Game 3 "Expert" Picks: UCLA vs. Nebraska

[HuskerFowler]

Just watched UCLAs charter land in Omaha. Don't think I will be able to get any pics thou.

 

Really? UCLA fans are quoting tweets from their players about corn everywhere timed around 1:30pm

ya see above, i assumed seeing 3 charter buses and a 747 it was for the players, but just found out differently. Cannot fathom how much money it must have cost to charter this thing

[HuskerFowler]

taking the picture down, thinking about it i dont want to get myself in trouble Carry on.

[RedDenver]

Just watched UCLAs charter land in Omaha. Don't think I will be able to get any pics thou.

 

Really? UCLA fans are quoting tweets from their players about corn everywhere timed around 1:30pm

ya see above, i assumed seeing 3 charter buses and a 747 it was for the players, but just found out differently. Cannot fathom how much money it must have cost to charter this thing

I didn't think 747's were allowed to land at Eppley.

[HuskerFowler]

typo

[HuskerFowler]

Just watched UCLAs charter land in Omaha. Don't think I will be able to get any pics thou.

 

Really? UCLA fans are quoting tweets from their players about corn everywhere timed around 1:30pm

ya see above, i assumed seeing 3 charter buses and a 747 it was for the players, but just found out differently. Cannot fathom how much money it must have cost to charter this thing

I didn't think 747's were allowed to land at Eppley.

 

its not a 47 it was a typo, meant 57. If need be we could land and depart a 47 in an emergency situation, we have one runway long enough, but no they typically require a 10,000 runway

[husker_99]

I don't complain about everything....but i see coaches who have less head coaching experience than Bo and they already have a BCS bowl win under their belt and just feels like Bo is never going to get there if he hasn't already.

Please, I want to see this list. Are you talking about a Michigan team that back doored into a win? Who else?

Are you going to acquire one of this coaches?

Please, do us a favor, bite a curb.

I've posted this list before. I'm not talking about Michigan. Coaching climate has changed and you aren't going to find many tenured coaches at one spot anymore because of it. When you coach at a school with multiple national championships you get even less time. Coaches are lucky they even get a full 4 years before they are fired now a days. Bo just doesn't have many signatures wins against good opponents. Beating UCLA will help but he has to continue that but if we lose that seat will get hotter. If UCLA stomps us there will be more serious talks about firing Bo at the end of the season. I want Bo to win and succeed but can't keep a coach who can't deliver just because you like him.

 

 

And, why does it have to be like that? And, even if other programs are like that, why does Nebraska have to be like that?

 

I personally find that an indictment on the fan base of those schools more so than the way the industry should be.

 

I hate coaching changes and believe they many times set back a program and stunts it's growth. ND over the last few decades is a prime example of this.

I don't like it either but other programs who do do this and have success put pressure on other schools to succeed as well. Let's face it Bo's recruiting will dry up if he can't win anything or have Nebraska considered as the elite. I think the next 2 years are crucial for Bo and whether or not he can get better the talent will drop off or get better. ND may be an example but they are also a private school with much stricter academics to get into in the first place. That is a large part of having limited recruits.

[husker_99]

I've posted this list before. I'm not talking about Michigan. Coaching climate has changed and you aren't going to find many tenured coaches at one spot anymore because of it. When you coach at a school with multiple national championships you get even less time. Coaches are lucky they even get a full 4 years before they are fired now a days. Bo just doesn't have many signatures wins against good opponents. Beating UCLA will help but he has to continue that but if we lose that seat will get hotter. If UCLA stomps us there will be more serious talks about firing Bo at the end of the season. I want Bo to win and succeed but can't keep a coach who can't deliver just because you like him.

 

 

And, why does it have to be like that? And, even if other programs are like that, why does Nebraska have to be like that?

 

I personally find that an indictment on the fan base of those schools more so than the way the industry should be.

 

I hate coaching changes and believe they many times set back a program and stunts it's growth. ND over the last few decades is a prime example of this.

completely agree, brb. and husker_99, you can keep a coach around just because you like him. especially if it appears that the future is bright and he has succeeded.

you can keep a coach around but paying Bo $3 million a year for blowouts isn't smart. In what way has Bo succeeded unless you start counting division championships as the new standard.

[NUinID]

I've posted this list before. I'm not talking about Michigan. Coaching climate has changed and you aren't going to find many tenured coaches at one spot anymore because of it. When you coach at a school with multiple national championships you get even less time. Coaches are lucky they even get a full 4 years before they are fired now a days. Bo just doesn't have many signatures wins against good opponents. Beating UCLA will help but he has to continue that but if we lose that seat will get hotter. If UCLA stomps us there will be more serious talks about firing Bo at the end of the season. I want Bo to win and succeed but can't keep a coach who can't deliver just because you like him.

 

 

And, why does it have to be like that? And, even if other programs are like that, why does Nebraska have to be like that?

 

I personally find that an indictment on the fan base of those schools more so than the way the industry should be.

 

I hate coaching changes and believe they many times set back a program and stunts it's growth. ND over the last few decades is a prime example of this.

completely agree, brb. and husker_99, you can keep a coach around just because you like him. especially if it appears that the future is bright and he has succeeded.

you can keep a coach around but paying Bo $3 million a year for blowouts isn't smart. In what way has Bo succeeded unless you start counting division championships as the new standard.

all right then who is your choice for the next head coach at Nebraska? Tell who is going to come in and for sure win for you?

[NUpolo8]

nevermind i just went over and found out it was a booster charter. A 747 and 3 charter buses full of boosters. Was told Players flew into lincoln today.

 

Man they better leave now from those hotel rooms in Atlantic, Iowa they had to get.

 

ZOMG THEY'LL NEVER MAKE IT,!!!!!!!!

