The DC dilemma

[clone]

Making a major staff change at this point isn't going to happen. Stability is important.

[knapplc]

Making a major staff change at this point isn't going to happen. Stability is important.

 

I don't disagree with you, but we could be coming close to the time when shaking things up is more important than stability.

[kchusker_chris]

Making a major staff change at this point isn't going to happen. Stability is important.

I don't disagree with you, but we could be coming close to the time when shaking things up is more important than stability.

You could be right. Do we wait for Pelini to get his 8-9 wins against our cupcake schedule? What's easier, firing an 8-4 bowl bound coach at the end of the season, or firing a 5-4 coach after a beatdown at Michigan?

[presidentjlh]

If we're 5-4 after Michigan, he's gone.

[The Dude]

Papuchis is more of a glorified position coach than a DC. He helps Bo but Bo is still ultimately in charge of what defense is being run here. Many people agree that Bo needs to hire an experienced DC to take over. But where does that leave Bo? His only great strength is running the defense. If we bring in a new DC, the new guy will run his own system. Not only would that create never-ending tensions between Bo and the DC, but it takes away Bo's only real strength.

 

I agree that responsibility needs to be taken off Bo's shoulders, but it's hard to see this being the most effective way. Perhaps bringing in a new OC that has proven management skills and tagging them with the Assistant Head Coach designation?

Can we still call that a strength of Bo's, though? Defense has been pretty dire around here for quite some time.

 

I don't think hiring a proven DC would necessarily cause tensions. If so, Bo simply has no business being a head coach.

[Count 'Bility]

If we start putting out "feeler" there's no way it doesnt go public in this day and age of social media and instant communications. Our recruiting would completely fall apart, and Bo himself would probably become even less ambitious and develop a "f#*k it" attitude. That would be stupid, and I highly doubt that it's going to happen at this point. 5-4 after Michigan? If it comes to that, then yes, there's gonna be more than feelers.

 

KC, I fully agree with you on the point of a HC having too many other issues aside from scheming and such. Which is why that since Pap is the DC, I would like to see Bo hand the reigns of playcalling to him. It's obvious Bo is calling the shots in game. He's the one that's always looking at the play card. But if he's working on other things all week, and Pap is the one in-depthly studying film and breaking down opponents and tendancies, then Pap should be the one calling the shots. He's more prepared. Of course this is all speculation, but it's also pretty obvious. Then Bo could put even more focus on proper delegation and recruiting and etc, etc, etc. I dont see how anyone can make a legit assumption on Pap's abilities as a DC because we really havent seen him with the full reigns yet. I would just like to see that change.

[TAKODA]

Mr. Accountability; my hope is that Paps has been making the calls and decisions on "D", because if he is not and Bo has been, this puts us in an even scarier position because obviously our "D" is not up to the standards we expect it to be and with the lack of adjustments, tells me that whomever is making the calls, is not cutting it or has no idea how to manage it!

[robsker]

I, of course, do NOT mean publicly. You put out feelers. You make connections. You frame things as a potential opportunity to coaches you might be interested in --- framing it in personal interaction with potential coaches this way: "were we to make a change at season's end, and were to be looking for a coach we would be interested in you... what are your thoughts? What would it take? Who do you see as having as a staff? How reasonable would it be to assemble that staff? What do see as your approach to improve our program?"

 

And this, of course, happens all the time. It is behind the scenes. By doing this, the probability of bringing in quality in atimely fashion is greatly enhanced.

I think it's pretty difficult to put out feelers and not have it become public. I don't think any talk of the hiring should leave Shawn's office until at least after the Northwestern game.

 

Just so we're clear, I'm not on board w/ Bo anymore (was on the fence before, firmly off it now). Unless he wins out, and takes Ohio State to the wire in the championship game...I'll remain there for a long, long time. And frankly, as bad as this sounds...I'm kind of worried this team might go 9-3, get blown out in a bowl and we go through this same thing again next year, and the next year, and the next year. If it's gonna happen eventually, lets just get it over with. I'm convinced at this point that we've peaked...and we're actually starting to regress, but due to scheduling the regression will not fully appear in wins/losses for a few years. Adding Rutgers/Maryland to the mix, and shifting Michigan to the other side is only going to make us look better on paper. But bottom line, we're going to play 4-5 decent teams each year, so we're going to have 4 losses all but built in to go along with our 8 built in wins. Even Bo can get a win in 1 out of the 5 games against descent teams to get to 9...

 

Excellent post. Your assessment makes perfect sense and your stated fears I hold as well.

 

We differ only in that I would put out feelers now. I would, as well, let Bo know this. I'd pull him in and state that I want this program to improve and that I am actively pursuing whatever is needed to increase the probability of long-term program success. I'd state that I'd prefer that the leader be Bo and that the problems would be fixed under his leadership... and I would delineate the problems and address measurables that we together can track with time to measure improvement. I would state that I would do everything in my power to see him meet those measureables and that I want him to succeed and hope not to have to go in another direction. That said, I would tell him that I am looking at other options as potentials with the hope of not having to exercise those options. I'd end by saying that the better good of the program is paramount and that I would exercise whatever is the best option come season's end and reiterate that I hope he is that option.

