A&M came onto the schedule) to the Big 10 and our competition, especially in our division, has become dramatically more difficult.

 

Point of emphasis: Bo isn't above being criticized or questioned, but honestly, let's not set the program back another 10+ years because a few insane squeaky wheels want grease.

Great post Skers.

[True2tRA]

I haven't run the numbers and could certainly be wrong, but it's always felt like Pelini is given the benefit of the doubt on this board, that the Pelini-bashers are a minority who get marginalized as cranks and that hardly anyone steps in to defend the position coaches who are absorbing blame that would go to the head coach on any other team.

 

Again, I'm no knee-jerk Pelini basher, but think he deserves more credit/blame than the position coaches or underperforming players because that just comes with the head-coaching position.

 

I like that Pelini's no Osborne. I like a little gum chewing, swearing and ass-kicking. I'm just not yet convinced that Bo Pelini is a great motivator of young men. You'd want to see lesser recruits playing out of their mind even in a losing effort and fewer athletic studs looking lost and/or underperforming.

Bo may not have it all figured out yet, but you won't find a guy on this PLANET that will give a sh#t more than Bo. You talk about the ultimate competitor. This guy wants to win. Not only on the football field, but OFF the football field. He holds this entire program to a higher standard. Some of you see the sideline rants as him acting ridiculous and losing control......The GUY GIVES A DAMN ABOUT THIS PROGRAM. When your really really care about something, sometimes your emotions run over. I respect that about Bo. Not only do I respect how much he cares about this team's on field performance, I respect the fact that this football team holds the HIGHEST GPA EVER HELD BY AN NU FOOTBALL TEAM AND IS ALSO ONE OF THE MOST ACTIVE GROUPS IN THE COMMUNITY. Enough said.

[True2tRA]

Football season is right around the corner ya'll. Time to jump on board this ship or jump the f#*k off........cuz' either way....this ship is sailing with or without you.

['SkersRule]

You don't see a bit of a double standard? I know that I do. Look in this very thread. Perceived slights against Pelini are met with outright hostility. Cries of "ludicrous!" "Crazy!" Etc.

 

Watson, Cotton, and company? Burn 'em. (Not arguing that Watson didn't deserve to be fired. He did. Also, I have probably been critical of Cotton for as long as anyone on this board.)

 

Getting rid of a coach who has won 9.5 games average every season, or even "hypothetically" discussing it, is ludicrous. It continually amazes me at just how many Husker fans there are out there who think that since we're Nebraska winning is our birthright. Not just winning, but winning by 70+ points each week. It's not. Scholarship reductions, combined with the mass proliferation of strength and conditioning programs have leveled the college football playing field like no other time in history. Factor in Nebraska's move from the old Big 8 (where essentially Oklahoma at season's end was our only real tough opponent every season) to the Big 12 (where Texas and Texas A&M came onto the schedule) to the Big 10 and our competition, especially in our division, has become dramatically more difficult.

 

Point of emphasis: Bo isn't above being criticized or questioned, but honestly, let's not set the program back another 10+ years because a few insane squeaky wheels want grease.

Great post Skers.

 

Thanks. It just absolutely dumbfounds me at how some of our fans are even contemplating getting rid of a coach who wins at least 9 games every season. It's as if they think that we can get rid of Bo and automatically hire someone else who is guaranteed to be better. It doesn't work that way, but there's a certain segment of our fans base whose connection to reality is tenous at best. I've asked the "fire Bo" crowd repeatedly who could we bring in that would be guaranteed to be better if we sh** can Bo. Not one of them has ever answered the question...which is a huge suprise.

[Hunter94]

there are no guarantees in life, but keeping him for 2-3 more years may be a stretch too......if you can't understand that the next 2 years are critical for Pelini as a head coach, wherever he goes, then you are simply kidding yourself.....his immediate career as a HC is in the balance for the next 2 years here.