[TheSker]

I've posted this list before. I'm not talking about Michigan. Coaching climate has changed and you aren't going to find many tenured coaches at one spot anymore because of it. When you coach at a school with multiple national championships you get even less time. Coaches are lucky they even get a full 4 years before they are fired now a days. Bo just doesn't have many signatures wins against good opponents. Beating UCLA will help but he has to continue that but if we lose that seat will get hotter. If UCLA stomps us there will be more serious talks about firing Bo at the end of the season. I want Bo to win and succeed but can't keep a coach who can't deliver just because you like him.

 

 

And, why does it have to be like that? And, even if other programs are like that, why does Nebraska have to be like that?

 

I personally find that an indictment on the fan base of those schools more so than the way the industry should be.

 

I hate coaching changes and believe they many times set back a program and stunts it's growth. ND over the last few decades is a prime example of this.

completely agree, brb. and husker_99, you can keep a coach around just because you like him. especially if it appears that the future is bright and he has succeeded.

you can keep a coach around but paying Bo $3 million a year for blowouts isn't smart. In what way has Bo succeeded unless you start counting division championships as the new standard.

all right then who is your choice for the next head coach at Nebraska? Tell who is going to come in and for sure win for you?

 

Didn't we go down this type of road in 2003? I'm confident we learned enough that Pelini's job is in no jeopardy......nor should it be. And linking Pelini's salary to the recent yardage given up is short sighted. Talk about rolling the dice on another coach if you like, but remember we just did that in 2004 and it turned out to be perhaps the worst mistake in the modern era of Nebraska football.

[husker_99]

I've posted this list before. I'm not talking about Michigan. Coaching climate has changed and you aren't going to find many tenured coaches at one spot anymore because of it. When you coach at a school with multiple national championships you get even less time. Coaches are lucky they even get a full 4 years before they are fired now a days. Bo just doesn't have many signatures wins against good opponents. Beating UCLA will help but he has to continue that but if we lose that seat will get hotter. If UCLA stomps us there will be more serious talks about firing Bo at the end of the season. I want Bo to win and succeed but can't keep a coach who can't deliver just because you like him.

 

 

And, why does it have to be like that? And, even if other programs are like that, why does Nebraska have to be like that?

 

I personally find that an indictment on the fan base of those schools more so than the way the industry should be.

 

I hate coaching changes and believe they many times set back a program and stunts it's growth. ND over the last few decades is a prime example of this.

completely agree, brb. and husker_99, you can keep a coach around just because you like him. especially if it appears that the future is bright and he has succeeded.

you can keep a coach around but paying Bo $3 million a year for blowouts isn't smart. In what way has Bo succeeded unless you start counting division championships as the new standard.

all right then who is your choice for the next head coach at Nebraska? Tell who is going to come in and for sure win for you?

The AD will make that choice. The question is how much time does the AD give Bo?

[AFhusker]

Didn't we go down this type of road in 2003? I'm confident we learned enough that Pelini's job is in no jeopardy......nor should it be. And linking Pelini's salary to the recent yardage given up is short sighted. Talk about rolling the dice on another coach if you like, but remember we just did that in 2004 and it turned out to be perhaps the worst mistake in the modern era of Nebraska football.

 

This defeatist attitude is what is wrong with the NU fanbase. Just because Peterson screwed up and fired Frank a year early (with the lack of talent that 2004 team had, Frank would have ruined the bowl streak just has he broke every other streak we had other than the KU winning streak) and then had to pick his 5th choice as HC doesn't mean it will be the same the second time around? Would you rather have Tom pick a third coach that fails because they have no experience as a head coach? That really worked out both times.

 

Bo is two blowouts from either getting a pick slip or an ultimatum that this sh#t stops next year or he's out. At least Bo is lucky that this schedule is so easy that he only faces three teams (UCLA, NW, and Mechicken) that can blow us out. Unless he wins the division, then Ohio State is another chance of getting taken behind the woodshed.

[TheSker]

Bo is two blowouts from either getting a pick slip or an ultimatum that this sh#t stops next year or he's out.

Interesting to know.....though I assume you mean pink slip. I'm not quite as certain of this.....of course I don't see us getting "blown out". I believe it was a one year thing. Our defense last season was simply not very talented. I think we're fine this year.

[RedDenver]

I didn't think 747's were allowed to land at Eppley.

 

its not a 47 it was a typo, meant 57. If need be we could land and depart a 47 in an emergency situation, we have one runway long enough, but no they typically require a 10,000 runway

Ok - that's what I thought. Sorry to derail the thread.

[Branno]

Didn't we go down this type of road in 2003? I'm confident we learned enough that Pelini's job is in no jeopardy......nor should it be. And linking Pelini's salary to the recent yardage given up is short sighted. Talk about rolling the dice on another coach if you like, but remember we just did that in 2004 and it turned out to be perhaps the worst mistake in the modern era of Nebraska football.

 

This defeatist attitude is what is wrong with the NU fanbase. Just because Peterson screwed up and fired Frank a year early (with the lack of talent that 2004 team had, Frank would have ruined the bowl streak just has he broke every other streak we had other than the KU winning streak) and then had to pick his 5th choice as HC doesn't mean it will be the same the second time around? Would you rather have Tom pick a third coach that fails because they have no experience as a head coach? That really worked out both times.

 

Bo is two blowouts from either getting a pick slip or an ultimatum that this sh#t stops next year or he's out. At least Bo is lucky that this schedule is so easy that he only faces three teams (UCLA, NW, and Mechicken) that can blow us out. Unless he wins the division, then Ohio State is another chance of getting taken behind the woodshed.

 

So if Bo goes 11-2, with a bowl win and 2 blowout losses to UCLA and MICH, he's gone?

 

Nope. Never going to happen.