[kchusker_chris]

If we're 5-4 after Michigan, he's gone.

He could be 5-4 and still end 8-4 with MSU, Penn State and Iowa to finish the season.

 

Northwestern and @Michigan are both games we will likely struggle. Easily could be losses. That's 5-3. Illinois has an explosive offense as you saw against Cincy, and we'll find out whether Washington was just a hangover or not when they come to Lincoln. They've got a bye, then have Miami(Ohio) which is another bye (125th ranked D by a mile - 633yrds/game, 125th ranked O by a ways - 180 YPG) before us. Illinois will be no pushover with 3 weeks to prep.

 

Purdue is a new team for us, and they almost beat Notre Dame last week. They've got a bye week before they play us as well. Road games don't always go our way.

 

5-4 after Mich, with an 8-4 season is what I'm predicting. I say we rally after the Michigan loss. By then it might be too late to save their jobs, but all the 9 win defenders will be able to say we fired an 8 win coach (even though his 9th was likely coming in a bowl game)

[kchusker_chris]

We differ only in that I would put out feelers now. I would, as well, let Bo know this. I'd pull him in and state that I want this program to improve and that I am actively pursuing whatever is needed to increase the probability of long-term program success. I'd state that I'd prefer that the leader be Bo and that the problems would be fixed under his leadership... and I would delineate the problems and address measurables that we together can track with time to measure improvement. I would state that I would do everything in my power to see him meet those measureables and that I want him to succeed and hope not to have to go in another direction. That said, I would tell him that I am looking at other options as potentials with the hope of not having to exercise those options. I'd end by saying that the better good of the program is paramount and that I would exercise whatever is the best option come season's end and reiterate that I hope he is that option.

I could see this, but it's still just week 4. I agree that Shawn should probably meet with Bo and put it all out on the table. And I'd force Bo to take a long hard look at this program and report back with the changes he intends on making to address the issues that have plagued this program for 18 months. You're almost forcing him to interview for his job again, which I'm not sure Bo would take well.

[robsker]

We differ only in that I would put out feelers now. I would, as well, let Bo know this. I'd pull him in and state that I want this program to improve and that I am actively pursuing whatever is needed to increase the probability of long-term program success. I'd state that I'd prefer that the leader be Bo and that the problems would be fixed under his leadership... and I would delineate the problems and address measurables that we together can track with time to measure improvement. I would state that I would do everything in my power to see him meet those measureables and that I want him to succeed and hope not to have to go in another direction. That said, I would tell him that I am looking at other options as potentials with the hope of not having to exercise those options. I'd end by saying that the better good of the program is paramount and that I would exercise whatever is the best option come season's end and reiterate that I hope he is that option.

I could see this, but it's still just week 4. I agree that Shawn should probably meet with Bo and put it all out on the table. And I'd force Bo to take a long hard look at this program and report back with the changes he intends on making to address the issues that have plagued this program for 18 months. You're almost forcing him to interview for his job again, which I'm not sure Bo would take well.

 

You hit the risk of my proposed approach quite well. What would be Bo's response? And that response would go a long way towards determining whether he is the man to have here come next season or not. If he did not respond well... then he is not that man we want as coach any longer. If he responds well... and meets the measureables with time... then he is.

[boach_clack]

Papuchis is more of a glorified position coach than a DC. He helps Bo but Bo is still ultimately in charge of what defense is being run here. Many people agree that Bo needs to hire an experienced DC to take over. But where does that leave Bo? His only great strength is running the defense. If we bring in a new DC, the new guy will run his own system. Not only would that create never-ending tensions between Bo and the DC, but it takes away Bo's only real strength.

 

I agree that responsibility needs to be taken off Bo's shoulders, but it's hard to see this being the most effective way. Perhaps bringing in a new OC that has proven management skills and tagging them with the Assistant Head Coach designation?

 

 

I usually dont say much, but this is a great point....

[boach_clack]

There aren't many head coaches who aren't also "in-charge" of one side if the ball or the other. I honestly can't think of any. I just think we need to bring in someone that isn't afraid to bounce new ideas around. Pap seems to just be a "yes sir" kinda guy. Could be wrong though

 

 

He is a "yes" coach. If someone took you from making $30,000 a year to $300,00 a year you woulod be a "yes" coach too. Its just part of the game. JP will get Pelini fired.

[clone]

Making a major staff change at this point isn't going to happen. Stability is important.

I don't disagree with you, but we could be coming close to the time when shaking things up is more important than stability.

You could be right. Do we wait for Pelini to get his 8-9 wins against our cupcake schedule? What's easier, firing an 8-4 bowl bound coach at the end of the season, or firing a 5-4 coach after a beatdown at Michigan?

 

Neither. That isn't going to happen. Michigan almost got beaten by Akron. The huskers WILL win at least 10 games. Have a little faith.